The American people have been in denial about the reality of human sexuality for far too long. The infant science of Sexology [the biological, neurological, and psychological study of human sexuality] has [in only the 50 years since it's beginning] provided undeniable evidence that the simplistic view of sexuality, gender roles, and gender identity proposed by Christianity and Western Society is just plain WRONG! There is a far more complicated and [in many ways] beautiful spectrum of sexual and gender behaviors, preferences, and identities.

 

The Christian Right continues to support only one kind of sexual behavior, sex between a married heterosexual couple for procreation only.

The Late Jerry Fallwell, again demonstrating his crass lack of respect and sophistication came up with a motto for his disciples on this issue:

 

"It was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."

 

 

The ability to choose to remain abstinent until marriage AND to choose to be in a heterosexual marriage is fine as far as it goes... but once again... the Christian Right continues to ignore science and civil rights.

 

Dr. Alfred Kinsey became the father of sexuality research when he conducted several thousand interviews of individuals in the 50s. He published 2 books that would shock the world and send many conservatives flying into a rage. The first was "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" and the second "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female."

Apparently much of the public [as usual] had issues with the truth.

 

 

20 years before the American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from their book of psychiatric disorders, Kinsey proclaimed that homosexuality was a normal behavior.

 

BTW... The Kinsey Institute - located at Indiana University - would be a very interesting place to visit for anyone interested in learning about Dr. Kinsey's research and the continuing research of scientists who practice at the institute.

 

Their website is quite facinating:

 

http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/

 

Kinsey showed that sexuality was not a set of 2 different categories [Heterosexual, and homosexual] but rather a spectrum with the vast majority of individuals falling somewhere in between.

 

He also demonstrated that pre-marrital sex and extra-marrital affairs were common among the subjects he interviewed.

 

We owe a huge debt to Dr. Kinsey. If not for his research it is doubtful that human sexuality would be as understood as it is today.

 

Kinsey demonstrated that homosexual encounters were common among males and females that identified themselves as "strait" as well. [What this means is that just because you "made out with" or "had sex with" someone of the same sex as you once on a whim... doesn't mean you're gay... ]

 

If you want to know more about kinsey's research, please read his books.

 

So what point am I getting to?

The religious right are holding on to archaic ideas about sexuality that are destructive to human culture.

 

1. It seems to make more sense to them for a couple that hates eachother to stay in a heterosexual marriage instead of a homosexual couple that loves eachother to get married at all.

2. They can't seem to live with the undeniable statistic that 90% of modern individuals are not virgins when they go to their marriage bed.

3. They can't seem to accept that women are sexual at all.

 

Anyone else think this is insane?

 

People that are as deluded about modern reality as these wack-jobs should NOT be allowed to dictate to the public by legislation what they can and can't do with their bodies and who can and can't get married.

The fact that "sodomy" is still illegal is insane... because many people do it... even straits.

 

And the fact that homosexuals only have 1 or 2 states left that will recognize a marriage between them is insane because their behavior is quite common and as natural as any heterosexual relationship.

 

So... I propose this to people against gay marriage... if you refuse to support gay marriage, then I demand that you outlaw heterosexual marriage as well! That makes as much sense as outlawing gay marriage... afterall.

Tags: , gay, marriage, sex, Dr., glbtq, homophobia, homosexuality, institute, kinsey, laws, research, truth

Views: 57

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

So I'm going to skip all the drama that this argument stirred up, and go right to the black and white.

1) Gay couples don't procreate by accident.
2) Gay couples are more likely to have two income families.
3) Gay couples are more likely to be socially aware.

Now, I'm not saying that all parents love unplanned babies any less, I am saying there are cases where unplanned pregnancies create a much more stressful environment and the possibility of financial strain. I will even go as far to say that unplanned pregnancies are more than likely to be the target of resentment from both parents, too. When gay parents become parents, they do so because the want to.
Likewise, I'm not saying that being poor means you'll be a bad parent, but when it comes to providing for your children, statistics are very clear that the correlation of poverty, education and health are pretty damn black and white.
Further, growing up in a minority household will go a long way to providing a more cultured, tolerant mind.
So what I'm saying here is that all facts point to the conclusion that children raised by gay parents should be more educated, culturally aware and healthier, over all.
I'd be happy to get rid of all marriage. And that picture of Kinsey doesn't look anything like Liam Neeson.
I'm sorry; I just don't believe marriage is an institution so sacred it can't be improved upon. I believe that we can make amendments to what it is and/or what it entails. No person enters a marriage thinking they're going to divorce that person, but there is a lot that can happen that would make a person want to seek a divorce. There is also no reason not to let two people enter a marriage that want a marriage though they're the same sex... except if we're just obsessed with tradition and propriety. A homosexual couple's marriage will not diminish the sanctity of a straight couple's marriage, or cheapen it.

You and I obviously come from different parts of the world; I'm sure there are things that we'll never be able to relate to each other on. That being said, I simply do not comprehend your defensiveness when it comes to marriage since you're atheist. Marriage is a religious institution, but that doesn't mean the concept of marriage must remain a religious institution. It doesn't mean a nonbeliever can't enjoy the benefits of marriage or draw up the contract of marriage in a way they feel is the most advantageous for both parties.

You say research has proven marriage to be a successful institution, but what do you regard as "success"? If the marriage lasts until one or both parties have deceased, is that considered successful? Were people polled and asked how content they were? What are these studies based on? Do they take into account the experience of men and women? Is there a possibility the participants would feel inclined to answer a certain way even if they felt differently? Is this a global study? Are the opinion's of the married couple's children taken into account? Are all demographics counted?

Since marriage is a global tradition, I would say it's impossible to really gauge the success of marriages across the board. To say marriage works in one part of the world therefore marriage works is a very liberal conclusion, and also presumptuous. I just don't think it's something that can be accurately measured, and (again) I don't think marriage has to be so black and white. Our world is progressing, and its traditions can progress as well.
Well, I'd first like you to link to to these studies you're referring to... or let me know how they're gauging the "success" of marriage. Also, I believe that the "parameters by which happiness is measured" are relative. I think it would be difficult for either of us to prove to the other who was happier. Is happiness what constitutes as a successful marriage anyway? That's my biggest question.

Besides, I'm not against marriage; I never said I wouldn't get married. I'm also not homosexual, so I don't have to fight for my own right to be happy with the partner I choose; I'm already with him and we may or may not get married.

I just don't think it's fair that other people are denied what would make them happy! I would never deny you the right to marriage; I would never deny you the right to conduct your marriage the way you saw fit. If you feel marriage is a life-long, nonnegotiable contract, then by all means... enter therein!

My only real position in this debate is that people should be able to marry whomever they choose and that it's no one's business but theirs. If two consenting adults choose to marry, that's their prerogative; if they choose to divorce, that's also their prerogative. "Selfishness" is not the only reason marriages end. My mother divorced my father because he left her and began relations with other women. He was not the one to file for divorce though he was the unhappy party! My mother loved him but knew she couldn't remain married to him. I suppose self-preservation is selfish, but it's also necessary.

I just think people are too concerned about what other people are doing, even when it doesn't affect them. