Friday, January 26, 2007

Do All Homosexuals Want to Get Married?

Photobucket - Video and Image HostingThere are three groups of homosexuals who have three very different views on the issue of same-sex marriages. The first group includes those who want to redefine the institution of marriage to include gay and lesbian couples. They argue that this will be good for society and cause gay men to "settle down". The second group of homosexuals want nothing to do with marriage, viewing it as incompatible with the so-called sexual freedom of the gay culture. The third group advocate for the deconstructing of marriage altogether. They argue that the government should sanction all relationships of any conceivable make up and size, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, number of partners or age.

The first groups position is at odds with the other two. Let's take the second groups view of marriage. For these gays and lesbians the thought of participating in a traditional marriage ceremony doesn't bring joy to their hearts. Instead, it provokes anxiety and even revulsion. These individuals view marriage as conformist, confining and diametrically opposed to everything that "gay liberation" represents. They are all for equal rights and benefits, but they believe that affirming marriage - gay or straight -works against this.
Jim Rinnert, of In These Times magazine, shares this same view in an editorial titled "The Trouble with Gay Marriage":
"Gay marriage strikes me as, first and foremost, just another way to show the straights we're the same as them, that we're as "normal" as the heterosexuals with whom we share the planet and thereby are worthy of acceptance into their club....{G}uess what - we're not the same. We're different. Rather than try to paint heterosexual strips on our pelts, let's examine, explore, and celebrate our different coloration."
"Let them have it - the term and the institution. To engage in that argument is to be sidetracked by semantics...If you want to register at Target and get lots of stuff when you "wed," do it. Let heterosexual men and women have their institution and their names for it; we need to find the imagination and the guts to visualize and build our own." Click HERE for full article by Mr. Rinnert.
Disagreeing with the idea of same-sex marriage may suggest that some homosexuals, particularly gay men, are simply not "the marrying kind." Social science research would seem to support that view. A 2004 report from the University of Chicago indicated that 61 percent of the men in Chicago's gay community had more than thirty sexual partners, with 43 percent of that group reporting more than sixty partners. (Adrian Brune, "City Gays Skip Long-term Relationships: Study Say, " Washington Blade, February 27, 2004, p. 12).
As for the group that wishes to deconstruct the institution of marriage, Paula Ettelbrick has spoken for this group many times. Ms. Ettelbrick, who teaches law at New York University and Columbia University, cautions gays and lesbians about pursuing same-sex marriage in order to "make us feel good about ourselves". In her essay "Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?" she makes this point:
"Marriage will not liberate us as lesbians and gay men. In fact, it will constrain us, make us more invisible, force our assimilation into the mainstream, and undermine the goals of gay liberation...Marriage runs contrary to two of the primary goals of the lesbian and gay movement: the affirmation of gay identity and culture and the validation of many forms of relationships."
Nancy Polikoff, a law professor at American University juxtaposed Ettelbrick's thoughts in an opinion piece in the Washington Blade:
"...Gay marriage will move us in the wrong direction if it limits legal recognition to married couples only." Read full opinion HERE.
According to Stanley Kurtz at the Hoover Institution, himself, along with Ettelbrick and Polikoff and other family law advocates, hope to use gay marriage to pave the way for the legalization of group marriage and the concomitant demise of all family categories:
"By ceasing to conceive of marriage as a partnership composed of one person of each sex, the state may become more receptive to units of three or more....All desirable changes in family law need not be made at once." (Stanley Kurtz, "Beyond Gay Marriage," Weekly Standard, August 4-11, 2003, pp. 26-33).
I am against same-sex marriages, however, I am a strong advocate for more rights for the homosexual community. This opinion is not new because it has been said and explained by me many times in various posts. I firmly believe that gay men and lesbian women are oppressed by society, mainly because there behaviors are unacceptable to what society views as "normal". This may be true, but on the other hand, we all need to learn to live together, but under better terms that is pleasing to both sides of the marriage issue.
I feel that the benefits that proponents of same-sex marriages are looking for fall under the Benefits Fairness Act. (Click HERE to read more about this act. )
A lot of same-sex supporters think that this act only further proclaims them as "secondary class citizens", it does however give them the many freedoms of marriage without redefining an institution.
We must come to some sort of middle ground, otherwise there will always be unnecessary strife and differences in opinion that will just further worsen the situation unless we can live together with a reasonable compromise.
As a final thought, what are some other compromises that we can come up with in order to please both sides on the marriage issue?
I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts and opinions as we come one step closer to living with each others differences.
Scia

34 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I guess I am missing the point of the article. Is it mean to imply that because some gays think gay marriage is a bad idea none of them should have the right to marry? This article only proves what we already know; everybody has their own opinion.

