Dad, mom ...I'm ...um, I'm gay

[KCKID]

The title/subtitle says it all. This scenario must have occurred many, many times. We've all heard, read or seen instances of this and the types of responses that parents of their gay children have given. While we only seem to have a handful of vocal anti-gay Christians on this forum, I'm genuinely curious as to how they would react if their son or daughter came to them and told them that they're gay. Others, feel free to offer your input.

The question again: How would you (a Christian) respond to your son or your daughter coming out to you that they are gay? Without revealing any more than you need to, has this actually happened to any of you ...either as a gay son/daughter or as a parent?

[Strider324]

[Replying to post 246 by dianaiad]

I had asked if you would google this term 'Gay Lifestyle' to support your contention that promiscuity was an objective element, but you demurred. Based on your comments, I assume this fits the bill:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... 0lifestyle

"Gay lifestyle is used by conservative homophobes to vilify gay people. When people are asked what gay lifestyle means most of them will only mention things that elicit a negative response: Drinking, drugs, promiscuity, cross-dressing, bar hopping and orgies."

They seem to neglect the fact most of these things (with the possible exception of cross dressing) are parts of straight society as well."

[dianaiad]

[Replying to post 246 by dianaiad]

I had asked if you would google this term 'Gay Lifestyle' to support your contention that promiscuity was an objective element, but you demurred. Based on your comments, I assume this fits the bill:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... 0lifestyle

"Gay lifestyle is used by conservative homophobes to vilify gay people. When people are asked what gay lifestyle means most of them will only mention things that elicit a negative response: Drinking, drugs, promiscuity, cross-dressing, bar hopping and orgies."

They seem to neglect the fact most of these things (with the possible exception of cross dressing) are parts of straight society as well."

Which is why I don't include 'these things' in the definition of 'gay lifestyle,' except promiscuous gay sex.

BTW, cross dressing is also indulged in by heterosexuals. Not all 'drag queens' are gay.

The thing that defines a lifestyle is the thing that cannot be included in any other sort of 'lifestyle.' If one is living a gay lifestyle, what is the only thing that cannot, and is not, done by a heterosexual: the thing that defines it as 'gay,' and not an activity possible for both heterosexual and homosexuals?

Here's a hint: its who they have sex with. That's it. That is the only thing different about gays: there's nothing specifically 'gay' about anything else they might do; a gay teacher doesn't teach math any differently than a straight one does, or buy homes differently, or get sick differently, or earn livings differently, or do anything ELSE differently.

Now, what makes who one has sex with a 'lifestyle,' rather than a 'preference?' The priority one gives it in one's life. When you are dealing with sex, making it a high priority in one's life, with multiple partners, is called 'promiscuity.'

the point here is....and it seems to be whishing over heads here....is that I think that gays and straights are considerably more alike than not; I can't see that a gay teacher is any different, or deserves more criticism, than a straight one, or that a gay banker does his job any differently from a straight one.

I disapprove of gay promiscuity. I disapprove of 'straight' promiscuity exactly the same degree, and for precisely the same reason.

[Strider324]

[Replying to post 246 by dianaiad]

I had asked if you would google this term 'Gay Lifestyle' to support your contention that promiscuity was an objective element, but you demurred. Based on your comments, I assume this fits the bill:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... 0lifestyle

"Gay lifestyle is used by conservative homophobes to vilify gay people. When people are asked what gay lifestyle means most of them will only mention things that elicit a negative response: Drinking, drugs, promiscuity, cross-dressing, bar hopping and orgies."

They seem to neglect the fact most of these things (with the possible exception of cross dressing) are parts of straight society as well."

Which is why I don't include 'these things' in the definition of 'gay lifestyle,' except promiscuous gay sex.

BTW, cross dressing is also indulged in by heterosexuals. Not all 'drag queens' are gay.

The thing that defines a lifestyle is the thing that cannot be included in any other sort of 'lifestyle.' If one is living a gay lifestyle, what is the only thing that cannot, and is not, done by a heterosexual: the thing that defines it as 'gay,' and not an activity possible for both heterosexual and homosexuals?

Here's a hint: its who they have sex with. That's it. That is the only thing different about gays: there's nothing specifically 'gay' about anything else they might do; a gay teacher doesn't teach math any differently than a straight one does, or buy homes differently, or get sick differently, or earn livings differently, or do anything ELSE differently.

