View RSS Feed

Raistlin

The cause of The Gay

Rate this Entry
4 Comments
by
Raistlin
, 10-26-2010 at 10:04 PM (1926 Views)
So I'm stuck at the law school for another 90 minutes until my next class and I'm procrastinating finishing my reading for it. So here's a little rant I promised in my last entry about the "choice vs. genetics" dichotomy as to what causes people to be gay.

The religious nutjobs say it is entirely a choice. But not only is this entirely baseless (well, based on the mindless bigotry that being gay is "ew"), but what the smurf does that even matter? Even IF being attracted to the same sex was entirely a choice, what difference does that make? Being Christian is a choice, too. Why does this choice (assuming arguendo that it is) mean that it can be completely disregarded? It has nothing to do with homosexuality being a "choice" and everything to do with idiots being uncomfortable with it.

That being said, the opposing side often argues that being gay is entirely genetic, which I don't quite buy and I think oversimplifies the issue. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, like enjoying tanning on the beach, is a preference. And sexual preferences are so tied up with psychology that I just don't buy the concept that post-birth events cannot have a dramatic effect. Certainly there is evidence that genetics has an impact, but it seems implausible to me that psychological responses to conditions does not have just as much of an impact (if not more). This is not to say that heterosexuality is some sort of "default" and some time of external stimulus is required to "change" someone to become homosexuality (though I certainly do think it is possible for a sexual preference to change in any direction); I think heterosexuality and any type of sexual preference (including more specific preferences, like fetishes) are just as affected. Obviously, something being a potentially changeable preference does not make it a "choice." It is not my choice to be heterosexual or to like pizza; that is just what sends signals to my brain that it interprets as pleasurable. But I do not doubt that those signals can be affected (though probably much less likely as someone ages).

Additionally, arguing that homosexuality is purely genetic in the face of the "it's just a choice" argument fails to attack the underlying stupidity of that argument: that it doesn't matter. The religious idiots are just trying to impose their own preferences on every one else (while ironically arguing just that against the "gay agenda"), and they cannot impose their arbitrary morality against others, regardless of what "causes" homosexuality. The religious nuts have nothing to go on besides their own discomfort and some words written 2,500 years ago that are between tons of other words that are modernly disregarded by all sane people.

The choice vs. genetics dichotomy is a red herring. The true target should be the baselessness of religious-based prejudice.
Categories
Miscellaneous

Comments

  1. Toni's Avatar
    Pretty much what my belief is, that they should drop the damn subject and let people be who there going to be and don't push their crap on other people because that's how conflicts get started. If Christians (or whatever other religion dislikes the idea of homosexuality) just accept the fact that this person likes this and just gets over it (Let's face it, it's not that big of a deal.) Then life would be better. A thing that I like to think about, is that religious weirdos (pardon that word) say that you'll be damned forever or some junk like that if you are gay, then if God made man in his/her/it's image (I would imagine if god existed it would be both male and female) then by god don't you think he would also be Bisexual? Because just think for a moment, if s/he created heterosexuality, then s/he must have created homosexuality too right? I think the people who oppress the homosexuals just because they can. They think they can at any rate, but they SHOULDN'T!!! I think the idea behind it is that it's "weird" for them because they don't have the preference, so therefore, others shouldn't either, and they swear on the bible it's wrong. BUT! The bible wasn't exactly written by "God" It was written by (Some say Jesus others say some king guy) but either way, it wasn't GOD so boo to them.

    Sorry if this is a little.. unprofessional sounding... but I think you get my idea.
  2. Yeargdribble's Avatar
    I've been thinking. I love to respond to your blog, but sometimes there's just little more to say. I think it's natural that people don't want to concede any ground though. To suggest even a little that post-birth factors or choice can enter into the equation gives bigots a huge foot in the door. If even a little of it can be choice, they assume it's all choice by depraved fags.

    It's easier for people to just argue that there's no choice and that it's all genetic, but it's weak position because there's not really the support for that.

    I don't think there's an easy solution other than religion bigots to STFU and stop caring so much. It's unimportant whether it's a choice or not. They often claim that they fear the influence it has on society and their children, but I really doubt homosexuals are the biggest fish to fry.

    I still think that the vast majority of Christian who dislike homosexuality are just inherently homophobic. The Christian part is an afterthought; a convenient justification for their bigotry.

    I ask constantly how any laws can be enacted regarding homosexuality. In what was is it constitutional? Is there any non-religious reason to put a law on the books that removes rights from gays? If it fails the Lemon test, then why the hell are we still even discussing it?
  3. rubah's Avatar
    *throws you some bait*
    Clint McCance, Arkansas School Board Member, Wants 'Fags' To Commit Suicide
  4. Raistlin's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Yearg
    I still think that the vast majority of Christian who dislike homosexuality are just inherently homophobic. The Christian part is an afterthought; a convenient justification for their bigotry.
    Of course. Religion doesn't require anti-homosexuality, contrary to what mindless idiots think. It is just what people, all people (including "liberal" Christians) use to justify what they want to be true. The only thing that anti-homosexuality religious nuts have as the foundation of their belief is their own personal distaste.

    I ask constantly how any laws can be enacted regarding homosexuality. In what was is it constitutional? Is there any non-religious reason to put a law on the books that removes rights from gays? If it fails the Lemon test, then why the hell are we still even discussing it?
    Because it's such a common prejudice that their are mindless bigots in the courts, too, who are not afraid to accept obviously ad hoc justifications for this prejudice (e.g., "they can't reproduce!").

    rubah: I saw that. I especially like his comment that people being gay apparently "ruins" the lives of good Christians. Just more persecution complex bull about how people supporting something that some Christians disagree with is a willful attack against all Christianity (if only).