I think it would be kind of foolish to think that all people from a certain aspect of society are going to have the same opinion. Would you have thought that all gay people like watermelon?

9:01 PM, January 26, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

I find you to be a very rational man, SCIA.

Anonymous writes:
This article only proves what we already know; everybody has their own opinion.

Hey, now you're catching on! In my opinion, and many others like me, there shouldn't be homosexual marriage in Massachusetts!

There can be something else but don't call it marriage - and don't try to pass it off as just another flavor of marriage. It isn't marriage now, and it never truly will be (in spite of the SJC's ruling and Romney's blunder), because marriage is something else - it's the union of one man and one woman.

One other thing - what do you have against watermelon? ;-)

8:54 AM, January 27, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is what I want out of my society. I want people to be able to walk down the street without being harrassed by others because of their perceived sexuality. We as a society are better than this. People should have all the same equalities as their neighbors unless they prove that they do not deserve them. This should be judged indiviually, and not as a group. Stereotyping is not an atractive trait, although it is our heritage as Americans.

Gay Marriage is a symptom of society ignoring the fact that a group of people are being unfairly treated. If society had addressed this issue instead of allowing it to linger, it may not have found itself in the position it is in now. Now that we have reached this point we should ask ourselves why we should continue along the same road that got us here. If you always do what you have always done, you'll only get what you've already had. Address the issues of equality and we will all live happily ever after.

Tyler, you may want to have someone explain to you why I brought up watermelon. ;)

3:46 PM, January 27, 2007  
Anonymous OMD said...

There are laws against the sexual behavior of sodomy.

The issue is not and has never been someones perceived orientation. It is the act, the behavior that is the real issue. It is not natural and is not what God intended.

Sexuality was intended for one thing only and that was a lure, a pull, an attractiveness, an intimatcy between a man and a woman cleved together to produce off-spring and enjoyment for each other. It was never intended for man to sexually pleasure man or woman to sexually pleasure woman.

I know what you meant by your watermellon remark and you wrongly try to associate homosexuals with
a particular ethnic group. Homosexual marriage has nothing to do with civil rights

10:06 PM, January 27, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The thread is about whether or not gays should marry because other gays are against it. I find your comments a little off base. Try again.

7:13 AM, January 28, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I know what you meant by your watermellon remark and you wrongly try to associate homosexuals with
a particular ethnic group."

Wrong. Guess again.

7:15 AM, January 28, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Homosexual marriage has nothing to do with civil rights"

Yes it does!

7:55 AM, January 28, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Who are you being harassed by when you walk down the street, anonymous? Is the protection of marriage as an institution that joins one man with one woman somehow harassment, in your mind? I guess I don't understand why you are not equal, because you can marry - just not someone of the same sex.

It's not a permanent condition by any stretch of the imagination, but I do know that some people, for some reason, are more comfortable with homosexuality than they are with heterosexuality.

If your sexuality were truly natural, you would have a basis for an argument about discrimination, but personally - and many people agree with me - there is no definitive proof that homosexuality is natural, and now is not the time to quote to me the existence of homosexuality in nature. It's a weak and pointless argument, because we are far above the animals - MUCH more intelligent. If that's an issue for you, let's talk about it.

6:01 PM, January 28, 2007  
Anonymous OMD said...

Peace be to you anonymous.

Whether or not you perceive my remarks to be off-base is not relevant.

Who really cares whether there are homosexuals that don't agree with homosexual marriage. There are plenty of heterosexuals that that hold the same position as well as those that are all for it. Of what importance is it?

I believe a great many of the concerns homosexual people espouse can be errdicated through the legislative process. BUT to change marriage to a free for all is wrong.

7:16 AM, January 29, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tyler you do a great job of trying to pass off your opinions as fact. Try citing your sources for information that says homosexuality is not natural. I am willing to bet that you will cite Dobson, who is a confirmed liar, and was called out on it publicly by Professor Carol Gilligan when he incorrectly quoted her research. Not only did she leave a five minute message for all to see on YouTube.com, she asked him to never quote her again.

These are the facts, not opinions or lies.

10:37 AM, January 29, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Anonymous,

You said:

"Try citing your sources for information that says homosexuality is not natural"

Sure:

There are no credible peer reviewed studies that conclude that people are born gay.

