Homosexuality from a Non-Religious perspective
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:59 pm
Ultimately, Sex is for procreation and that is it. We can douse it with all sorts of special meanings, but in the end, it's about keeping the human species going.
Now nature/god/"the giant turtle that barfed up the universe" or whatever you believe made sex extremely pleasurable so that we actually would DO it. If sex were unpleasant or boring, we would still be a small tribe in africa numbering a couple hundred with Dolphins ruling the world. Humans, however, being the intelligent and fun seeking bunch that we are, learned to use the pleasant part of sex, and block the actual use of it with contraceptives. Kinda like sniffing glue. Sure, the USE of glue is to stick something to something else, but that side effect has a lot of kids in the hobby shop...
Another part of the reproductive system is that we are male and female and have roles. I know, we as a society don't like roles, but traditionally, the women birthed and nurtured the child while the man protected the "family". Men are naturally more agressive and physical while women are naturally more intelligent and emotional. This role system has been effective in getting us where we are today from hiding from saber-toothed tigers to protecting familes from the evil communists. These roles were EQUAL, but DIFFERENT.
Now I know, there are men who ABUSED the role system, and in traditional "overractive" society that we have become, we throw the baby out with the bathwater. Rather than directly address the problem we threw out all ideas of roles and beat them into the ground... That coupled with World War II when women were forced to work for the factories, etc. to keep the country going, having these traditional roles became "evil".
Whatever the case, in order to get these men and women together, there was the law of attraction. Men desired women and women desired men. But once in a blue moon, that mechanism fails, and we get Homosexuality.
The question becomes, why does this mechanism fail? Many theorize a chemical issue. We have all sorts of classified "chemical issues" that affect behavior. From depression, to ADHD, to sexual addiction... Each creating a sense of reality different from the norm. For example, in depression (clinical), the sense of sadness is very real, even though there isn't much to be sad about... So if homosexuality is a similar chemical imbalance, the same is true there. The sense that they love the same sex is very "real".
Perhaps my computer background is part of the problem. If a part of a computer fails (expecially the motherboard), some people just ignore that part. For example, if an on-board ethernet controller fails, some people would just disable it and install an add-on card. The problem is that if one part of the motherboard has failed, other parts could be soon behind it. I would want to find out what killed the original ethernet port in the first place. If it is a shorted cable that did it, the cable plugged into the new card could kill it too.
So that comes back to homosexuality. I am against "protecting" it as an alternative lifestyle. I agree that people with disabilities should be treated with respect, but trying to promote it as a way to be is where we part company. What if this chemical imbalance (as even the homosexual community is promoting - "being gay is not a choice!") has broader effects? Protecting it as a legit way to be could hinder the review and examination of homosexuality. What if it can be cured? We want to cure depression. We want to cure ADHD/ADD... We want to cure people attracted to children.... Why do we want to take homosexuality and drop it into a different area and promote it as a great alternative lifestyle? I don't mind tolarance of people who are different, but to protect broken sexual behavior opens the door wide open to accepting other "alternative" preferences... Beastiality anyone?
Just my thoughts...
JMS
Now nature/god/"the giant turtle that barfed up the universe" or whatever you believe made sex extremely pleasurable so that we actually would DO it. If sex were unpleasant or boring, we would still be a small tribe in africa numbering a couple hundred with Dolphins ruling the world. Humans, however, being the intelligent and fun seeking bunch that we are, learned to use the pleasant part of sex, and block the actual use of it with contraceptives. Kinda like sniffing glue. Sure, the USE of glue is to stick something to something else, but that side effect has a lot of kids in the hobby shop...
Another part of the reproductive system is that we are male and female and have roles. I know, we as a society don't like roles, but traditionally, the women birthed and nurtured the child while the man protected the "family". Men are naturally more agressive and physical while women are naturally more intelligent and emotional. This role system has been effective in getting us where we are today from hiding from saber-toothed tigers to protecting familes from the evil communists. These roles were EQUAL, but DIFFERENT.
Now I know, there are men who ABUSED the role system, and in traditional "overractive" society that we have become, we throw the baby out with the bathwater. Rather than directly address the problem we threw out all ideas of roles and beat them into the ground... That coupled with World War II when women were forced to work for the factories, etc. to keep the country going, having these traditional roles became "evil".
Whatever the case, in order to get these men and women together, there was the law of attraction. Men desired women and women desired men. But once in a blue moon, that mechanism fails, and we get Homosexuality.
The question becomes, why does this mechanism fail? Many theorize a chemical issue. We have all sorts of classified "chemical issues" that affect behavior. From depression, to ADHD, to sexual addiction... Each creating a sense of reality different from the norm. For example, in depression (clinical), the sense of sadness is very real, even though there isn't much to be sad about... So if homosexuality is a similar chemical imbalance, the same is true there. The sense that they love the same sex is very "real".
Perhaps my computer background is part of the problem. If a part of a computer fails (expecially the motherboard), some people just ignore that part. For example, if an on-board ethernet controller fails, some people would just disable it and install an add-on card. The problem is that if one part of the motherboard has failed, other parts could be soon behind it. I would want to find out what killed the original ethernet port in the first place. If it is a shorted cable that did it, the cable plugged into the new card could kill it too.
So that comes back to homosexuality. I am against "protecting" it as an alternative lifestyle. I agree that people with disabilities should be treated with respect, but trying to promote it as a way to be is where we part company. What if this chemical imbalance (as even the homosexual community is promoting - "being gay is not a choice!") has broader effects? Protecting it as a legit way to be could hinder the review and examination of homosexuality. What if it can be cured? We want to cure depression. We want to cure ADHD/ADD... We want to cure people attracted to children.... Why do we want to take homosexuality and drop it into a different area and promote it as a great alternative lifestyle? I don't mind tolarance of people who are different, but to protect broken sexual behavior opens the door wide open to accepting other "alternative" preferences... Beastiality anyone?
Just my thoughts...
JMS