Homosexuality: A chosen trait, or gentetically aquired?

[The Persnickety Platypus]

This question is a major underlying factor of the general homosexual debate, the answer of which can narrow the scope in questioning its morality.



Are people born gay, or do they choose to be?
Can someone be blamed for their sexual orientation, or is it subject to factors we have no control over?

[GhostBear]

So what? Hey there's a first time for everything. And it doesn't matter if you've heard of it or not, your hearing does not affect it's possibility.

Anyway, let's drop the crying over homosexual people. Real sad, I'm sure, but I'm here to prove one can control themselves. Nothing more, nothing less. You'd think the name would have been a dead give-away. And more to the point, hetero/ homo people have been known to become paraphiliacs. So now you know that it is possible to change an orientation somewhat.

But I think that is exactly the point. “Reparative therapy” was invented over thirty years ago and since then innumerable Christian ministries have cropped up claiming that sexual oriention can be changed. But despite thirty years of existence these organizations cannot provide evidence of anyone changing form a homosexual to a heterosexual.

[mishi]

No one is going to argue that homosexuals cannot control themselves when it comes to acting on their feelings, but the whole point is that their feelings are just that - feelings. They cannot control what they feel, as that is what defines feelings in general - they are the opposite to thoughts and thinking and actions, all of which can be influenced or controlled consciously. Feelings, however, cannot be controlled. And the whole point is also that we have no right to expect homosexuals to control their actions in regards to their sexuality as we have no real justification to do so - it harms no one, and the only thing that says it's apparently wrong is a book written thousands of years ago by men (and, shock horror, edited by men also)...a book that also says that wearing clothing made of different materials is wrong also. Homophobia (yes, that's what it is whatever you might say) is outdated, close-minded and hurtful to others for no real reason whatsoever, and completely based on religion and fear of that which some cannot understand.

[scorpia]

But I think that is exactly the point. “Reparative therapy” was invented over thirty years ago and since then innumerable Christian ministries have cropped up claiming that sexual oriention can be changed.

So whenever the idea that "homosexuality can be changed" comes up one automatically thinks of said Christian ministries?

But despite thirty years of existence these organizations cannot provide evidence of anyone changing form a homosexual to a heterosexual.

There does seem to be some evidence of someone who's heterosexual change to some other sexuality, become a paraphiliac, etc.

No one is going to argue that homosexuals cannot control themselves when it comes to acting on their feelings, but the whole point is that their feelings are just that - feelings. They cannot control what they feel, as that is what defines feelings in general - they are the opposite to thoughts and thinking and actions, all of which can be influenced or controlled consciously. Feelings, however, cannot be controlled.

Homophobia (yes, that's what it is whatever you might say) is outdated, close-minded and hurtful to others for no real reason whatsoever, and completely based on religion and fear of that which some cannot understand.

Homophobia is also a feeling; a feeling of hatred and a despisable one at that, but hatred is still a feeling. Therefore since that is a feeling, by your logic, it must also be uncontrollable. You cannot say one is excusable and the other is not. Both go together.

[GhostBear]

But I think that is exactly the point. “Reparative therapy” was invented over thirty years ago and since then innumerable Christian ministries have cropped up claiming that sexual oriention can be changed.

So whenever the idea that "homosexuality can be changed" comes up one automatically thinks of said Christian ministries?

Can you identify non-Christina ministries engaging in reparative therapy? Considering the practice is condemned by the APA and similar legitimate organizations because based on discredited theories, it is ineffective and it has been show to be actually harmful.



http://www.psych.org/psych_pract/coppth ... m83100.cfm
http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html



no ethical counselor, social worker, therapist, psychiatrist or psychologist would recommend it much less inflict it on any human being.

But despite thirty years of existence these organizations cannot provide evidence of anyone changing form a homosexual to a heterosexual.

There does seem to be some evidence of someone who's heterosexual change to some other sexuality, become a paraphiliac, etc.

Do you even know what a paraphiliac is?

A paraphilia such as exhibitionism, voyeurism, sadism are not alternatives to sexual orientation.

Ex-gay ministries claim to have changed hundreds of thousands of homosexuals into heterosexuals…yet these organizations can show absolutely no evidence to back up this claim. None.

No one is going to argue that homosexuals cannot control themselves when it comes to acting on their feelings, but the whole point is that their feelings are just that - feelings. They cannot control what they feel, as that is what defines feelings in general - they are the opposite to thoughts and thinking and actions, all of which can be influenced or controlled consciously. Feelings, however, cannot be controlled.

