Homosexuality: Choice, Biology, or Sin?

[Gringo]

What's your take on it?

[truthspeaker]

1. I wanted to vote biology

I voted "inherited", but I suspect it could be a combination of genetic disposition and environmental factors in the womb. Either way it's biological destiny, not a "choice". Could I choose to be gay? Ew. Men have hairy asses - not gonna happen. But even if it were a choice I wouldn't care what consenting adults do in their bedrooms (or living rooms, or on the kitchen table....)

[truthspeaker]

2. I wanted to vote biology

I voted "inherited", but I suspect it could be a combination of genetic disposition and environmental factors in the womb. Either way it's biological destiny, not a "choice". Could I choose to be gay? Ew. Men have hairy asses - not gonna happen. But even if it were a choice I wouldn't care what consenting adults do in their bedrooms (or living rooms, or on the kitchen table....)

[truthspeaker]

24. but I didn't want to post twice

don't know how that happened.

[Uzybone]

3. who cares

I lean towards biology, no one would choose to be ostracised and ridiculed. But either way who cares, human beings deserve human rights, regardless of what sex the consenting adults they sleep with are.

[supernova]

More biology

than choice it seems. Whether its a combo of environmental factors or heredity is irrelevant. The fact is gays exist. It's up to our culture to give them equal treatment under the law.

For the record, I do believe God makes gays just like he makes us straights. :D

[Military Brat]

4. You know, my brother is such a sinner for being left-handed

It's the same argument Christians made hundreds of years ago when the left hand was associated with being sinister. Same goes for people with epilepsy, who were considered to be "possessed."

If it's anything in the minority as far as physical attributes, or straying too far from the norm, the Christian fundies turn it into a sin. What boring lives they lead, that they must interfere with the rest of us. :shrug:

[terrya]

5. It''s biological, IMO.

Homosexuality transcends race, gender, ethinicity, religion, economic status.

It is NOT a choice. Speaking only for myself, I didn't stand in front of the mirror one morning, shaving, and saying to myself "gosh, how can I spice up my ordinary, humdrum life? I know...I'll become a homosexual!". I was attracted to boys in GRADE SCHOOL, for heaven's sake. In the 1960's, I may add.

And I won't even bother responding to the "it's a sin" crap.

[Andy_Stephenson]

6. I generally don't take offence but I do with this thread.

Why give the right more ammo?

[Gringo]

11. How on earth does it "arm" them?

I happen to believe that it's a combination of genes and choice (Kinsey's bisexuality scale puts many people in the middle. By definition, those people MUST choose.

I also think that it should be put forward that even if it is a choice, every person should have the right to love who they want to.

[GOPBasher]

7. it's biology

I also could've voted for "Who the hell gives a half of a shit what consenting adults do in their own homes?"

[TexasMexican]

8. Choice

I think its choice.

Its not a sin, but I personally find male on male disgusting.

[Gringo]

12. If you find it disgusting,

I highly suggest that you NOT DO IT!

:-)

[Stuckinthebush]

35. I have heard that many guys who are so disgusted by it

are actually quite attracted to it and their disgust is a mask to this attraction.

Hmmmmm......

[Liberal Veteran]

39. I notice you limit your disgust to male homosexuality....

Are you turned on then by female homosexuality?

[TexasMexican]

45. yes.

some of it anyways.

[Terran]

42. you're wrong

It's not a choice. Trust me on this, okay?

There are a lot of people who are born bisexual, and sometime during their lives, a lot of them decide to go one way or the other. But the fact of their bisexuality wasn't a choice. They were born that way. Same way with heterosexuals and homosexuals.

This "choice" question is central to overcoming hatred of gays and lesbians. I am amazed at how many people on our side still think there's a choice involved.

[mlawson]

47. Duh... WHEN did YOU choose to be heterosexual??????

Was it when you turned 13??? Did you have to fill out a form??? Did you have to get a fucking license????

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[TexasMexican]

56. when...

I began to actively seek to have sexual relations with women.

[mlawson]

60. You CHOSE to be attracted to women????

Was there some point at which you had to do this?

[ulysses]

53. your disgust is noted.

