Disturbing video with parents' reaction to son coming out as gay (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

The majority of Americans are Christian, and Scripture condemns homosexuality as a sin.

No, it condemns homosexual activity as a sin.

You're making a distinction here and I agree with you, but I don't think Scripture does.

What verse would you say condemns homosexual orientation rather than homosexual activity?

the Bible doesn't recognize sexual orientation, which is my whole point. There are no gay people in the Bible, there are only acts of homosexuality, which are condemned.

If the Bible says only that acting gay, not being gay, is sinful, doesn't that refute your contention that the question of choice is important because of the Bible? I don't think anyone disputes that acting gay is a choice.

 

[Spartans Rule]

We're getting to the heart of things now. Here is my understanding of the Bible. If somebody here thinks I got any of this wrong, please correct me:

1. The Bible in several places regards homosexual sex as a sinful and evil act. I know that there are some more progressive religious people who dispute this interpretation, but what I just wrote is the standard interpretation, nearly universally accepted.

2, God doesn't create evil human beings. Everyone has free will to commit good or evil acts.

3. Therefore, according to Scripture, homosexuality MUST be voluntary, since God would never create a human being inclined to commit evil acts.

4. If it were scientifically proven that homosexuality is not a choice, then religious Christians would be forced with the choice of either rejecting the science or rejecting everything the Bible has to say on this subject.

All human beings have at least some inclination to commit evil acts. We have urges to lie, cheat, commit adultery, steal, drink/use drugs to excess, etc.

The Christian view as far as I understand it is that homosexuality is a sin that some people struggle with just like other people struggle with other sins. I don't think science would change that. I'm not Christian so I could be wrong on that, but that's how I remember it from my church days.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I think the important point here, which has not yet been touched upon, is that during the darkest moments of doubt and despair the young man in the tape had over his coming out, at least he had Michael Sam on an NFL roster to help him understand that everything would be all right. That fact may have prevented another gay youth from becoming a suicide statistic. At one point in th etape I believe I hear him beseeching Michael Sam for strength.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

We're getting to the heart of things now. Here is my understanding of the Bible. If somebody here thinks I got any of this wrong, please correct me:

1. The Bible in several places regards homosexual sex as a sinful and evil act. I know that there are some more progressive religious people who dispute this interpretation, but what I just wrote is the standard interpretation, nearly universally accepted.

2, God doesn't create evil human beings. Everyone has free will to commit good or evil acts.

3. Therefore, according to Scripture, homosexuality MUST be voluntary, since God would never create a human being inclined to commit evil acts.

4. If it were scientifically proven that homosexuality is not a choice, then religious Christians would be forced with the choice of either rejecting the science or rejecting everything the Bible has to say on this subject.

dealt with this a long time ago. He stated that Romans 1 says that homosexuality is the result of turning so far away from God that God turns his back on the homosexuals which results in the behavior (among other behaviors). Of course since there are studies showing that sexual orientation can be determined with pretty good accuracy with 6 month olds (60 minutes) these infants must be all over exploiting their free will.

 

[jon_mx]

How accurately? I could just call all 6 months old straight and be over 90 percent accurate.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that “most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.” APA, “Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality” 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., “Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample,” 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (“combining respondents who said they’d had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation”). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, “Answers to Your Questions,” supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 35–41 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

How accurately? I could just call all 6 months old straight and be over 90 percent accurate.

Not sure that it was actually 60 minutes now. Can't find the video.

 

[jon_mx]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. APA, Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (combining respondents who said theyd had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, Answers to Your Questions, supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 3541 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

Your presumption as to why a lawyer chose not to argue a point does not provide proof of anything. Perhaps the lawyers did not consider it an important point.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. APA, Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (combining respondents who said theyd had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, Answers to Your Questions, supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 3541 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

Your presumption as to why a lawyer chose not to argue a point does not provide proof of anything. Perhaps the lawyers did not consider it an important point.