Homophobia (yes, that's what it is whatever you might say) is outdated, close-minded and hurtful to others for no real reason whatsoever, and completely based on religion and fear of that which some cannot understand. Homophobia is also a feeling; a feeling of hatred and a despisable one at that, but hatred is still a feeling. Therefore since that is a feeling, by your logic, it must also be uncontrollable. You cannot say one is excusable and the other is not. Both go together.

Only if one is dishonest and falsely proclaim sexual oriention as “just a feeling”

[scorpia]

Can you identify non-Christina ministries engaging in reparative therapy?

Has anyone outside of there tried? All I know is the narrow-minded propaganda that anyone who so much of thinks that changing homosexuality, heterosexuality, etc must certainly be one of those "re-education camp" peoples. And of course I'm not so much as allowed to think it can be changed, or see for myself if anyone's claims are true or false, oh no! I have to blindly believe what everyone else says........ Or else I will magically turn into a re-education camp nut the next time I eat a mushroom.

Do you even know what a paraphiliac is?

Yes.

A paraphilia such as exhibitionism, voyeurism, sadism are not alternatives to sexual orientation.

And not all paraphilias are limted to the above.

Besides, that is beside the point. the point being, a sexuality can change from one thing to the other.

Ex-gay ministries claim to have changed hundreds of thousands of homosexuals into heterosexuals…yet these organizations can show absolutely no evidence to back up this claim. None.

Hooray for them. And Hooray for you and your strawman argument.

[micatala]

I have to admit, I have not gone back through the whole thread to see what evidence has been provided and debated. I have seen some of the NARTH info, and also the APA info recently cited by Ghost Bear. From this cursory inspection, it seems to me the weight is on the side that homosexuality, at least for the vast majority of homosexuals, is not a chosen trait.

ANother compelling line of evidence for me is the testimony of gays themselves. Nearly every homosexual person that I have heard discuss this says they did not choose their orientation, and I am not sure why so many people are unwilling to take this testimony at face value.

In addition, the fact that admitting to homosexuality has usually meant, at least here in the U.S., that one opens oneself up to persecution and even violence, and yet people still admit to being homosexual and that they can do nothing to change it even if they try (and some have) is very compelling in deed.

To assert that many or most homosexuals choose this as a sexual orientation in the face of these factors does not make sense to me. Why would anyone 'choose' to be a homosexual?

[melikio]

Nearly every homosexual person that I have heard discuss this says they did not choose their orientation, and I am not sure why so many people are unwilling to take this testimony at face value.

After hoping and trying hard to be STRAIGHT for a very long time, I eventually became depressed, and my "faith" in everything "Christian" shifted to a more reasonable position. No more was I going to pursue something that I really didn't need to change (and likely could not change). And it didn't mean I would become a massive "hedonists" or proponent of homosexuality; but it did allow me to see the significant FLAWS in the approaches of many "Christians" to the issue, problem or sin of "homosexuality".

It was similar to riding numerous "wrong" routes in one's car, to a specific destination. I did not make a conscious choice to be homosexual. I in fact realized over a relatively long period of time, that females did not turn me on, in even the smallest ways. I was ALL CURIOUS BOY (albeit with a strong sense of morality), and I tried things that most boys do with girls; none of it caused me to be INTO females. And no, it didn't seem to me that something was "wrong"; and I KNEW instictively to not talk about things like that (now to some degree, I wish I had); and such was "life".

Then came many years of seeking what many had said was "missing" (from homosexual people). Why wasn't I a "man"; where was the "normalcy"? So I figured that perhaps becoming a serious and fully devoted "Christian" would somehow FIX the problem. Surely something "spiritual" or "demonic" was behind this "lack" of heterosexual interest? (I seriously thought there HAD TO BE.) I did not have a casual approach to "homosexuality"; not by any means.

The next 25+ years were about a conservative/tradition spiritual trek, where I learned to be as "Christian" as most other people ever become. NOt that I was Mr. Super-Christian, but that the goals of Jesus Christ became "real" to me. All the while, I had been hoping that a life of service, holiness, and prayer would FIX, REPAIR or CURE my homosexual-orientation. I never went to gay bars, had a boyfriend and typically convinced homosexual people to NOT be hedonistic in their approach to human sexuality. I was always, in some way hoping for the "CHANGE" so many seemed to indicate SHOULD have been a part of my life.

