Young Writers Society

OK, it may be all about your feelings and your own choices but does that still mean it's natural?. 'Naturally', by that I mean physically and emotionally. For example in the physical side here's a good argument: If homosexuality is natural then why can't the two same sex's who are sexually attracted to each other reproduce? It's quite confusing, it almost clears up the fact that homosexuality just doesn't work. Not that I have any thing personally against gays, it's just I really don't seem to understand how some people are like that. To me, it doesn't make sense. And the example before is one of the reasons why. Please, try to remain civil in this particular debate since this particular debate is known to be quite... sensitive.

From an evolutionary stand-point, homosexuals are theorised by some to have an altruistic value regarding the success of their genetics.

Or, in English, they work as a sort of kind, protecting uncle (or auntie), protecting and looking after their sibling's children. This may be backed up somewhat by the fact that each successive male child a mother has is more likely to be homosexual. The youngest brother may be designated the gay uncle.

This basically answers the whole "but they can't reproduce" thing - they have a different purpose.

But of course, I don't think that matters either way. Even if they're a mistake, a disease, or whatever, who honestly cares? What difference does it make?

Their inability to reproduce is actually somewhat of a positive in our modern society, because there are currently lots of children who don't have parents. Children with no parents + adult couples who cannot have children = families.

I think it is natural. To say that to be 'naturally' right is to reproduce is...well...a bit cold if you ask me. Furthermore, there are many heterosexual coupless who down to natural reasons cannot concieve together. Does that make them any less natural?

And I agree with Surreal-does it really matter? I once saw a great poster, and it had three photos of three different couples-one was two en, the other two women and the third of a man and a woman. The slogan was 'define love.' If you ask me, love is love and if begin to question 'natural' relationships-well I think that's along the same lies as 'prove love is real.' Why waste time on things like this when are so many worthwile causes out there that can yield much better and more worthwile and beneficial result.

So it doesn't make sense evolutionarily... It's not what I consider to be 'natural' but then again, everyone has their beliefs. I don't think it's natural, but I'm not going to harass someone just because of their sexual preference. It's their choice to make, and it's my choice when it comes to my sexuality. A choice everyone has to make for themselves. I may not agree with your or someone else, but I respect your choice.

So it doesn't make sense evolutionarily...

Uh, actually, my post was about how it does make sense from an evolutionary point of view.

Further evidence:

Our closest living relatives are the bonobo chimpanzees, followed closely by the common chimpanzees.

There is one very notable distinction between the two species of chimpanzees: the bonobo chimps are less violent than the common chimps. This lack of violence actually comes down to sex - and, yes, that includes homosexual sex. Bonobo chimps frequently engage in sexual acts with one another, and this brings them a lot closer together.

When they first meet? Sex.

When they're happy? Sex.

When they're annoyed with each other? Sex.

(Bonobos are sometimes referred to as the 'make love, not war' chimps.)

The common chimps, on the other hand, are constantly fighting and killing one another.

Homosexuality, therefore, has another useful altruistic value: it brings everyone in the society closer together. It's a way to greet, bond, and apologise. It helps them work together.

Of course, this only works if all (or most) members of the species engage in such acts, and clearly that isn't the case with humans. But I personally believe that humans are also naturally bisexual, and the heterosexuality that most of us exhibit (myself included) is due to the culture we grew up in.

If we look to, say, the ancient Greeks, a culture that didn't vilify homosexuality like almost all modern ones, we see that bisexuality is pretty much the standard, and a very large portion of all Greek heroic figures had male and female lovers.

Furthermore, we see that teenage girls are more likely to be bisexual than older woman, or men of all ages. Teenage girls experimenting, however, is becoming increasingly accepted in our culture (see: all the pop stars and actresses who have had a girl-girl kiss for publicity). These girls bisexuality is again dictated to them by society.

Also, I personally found that if you ask straight people how 'far' they'd be willing to go with a member of their own sex, the answers you get are interesting. Everyone has their own limits - a hug, a kiss on the cheeks, a kiss on the lips, more. This again leads me to think that there is no real distinction between sexualities - everyone is, to some extent, bisexual, and the limits we impose on ourselves are because of our upbringing, and not to any sort of natural inclination to one sex or the other.

I've always thought that everyone must be-even just a little-bisexual. We fall in love with people, not genders.

Surreal, you are correct in saying that chimpanzees do engage with each other largely with sex, but not homo sex (if I may put it that way).

I don't agree homosexuality 'will bring each other closer', for the fact is people are still divided to the very fact of homosexuality. And, homosexuals are also divided. It's not like they all get along. I think physically, we are not designed to be homosexual. I mean (this may sound kinky), penis's were not designed to go up the anal. They were designed for the vagina to reproduce and therefore the male and female are both parents of their own child biologically.