A question, though - so the fuck what? Do you ask society's approval for your own sexual activities?

To answer the original question, I think it's biological, but who the hell cares what I think? Why should anyone need my approval to love or scrump anyone else?

[Ardee]

75. you had a choice too

you could have refrained from posting that silliness and honored an old saw Im rather fond of:

You can remain silent and chance having folks think you are stupid or speak up and remove any doubt.

[gpandas]

77. not choice

can you tell me how you "chose" to be heterosexual? Just put a little common sense to the question of choice and the answer will come to you.

[Book Lover]

80. Then I suggest you refrain from indulging (nm)

[Deja Q]

82. But I'm sure you love...

female on female.

:eyes:

Perhaps I find male on female disgusting? It's certainly the most ridiculous looking...

[DinahMoeHum]

9. I think it's about biology, and that "Choice" is about whether

or not to "come out of the closet" about it.

[Outvoicer]

44. we have a winner...

bingo!

[GainesT1958]

10. We don't say left-handers are "evil" anymore...

We've learned that it's in how one's brain is "wired". The same goes for being gay.

Gays and lesbians aren't "evil" by virtue of their biologically-blueprinted preferrences any more than heterosexuals are. It's just a matter of some self-proclaimed "moral superiors" needing a "scapegoat" to "look down on" in society. Since they can't use racial or ethnic minorities--at least not publicly--anymore, they've turned to gay-bashing as something that makes them all feel better. And the rest of us feel all the worse about them--and better about gays and lesbians--in the process!:D

Moreover, gays and lesbians aren't "handicapped" by being who they are, either. Society needs to stop treating them as second-class citizens--and DEFINITELY should stop accepting those who look down on then as "moral and "normal"!x(

B-)

[Blue_Chill]

16. Yeah but be honest do you trust the left handed folk?

I find it disgusting that we are forced to suffer them among us. :D

[truthspeaker]

25. I don't mind if people are left-handed,

but why do they need to flaunt their lifestyle in public? Especially baseball players. Don't they know children are watching?

[TeeYiYi]

81. It's the green handled scissor users that offend me. ......n/t

TYY

[Beer Snob-50]

13. Hello

I am a lesbian in a man's body!

[youngred]

14. Its biological

hands down, its not a sin seeing as God (if you believe in one) would have made gays and lesbians biologically homosexual there can't be anything wrong with it.

They are as deserving of equal rights as red heads, blue eyed people, left handers and asians. You can't help the way your born and should never be discriminated against over it.

[loudnclear]

15. Biology and choice.

Heterosexuals are so by biology and they have a choice to engage in homosexual acts and many do. Same thing for homosexuals and they have a choice to engage in heterosexual acts and many do.

[David Zephyr]

43. Yes.

But this is very difficult for gays and straights to understand.

[MrPrax]

17. Oh not again...!!?

Who cares?

It is not like the bigots that worry about this stuff are going to change their rap--
"Oh sorry for being a homophobic fag-basher, I didn't know it was a disability!"

Yeah right...

[Q3JR4]

18. Doesn't the constitution

protect choice (if being gay is one)? Also, doesn't it protect people from discrimination due to biological differences (if it's NOT a choice)?

If the above is true, then isn't this poll mostly moot?

:eyes:

[Deja Q]

84. Welcome to DU! As to your post,

since when has the Constitution been properly and consistently handled? From day 1 we had slavery. Even when slavery was abolished, we had segregation.

And those are just two more noteable examples. There are several other injustices, can you find them all? Women were hardly treated equally for a very long period of time as well, and that has nothing to do with abortion issue...

George Washington et al made a brave noise. Pity they were acting out of self-interest and not altruism, typical American behavior... So when tommy franks mentions abolishing the constitution, don't see it as a big threat. America's history is spurious at best in terms of its morality. Better than other nations, yes, but has never been totally true to its word.

Maybe the next empire will be ethically correct...

[MotorCityMan]

19. It is not a choice

The only choice involved is what you are going to do about it when you realize you are gay.

You do NOT just one day decide "I'm going to be gay!"

[Bertha Venation]

26. How's Lana?

:hi:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. It's about human rights.