You should still read Posner's opinion.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. APA, Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (combining respondents who said theyd had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, Answers to Your Questions, supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 3541 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

Your presumption as to why a lawyer chose not to argue a point does not provide proof of anything. Perhaps the lawyers did not consider it an important point.

I explained why it's an important point. Establishing that it's a choice would support an argument for rational-basis analysis rather than heightened scrutiny. That's like facing the Cowboys defense instead of the Seahawks. Granted, the states' arguments ended up failing to survive even rational-basis analysis, so in the end it didn't matter. But at the time of the litigation, it was an important point -- or would have been, if it could have been placed in dispute.

 

[pats3in4]

The only logically conclusion in light of your at least partial hyenas is that it's at least partly biological.

What?

He said hyenas!

Autocorrect. Gayness =

New FF team name: Eminence's Hyenas

logo

 

[Rayderr]

seems to be a pretty common fall-back for the religious folk looking to not accept gays- that it was "chosen" by the gay person and not born into (which would imply- it seems- god's will).

It's probably the leading justification verbalized among religious folk for not accepting gays, not wanting gays to have the same rights as others. The idea they lean on is that homosexuality is a sin, and so therefore it had to be chosen by the sinner. If it wasn't chosen by the sinner they run into the problem of deciding if god created sinner gay people, or it's not a sin. So they go with the certainty of "its a choice so it's a sin".

Isn't one of the main themes of the bible is that all of mankind are sinners?

Yes. But that doesn't seem to be widely used by religious people as an argument against mankind.

But "god creating sinner gay people" and "homosexuality is a sin" are by no means mutually exclusive.

I don't know why that distinction matters to you. You originally said

I

I really don't get why it's such a big deal if a person was born gay, chose to be gay, or ended up gay because of how they were raised.

Born gay, choosing to be gay, ending up gay because of environment --- I don't think those things matter and neither do you. Clearly some peope think the reason for being gay is important, though, including some religious people who oppose homosexuality who (honestly or dishonestly) use religion to buttress their opposition. I explained why it's important to them, and you're quibbling with my explanation. I'm certainly ready to listen to your explanation of why it's important to them.

Basically I'm pointing out that the religious folks that are against gays will still be against gays even if it is proven that they are born that way. There was a rather lengthy article I linked to a while back in here where there was a religious argument that those that are gay are indeed born that way however that by no means excuses their sinful lifestyles, and those the religious folks should continue their crusade.

Long story short, haters will hate, no matter the reason. So why keep engaging them in a pointless argument in which you have no hopes of ever changing their minds?

 

[bigbottom]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. APA, Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (combining respondents who said theyd had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, Answers to Your Questions, supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 3541 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

Your presumption as to why a lawyer chose not to argue a point does not provide proof of anything. Perhaps the lawyers did not consider it an important point.

If an attorney doesn't consider an issue bearing directly on the standard of review in a constitutional law analysis to be an important point, he might want to consider another profession.

 

[Ray Karpis]

Anyone changed his mind on this issue during the course of this thread?

 

[Sinn Fein]

Anyone changed his mind on this issue during the course of this thread?

Yes. I used to think [________] was born with homosexual tendencies, now I realize that he has chosen to repress those thoughts/feelings.

 

[jon_mx]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. APA, Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (combining respondents who said theyd had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, Answers to Your Questions, supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 3541 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

Your presumption as to why a lawyer chose not to argue a point does not provide proof of anything. Perhaps the lawyers did not consider it an important point.

If an attorney doesn't consider an issue bearing directly on the standard of review in a constitutional law analysis to be an important point, he might want to consider another profession.

Then maybe they should. Here is a written arguement by a PHd in PhyscologyToday which shows it is far from immutable:

Sexual Orientation: Is It Unchangeable?Are we all really "born this way?"
Published on May 17, 2011 by Michael C. LaSala, Ph.D., LCSW in Gay and Lesbian Well-Being



Lately, I have been doing a lot of speaking at various PFLAG meetings (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) to share the research findings from my book: Coming Out, Coming Home:
Helping Parents Adjust to a Gay or Lesbian Child (www.comingoutcominghome.com). As a result of these meetings, as well as my own research, I have found that one of the things that helps parents come to terms with their children's sexual orientation is the idea that being gay or lesbian is innate. This is how they're born and that's that!. I am happy this idea comforts parents, but is it true?