I thoroughly believe that humans are parents by male and female together. Not male with male, nor female with female. The same sex's are not suppose to be attracted to each other. I believe it's a spiritual thing, a very strange and unnatural (if that's the word) spirit that has been allowed access into people's minds and hearts. Therefore, affecting the whole natural cycle.

Now as a Christian, I believe it would be right to state forth what I believe in this area so you know where I am coming from. What is written below is one of my sources from http://www.allaboutgod.com/is-homosexuality-a-sin.htm


Is homosexuality a sin? And who do we believe?
God is the ultimate and sovereign judge for sin. Homosexuality is sin by His order; it is not decided by public opinion or deceived/false clergy. Changing societies do not dictate God's standards. Sin is defined by God for us in the Bible. It is the source for what God says is holy and righteous or sin and abomination. Hebrews 13:8 states that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever; he does not “go with the flow.”

God's Word says that homosexuality is unnatural, a perversion, an abomination, fornication, vile affections, and a great sin against Him. He states any sexual act outside of marriage is adultery (hetro or homo sexual). Sex is to be between man and woman within marriage.

Is homosexuality a sin? What does this mean?
God's design for natural sexual relationships is part of His plan. Homosexuality falsifies what God designed. Sin often means not only rejecting God but denying or rejecting how and why we are made. Though it may be considered acceptable by some today -- even in some churches -- it is not acceptable to God. And we need to take that seriously.

Sexual sins were rampant in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. (This is the origin of the word sodomy.) Despite warnings, they refused to repent. God destroyed those cities and it was recorded as a warning to all future generations. (Genesis 18:20-21, Genesis 19:4-5, 2 Peter 2:6) Some additional scriptures on homosexuality are found in:

Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
Romans 1:26-27
The price paid for homosexuality and other fornications are told in:
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Jude 6-7
Romans 1:18
In spite of the growing secular humanist trend to think "it's ok to be gay," it's not a righteous lifestyle. Most vocal Christians are not homophobic, but are trying to share Christ's love for homosexuals and trying to keep them from horrific judgment.

Is homosexuality a sin? Is there hope for forgiveness?
There absolutely is hope for homosexuals. God can cleanse and purify all persons from sin. As many scriptures as there are that address sin, there are more that speak of forgiveness and redemption. He is able to give deliverance to any who sincerely desire true freedom and salvation. Such is demonstrated in 1 Corinthians 6:11 (KJV): "And such were some of you: but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." This verse says “some of you were,” meaning they became past acts.

We are offered the empowering Spirit of God to help us turn from our sins. Coming out of drug addiction, homosexuality, pornography, or other sin isn't always easy but God will provide the way. Christians are to "love" into the kingdom, those who desire repentance and to live by His natural plan.

Jesus Christ died on the cross for all of our sins and rose again the third day. He desires that we repent and be forgiven of our sins by coming into a personal relationship with Him.

Please, be civil. I have been given many insults about my answer for this and many other questions from the Bible. Please, try not to do the same.

Since is this a debate on how natural homosexuality is and not whether it's a sin, I'm not sure that argument really contributes much, particularly to pagans and atheists.

God's design for natural sexual relationships is part of His plan. Homosexuality falsifies what God designed. Sin often means not only rejecting God but denying or rejecting how and why we are made. Though it may be considered acceptable by some today -- even in some churches -- it is not acceptable to God. And we need to take that seriously.

But: I thought we were "made" with hair - why do we wear hats then? I'm pretty sure 99% of things related to the human race are not natural.

Besides, since when did animals provide us with our moral standards? Aren't these the same animals we eat? Anyhow, that's irrelevant.

Not that I have any thing personally against gays, it's just I really don't seem to understand how some people are like that. To me, it doesn't make sense.

If you have an open mind, that should be all the evidence you need. Homosexuals simply can't relate to fancying someone of the opposite sex, just as, you have stated, vice versa; remember that "being gay" is not about sex, but it's about having a feeling of attraction for the same sex. You can't decide who you feel attracted to and as such, it is very natural; like Sureal said, every boy is 30% more likely to be gay than his next older brother. I'm not sure about females.

Furthermore, there has always been evidence of homosexuality in the human race, and always at around the same percentage; of course, it exists in animals too, but there we go. It's only since the Victorians started labelling sexualities that it became an issue, I imagine. Greeks, Romans, and even William Shakespeare are all supposed to have had these relationships. But what's noteworthy is that I think only the Greeks actually accepted the act. It was, as such, illegal throughout most of history. And yet it still happened.

Is it natural? It depends completely on your viewpoint.

