I have noticed atheists coming out in support of homosexuals. Do some feel that supporting homosexuality is a necessary part of atheism ? Or, do they support homosexuality simply because religion opposes it? What is the attitude of atheists in general to homosexuality? Where homosexuality deserves support and where it should not be supported?
Homosexuality is not a "disorder" any more than being left-handed.
Your third paragraph is complete nonsense. How is it that anyone would support gay rights, but expect gays to stop engaging in gay behavior in accordance with a social moral code? It makes no sense. "I believe you should have this right, but I'm only going to support it if you agree to stop exercising it."
Your inconsistency is so great that I truly suspect intense prejudice as the source of your efforts to find fault in homosexuality.
Madhukar, I'm sure that after reading so many of these forums, you have noticed that we atheists do not agree on much except holding the strong opinion that there are no gods. Still, the reason that most people reject homosexuals as equal, honorable people, is that god told them to, or gave them an excuse to. We do not share that excuse to practice acts of bigotry toward homosexuals. We therefore must find non-theological reasons to hate, fear, or scorn them. Since what other people do sexually is really none of our business, and does others no harm at all, what reasons are there?
Also atheists have felt the sting of prejudice. Compassionate individuals do not wish to cause pain to others. We may stand up for their rights out of empathy for their bad treatment. Most atheists, who I know, put a high value on fairness and justice. That is reason enough to treat homosexuals with dignity.
As to your question, "Where homosexuality deserves support and where it should not be supported?" I, personally, do not support any behavior that causes pain, or harm to others. It doesn't matter what the sexual orientation of the person is.
Your compassionate reply makes me think more compared to all other replies. I am reviewing all the discussion elsewhere and you wll find that what you say will find strong weightage.
I think that this discussion might increase our understanding of why it is so difficult to convince believers that there is no factual basis for their belief. They have eagerly given up their will. Not only their ability to reason, but their will to do so. Following the leader removes all responsibility for their ideas and their actions. They don't need to plan. The leader thinks for them. he tells them what to do. When we engage them in rational discussion, we are forcing them to think. They HATE that!
I don't support homosexuality. Then again, I don't support heterosexuality. And, I don't support bisexuality. And the reason I don't? Because it's none of my damn business who you are or how you define yourself. I've got a hard enough time leading my own life without worrying about what two or more consenting adults are doing across the country, in the bordering state, or next door. I do, however, support equal rights under the law for all people. If you're a man who likes to have sex with women, good for you. If you're a woman who likes to have sex with women, good for you. If you're either a man or a woman who likes to have sex with both males and females, good for you. And, if you fall in love with a person of the same or opposite sex, I sincerely wish you the life that brings you the greatest joy and most happiness.
The only thing I ask of my fellow primates is to do your best to treat everyone else with decency and respect. Mow your yard, pay your taxes, rotate your tires, and be a good neighbor. I'll do my best to reciprocate.
I'll try to be sensitive here to the cultural differences and to a possible language difference. But.... There are many places, and many people, who discriminate against and persecute LGBT people. Such activities are against human rights. There is no objective reason that people of the same gender should not fall in love and marry. As for whether society, or culture, has the right to write laws that persecute LGBT people, I would say no. A culture that imposes punishments on people for being LGBT is a backward, nonhumanist culture.
I don't know whether the caste system was religious or cultural. I suspect both. And I would regard the caste system as immoral and backward. I would say the same about purdah and sati. These customs are culturally propagated, whether they are part of religion or not. If it's OK for society to persecute LGBT people, because those rules are cultural, then purdah, thecaste system, sati are also OK. And they are not.
I think its simple
" what reason do you have not to support it ? "
I support anyone in thier endeavour to find mutual love in almost all circumstances that I can think of.
The religious have a reason " GOD SAYS ITS WRONG !!" or words to that effect depending on the religion. Even though on occasion it appears full ok in the bible.
Reply by David Raphael
Where on earth do you get the idea that homosexuality is a disorder?
Reply by dr kellie
Your assertation that homosexuality is a disorder is bullshit.
As far as I am aware, the medical science says that
homosexuality is neither a medical nor psycological disorder but does not say
what exactly it is. If I do not agree with religion on what it says about god,
I do my own thinking. That is was I do on this subject too, until science comes
up with a firm diagnosis.
“The language used by DNA is
called the genetic code, which lets organisms read the information in the genes.
This information is the instructions for constructing and operating a living
contain all the information an organism uses to function”
Gens are what decide how a man behaves.
During the process of DNA replication,
errors occasionally occur in the polymerization of the second strand.”