There are three ways to test for inborn traits: twin studies, brain dissections, and “gene” linkage studies. Since about half of the identical twins studies didn’t have the same sexual preference, twin studies demonstrate that something other than genetics must account for homosexuality. If as many claim, that homosexuality is inherited then identical twins should either be straight, or both gay. (Dr. Jeffery Satinover, “The Gay Gene?” The Journal of Homosexuality).

Another study, which attempted to demonstrate a link between homosexuality and the X-chromosome, has yet to be replicated and a subsequent study actually contradicted the findings of the first. (Dallas, Joe. A Strong Delusion: Confronting the “Gay Christian” Movement. Eugene, Ore: Harvest House,1996).

Even if homosexuality were found to be an “inborn” inherited trait, it would not necessarily mean that it would be “normal”. Some children are born with cystic fibrosis or spina bifida but that doesn’t make it a normal condition. Behaviors and inborn proclivities toward alcoholism, violence, obesity, and homosexuality are now thought to have some connection to genetics but are not good behaviors. There are a number of “normal” and “natural” predispositions that we are “born” with, but we as individuals also have the power to overcome these predispositions.

11:23 AM, January 29, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Since about half of the identical twins studies didn’t have the same sexual preference, twin studies demonstrate that something other than genetics must account for homosexuality."

The latest studies I have seen suggest that twins have a mirror image factor when they divide into two seperate beings. That is also why in many twins one is lefty and the other is righty. I would read further if I were you and get to the part where it says that it is still too early to dismiss genetics as a factor based on this research. My understanding is that they are still trying to figure out what the results mean.

Much to the contrary of what is trying to be portrayed, the research I have seen suggests that a large dose of testosterone given while a mother mouse is still pregnant will render her females with male behavior for life, and likewise for males and estrogen. This behavior can be reproduced in a laboratory at will now according to 60 Minutes.

Whether or not homosexuality is genetic or by choice, we still have a responsibility to live together in peace. Gay people are rightfully standing up for themselves and saying they do not wish to take any more misbehaviour from their neighbors. I say it is about time people who say they love God to start following his will, and learn to put peace first.

12:20 PM, January 29, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Anonymous,

You said:

"I would read further if I were you and get to the part where it says that it is still too early to dismiss genetics as a factor based on this research. My understanding is that they are still trying to figure out what the results mean."

Yes, this is true, but there is more evidence to strongly suggest that homosexuality is NOT genetic than vice-versa.

You said in closing:

"I say it is about time people who say they love God to start following his will, and learn to put peace first."

True, but what does this have to do with the fact that Christ does not agree with the homosexual lifestyle?

4:05 PM, January 29, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Didn't God have something to say about this?

7:37 AM, January 30, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Yes, this is true, but there is more evidence to strongly suggest that homosexuality is NOT genetic than vice-versa."

This is an unfounded statement. Passing off an opinion as a fact helps no one better their understanding of the truth. What has been said is that the results of the research has raised more question than answers.

We are very close to understanding that homosexuality is in fact not a choice. When this is scientifically proven, the notion that it is a sin will have to be dismissed. That will leave all the acts and fear perpetrated against the gay community unwarranted. Wouldn't it be best to work from a position that gives you no shame if you're wrong?

Like I said, God calls you to love first. There are so many reasons to hate that we could find one on just about anybody. The opposite is also true.

7:39 AM, January 30, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Does love have boundaries, or does it allow the loved to endanger themselves?

10:07 AM, January 30, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

When this is scientifically proven, the notion that it is a sin will have to be dismissed.

Is the Creator of the Universe uninformed on His creation?

Do we presume to tell God what is, and what is not, sin?

Is He not the one in control?

10:09 AM, January 30, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If He is in control, what are you worried about? Isn't it presumptious to think He needs your help?

7:37 PM, January 30, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Isn't it presumptuous for you to assume that you can tell Him what is, and what isn't, sin?

Read Isaiah 14 and ask yourself, "Do I want to compete for God's position on the throne?"

9:02 AM, January 31, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Anonymous,

I said:

"Yes, this is true, but there is more evidence to strongly suggest that homosexuality is NOT genetic than vice-versa."

And you responded with:

"This is an unfounded statement. Passing off an opinion as a fact helps no one better their understanding of the truth. What has been said is that the results of the research has raised more question than answers."

A.) Show me the documentation to back up your claim.

The research out there to suggest that homosexuality is genetic has NEVER been replicated to prove it past a "theory". The scientific evidence that I have provided, and can provide more if requested, is irrefutable and has been replicated in the medical community time and time again.

SHOW ME YOUR EVIDENCE before passing CLAIMS off as fact.