Scientifically, it is unnatural. We have hormones meant to attract us to the opposite gender. Think about this in a way that's not emotional: we are meant to reproduce, to have children with the opposite gender. We are meant to make more of our species. A woman can only do this with a man, and vice versa.

But think about it scientifically and mentally. Psychologically. With hormones attracting us to the opposite gender, what makes certain people have sexual feelings for those of the same gender? Could homosexuality possibly be a mental disorder?

Still, no matter what, that's the way they feel, and they should not be pressured into psychiatric care, ever.
It's simple human emotion to fall for someone you like. Homosexuality is natural because of human emotions, unnatural because of scientific proof.

I'm pretty neutral on the subject

On how homosexuality may have survived through evolution:
http://www.economist.com/sciencetechnol ... d=12465295

But, I've always found the nature vs. nurture argument to be rather trivial. What is is.


As to quoting the bible, I've always been fond of this quote from the West Wing (an American TV show about a fictional president):

Fictional President on West Wing wrote:I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleaned the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?

My chief of staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?

Here's one that's really important cause we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7 If they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?

Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother, John, for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

As it regards the inerrancy of the Bible, there are four predominate views on this in Christiandom:

1. The Bible, as translated, is without error.

2. The Bible, as it was originally written or taught, is without error.

3. Human beings, especially thousands of years ago, were incapable of understanding all that God told them (after all, how could a man living 3,000 years ago understand the concept of galaxies?). So human beings inevitably introduced error into the Bible.

4. The Bible is a historical religious text that should serve as the beginning, but not the end, on matters of faith and morals.

A lot of people, myself included, don't fall neatly into any one of these groups. But I think it's obvious that some verses in the Bible are incorrect, as the above West Wing quote illustrates. I think this error mainly comes from the Bible being incorrectly translated. Plus, many books of the Bible, such as Leviticus, had revisions done by later people. Indeed, most of the verses in Leviticus can apply only to a small, struggling ancient agrarian society.

With the original texts long gone (if they ever existed; many think books like Genesis and Exodus were oral for centuries before finally being written down, which would introduce the error of faulty human memory into the text), I don't think we can rely on its literal word for truth. Instead, we must study it for its meaning. And I think the most powerful meaning contained within the Bible is simply:
Love Thy Neighbor

Jesus did not seek to reform the tax collector or the prostitute; he simply loved them in the purest sense of that word. We are all sinners, and all sins are equal before the eyes of God.

I am...well....I'm not religious anyway, but that's not the argument at hand, is it?
To say that homosexuality is wrong because it is not perhaps natural-well, then eating meat must be wrong too. The human body was not designed to digest meat. So, then, why do people do it? People eat meat even though they know the suffering that animals endure in the meat industry is absoloutely disgusting. Furthermore, they do it out of what-greed? Bloodthirst? If you call homosexuals siners, I think meat eaters must be too then!


Nothing personal, Matthe, but you said you weren't a homophobe right after you used the word 'gays'-isn't it gay people or homosexuals? Juat thought I'd say it!:)

Hehe... some sex actually makes no sense in the evolutionary sense anyway. For example, why would a peacock have all those clumsy feathers and attract females with it, and why should females go for those peacocks? It doesn't make sense, and yet it happens anyway. There are more examples that go a lot more in anatomy (for example, mallard drakes have penises that look like corkscrews, yet the female mallard has a vagina that looks like a corkscrew except it goes into another direction... and there are many other copulation techniques that really don't make sense) but we'll skip past that.

What is important to note is that evolution is a constant revision, and lots of parts, ESPECIALLY sexual attraction, don't really make sense. Evolution is not always perfect and doesn't always make sense. But it's natural.

So, no, homosexuality doesn't make sense, really. But it happens. And it happens naturally. So there you go!

A yes, the human body was designed to eat meat. Where in the world did you get that from???

Nate, I have something to say on what you said about the Bible. The Bible is like a group of legiments, if one legiment is not correctly stated all the rest falls. Same with the Bible, if one part of the Bible is wrong or incorrect then the rest has no meaning. And presides, the old testament law was a shadow of what was to come: Jesus Christ. Those 'kill him on the sabbath for working' was for the Jews, and not to be practised today for Christians. Those old regulations have passed away, but not God's moral values. Sin deserves death, what happened to sinners back in those days when they got killed physically is God saying sin will kill you, sin is death, hell. I mean, do you see Christian's and I mean real Christians going around killing each other because they broke the Sabbath? If that was the case, Christ's forgiveness would have no place! His death on the cross would mean nothing! It would only be condemnation.

It is so sad that people randomly look at the Bible to be taken as an ultimate action, you obviously don't read it right.