In my early 40's, a heterosexual friend of mine (who was once a devout "Christian") became an "Atheist". That floored me completely. I thought THAT was never suppposed to happen, at least not to a person who went through every "right" and "proper" motion to be a "believer".

To fast forward, I eventually came to the conclusion that many people had been taught some very "inflexible" (literally rigid) form of religion, that led to many types of neuroses; neuroses that have yet to be fully examined and subsequently discussed in this world. For all the absolute GOOD that certain doctrines and dogmas bring to this world, there are often those who take a far more dehumanizing approach to the "truths" of what is considered "sacred" (from the Bible, to the religious views which branch from it).

It is undeniable, that what some call "Christianity", does not always lead to what is good; what leads to GOOD is LOVE. Jesus said this in so many ways (even in the Bible), that it's very difficult to miss. Yet, many have (over much time) have turned The Gospel into everything from a rigid system of RULES and REGULATIONS to an instrument of hatred and war. It has been done in God's name, over and over and over...etc.

Attached to all of that "religion", is the present inhumane approach to homosexuals and homosexuality. It is the "norm" (as defined). Let me be more specific:

It is considered NORMAL to be HOMOPHOBIC. Homophobia is about a lot more than "fear" of homosexuality. Many are TAUGHT to be homophobic, and are unconscious of the same; it just feels "normal" for them to be creeped-out by homosexuals and homosexuality.

This from Dr. Geroge Weinberg:

"Homophobia is just that: a phobia. A morbid and irrational dread which prompts irrational behavior flight or the desire to destroy the stimulus for the phobia and anything reminiscent of it. Because human beings are the stimulus, a common homophobic reaction is brutality in many cases, as we all know. We also know its consequences.

I am very proud of being the one to have coined the word. I remember the moment in 1965 when it came to me with utter clarity that this was a phobia. I was preparing a speech for a homophile group, which set me to thinking about "What's wrong with those people?"

By "those people," I had in mind that day a few therapist friends who had liked a gay friend of mine, spoken well of her until I told them that she was a lesbian. Hearing that, they didn't want me to bring her to a party, as if she was a contaminant. Since I kept my own life quite a secret from them, having heard their views too often, perhaps a little bit of rage spurred me on to finding the word. The Roman poet, Catullus, describing how he came to write his love poetry, one wrote, "Anger moves my verse (Ira versum movet) amd I think that healthy anger at injustice has strengthened the love within the gay movement, of which I am very much a part." http://www.pflagdetroit.org/george_weinberg.htm http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/homopho1.htm

Above, micatala expressed:

...and I am not sure why so many people are unwilling to take this testimony at face value...

At the very least, I'm virtually certain that many heterosexual people are taught (often via religion) to fear homosexuality, as opposed to being instructed to understand it. Additionally, people are so often conditioned to react negatively, that they can actually only IMAGINE that they "love" homosexuals; when they in reality CANNOT love them. They ARE PROGRAMMED to NOT love them. So, the sense of responsibility that many have for other "sinners" to love them (as Jesus loved), is either stunted, or practically eliminated. Some Christians, as it pertains to homosexuality, have relegated themselves to being CRUEL; justifying their hateful and cruel thinking/actions as being the actual "WILL OF GOD". It has compounded any existing suffering and sadness, that might actually be a result of our very human hature. I've spent YEARS learning to see what is spiritual vs. what is social; and many so-called "Christians" get angry when you remind them of the difference (especially as it pertains to their view of "homosexuality"). Many only want to throw The BOOK at it; but are found hypocritical when their inconsistency (relative levels of compassion toward other sinners and forms of sin) are revealed.

They WANT to crucify homosexuals and homosexuality, primarily because they are "conditioned" to DEHUMANIZE anything having to do with it. I'm not talking about tolerance/acceptance, but directly addressing the problem represented by the difference between concept of "loving the sinner", with the action of actually DOING IT. Many Christians enjoy comfortably stating:

"Love the sinner, hate the sin."

And many don't even realize that they have little to no idea just how that is done. (To me that's evident; despite how "wrong" many believe "homosexuality" to be.)

And that explains the majority of the typically irrational "reaction" to homosexuals (or anything associated with them). I WOULD NOT take the position I do, if I hadn't witnessed the abject HATRED and FEAR that people typically have for homosexuals; and no, it really doesn't make sense (though many do consider such behavior to be sensible, moral and even called-for by God Himself.

