Is "being born this way" an acceptable justificati

Debating issues regarding sexuality

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
KingandPriest
Sage
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2016 1:15 pm
Location: South Florida

Is "being born this way" an acceptable justificati

Post #1

Post by KingandPriest »

An all to common argument I have heard to support homosexuality or transgender-ism is the concept of being born this way. As a Christian I could relate to the concept of being born with a proclivity towards a certain activity which may lead to sin.

Recently, I heard a discussion which reminded me of one of my undergraduate law courses. This was years ago, so I apologize if I do not present as good an argument as this professor. In the course, the professor argued for maintaining the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman because in the court of law, setting a legal precedence on one matter can lead to unintended applications of the decision later on.

As we know, the law is tricky in that a judge may be forced to rule one way based on precedence rather than fairness or equity. To this end, the professor argued that if the law was changed (as it has been today) because one judge or a few judges deemed it acceptable to broaden the definition of marriage, then a precedent could be set for future changes resulting in "undesired effects."

This now leads to the conversation on being "born this way." When a person is making an argument from the position of being "born this way" are they arguing that any person who is born with certain attractions should be allowed to love who ever they wish?

I ask, because many individuals who are currently considered sexual pedophiles can argue that they were born this way, and were attracted to younger people since they were a child. Is it wrong to condemn these individuals for their attractions but praise or support an individual who has homosexual feelings?

If the only answer is because they are breaking the law, then it is fair to argue that homosexuality was once illegal in many nations in the world. Is is possible that a precedent has been set to allow those who were once demonized and criminalized as pedophiles to join the LGBT community, as another misunderstood and rejected people group?

Why treat those who have been "born with a attraction" to the same sex differently from those who have been "born with an attraction" to a younger individual?


In some places, consent for marriage can occur as young as 13. Could those individuals who desire to have relationships and marriage to 13 year old, use the precedent of changing the definition of marriage to expand the parameters on consent as well?

What about being born with an attraction towards animals, or physical objects? The porn industry is evidence that people have these desires. Should they be allowed to marry what they love as well? In short, the professor argued that the court of law does not ask, "where does it end" if precedent has been set and no new laws are written.

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Is "being born this way" an acceptable justifi

Post #41

Post by ttruscott »

benchwarmer wrote: Frankly they should just make all bathrooms unisex such that everyone has privacy. I think that's the only sane move going forward. I realize retrofitting existing bathrooms will be cost prohibitive, but probably cheaper than the avalanche of ridiculous law suits that will soon emerge as this silliness continues to grow.
Exactly. Has the biffy line at a park or fair caused anyone any trouble?
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

DanieltheDragon
Savant
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:37 pm
Location: Charlotte
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Is "being born this way" an acceptable justifi

Post #42

Post by DanieltheDragon »

[Replying to post 38 by KingandPriest]
Allowing teens in high school to choose the bathroom of their preference without supervision can lead to undesired abuse for sexual activities
Allowing teens in high school to go to the bathrooms unsupervised can lead to undesired abuse of sexual activities. Transgendered teens are not the problem.
Post 1: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:48 am Otseng has been banned
Otseng has been banned for having multiple accounts and impersonating a moderator.

steellord123
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 6:24 am

Post #43

Post by steellord123 »

Seems to me the fallback response of being born lgbt is more an attempt to elicit sympathy, to change hearts and minds. It's not meant to be a legal argument or standalone. Rather, the inborn nature of it *combined* with the fact it harms no one should put to rest any argument that lgbt rights will lead directly to open pedophilia, bestiality etc, and to secure their own rights. Any legal restriction should require an actual victim. Otherwise we're no better than communists

jgh7

Post #44

Post by jgh7 »

In a court of law, someone is asked to give a justification for why they like to eat potato salad. They say they are "born this way".

Which is more messed up:

1) the justification they gave

or

2) The people who thought a moral justification was needed for this "immoral" preference

User avatar
OnceConvinced
Savant
Posts: 8969
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 66 times
Contact:

Re: Is "being born this way" an acceptable justifi

Post #45

Post by OnceConvinced »

Wootah wrote:
The problem for born thus way proponents is that everything becomes justifiable.
This is not true. Just because one is born with a penchant to cause harm in some way does not make their negative actions justifiable. One has to learn to control the negative attributes one is born with. Just as all humans have to control basic desires to commit negative acts ,eg lying, wrath, greed, lust etc. We are all born with negative urges. We see that in babies. However we need to be taught how to deal with those negative urges.

Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.

Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.

There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.