I suppose we are biologically driven to reproduce. Some people "choose" to do so, others, for any number of reasons, "choose" not to.

The rights inherent in that "choice" should be seperate from any biological imperative.

It doesn't matter why people select other people to love, lust after, like, or loathe (I'm thinking of Dubya when I included loathe).

As a straight, for whatever reason, I really don't care what other people do sexually (as long as it doesn't involve coercion). Nor do I think it is the business of anyone other than the individuals (as long as it doesn't involve coercion).

Unfortunately, this is an issue that should be a non-issue.

[DrWeird]

21. I think homosexuality is as much a choice as heterosexuality.

and just as sinful.

[TrogL]

22. It's a random variation

like left-handedness.

In earlier cultures, left-handed people were burned at the stake. We've learned better since then. Schools have left-handed desks. Stores sell left-handed golf clubs.

[stevebreeze]

50. earlier?

both my father and my mother-in-law suffered beating due to their handidness.
:kick:

[Touchdown]

23. The only people who can answer this...

are gay people, ourselves. Unfortunately, few people choose to listen to us.

[TSElliott]

28. Not really, anyone could answer it...

by examining their own sexuality. If one is heterosexual they should ask themself, is this by choice, environment or were they born this way?

[Stuckinthebush]

37. Excellent point!

One that should be screamed from the roof tops.

This is not about homosexuality only. It is about sexuality, or better yet, sexual preference. By examining our own sexual preference, we can better understand the choice/nature debate. I couldn't choose to be homosexual if I wanted. I could act on it, but I could never make my desires work that way.

So, by that token, an individual who is gay couldn't force himself to be straight.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

27. Science would show that its..

..a lot to do with genetics, but environment (aka choice) also plays a large part. Its about "half and half".

[diamondsoul]

30. "half and half"- really??

So how then did I "choose" to be straight and not remember any of it? It's biology and genetics, period. I didn't make a choice, and neither to gay, lesbian, bisexual, transexual people. We are who and what we are, period.

[DrWeird]

38. Environment and choice are two completely different things

btw

[SeveneightyWhoa]

55. Yeah, my bad, you two are right.

I just finished up a "Behavioral Genetics" course, I should know better. But basically, genetics makes up for half of the variability in homosexuality in the population, and environment makes up for the other half. Its not ALL genetics, because half of monozygotic (identical) twins studied are discordant (not the same) for homosexuality.

[HEyHEY]

29. Biology

Everything is.

[freestyle]

31. It doesn't matter

I don't know exactly what combination of nature and nurture makes me gay, but I do know that there's nothing wrong with it. I also know that national civil rights laws say its as wrong to discriminate against the biological Black and male parts of me as it is to discriminate against the chosen Episcopalian part of me. Alas, the gay part of me is left out, which creates complications since I am all of me all the time.

To me, it is a useless argument, and those who think that proving some biological basis for sexuality will reduce discrimination are delusional. Racial appearance and sex are biological, everyone knows it, and racism and sexism are still rampant. The issue is whether each person is treated as fully human. If not, we still have work to do.

[Fleshdancer]

32. There's more to homosexuality than just sex

What drives me crazy about this subject is that people can't get past the act of sex when discussing sexual orientation.

Sure, we all have the ability to have sex with people of the opposite gender AND the same gender, but that doesn't mean we're all bisexual. Think about the uncontrollable actions of attraction and tell me you can control them...increased heart rate, flushed cheeks, dialated pupils, that giddy feeling of uphoria when you're falling in love.

We neglect the emotional, mental, and spiritual aspects of truly connecting with individuals when we dicuss sexuality and that's a shame. If people can't acknowledge that homosexuals share deep, caring relationships that go beyond sex, then it makes me wonder if their lack of acknowledgement is due to their lack of experience with love.

[Stuckinthebush]

33. You DUers who voted for "Sin"

Don't make me jump through this computer at ya, OK? We're supposed to be the enlightened ones, not the backward ones, OK?

[Selwynn]

66. Thanks - that really helps a lot.

[Curious Dave]

34. Biology

To those who tell me being gay is a sin undertaken by choice I like to offer this counter arguement...