It is unrealistic, to expect that pressurung homosexual people with religion, the Bible or Christianity, will somehow cause the effect many desire. And while I may not be so absolutely objective about that myself (as I have endured a long and practically fruitless struggle to change my sexual-orientation), I still realize that what MANY do (cruely) to homosexuals in the name of "God", is NOT godly. And while there are likely some who may actually choose to be "homosexually-oriented", I am certain that I and many others did NOT choose to experience life in this way.

And I say thee things not to illicit "sympathy" or "pity" (not at all), I am sharing something that likely most Christians today need to actively consider, as they make their judgements about what they think/believe homosexuality actually stems from in reality.

That one may view homosexuality (the acts) as immoral is really A SEPARATE ISSUE, from whether or not it is "genetic" or "chosen". In the spiritual sense, ALL have sinned unto death; we are BORN that way (in the biblical sense of sin). If Jesus didn't not COVER for those who simply don't line-up with the "religious" views and opinions of other human beings, then I don't understand ANY of what Christianity really means for mankind (not "to" mankind). Most homosexual people aren't seeking to be proven "valid" in being homosexual (they know they exist, and they realize what the "Christianity" of many says/thinks about them); most homosexuals are seeking freedom within or from religion to be fully human, just as Jesus promised in so many ways to ALL of mankind.

-Mel-

[GhostBear]

Can you identify non-Christina ministries engaging in reparative therapy?

Has anyone outside of there tried?

As previously noted …no.

For the following reasons:
Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals know homosexuality is not an illness and as such is not “curable”

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not and will not engage in a therapy shown to be ineffective

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not and will not engage in a therapy based on discredited and/or unsupported theories

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not and will not engage in a therapy that encourage and/or reinforce self hate in patients

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not and will not engage in a therapy shown to be harmful

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not determine the goal of treatment either coercively or through subtle influence.

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals disavow themselves from the promotion of discrimination

All I know is the narrow-minded propaganda that anyone who so much of thinks that changing homosexuality, heterosexuality, etc must certainly be one of those "re-education camp" peoples.

Yet you obviously cannot come up with examples to counter what you claim to be propaganda

And of course I'm not so much as allowed to think it can be changed, or see for myself if anyone's claims are true or false, oh no! I have to blindly believe what everyone else says........ Or else I will magically turn into a re-education camp nut the next time I eat a mushroom.

You can believe in magical purple unicorns living on Venus if you care to. You can believe that the post office has used mind control rays to make Paris Hilton a Star. But what I have stated is that After more than thirty years of innumerable Christian ministries practicing this “reparative therapy” and despite their claims of hundreds of thousands of homosexuals transformed into heterosexuals these groups are not able to offer up any evidence that anyone ANYONE has actually ever changed from homosexual to heterosexual.

Do you even know what a paraphiliac is?

Yes.

A paraphilia such as exhibitionism, voyeurism, sadism are not alternatives to sexual orientation.

And not all paraphilias are limted to the above.

You claim to know what a paraphilia is yet you cannot differentiate between that and sexual oriention…which is a good indication that you either do NOT know what it is or that you are purposefully misrepresenting what it is.

For the record:
paraphilia (in Greek para παρά = besides and '-philia' φιλία = love) is a term that describes sexual arousal in response to sexual objects or situations which may interfere with the capacity for reciprocal affectionate sexual activity. Paraphilia may also be used to imply non-mainstream sexual practices without necessarily implying any dysfunction or moral deviance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphilia
and one notes that these are separate form sexual oriention.

Besides, that is beside the point. the point being, a sexuality can change from one thing to the other.

These things are not sexual orientation.

Ex-gay ministries claim to have changed hundreds of thousands of homosexuals into heterosexuals…yet these organizations can show absolutely no evidence to back up this claim. None.

Hooray for them. And Hooray for you and your strawman argument.

You do not seem to know what a strawman is…allow me to help you.
A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, since the argument actually presented by the opponent has not been refuted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

What I presented is not a strawman.

You have claimed that sexual oriention is changeable, yet you have repeatedly failed to provide any support for your claim. In the same way the organizations that claim to have changed hundreds of thousands of homosexuals into heterosexuals cannot provide any support for their claims

[scorpia]

You have claimed that sexual oriention is changeable, yet you have repeatedly failed to provide any support for your claim.

