Before anyone completely flies off the handle at me, I support the Gay and Lesbian community. I have no problem with gay marriage, gay rights, or gay adoption, in fact I encourage it ESPECIALLY gay adoption. There are so many children in this world who need a family who can provide them with love and good home and I disagree with anybody who wants to deny a child a family based off something as trivial as sexual preference.

This post is basically asking others opinions of the idea that is out now that being homosexual is inborn. My personal stance on it is that you can't be born genetically predisposed to be attracted to a certain gender. I think that homosexuality is a choice that is made by the individual at puberty. The only reason I specify puberty is because that's when the body starts to mature emotionally and sexually, and starts to produce those hormones that causes our minds to shift from when we were little and thought "girls were icky" and that "boys have cooties" to seeing the opposite gender as attractive and a potential mate. Which is why males like female and vice versa. In the case of homosexuality I just think that an individual has these same thoughts and feeling but just finds member s of the same gender as attractive and sees them as potential mates.

Anyways that's my take on it that homosexuality is a matter of preference.

Views: 111


You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Creature on December 11, 2009 at 3:08pm
I'm bisexual, I never really considered the implications or tried to label myself 'til I reached my teens. I did, however, start having girl crushes when I was a little girl(probably 5ish), it wasn't so much a sex thing(ewww 5), as the same sort of emotional feeling I've had when meeting someone I'm attracted to as an adult. I think it's intrinsic, in the same way as handedness. As a lefty I never had to consider which hand would be dominant, it's just how I am.
Comment by Buffy on December 10, 2009 at 10:29pm
It's not a matter of "preference". That would mean "gee, I could go for either gender but I prefer my same gender". I mean did you get to puberty and think, "I like boys and girls equally but I prefer boys so I'll date them"?

Like heterosexuality, homosexuality is an orientation, not a preference. It's not something we "choose" and if you ask reputable researchers and LGBT people you'll discover it's considered to be inherent.
Comment by Prog Rock Girl on December 10, 2009 at 4:59pm
It's got to be somewhere in the middle of genetic or choice. It's not something a person can easily turn on or off, but I also don't think it's genetically set in stone. Studies about the effects of birth order on homosexuality, and many other psychological theories about homosexuality, omit the idea of bisexuality completely. Different cultures' traditions show sexuality to be more flexible, and in some animals, homosexuality occurs but isn't treated with any stigma--it also isn't divided into hetero and homo "teams".

Maybe it's similar to a person's becoming left- or right-handed?

But at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter. Why debate why some people like certain colors or certain kinds of music? That's just their particular taste. There are a lot of tastes and interests that we don't consider an on/off "choice", but we also don't think they are genetically inflexible.
Comment by Howard S. Dunn on December 10, 2009 at 4:38pm
A. Williams 'spectrum of preference' rings pretty true. Here's an anecdote that doesn't prove anything - but, nevertheless, is food for thought:

In college, a friend from East St. Louis told us about a guy that kept offering him $50 to give him head - not to get it - to give it. He then said to us: "Dude, isn't that the sickest thing you ever heard?"

My brother, a highly successful heterosexual philanderer says, without blinking: "Dude - 50 bucks is 50 bucks and a blow job is a blow job!"

It was kinda hard to argue without being disengenous.

B. I had a girlfriend who had just broken up with her girlfriend. I asked her if she considered herself "bisexual". She said it was more like "ambisexual" - some people have a dominant right hand, some a dominant left. But if you can use both with equal ease, you are ambidexterous.

I think the right handed, left handed, ambidexterous model is a viable parallel.
Comment by Johnny on December 10, 2009 at 1:36pm
well, first of all I'd like to say that it's not a matter of opinion. Science will determine yes or no.

Second, I say it doesn't matter. People are the way they are and it doesn't hurt anybody. In fact, widespread gayness can only help the world! Yes, help. We are having a population crisis here and there are nowhere near enough loving homes to take in all of the babies that result from unwanted pregnancies. Gay families= loving homes. Gay relationships = less babies being born. Win/win. There's no argument against gays accept "eeeeeeeeewww" and "god says no."

wow, mature.
Comment by Howard S. Dunn on December 10, 2009 at 11:44am
It is definitely physiological for the most part. Also, while it is a construct to assert that anyone is 'born black' it is true that there are certain features that have been jammed into this construct - even though they are not consistent. Skin hues may differ, nose shapes, hair texture, etc. and you can still be of African descent - but WE ALL ARE OF AFRICAN DESCENT at one point or another.

In fact, the propensity to become aroused by people of the opposite or same gender has a huge physiological component.

BTW - Is my neighbor's dog gay as a lifestyle choice? He prefers, consistently, to attempt to mount other male dogs even when a choice is available.
Comment by Fabio on December 10, 2009 at 11:04am
Sexual orientation is not an active choice. The discovery of one's own sexuality - and I agree that it usually coincides with the kick-in of puberty, though not always - simply means acknowledging a particular side of one's own nature. That said, sexual orientation is not (entirely) genetically determined - nurture plays a role too - just as gender is not that easy to determine using our rigid social labels of male and female. As it turns out, biology doesn't really give a damn about our social conventions.
Comment by Loren Miller on December 10, 2009 at 10:58am
Courtney, before you go to far with that "choice" business, may I heartily recommend the following two 60 Minutes segments:

60 Minutes: Gay or Straight, Part 1
60 Minutes: Gay or Straight, Part 2

This story alleges that we may be dealing with a phenomenon which may be partially genetic in its aspect and partially hormonal. We're introduced two sets of identical twins, one set of young boys, one set of adults, and in each case one of the twins is straight and one is gay ... and in both cases, there was no difference in how the children were raised.

Watch both clips ... then YOU TELL ME.

© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service