"So people aren't born gay?"

"of course not!"

"so something in the way they were raised makes them gay?"

(this usually results in a pause in the conversation while they consider the ramifications of their answer...)

"ummm yes it must be the way they were raised"

"so if you personally had been raised differently, you would be gay?"

That usually ends the discussion!

[VelmaD]

36. All sex is a sin...

at least it is if you're doing it right. ;-)

[Liberal Veteran]

40. I want to know why my 14 year same gender relationship is a sin...

...but Liz Taylor's 8 marriages are sanctified?

[David Zephyr]

46. Congratulations!

On your 14 years together! :toast:

[David Zephyr]

41. Here is the Answer If You Can Handle It.

Homosexuality is both biological in the sense of permanent being, and at the same time it is a choice in the sense of temporary behavior. A great amount of confusion in understanding homosexuality is the result of the limits of language.

If you will bear with me a moment, I can make this very clear for anyone who truly cares to understand and learn. It's really quite simple.

Latin languages have an advantage over our English tongue: For example, in Spanish, there exist two forms for the state of "being" or "to be": “ser” and “estar”.

The verb "ser" refers to a permanent state of being that is intrinsic and unchangeable such as height, eye color and so forth. In English, we say, "I am white". In Spanish, we say "Yo soy blanco".

The verb "estar" refers to a temporary state of being that can change such as being hungry, cold or warm. Now watch the subtle, but important difference: In English, we say, "I am hot". In Spanish, we say, "Yo estoy caliente."

In the examples above, in English we use the word "am" for both permanent and temporary states of being, while in Spanish, we use "soy" for the permanent and "estoy" for the temporary state of being.

With that in mind, let's consider both the permanent and temporary state of homosexuality.

PERMANENT HOMOSEXUALITY (BIOLOGICAL)

A great many of us are born homosexual. It is biological. It is genetic and an unchangeable and intrinsic to our nature. Language limits us to the term of "homosexual". Gore Vidal, whom I greatly admire, once said that he refused to refer to himself as an "adjective". While that is humorous, he does have somewhat of a good point. Still, the fact remains that nature, not nurture is the only explanation for a great part of homosexuality within the human race. The growing mass of scientific studies that point to a genetic/biological component to the nature of homosexual persons is now so great that even some of the greatest contemporary enemies of gay and lesbian people, such as William Bennett and Dr. Laura Schlesinger, willingly acknowledge it. People who identify themselves as homosexual persons obviously would not choose to be homosexual in a society where they are condemned, criminalized and even murdered. They are (from "ser") permanent homosexual beings.

TEMPORARY HOMOSEXUALITY (CHOICE)

There also exists homosexual conduct which is not dependent on any genetic predisposition, but rather on temporary sexual desire. The best example of this that I can provide would be the undeniable fact that every prison population on earth is a canvas of homosexual acts, and yet the prisoner population has the same percentage of biological homosexuals as the general population. The temporary homosexual activity of predispositioned heterosexuals in prison does not make them homosexual in nature. The people are (from “estar”) homosexually being active sexually.

A majority of people have at sometime in their lives engaged in homosexual conduct, and yet the majority of the population are not homosexual beings. When heterosexuals experiment or engage in homosexual acts they correctly believe that they “chose” to do so. The problem is that they in turn transfer their own understanding and experience to all others assuming that homosexual beings also “choose” to be homosexual.

Many gay people do the very same thing. Many homosexual beings refuse to believe that a “straight” person is actually a true heterosexual. They just can not get beyond their own empirical self-understanding to believe that another person can be wired differently.

So, to answer you question as to whether homosexuality is a choice or is it a biological human state of being, the answer is that it is both.

Heterosexuals can choose or not choose homosexuality. Homosexuals can choose or not choose heterosexuality.

[Silverhair]

48. Interesting viewpoint. I would disagree on one point.

Based on evolution, I can't accept that homosexual orientation is genetic. Even as a recessive gene, evolution would act to remove it as it has zero offspring. Even bisexuals would have a slightly lower reproduction rate, and that is all evolution needs to target a gene for elemination. Such targeting is neither evil nor good, it simply is.