Well.....hmmm....ummm...perhaps, or maybe not.

There is good reason to believe that for many women, feelings of sexual attraction are less fixed and more flexible than originally thought. Sex researchers have examined the factors related to women and men's sexual arousal and have found that women of all sexual orientations were more likely than heterosexual and gay men to become sexually stimulated in response to erotic images of both women and men, in heterosexual and homosexual coitus. In comparison, men became sexually aroused only by depictions that that corresponded with their sexual orientations. Furthermore, Lisa Diamond, a researcher from the University of Utah followed a sample of one hundred lesbians over a period of ten years to determine whether there were any changes in their sexual feelings over time. She found that women who identified as lesbians could find themselves periodically attracted to and sexually active with men, then women, then men again. Some women could be having relationships with members of both sexes at the same time. In fact, only one third of the women who initially identified as lesbians at the start of the research project reported exclusive sexual attractions and behavior toward women over the course of the study. So this research could explain how Anne Heche, after being in a relationship with Ellen DeGeneres, could then go on to to marry a man. Or that we are ready to believe that the sexy Samantha character in Sex in the City could take a break from men and engage in a complicated steamy affair with a lesbian played by Sonia Braga (OK, who wouldn't?)

Search for a mental health professional near you.


There is evidence that male sexual attractions and behaviors can also be fluid. First of all, men in other cultures, including non-Western societies and those of ancient Greece, have been known to participate in a transitory period of ritualistic homosexuality at some point during their lives. For example, not too long ago, the Sambia, an indigenous tribe in New Guinea believed a boy could not reach manhood unless he fellated an older man and ingested his semen. Secondly, in my own research, I found it was possible for the self-identified gay youth to have experienced sexual attractions to women before they identified as gay. Thirdly, I invite readers to go to Craigslist.org and take a look at the personal ads, for "men seeking men" and count how many are written by self-identified "straight" or "str8" men looking for sex with other men. Finally, some progressive adolescents and young adults with same-sex attractions do not label themselves or identify as gay because they refuse to center their identities on their current sexual feelings and behavior--which they expect will change depending on who their partners are.So, what does this all mean? Is sexual orientation fluid and/or changeable? Or are some gay and lesbian people really closeted bisexuals? A long time ago, Kinsey told us that bisexuality is much more prevalent than we think. However, we live in a society in which many people (including self-identifying gays and lesbians) don't quite believe in bisexuality. Maybe Anne Heche and some of the respondents in my study are being pressured to "pick one sex, dammit, and stick with it!" Is that what's happening?

Does it really matter?

If we truly believe that it is acceptable to have sexual and romantic relationships with the same sex, then it shouldn't matter whether or not sexual orientation is changeable. If it is really OK, we should be as accepting of a person who has a relationship with a man and then a woman as we would of someone who usually eats vanilla ice cream and then decides to start eating pistachio. So what? Sex between two consenting adults, like eating ice cream, should be about pleasure, personal preferences, or expressions of love and affection, not about social rules and definitions. However, in order to support the people in our lives who are struggling with their sexual orientations, we must reluctantly leave Utopia and remember that we live in a world that puts limits on people's sexual inclinations and punishes those who don't follow the rules. People of all sexual orientations (even those who don't claim one) need to find ways to live in a world that stigmatizes same-sex attractions and relationships, and those of us called upon to support and assist these people need to understand this if we are to be helpful.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. APA, Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (combining respondents who said theyd had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, Answers to Your Questions, supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 3541 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

Your presumption as to why a lawyer chose not to argue a point does not provide proof of anything. Perhaps the lawyers did not consider it an important point.

If an attorney doesn't consider an issue bearing directly on the standard of review in a constitutional law analysis to be an important point, he might want to consider another profession.