Now, what makes who one has sex with a 'lifestyle,' rather than a 'preference?' The priority one gives it in one's life. When you are dealing with sex, making it a high priority in one's life, with multiple partners, is called 'promiscuity.'

Sex is an extremely high priority in my life - especially really good tantric sex. I have had....... 1 sexual partner.....in the last 6 years.

Your argument fails. You have arbitrarily added 'multiple partners' - which indeed is a component of promiscuity - and simply assumed for your convenience that this is a condition of whatever 'Lifestyle' you choose to demonize - the newly minted 'heterosexual lifestyle' you were backed into that magically includes promiscuity (a definition found no where else), or the 'homosexual lifestyle', which is the one you really have an issue with.

Bottom line, you have invented a definition much like the one from the conservative homophobes referenced above. Why?

[bluethread]

,

I have to question whether most gays consider themselves living a "gay lifestyle". That is a term used most often by people who fear gays (yeah I've got no idea either). Gays, as a general rule, live "human lifestyles" (and ain't that a big farm) just as heterosexuals do.

The problem arises when one group of people feel they have the right to deny another group of people the right to live a "human lifestyle".

The above sentence is what the "anti-gay" faction of humans are guilty of.

It is true that most people consider their lifestyles to be normative, especially regarding things that they do on a routine basis. However, people also identify themselves based on a certain behavior when they wish for that behavior to receive extra consideration. For example, those who seek to have homosexuality accepted as a social norm refer to homosexuals as a community, implying a common social structure.

Extra considerations. Surely this is a very poor joke. Having equal rights is not EXTRA. Having homosexuality accepted as a human norm, which it so obviously is.

I speak of extra as in addition to what is already provided. If homosexuality were accepted as a social norm, then people would not be protesting for it's acceptance as such.

[bluethread]

It is true that most people consider their lifestyles to be normative, especially regarding things that they do on a routine basis.

Unless one works in the sex industry - whether gay or straight - then one's lifestyle - gay or straight - would be pretty much the same.

Except in those areas that differentiate homosexual behavior from heterosexual behavior.

However, people also identify themselves based on a certain behavior when they wish for that behavior to receive extra consideration. For example, those who seek to have homosexuality accepted as a social norm refer to homosexuals as a community, implying a common social structure.

Seems to me that the above would refer more to heterosexuals than to homosexuals. However, whether gay or straight people generally tend to be tribal.

Yes, people tend to be tribal, that is my point. People establish social norms. If one wishes to change those social norms, that does not exempt them from the tactics used by those who seek to maintain those social norms. Identifying oneself as part of a group that defines themselves based on a particular characteristic, does not make that group a community, unless that is a characteristic central to the activities of that group. Most heterosexuals do not identify themselves as being part of a heterosexual community. They may identify themselves as part of a community that's say religious, which may by the way include norms that speak to sexual behavior.

[Danmark]

Yes, people tend to be tribal, that is my point. People establish social norms. If one wishes to change those social norms, that does not exempt them from the tactics used by those who seek to maintain those social norms. Identifying oneself as part of a group that defines themselves based on a particular characteristic, does not make that group a community, unless that is a characteristic central to the activities of that group. Most heterosexuals do not identify themselves as being part of a heterosexual community. They may identify themselves as part of a community that's say religious, which may by the way include norms that speak to sexual behavior.

And in the United States most 'whites' do not identify themselves racially. Race, like gender assignment is not an issue to whomever is in the traditional majority, particularly if that majority also has been the group in power. For most of those in the dominant group, such racial and sexual distinctions are a non issue. This is helps explain their insensitivity to the issues those in the oppressed minority hold dear.

[bluethread]

Yes, people tend to be tribal, that is my point. People establish social norms. If one wishes to change those social norms, that does not exempt them from the tactics used by those who seek to maintain those social norms. Identifying oneself as part of a group that defines themselves based on a particular characteristic, does not make that group a community, unless that is a characteristic central to the activities of that group. Most heterosexuals do not identify themselves as being part of a heterosexual community. They may identify themselves as part of a community that's say religious, which may by the way include norms that speak to sexual behavior.

And in the United States most 'whites' do not identify themselves racially. Race, like gender assignment is not an issue to whomever is in the traditional majority, particularly if that majority also has been the group in power. For most of those in the dominant group, such racial and sexual distinctions are a non issue. This is helps explain their insensitivity to the issues those in the oppressed minority hold dear.

