this is boring. I've gone over this already. manipulation of environment, labeling from a cultural perspective, cultural need for power and the validation of associated behaviors. I know this is a simple view but Nature made the anus for excrement not for the human mammalian brain to seek boundless pleasure or self gratification thru sexual behavior. (The vagina for the insertion of a penis) Hell we can say that according to our view, animals practice beastiality, so it's "normal" for us to follow suit since we too are animals. We can pass a law to make it legal, why not, it's within our scope to behave as such. Homosexuality is aberrant in Nature (not practiced universally or even in great numbers) even among zoo animals
Individualism allows for a few "individuals" to express their personal desires. Ideas of "freedom" and "rights" allow other "individuals" to support them because they too feel that this idea of "rights and freedom" shouldn't be breached because they too have them. Now when this is juxtaposed against the idea that we are above Nature and are boundless, hell we'll almost accept any behavior.
Why does the g-spot exist then? Whats that for?
How can you be sure it exists...? Have you ever seen it.. ? LMAO
As for not being practiced universally, you apparently didn't follow those links I provided. They would show you that in fact it is practiced universally.
So what if its not practiced in great numbers in animals? That doesn't invalidate it.
Sounds like both of your suppositions have just bit the dust there.
I missed this earlier:
@Shabaka Tecumseh "I know this is a simple view but Nature made the anus for excrement not for the human mammalian brain to seek boundless pleasure or self gratification thru sexual behavior. (The vagina for the insertion of a penis)"
So do you also say that oral/genital sex is aberrant? By the logic you present here, it is. The mouth is for eating and making sounds, not sexual gratification. Would you say that the only time a penis should be inserted in a mouth is when the intent is to bite it off?
If you don't consider oral/genital sex aberrant, how is that not a hypocritical view?
My best friend is gay , we have been friends for 44 years and I am glad that I didn't have to go through all of that thinking to value him as a terrific friend !!!! We just love and respect each other as human's. Not as a species, or competition,, social functioning being palatable.... geez after all of that ... who would have any friend..... I just want to live and enjoy my time on earth . If I meet a person I like and they happen to be gay , so what !!!!! I have many gay friends and my children have gay friends . I taught them well and they don't thing any thing different about their friends gay or straight.
That's the problem.. you can't unify religion and biology.
Everything evolves in one way or another. Businesses, computers, car design. manufacturing, phones, etc... doesn't mean it has anything to do with biology. Biology is devoid of religion. Religion is a human construct, biology is how humans are constructed. One has nothing to do with the other.
Psychology and anthropology on the other hand, they have something to say about Religion.
Would it be helpful to drop the concept of "Homosexual" and instead replace it with "Mammalian Sexuality Spectrum" ?
I suggest this because it is very clear that in nature ALL mammals have a spectrum of sexuality, in fact given that biological systems are what they are there can never be a black and white result, statistically there has to be some variation - hence a spectrum. Now on top of this you have all the social nuances of the human race, these being shaped by such things as religion, education, the basic misogynism of a society (links back to religion) all trying to force human behavior into some abstract idea of what it considers "normal" at a particular point in time.
Religion is just one part of the picture, though it is certainly a most cruel and brutally violent part of it. Tolerance of variations in the human race, be they sexual, skin tone etc all starts in the home,after that it is those with a big voice in society that have the next biggest influence, sadly they (politicians, religious nuts leaders, media pundits. Sadly in some countries it is those voices that are currently ignoring their humanitarian responsibilities for reasons of personal gain.
Nina van der Roos.
Repulsion of anything (whether it's spiders, dogs, cats, feces, etc) is a culturally learned response. Basically, you learn it, it's not a natural thing.
Using foods as an example, some people find the concept of eat raw fish repulsive. Here in the U.S. we're generally taught that eating raw fish is bad, so you get people who find it repulsive and refuse to eat it. Whereas in Japan it's been a cultural mainstay for centuries,, so they think nothing of it.
What I'm saying is this.. your were taught to be repulsed by homosexuality, it didn't come naturally. .. That being said, I could show you a few gay people who are repulsed by straight people showing affection in public, so does that mean no one (gay or straight) should hold hands or kiss each other on a city street?
No, I don't think so. There is a great deal of evidence that it is related to low IQ. Many heterosexual people find the idea of gay sex distasteful just as many gay people find the idea of straight sex distasteful. This is just the normal reaction to thinking about sex with someone you do not find sexually attractive. Intelligent people realise that this reaction is all to do with them and nothing to do with the opposite sexuality and knowing this makes them reject the notion that gay sex is actually distasteful. Less intelligent people may feel that their own reactions are all the evidence they need to say something is wrong. Religion encourages them to believe they are right in this and gives them the excuse to say this openly.
I agree that discrimination against GLBT people is down to the sanction of religions. If there was no justification for this attitude then more people would feel ashamed of any homophobic thoughts they may have and reason with themselves about it.
Clearly because in history there are plenty of examples where it existed and was not treated with the contempt that the crazy god worshippers seem to have for it now.