Then maybe they should. Here is a written arguement by a PHd in PhyscologyToday which shows it is far from immutable:

Sexual Orientation: Is It Unchangeable?Are we all really "born this way?"
Published on May 17, 2011 by Michael C. LaSala, Ph.D., LCSW in Gay and Lesbian Well-Being



Lately, I have been doing a lot of speaking at various PFLAG meetings (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) to share the research findings from my book: Coming Out, Coming Home:
Helping Parents Adjust to a Gay or Lesbian Child (www.comingoutcominghome.com). As a result of these meetings, as well as my own research, I have found that one of the things that helps parents come to terms with their children's sexual orientation is the idea that being gay or lesbian is innate. This is how they're born and that's that!. I am happy this idea comforts parents, but is it true?

Well.....hmmm....ummm...perhaps, or maybe not.

There is good reason to believe that for many women, feelings of sexual attraction are less fixed and more flexible than originally thought. Sex researchers have examined the factors related to women and men's sexual arousal and have found that women of all sexual orientations were more likely than heterosexual and gay men to become sexually stimulated in response to erotic images of both women and men, in heterosexual and homosexual coitus. In comparison, men became sexually aroused only by depictions that that corresponded with their sexual orientations. Furthermore, Lisa Diamond, a researcher from the University of Utah followed a sample of one hundred lesbians over a period of ten years to determine whether there were any changes in their sexual feelings over time. She found that women who identified as lesbians could find themselves periodically attracted to and sexually active with men, then women, then men again. Some women could be having relationships with members of both sexes at the same time. In fact, only one third of the women who initially identified as lesbians at the start of the research project reported exclusive sexual attractions and behavior toward women over the course of the study. So this research could explain how Anne Heche, after being in a relationship with Ellen DeGeneres, could then go on to to marry a man. Or that we are ready to believe that the sexy Samantha character in Sex in the City could take a break from men and engage in a complicated steamy affair with a lesbian played by Sonia Braga (OK, who wouldn't?)

Search for a mental health professional near you.


There is evidence that male sexual attractions and behaviors can also be fluid. First of all, men in other cultures, including non-Western societies and those of ancient Greece, have been known to participate in a transitory period of ritualistic homosexuality at some point during their lives. For example, not too long ago, the Sambia, an indigenous tribe in New Guinea believed a boy could not reach manhood unless he fellated an older man and ingested his semen. Secondly, in my own research, I found it was possible for the self-identified gay youth to have experienced sexual attractions to women before they identified as gay. Thirdly, I invite readers to go to Craigslist.org and take a look at the personal ads, for "men seeking men" and count how many are written by self-identified "straight" or "str8" men looking for sex with other men. Finally, some progressive adolescents and young adults with same-sex attractions do not label themselves or identify as gay because they refuse to center their identities on their current sexual feelings and behavior--which they expect will change depending on who their partners are.So, what does this all mean? Is sexual orientation fluid and/or changeable? Or are some gay and lesbian people really closeted bisexuals? A long time ago, Kinsey told us that bisexuality is much more prevalent than we think. However, we live in a society in which many people (including self-identifying gays and lesbians) don't quite believe in bisexuality. Maybe Anne Heche and some of the respondents in my study are being pressured to "pick one sex, dammit, and stick with it!" Is that what's happening?

Does it really matter?

If we truly believe that it is acceptable to have sexual and romantic relationships with the same sex, then it shouldn't matter whether or not sexual orientation is changeable. If it is really OK, we should be as accepting of a person who has a relationship with a man and then a woman as we would of someone who usually eats vanilla ice cream and then decides to start eating pistachio. So what? Sex between two consenting adults, like eating ice cream, should be about pleasure, personal preferences, or expressions of love and affection, not about social rules and definitions. However, in order to support the people in our lives who are struggling with their sexual orientations, we must reluctantly leave Utopia and remember that we live in a world that puts limits on people's sexual inclinations and punishes those who don't follow the rules. People of all sexual orientations (even those who don't claim one) need to find ways to live in a world that stigmatizes same-sex attractions and relationships, and those of us called upon to support and assist these people need to understand this if we are to be helpful.