If however, as researchers Simon Levay, Michael Baily, and Richard Pillard have argued that homosexual tendencies may be indicated even prior to birth, this predisposition still does not make the behavior “normal”. Alcoholics are predisposed to drinking which makes it easier for them to fall into the sin of drunkenness. It is not a sin to want to drink. But it is a sin to drink to excess. But God gave man free will so that we can choose to respond to the influences in our lives or let them control us. While it is true that those who are genetically predisposed sexually toward those of the same sex or who are even disposed to little children or even to being a transvestite, it is also true that each of us individually is also responsible for crossing over from the temptation to sin.

There is no specific gene linked to homosexuality. Even though there were early findings that there was a link, other geneticists quickly debunked this notion. At this time there has never been any conclusive evidence demonstrating such a genetic causation.

10:06 AM, January 31, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check this out:

http://www.borndifferent.org/

4:52 PM, January 31, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Anonymous,

I checked out the Born Different website. The site does not come up with any conclusive, or remotetly conclusive, evidence to suggest that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition.

Starting out with the "gay" penguins to the way people sit and talk, 60 Minutes clip, is just absurd and opinion based. The twins story is concluded with the statement: "that means some people are born gay." Like I said, and referenced, this is unconclusive and only an inference at best.

There is no conclusive evidence to state that there is or is no connection between genetics and sexual orientation, BUT there is more evidence to suggest that sexual orientation is not gentically inclined but a choice.

Interesting site (not being smart in saying this). Thanks for sharing.

Scia

2:46 PM, February 01, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me ask you the same question that is asked in one of the video at borndifferent.org:

Do you remember when you choose to be straight?

Clearly we have opposing opnions of that video. They document how a little girl or boy can already show obvious signs of their sexuality, even at the toddler stage. This would suggest a trait and not a choice to me. I would love to better understand why we differ on this if you care to have a conversation.

10:17 PM, February 02, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

They document how a little girl or boy can already show obvious signs of their sexuality, even at the toddler stage.

Give that some thought...a toddler, showing signs of their SEXUALITY at a young age?

You have to have more common sense than that, my friend. Kids are curious, girls like to play with girls, boys like to play with boys, and every child goes through the stage where the opposite sex is "yucky". Maybe that's why the homosexual activists groups want access to them when they're 9, 10, 11 years old? Convince them that yucky is forever, instead of letting them grow through that phase like all the other children, perhaps?

If this is the goal...it's deplorable...no, it's CRIMINAL to play games with a child's sexuality.

5:52 AM, February 03, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCIA, there is NO "evidence" that being gay is a choice. The ONLY "evidence" I've even seen you (or Tyler for that matter) comes from biased, outdated and tainted sources. You both are only regurgitating the propaganda groups such as Focus on the Family, and other such groups, publish, NONE of which is based on any true science.

7:44 AM, February 03, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Observing and recording their behavior is science Tyler. Nothing more. It is obvious you did not watch the video, because there is no denying what is seen.

11:07 AM, February 03, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Why would you cite our sources as biased, and hold the position that yours are not?

My source is not Focus on the Family, but that is a good, reliable, and trustworthy source. Dr. James Dobson seeks to HELP those that want help. Yes, homosexuality is not normal behavior. Yes, we are above the animals. Yes, God does have a plan for us that doesn't involve homosexuality.

Back to basics...children only come from a male-female relationship, without additional help and scientific intervention. Claiming that this help and scientific intervention is something along the continuum of evolution is nothing short of absurdity. When nature is tinkered with, that's not evolution.

I can't watch the video from work, but regardless of what is seen...kids show affection to eachother in an unhindered way. This weekend, my daughter was at a birthday party with about 10 young girls, and one boy. They were bowling, and when they got excited the girls would grab each other, hug each other, and jump up and down excitedly. Does this mean that they are becoming lesbians? By no means! They are having fun, and showing natural affection for each other! If I were to discourage this behavior, that might prompt some to want to rebel, and perhaps they would start to develop into lesbians because now I've intervened in the normal course of things. Then again, if I was to strongly encourage this behavior, then it could have the same effect.

It bears no witness, however, to any "pre-existing condition" in these tender young women, and should never be construed as such.

9:59 AM, February 05, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I can't watch the video from work, but regardless of what is seen..."

How can you give your opinions on a story you have not seen?! Surely you can't be serious.

By the way, Dobson has been caught in many lies, and his latest is in the form of a five minute video on YouTube.com:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9NHdSVknB5Q

Dr. Gilligan went on YouTube.com with her outrage, and asked that Dobson never cite her work again.