Check out my website: Recker's World

User avatar
OnceConvinced
Savant
Posts: 8969
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 66 times
Contact:

Re: Is "being born this way" an acceptable justifi

Post #46

Post by OnceConvinced »

ttruscott wrote:
OnceConvinced wrote:Psa 139:13
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.

This scripture tells us that any leanings we have were specifically designed to be there by god. So if we have paedophilic tendencies, then it is God who created us with those. Likewise with homosexual tendencies.
Please consider the option
that GOD created us ingenuously innocent with a free will so that we could chose our eternal relationship with YHWH as our GOD or as our enemy by choosing to believe HE was a false GOD.
If he created us with a freewill, then he can't blame us if we act on that freewill. If we chose to act in a negative way then God can't just put all the blame on us. If we were the creators and we created a robot with freewill and the ability to run amok if the robot so wishes, then we as designers must take some of the blame for that.

It's like I've pointed out to you before. If a programmer creates a program that includes say a self destruct button and the user presses that button even when told not to, the programmer must still be held accountable for including a self-destruct button.
ttruscott wrote: Then it is no great leap to think that if we chose sin,
If we have chosen to press the self-destruct button then that is very foolish and rebellious of us. However the fact is there was still a self-destruct button. We as humans did not put that button there.
ttruscott wrote: if we separated ourselves from HIM and self created our essential natures as sinful, our minds and desires became clouded by sin like an addiction.
The only way that can possibly happen is if the designer designed our minds in such a way that it CAN become clouded by sin. That it CAN become an addiction. So thus the designer is responsible as much as the user may be when they chose to sin.
ttruscott wrote: Then too it is not a great leap of pre-existence logic nor faith to see that if we were then sent into humans bodies that we would bring our addiction to sin with us and once grown, our sinfulness, not created by GOD but by ourselves, would be expressed in all manner of sin in our human lives.
We can only become addicted to sin if our bodies were designed to become addicted to sin. Like that scripture I quoted says, "God knitted us together in our mothers' wombs." So any desires to sin, any fleshy desires, or any susceptibility to addiction was designed with that purpose in mind. Either it was deliberately designed that way (malevolence) or unwittingly designed that way, (incompetence) on behalf of the designer.
ttruscott wrote: IF GOD by giving us lives wherein we can express our sinfulness perfectly tuned to our sinful desires in response to our free will decisions, how can HE be guilty of 'making us this way?'
Because he designed the system so that these things would eventuate if we chose to sin. He designed it so that we would DESIRE to sin. And he designed the CONSEQUENCES of what would happen if we gave into those desires.
ttruscott wrote:
Our lives are perfectly in tune with and reflect our rebellion, pre-earth, to the purpose of opening the eyes of HIS sinful elect to their sin so they can feel/experience their guilt and repent and so be redeemed.
Sorry, but corruption can only occur due to faulty or malevolent design. It bamboozles me that you still can't see that.

ttruscott wrote: In other words, Pre-Conception Existence is the only theory of our creation that makes us 100% responsible for our lives here on earth and our ultimate fate. GOD let us choose and is following our lead...until HE brings the end.
But it does no such thing because it can only work if God designed it to be that way. So if it all goes to chaos, then that is God's fault as much as ours.

Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.

Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.

There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.


Check out my website: Recker's World

User avatar
OnceConvinced
Savant
Posts: 8969
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 66 times
Contact:

Post #47

Post by OnceConvinced »

jgh7 wrote: In a court of law, someone is asked to give a justification for why they like to eat potato salad. They say they are "born this way".
I don't know about anyone else here but I had no choice about what I liked the taste of when I was a kid. Brussell's Sprouts tasted disgusting. They just did. Still do. Chocolate however, I found delicious. Still do.

I really wish I could switch off the desire for chocolate, while switching on a love for pumpkin! But it's impossible.

So how else did I end up with those likes and dislikes if I wasn't born that way?

Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.

Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.

There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.


Check out my website: Recker's World

User avatar
KingandPriest
Sage
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2016 1:15 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Is "being born this way" an acceptable justifi

Post #48

Post by KingandPriest »

DanieltheDragon wrote: [Replying to post 38 by KingandPriest]
Allowing teens in high school to choose the bathroom of their preference without supervision can lead to undesired abuse for sexual activities
Allowing teens in high school to go to the bathrooms unsupervised can lead to undesired abuse of sexual activities. Transgendered teens are not the problem.
I never implied that transgendered teens were the problem. I am talking about legal decisions and the implications of these decisions.

There are times when public safety requires us to give up some of our basic freedoms. In the setting of a public high school, is it reasonable or wise to allow all teens to choose the bathroom of their choice without supervision?