So more people than will admit it from both those that identify as heterosexual and homosexual are born bisexual. Especially women.

This is news?

 

[EYLive]

This made me laugh and reminded me of some of the morons in this thread.

 

[fatness]

Basically I'm pointing out that the religious folks that are against gays will still be against gays even if it is proven that they are born that way. There was a rather lengthy article I linked to a while back in here where there was a religious argument that those that are gay are indeed born that way however that by no means excuses their sinful lifestyles, and those the religious folks should continue their crusade.Long story short, haters will hate, no matter the reason. So why keep engaging them in a pointless argument in which you have no hopes of ever changing their minds?

Thanks for the explanation; I see where you're coming from now.

Engaging them in an argument doesn't matter to me. Calling out BS justifications matters, though. It's not a 2-way conversation when it's online. There are other people reading.

 

[Zow]

The issue of whether gayness is a choice was relevant to the Seventh Circuit gay marriage cases that were just decided. They were Equal Protection Clause cases, and one of the tests for whether to apply some form of heightened scrutiny is whether the characteristic -- in this case, gayness -- serving to classify the discriminated-against group is "immutable" in the sense that it cannot simply be chosen.

The plaintiffs introduced solid evidence that sexual preference is not chosen.

The states would have benefited from introducing solid evidence that sexual preference is chosen -- but there isn't any, so they didn't even try.

Here's the court's summary of the topic:

[T]here is little doubt that sexual orientation, the ground of the discrimination, is an immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather than a choice. Wisely, neither Indiana nor Wisconsin argues otherwise. The American Psychological Association has said that most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. APA, Answers to Your Questions: For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality 2 (2008); see also Gregory M. Herek et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sexuality Research and Social Policy 176, 188 (2010) (combining respondents who said theyd had a small amount of choice with those reporting no choice, 95% of gay men and 84% of lesbians could be characterized as perceiving that they had little or no choice about their sexual orientation). That homosexual orientation is not a choice is further suggested by the absence of evidence (despite extensive efforts to find it) that psychotherapy is effective in altering sexual orientation in general and homosexual orientation in particular. APA, Answers to Your Questions, supra, at 3; Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation 3541 (2009).

The opinion is here. I recommend reading the whole thing.

Your presumption as to why a lawyer chose not to argue a point does not provide proof of anything. Perhaps the lawyers did not consider it an important point.

While I'm not a Con law lawyer who graduated from Harvard in the '70s, I can assure you that one of the first issues to look at in an equal protection case is to determine whether the identified group is threaded by a common, immutable characteristic.

What I'm saying is that these lawyers would have to have been borderline morons to not consider it an important point.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

Or are some gay and lesbian people really closeted bisexuals?

Key and Peele could have fun with this one.

 

[SWC]

i think in fifty years we will look back at the jagbags who keep trying to run down same sex couples and realize they were just as bad as the bigots and racists in the fifties when race relations finally opened up when you are filled with hate you are filled with hate and a detestable person no matter what decade you are in grow up live and let live and be good to your fellow brohans take that to the bank bromigos

 

[ClownCausedChaos2]

i think in fifty years we will look back at the jagbags who keep trying to run down same sex couples and realize they were just as bad as the bigots and racists in the fifties when race relations finally opened up when you are filled with hate you are filled with hate and a detestable person no matter what decade you are in grow up live and let live and be good to your fellow brohans take that to the bank bromigos

Couldn't have said it better myself, you bromo.

 

[SWC]

i think in fifty years we will look back at the jagbags who keep trying to run down same sex couples and realize they were just as bad as the bigots and racists in the fifties when race relations finally opened up when you are filled with hate you are filled with hate and a detestable person no matter what decade you are in grow up live and let live and be good to your fellow brohans take that to the bank bromigos

Couldn't have said it better myself, you bromo.

high five felllow bromerican you can be my wing man any day take that to the bank