The third view is "biological" and holds that
such desires are genetic or hormonal in origin, and that there is no choice
involved and no "childhood trauma" necessary.
Genetics tells us bout the ‘variations’ in living
organisms. Errors likewise occur during
DNA replication. I am extremely sorry if my choice of the word ‘disorder’ is
causing so much anguish, but I hope eventually you will all realize what I am
driving at and will then pardon me for this. The ‘biological’ view has existed,
though not proven and so is not just my imagination.
“Since what other people do
sexually is really none of our business, and does others no harm at all, what
reasons are there?”
Reproductive ability is one important reason for evolution
and life forms on this planet have been endowed with this natural ability.
Intelligent man has further attached great emotions with this ability. The
family system is created and sustained because of desire for orderly reproduction.
Homosexuality completely ignores this noble human emotion and is centered
around questionable pleasure. If animal
pleasure can be given so much importance, why not legalise extra-marital
relations? Or, remove the institution of marriage from our social system?
“I would still support that
homosexuals have the same rights as anybody else, that would include marriage.”
“In Denmark, a form of homosexual marriage has been legal
since 1989. Through 1995, less than 5% of Danish homosexuals had gotten married,
and 28% of these marriages had already ended in divorce or death.”
Marriage need not be considered a fundamental right.
However, what would be the purpose of homosexual marriage? Almost all of us
ordinary folks do marry. With legalized homosexual marriage, do all homosexuals
want to marry? How long their marriages last?
Physicians who understand current scientific views of
homosexuality are in a position to provide excellent care to gay and lesbian
patients and to provide a model of leadership in their communities and
hospitals regarding issues of homosexuality.
If homosexuality can be treated medically, is it not a ‘disorder’?
And if a person can abandon these practices, why not expect him to do so?
“The typical sexual practices of homosexuals are a
medical horror story:
Their sex practices include:
“The median age of death for homosexuals,
however, was virtually the same nationwide--and, overall, less than 2% survived
to old age.”
“In 1993, a study(9) of 428 gays in San Francisco found
that only 14% reported just a single sexual partner in the previous year. The
vast majority had multiple sex partners.
“In 1994, the largest national gay magazine'° reported
that only 17% of its sample of 2,500 gays claimed to live together in a
monogamous relationship. “
We do concern ourselves with society’s health.
Reply by Sentient Biped
I'll try to be sensitive here to the cultural differences
and to a possible language difference.
"I don't know whether the caste system was religious or
cultural. I suspect both. And I would regard the caste system as immoral and
backward. I would say the same about purdah and sati. These customs are
culturally propagated, whether they are part of religion or not. If it's OK for
society to persecute LGBT people, because those rules are cultural, then purdah, the caste system, sati are also OK. And they are not."
I have made every effort to exclude any cultural effect and
base all my thoughts on plain logic. You have mentioned some wrong social
practices. Forget the ‘prdah’. Its futile to talk about muslims, but Hindu
society did realize its errors and they largely stand corrected. A little more
time, and they will go away. What is more, the liberal thought that arrived
here through the British has also played some part in the reformation. Why not
learn something from us now?
I must once again state emphatically that I have no desire
of offending anyone, in fact any discussion on social reform can never be with
that intent. Still, I once again sincerely apologise if what I have said has
"Almost all of us ordinary folks do marry."
Your bigotry is showing. Sexual preferences do not define how "ordinary" a person is, or even whether they wish to marry.
"Their sex practices include:
Dude, all I can assume is you're a virgin, if you have no idea that all people (yes, even straights!!1!) have sex this way.
"What would be the purpose of homosexual marriage?"
The exact same as any other marriage. People get married for tax breaks, for foreign residency, for inheritance, for raising children, for being in love, for simply getting people to stop telling them they're going to hell for living together, and on and on and on. What do I have to say to get it through your head? WE'RE JUST LIKE YOU, BECAUSE WE'RE AS HUMAN AS YOU ARE.
IF I have to believe you, I am a bigot if I have not indulged in oral and rectal sex. I am not a virgin, which is well appreciated by people who know me. However, if you wish to call me a bigot, so be it. I seem to be speaking a language quite foreign to most of you, but I wish to say that when westerners commented on the social matters not acceptable to them we reacted in a far more positive manner. I accept all criticism and all adjectives you all want to attach to me, but I would still hold that if homosexuality can find cures, then it is desirable to do so.
And, hey...what about hand jobs? I love a good hand job:)
I know the point/points you are making, Nerd, and, as usual, I agree. On the other hand, I don't ever want to be ordinary. I prefer extraordinary.