If gay is a choice, then so is Lutheran or vegetarian

[skjpm]

The point is, rational adults have the right to make choices without being discriminated against. I don't think homosexuality is a choice, but so what if it is? What if an adult decides that he is better able to bond with members of his own sex and decides to choose his life partner from his own sex?
Gay activists say, "It can't be a choice because no one in his right mind would choose to experience the hatred and discrimination." It depends--someone might decide the possibility of real intimacy is worth the risk. He weighs the advantanges of a close relationship against the disadvantages of discrimination and decides the advantage outweighs the disadvantage. That's his business.
I don't think that there is some overwhelming natural revulsion which makes gay sex impossible for some people. I think it has more to do with unfamiliarity. If a vegetarian can overcome his initial revulsion to tofu, or a Lutheran to hot dish, most people can find forms of gay sex which they would enjoy. Frankly, it's just nice when someone else is there to help.

I think the debate over whether or not it's a choice is moot.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. If it's a moot argument...

why are you making one?

[sui generis]

2. I agree in principle, but

as a society we tend to single out factors like skin color as "race" (stupid), and other inborn traits as qualifications that stand outside of moral judgement, however reluctantly for some people. The "foot in the door" is that whether or not one chooses, there shouldn't be a moral judgement about the choice if some people are born that way, any more than having blue eyes is immoral. Keep in mind that the objections of the people who don't get it are usually based on "morality" and "values" -- things that are associated with choice.

On making choice a moot point for a more mature society though, great idea. I think that committing to whomever you love shouldn't make a damn bit of difference whatever sex they just happen to be, and I find it really hard to accept that loving someone is immoral, just because they happen to be the same sex.

[skjpm]

3. The "inborn" argument isn't working

The anti-gays say that just because a trait is inborn, doesn't make it moral. Some people might be born with greater tendency to violence or alcoholism and be forced to control their behavior. I'm not saying that--that's the argument they make when faced with the evidence for a genetic cause for homosexuality.

My argument is that adults have the right to make choices which are not harmful to others. Voluntary groups, such as churches, also have the right to condemn me for my choices, but the state can't restrict me if I'm not hurting or exploiting anyone.

So, the answer should be, "OK, OK, I chose to be gay--you chose to own guns, didn't you?"

[library_max]

7. "The state can't restrict me if I'm not hurting or exploiting anyone."

Sure it can. It can prosecute you if you take drugs, have sex for money, or drive without a seatbelt. Libertarianism is not a principle written into the Constitution.

And please don't give away gun control like that. It's important to some of us. Thirty thousand people per year, etc.

[library_max]

4. The importance of the distinction

is that there is no Constitutional right to be a vegetarian. If society were to decide for some reason that vegetarianism is perverse and evil, vegetarianism could be outlawed with no violation of any Constitutional right (the way narcotic drugs are outlawed, for example). That's why the nature vs. choice issue is not entirely moot.

I personally think your argument applies only to bisexuals anyway. I can't speak for women, but there is a primal, instinctive revulsion on the part of most heterosexual male adults for gay sex. It's not like tofu.

[skjpm]

8. It's odd that this inborn revulsion can be overcome with a few beers.

I guess I just don't believe that some people are born with an inabilty to enjoy gay sex, ever, ever, ever. People learn to like opera. You think you won't, and then you're crying at La Boehme. On the other hand, no one is forcing you to explore your potential for liking opera, either. But I think that self-honesty requires that there may be some circumstance, some day when you will be overcome by a passionate aria.

[library_max]

17. Different people differ on this.

Don't assume that your experiences or feelings are universal.

[Az]

5. You don't choose whether you like icecream or not

You recognise what you like and acknowledge it.

There is definately a learned social reaction to homosexuality that causes much of the problems. As we grow up our experience of gender is typically unaffected by issues of homo/hetro sexuality. Thus our perception of identity takes on a binary mode. Male or Female. As we learn to interact with those around us we develop rituals and methods for bonding with others. These are based on our perceptions. One set of expectations for bonding with males and one for bonding with females.

As we encounter more and more people in society we begin to interact with individuals who throw off our socially learned expectations of male or female. We do not know how to bond with these individuals because our expectations were geared for a binary issue and we are now confronted with an analog issue. We are now exposed to the fact that sexuality is much more a sliding scale than it is a male or female issue. This sudden realisation strikes people in different ways ranging from acceptance to rejection.

It is worth noting how other socially learned factors affect this acceptance. Because we learn to expect males to be aggressive and females to be compassionate it affects our reaction to those that break the norm. Thus lesbians (mostly lipstick lesbians) are seen as socially acceptable. Two women expressing compassion falls within our criteria of learned definitions of females. But two men acting compassionate towards each other seriously violates several expecations.