Other research indicates that strong sustained stress on the mother in the 4th & 5th months of pregnancy causes changes in the harmones in the womb that can cause the fetus to develop as a homosexual.

I' not going to bother with a link. There are lots of them. Just google on "homosexual" & "maternal stress" if you're really interested.

Of course, whether it is genetic or prenatal enviornment, it still isn't a choice for the individual that is born that way.

[Military Brat]

71. "evolution would act to remove it as it has zero offspring"

Doggone, Silverhair, here I am disagreeing with you again. How do you explain that since the beginning of humankind, we have had individuals who are congenitally sterile? This may or may not be a genetic trait (now there's a real conundrum), or perhaps it's a recessive gene. And we continue to pass along debilitating disorders, generation after generation, such as hemophilia. Surely evolution in the sense of survival of the fittest would have eliminated them by now.

Not all traits are passed on or eliminated for the sole purpose of survival of the species.

I do find your referenced hypothesis on "strong sustained stress" in the 4th and 5th months of pregnancy intriguing, but if that were the case, countries perpetually at war would have an extremely high homosexual rate.

Hmmm ... bush promoting perpetual war, American mothers stressed out, rising rates in homosexuality ... hmmm

[tucson]

67. David, I disagree with parts of what you write.

You state that "A majority of people have at sometime in their lives engaged in homosexual conduct, . . .". The Kinsey study stated that 37% or 38% (I think I remembered that accurately) of their population (American males) had engaged in homosexual activity to the point of orgasm. Someone later revised those figures because of statistical problems and estimated that about 27% of the American male population had reached orgasm in homosexual activity.

But I haven't seen figures as high as the majority that you state. Fill me in if you can.

You also write that "Homosexuals can choose or not choose heterosexuality." Women do not stimulate gay men. Some gay men can achieve a heterosexual act through fantisizing a homosexual encounter, but I wouldn't consider such an act a choice of hetersexuality at all. Spiritually, emotionally, and sexually it is an expression of a homosexual orientation, an expression of a homosexual sexuality. Perhaps it is a semantic disagreement. I would agree that a gay man could choose and achieve a hetersexual act, but not that a gay man could choose and achieve an expression of heterosexuality.

I'm responding to this from a computer lab, which is closing in 10 minutes, and doubt that I would see a response from you.

[info being]

49. Yes

[stevebreeze]

51. I am still waiting for a homophobe to tell me

about how they choose to be stright.

[buddhamama]

52. i don't care if it's a choice, biological or sin

although i might argue the sin part.

equality and justice for all.

[redqueen]

54. Ehhhh who cares?

Most often biology, partly or rarely influenced environment, I'd say.

But really who gives a ????

Did anyone else hear about the study that said there really aren't just three sexualities (gay, straight, & bi?). They said there were actually five, with two in the middle (gay males (is there a separate word for this, like lesbian?) / slightly bi males / straight males & females / slightly bi females / lesbians). Go figure!

[Chovexani]

73. You're probably thinking of the Kinsey Scale

The Kinsey Scale (named for the pioneering sex researcher Alfred Kinsey) puts sexuality on a seven point continuum:

0- Exclusively heterosexual
1- Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2- Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3- Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4- Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5- Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6- Exclusively homosexual

I prefer the Klein Scale, which builds on Kinsey's work but uses less loaded terminology and also brings other dimensions of sexual orientation into the equation, such as fantasies, emotional preferences, etc.

You can read an interesting little article about both scales here:
http://www.qrd.org/qrd/orgs/BRC/1994/klein.txt-07.94

--C.

[Joe Lieberman]

57. It's biological

I think that there is a gay gene. As long as people cannot choose their sexuality, we have no right to discriminate against them.

[IronLionZion]

59. Hey Holy Joe!

Welcome to DU and glad you could take time off from the campaign. haha
:toast:

[Chovexani]

76. The issue of choice is utterly irrelevant.

Civil rights laws do not (and should not) protect people solely on biology--after all, religion enjoys protected status in this country (as well it should).

GLBT people should enjoy the same civil liberties as anyone else, regardless of how we came to be "that way".