If yes, what are the possible ramifications of this decision?
If no, then how can these actions be supervised without someone claiming discrimination or bigotry?

User avatar
KingandPriest
Sage
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2016 1:15 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Is "being born this way" an acceptable justifi

Post #49

Post by KingandPriest »

benchwarmer wrote:
KingandPriest wrote: Allowing teens in high school to choose the bathroom of their preference without supervision can lead to undesired abuse for sexual activities.
I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. If teens want to hook up, do you think this whole bathroom broohaha makes any difference? You seem to be suggesting that currently the doors to all bathrooms are monitored somehow and teens are unable to slip in and have sex together under the current scheme.

What about boys having sex together in the bathroom? Girls having sex together in the bathroom? How come you are not all up in arms about preventing that with some other draconian bathroom laws?

It seems like a big red herring and a convoluted excuse to put down transgender people.

Frankly they should just make all bathrooms unisex such that everyone has privacy. I think that's the only sane move going forward. I realize retrofitting existing bathrooms will be cost prohibitive, but probably cheaper than the avalanche of ridiculous law suits that will soon emerge as this silliness continues to grow.
Its called enabling. If we know teens want to hook up and will use every opportunity to do so, and we also know the psychological harm which can occur, do we make it easier for teens to partake in these activities?

School administrators had the ability to supervise bathrooms and locker rooms in the past. If a school administrator saw for example a young boy following a girl into the bathroom or locker room, they could speak up and intervene. Now, for fear of violating Title IX, they look the other way. Whether or not this boy was a male teen struggling with gender identity, or just a teen looking to hook up, the administrator must turn a blind eye.

Do you think making all bathrooms unisex will help enable teen sexting, which is basically child pornography or prevent it?

Teens hooking up is not the only consequence. Teens are posting their sexual encounters online for each other to see. This leads to bullying, shaming and increased psychological consequences than in prior generations. Do we ignore these facts, for the sake of convenience?

No one is putting down anyone. I am talking about the ramifications of legal decisions.

One important thing to know is that youth under age 18 commit a substantial number of the sex offenses committed in the United States. At least one-third of all sexual abuse of children is committed by boys and girls under 18. And according to the U.S. Department of Justice, adolescents account for about 17 percent of all arrests for sex offenses. Boys commit the majority of these offenses, an estimated 90 percent, and girls commit about 10 percent of the offenses.
http://www.ncsby.org/content/understand ... l-behavior
It is important to note that many gay teens have never had a sexual experience with someone of the same sex, and that “teens who will eventually identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual do not always do so during adolescence.
http://pedsinreview.aappublications.org/content/34/1/29
Young people who are in the process of “coming out� (acknowledging their homosexual orientation to themselves, family, and friends) often lack realistic models of same-sex relationships. While struggling to figure out how to meet someone who they might be interested in or how to introduce a sexual element to the relationship, these teens may turn to the Internet to meet partners, without understanding the possible risks.

A history of heterosexual activity does not rule out eventual self-identification as lesbian or gay. There are societal pressures on young people to be heterosexual, and youth who disclose homosexual feelings may be told that they cannot know that they are gay until they have had unsatisfying heterosexual sex. Heterosexual sex also may occur to camouflage a gay orientation. Several studies have shown that, while in the process of coming out, young people are as likely to have heterosexual intercourse as those who identify as heterosexual.
http://pedsinreview.aappublications.org/content/34/1/29

This shows that teens who may consider themselves gay are less likely to engage in homosexual activity in a school bathroom. In addition, they are more likely to engage in heterosexual relationships to "test out whether they are really gay".

DanieltheDragon
Savant
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:37 pm
Location: Charlotte
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Is "being born this way" an acceptable justifi

Post #50

Post by DanieltheDragon »

[Replying to post 47 by KingandPriest]
never implied that transgendered teens were the problem. I am talking about legal decisions and the implications of these decisions.

There are times when public safety requires us to give up some of our basic freedoms. In the setting of a public high school, is it reasonable or wise to allow all teens to choose the bathroom of their choice without supervision?
The highlighted red implies transgendered teens choosing their bathroom of choice is part of the problem. That issues related to teen sex would be partially solved by prohibiting them from choosing a bathroom related to their gender indetification.

This is simply a gross misunderstanding of the transgendered issue and teen sexuality. How about instead of policing transgendered teens, we invest in a robust sex education policy that involves informing students the legal and emotional ramifications of sex?
Post 1: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:48 am Otseng has been banned
Otseng has been banned for having multiple accounts and impersonating a moderator.

Post Reply