Exposure to the real nature of the world would do a great deal to eliminate the social discord of this system. If children were exposed to more than just the binary identity of male and female at an earlier age it would shatter the current modus of prejudice. But the very prejudice itself causes many to fear allowing any that do not fit the binary definition of gender near children in the first place. Thus the system of oppression continues.

[durutti]

16. Good post.

Have you read Sexing the Body by Anne Fausto-Sterling? It's quite good.

[ArkDem]

20. How about single malt scotch?

.

[demnan]

6. I don't think it's a choice for most gays

Most of them know really young they are gay. What gave them that idea? I don't know, but I don't think it was a whim or a choice. Having brown eyes isn't a choice.

On the other hand, there are people who experiment with sex and may have tried a same sex liasion or two. These people aren't necessarily gay, they're just sexual adventurers, sometimes they find they are bi.

I agree with you. I don't care what people do in their own bedrooms, as long as they aren't there to tell me what to do in mine. However, I do think homosexuality is an inherent part of nature - perhaps it is a natural response of biology to the overcrowding and overbreeding of our species.

[skjpm]

10. I agree

That's my point of view. But other arguments might be convincing to other people.

[H2O Man]

9. The only serious question

is if the hatred and bias against gay people is a choice, or is it a genetric predisposition? Because the problems in our society have little or nothing to do with gay people. The problems are almost exclusively on the part of a segment of the heterosexual majority. As there have been societies that have not discriminated against gay people, the obvious answer is that homophobia, like other forms of hatred, is un-natural, and must be taught. Just my opinion.

[durutti]

11. I don't think there's a biological basis for homosexuality.

That said, it is anymore of a "choice" than is the preference for a certain color or food.

[Flubadubya]

13. Yeah...

and there's no biological basis for heterosexuality either, right?

[durutti]

18. Correct.

I think that categorizing people as gay or straight is abritrary. They aren't in fact discrete categories, but idealized poles on a continuum.

From an evolutionary perspective, the purpose of sex is as much to solidify social bonds as to reproduce. Our nearest genetic relatives, the bonobos, are pretty much omnisexual. Everyone has sex with everyone, and frequently.

[Flubadubya]

19. Well, I'll be damned...

Y'all hear this? According to durutti there is NO biological basis for sexuality whatsoever. Phew... you sure could've fooled me. :shrug:

[GreenPartyVoter]

14. There's definitely a biological basis

I am not saying that is the case for every homosexual, but I have seen it myself.

My brother went through a phase of not being sure if he liked guys or gals. It turned out he has XXY chromosomes. For health reasons, they boosted his testosterone with shots, and his physical interest in other guys died away.

So yeah, that tells me there are times when biology is playing a role.

Editing to add that NO I don't think all homosexuality can be "cured". Nor do I think it ought to be. This was just one case where an interest in the "same" sex was brought on by on overload of female hormones due to an extra female chromosome.

[durutti]

21. Anecdotal evidence.

And it could also have had the same effect as a placebo.

"Homosexuality" as such is mostly a modern invention, much like "race". In the ancient world and in at least some cases in medieval Europe, it was expected that men would engage in homosexual activity (frequently with young boys) in addition to heterosexual activity.

[Flubadubya]

12. An important reason not to mistake homosexuality...

for a chosen lifestyle. First of all it simply isn't. Secondly, accepting this concept that it is a choice plays right into the hands of the Great Moralists in this country who hold that erroneous concept. Because they perceive it is a chosen lifestyle, they believe that children can be "recruited". It is the reason they believe that gays and lesbians not only CAN change their sexual orientation, but MUST!

Just let them start legislating their brand of morality and see what happens to all the heretofore harmless homosexuals in this country. They will be villified!

[Timefortruth]

15. If gay is a choice so is heterosexuality.

That is the best answer to the gay-basher. You mean that you are more sexually attracted to people of the same sex but you live a heterosexual lifestyle for reasons of faith?

As a heterosexual that is how I'm absolutely certain that there is no choice involved.

[msmcghee]

22. skjpm's point goes beyond sexuality . .

Although the RW usually has no clue on this I am dismayed that so many liberals fail to recognize the underlying principle of freedom - that adults must have the right to do whatever they wish as long as they do not harm others.

In that regard it makes absolutely no difference whether homosexuality is a choice or genetically determined - or as is probably the case, some combination of the two with neither factor having complete control of the outcome.

Freedom is not just the right to do whatever a majority or those in power think is OK. That's one thing the libertarians have right.