[IronLionZion]

58. I chose who gives a shit

because people need human rights for being human. In the past, blacks, jews, irish, etc have been denied human rights -- maybe next time it will be YOU.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

61. Try this on:

If it's a choice, I am free to make it.

If it's biological, the question is moot.

If it's a sin then it is under God's domain and certainly not that of any known human being.

Why are people so fucking pre-occupied with my sexuality...frankly I think it says more about them than me.

[Swede]

62. The only way it is a choice is if you are bi-sexual and you choose one

team over the other exclusively. Other than that it is biology.

[Chovexani]

69. I respectfully disagree

I was born bisexual and I could no more choose not to be attracted to a gender than you could choose not to be attracted to whichever gender you happen to fancy. Why is that so hard to understand?

Sorry for being snippy, I'm just really sensitive to these kinds of discussions because bisexual people are so goddamn invisible and (non-bi) people have a tendency to make sweeping statements about bisexuality without knowing anything about it.

--C aka Token ____ (Pagan/Bi/Black/Mac user take your pick :P)

[dreissig]

63. Republicanism: Choice, Biology, or Sin?

Republican voting patterns seem to cluster in genetic groups. It seems to be more than a statistical oddity because the correlations are far more than random. If you father was a Republican, there's more than a good chance you will be a Republican, too.

Don't tell me that anyone chooses to be a Republican. It's got to be genetic. Or sinful.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

64. SIN SIN SIN...we need SIN TAXES!!!!

:D

[Military Brat]

74. You got it! We would make millions from Repub adultery

:evilgrin:

[Selwynn]

65. I choose "who knows and who cares" for the following reason:

I actually do believe homosexuality is a combination of non-volitional and volutional factors, however I chose "who knows and who cares" because it is irrelevant to the fact that all men and woman should truly enjoy the same rights, not "all men and woman except homosexuals."

[Selwynn]

68. Another choice: Yes it is sin, AND yes Gays should have equal rights

Most of you know enough about me to know that is NOT my position. However, not every religious person who takes the bible at face value necessarily believes that discrimination in our laws is appropriate or decent. There are many people I know who would confess to feeling a personal opinion that homosexuality represented an immoral choice, but who at the same time recognized that ultimately it was/is a personal choice, and that no one should be discriminated against under the laws of the lands.

I know my 55 year old parents do feel that homosexuality represents less that perfect choices and broken down relationships, even though they would never do anything but show kindness towards homosexuals or anyone else for that matter (this is true, my father, a former protestant minster, is friends with and close to a gay man - he still believes his choices a) are choices and b) are mistakes, but he is friends with him anyway). Because my parents believe that more important than their feelings on issues is the sacredness of a personals right to make personal decisions, they would never support a ban on gay marriage (and have said so many times) and would never support discrimination of GLTBs under the law.

I don't agree with my partents that homosexuality is wrong, but I am proud of how kind and genuinely loving they are even towards people with whom they disagree.

[baldguy]

70. Gay sex is a sin.

But only if you do it right.

[redqueen]

72. Just had to tell you

that I absolutely adore that sig. :)

Thanks for sharing it!

[littlejoe]

78. I like hamburgers

[goodhue]

79. biology

so I had to vote other

[AndyP]

83. biology

I'm going to school for biotechnology and I'm going to be doing research this summer, and I would really love to do something with this but I don't think a grant for "what makes gay people gay" would fly.
I think that being gay is something biological, something is mixed up(in the animal sense that being gay doesn't help to keep your genes in the pool) BUT there is nothing a homosexual person can do about it. I'm a male and there's nothing I can do about that-it's biological. I say give them equal rights. I don't understand why repubs won't let them get married- Don't married couples get taxed more because they tax the combined income??? I could be wrong.

[Deja Q]

85. If my being homosexual offends people, then they must do the right thing:

Find me a good looking woman with luscious brunette hair, gorgeous deep blue eyes, and 100% natural DD perky boobs, with a nice personality to complement mine.

:eyes:

Otherwise they should shut up and allow me to be homosexual. (which, to me, is meaningless because I'm celibate (not by choice) and hopeless anyway. So what? There's not a woman who'd want me anyway...)