That is a factor. However, there are many "blacks" who do not wish to identify themselves racially. This is difficult, because those who wish to continue to affect change in the norms insist on promoting a "black community". Yes, there are communities that have particular norms associated with the "black experience". However, that is the point. Those who wish to promote particular norms promote the idea of a "gay lifestyle" or "gay community". Not that those things are well defined, but that the terms "lifestyle" and "community" connote a degree of social acceptance. Now, when one asks for a definition or tries to define such terms, the objections to such a request or action, exposes the real purpose as political and not definitive.

[The Me's]

The title/subtitle says it all. This scenario must have occurred many, many times. We've all heard, read or seen instances of this and the types of responses that parents of their gay children have given. While we only seem to have a handful of vocal anti-gay Christians on this forum, I'm genuinely curious as to how they would react if their son or daughter came to them and told them that they're gay. Others, feel free to offer your input.

The question again: How would you (a Christian) respond to your son or your daughter coming out to you that they are gay? Without revealing any more than you need to, has this actually happened to any of you ...either as a gay son/daughter or as a parent?

Christians who express an opinion on homosexuality and gay marriage face immediate retribution from the LGBT community.

That's why you don't see openly vocal anti-gays.

This practice is common among those who want to be right but can only BE right through bullying anyone who disagrees. If they knew in their hearts that they were right, they would have faith in ultimately convincing others. Truth is that powerful. It needs no assistance from us.

[Danmark]

Yes, people tend to be tribal, that is my point. People establish social norms. If one wishes to change those social norms, that does not exempt them from the tactics used by those who seek to maintain those social norms. Identifying oneself as part of a group that defines themselves based on a particular characteristic, does not make that group a community, unless that is a characteristic central to the activities of that group. Most heterosexuals do not identify themselves as being part of a heterosexual community. They may identify themselves as part of a community that's say religious, which may by the way include norms that speak to sexual behavior.

And in the United States most 'whites' do not identify themselves racially. Race, like gender assignment is not an issue to whomever is in the traditional majority, particularly if that majority also has been the group in power. For most of those in the dominant group, such racial and sexual distinctions are a non issue. This is helps explain their insensitivity to the issues those in the oppressed minority hold dear.

That is a factor. However, there are many "blacks" who do not wish to identify themselves racially. This is difficult, because those who wish to continue to affect change in the norms insist on promoting a "black community". Yes, there are communities that have particular norms associated with the "black experience". However, that is the point. Those who wish to promote particular norms promote the idea of a "gay lifestyle" or "gay community". Not that those things are well defined, but that the terms "lifestyle" and "community" connote a degree of social acceptance. Now, when one asks for a definition or tries to define such terms, the objections to such a request or action, exposes the real purpose as political and not definitive.

Those are important points. Neither the 'gay' nor the 'black' community are monolithic. The goal is to be color blind to some extent. We've had tremendous positive change in the U.S, if not the world on these issues. Minority groups certainly need to go through a stage where they seek empowerment and success is achieved when group identification is no longer necessary. In the meantime individuals in the group get to make their own decisions about how import such identification is.

[KCKID]

The title/subtitle says it all. This scenario must have occurred many, many times. We've all heard, read or seen instances of this and the types of responses that parents of their gay children have given. While we only seem to have a handful of vocal anti-gay Christians on this forum, I'm genuinely curious as to how they would react if their son or daughter came to them and told them that they're gay. Others, feel free to offer your input.

The question again: How would you (a Christian) respond to your son or your daughter coming out to you that they are gay? Without revealing any more than you need to, has this actually happened to any of you ...either as a gay son/daughter or as a parent?

Christians who express an opinion on homosexuality and gay marriage face immediate retribution from the LGBT community.

Um ...might this be because the average Christian opinion on homosexuality is one that generally demeans homosexuals? Besides that, the OP asks how a parent participating in this forum would respond if their child came out to them as gay.

That's why you don't see openly vocal anti-gays.

Really? Could've fooled me. That said, I see no reason for one to be anti-gay to begin with.

This practice is common among those who want to be right but can only BE right through bullying anyone who disagrees. If they knew in their hearts that they were right, they would have faith in ultimately convincing others. Truth is that powerful. It needs no assistance from us.

Unclear as to the meaning of the above. Are you referring to the gay or anti-gay as being the bully?