2:07 PM, February 06, 2007  
Anonymous OMD said...

anonymous, even though one may exhibit tendencies towards homosexuality is one thing. Actually engaging in sodomy with another man or a man performing fellatio on another man is the issue here. It is the behavior not the tendencies.

God is clear that He considers the act of homosexual behavior to be a sin. Even sexual fantasies of the same type fall short of God's standard.

If you are suggesting that God's word is faulty or incorrect regarding homosexuality then you are suggesting that God is fallible. If God is fallible we are all doomed.

We are given the ability to choose. God does not force us to act nor does the devil. We make our own decisions.

If you think those that believe homosexual behavior is wrong are persecuting homosexuals try living in the Muslim world as an openly homosexual person.

Would you please admit that it is the behavior that people are reviled by not perceived tendencies. Look, even in the heterosexual world God instructs us NOT to enter into or engage in fornication (unmarried sex) and adultry (sex outside the marriage boundry). See, it is the behavior that God is speaking of. When we do not heed His instruction we fall short of His standard for us.

9:40 PM, February 07, 2007  
Blogger Tyler Dawbin said...

Great points, OMD.

4:47 AM, February 09, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If you think those that believe homosexual behavior is wrong are persecuting homosexuals try living in the Muslim world as an openly homosexual person."

OK, why don't you try living in the Muslim world as an openly Christian person. Still think there has to be sin in order not to be accepted?

"Would you please admit that it is the behavior that people are reviled by not perceived tendencies."

From the KnowThyNeighbor.org blog we find Patriot saying things like:

"no I am here to make you miserable..."

"If I think your gay when I meet you, I will naturally choose not to pursue a meaningful friendship with you."

Can you see why you do not speak for everybody on your side of this argument? This person says that he cannot even be friends with someone who he THINKS is gay, not just an actively practicing homosexual. These are the people I am most concerned with.

10:10 AM, February 10, 2007  
Anonymous OMD said...

You wrote ~ "...Still think there has to be sin in order not to be accepted?"

Reply ~ No I don't.

You wrote ~ "This person says that he cannot even be friends with someone who he THINKS is gay, not just an actively practicing homosexual." "These are the people I am most concerned with."

Reply ~ You know, there are people out there that don't like me just because I am a Christian and when they find out, they do not want to persue a further relationship with me JUST because I believe in Jesus, the Christ.

In the past, my family has been singled out for persecution because of those beliefs. We've had rocks thrown at our house, our dog was murdered and other troubling things happened that I will not mention here, all because I have a Biblical worldview and share that worldview.

Is it right?

Absolutely Not!

I do not speak for Patriot. He or she is entitled to their opinion and decisions on who they will associate with.

Everyone has experienced persecution sometime in their life. Maybe it's the color of their skin or the slant of their eyes or the size of there ears or how short or tall they are or they are disabled or they made decisions that didn't mix with others or they went to jail or they aren't pretty or they don't dress well... and so on and so on. We are imperfect beings and we ALL fall short of God's standard.I do not condone or endorse any form of persecution BUT it exists and will continue to exist.

I guess the point I am establishing is... God loves us all. He doesn't want any of us to perish. There is no one sin greater than another except the blaspheming of the Holy Spirit.

Anonymous, you and I and Scia and Patriot and everyone else, living and dead, will stand before God, in the end, and be judged by Him. There will be two groups, those that disavowed Jesus and those that truly believed in and followed Him. After that, we will respectively receive our just rewards.

11:38 PM, February 10, 2007  
Anonymous OMD said...

Anonymous, when I wrote my reply last night I forgot to inquire of you why you did not address my request?

I wrote ~ "Would you please admit that it is the (sexual) behavior that people are reviled by not perceived tendencies."

I did add (sexual) in this post to make sure it was clear what I was requesting.

Anonymous, I would like to ask you a question because I am very interested in understanding your point of view.

Why do you believe people are turned off by the homosexual physical sexual act and behavior?

Remember, I'm not speaking about orientation.

9:06 AM, February 11, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OMD, I thought I was clear in citing Patriot as an example of how not everyone falls into your belief that it is "(sexual) behavior that people are reviled by not perceived tendencies."

Patriot states that he does not like people that he merely perceives as gay. The act is not what is the trigger for him, and from my observations his reaction is typical of many.

As for your question, sexual attraction is very instinctual. I believe that a hormonal difference exists at some point before a child is born, and they develope same sex attraction.

I would imagine that the disgust people feel at the idea of sexual relations with the sex they are not attracted to is the same for both sides, both gay and straight.

5:49 PM, February 11, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Sign my Guestbook from Bravenet.com Get your Free Guestbook from Bravenet.com