Behold my support, what you have said yourself;

response to sexual objects or situations which may interfere with the capacity for reciprocal affectionate sexual activity

You want futher proof? Don't you think that there are some homosexuals out there that are so because of a rational reason?

What I presented is not a strawman

Bull. You yourself say;

A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent.

AND you come up with arguments relating to Christian ministries which I don't give two hoots about. I'm not going to counter it by saying "yes they are" or anything of the sort. If anything I would agree that they are ineffectual. I am not going to support their methods. I am not going to say people should try and follow any such method.

It's like saying"because person Y tries to strap a bunch of fireworks to a chair was not able to go to the moon as intended space travel is impossible"

For the following reasons:
Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals know homosexuality is not an illness and as such is not “curable”

I'm not trying to cure anything! I'm not saying homosexuality is some disease or any such nonsense! HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THIS?

In the same way the organizations that claim to have changed hundreds of thousands of homosexuals into heterosexuals cannot provide any support for their claims

In what same way? Just how the hell am I the same?

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not and will not engage in a therapy that encourage and/or reinforce self hate in patients

I don't even want them to hate themselves or anything. All I want is to prove that genetics does not control a person. If anything, that would make a person feel better, no? Imagine how much better a person would feel if they realise that just because they have some genetics/ psychology that may change them into something they don't like they can find a way to change into something they do. All I want is people to realise they can control their own minds. If anything, that should do the opposite of self-loathing. It's like going up to Luke Skywalker and saying "Just because your father is Darth Vader desn't mean you'll turn out like him. Genetics doesn't mean squat!"

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not and will not engage in a therapy shown to be harmful

And how is it harmful? Because of said Christian ministries? (aka quacks)

And a FINAL THING, this is not some form of treatments, it is something an individual does for themselves, not something for a doctor to do, or a minister, or anyone else. One's body is their own buisness

But what I have stated is that After more than thirty years of innumerable Christian ministries practicing this “reparative therapy” and despite their claims of hundreds of thousands of homosexuals transformed into heterosexuals these groups are not able to offer up any evidence that anyone ANYONE has actually ever changed from homosexual to heterosexual.

Legitimate and ethical mental health professionals do not and will not engage in a therapy shown to be ineffective

All this proves is that their methods are ineffectual. Not that it is impossible.

[micatala]

OK. Let me see if I have this straight, and my apologies if I don't have it straight.

scorpia is claiming, if I can rephrase hopefully correctly, that genetics is not destiny. Just because one has a genetic predisposition towards a certain behavior (e.g. homosexuality) does not mean that is their destiny.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

She is pointedly noting that so-called (Christian) reparative therapies are not what she is talking about. She is allowing that they may be completely ineffective, but that this does not negate the fact that other methods, perhaps employed solely by the individual themself, may result in an individual not following any genetic pre-disposition to homosexuality.

Ghost Bear is claiming that the so-called Christian reparative therapies have shown no evidence of success. He notes that psychological professionals and professional organizations do not believe that any reparative therapy can change a person's sexual orientation.


My few comments:

I would agree, genetics is not necessarily destiny in all cases. However, genetics is destiny, for example, with respect to at least some aspects of a person's physical body. Outside of sex change surgery, for example, one cannot change from a woman to a man or vice versa. Our face is our face, our voice is our voice.

Now we can change a lot about our bodies. We can exercise and eat right and be thin, even if we have a genetic pre-disposition to obesity. WE can overeat and be fat. We can eat poorly and poison ourselves in a variety of ways and get sick.

Now, I would certainly agree that a person with a self-identified homosexual orientation does not need to act on that orientation. They can refrain from sex. They could try to engage in heterosexual behavior. However, I am not sure this does much to changing their orientation, which I would define as their innate sexual attractions, either to opposite gender or to same-gender people. I conceivably could engage in homosexual sex, but I certainly have no desire to do so, and doing so would not change me into a homosexual.


Can a person change their orientation? At this point, I think the evidence says that the vast majority of people at least will not be able to. What we would need to counter this conclusion are actual bonified examples, and better yet statistics, showing that some people have been able to accomplish this.

Without this evidence, we may not be able to say it is impossible, but if it is possible only in theory, or only because it hasn't been shown to be impossible, then this seems to me to be an almost pointless assertion. We might assert that it is not impossible for a person to swim across the Atlantic Ocean. Until someone does it, we are probably safe in stating that is is (very likely) impossible to do.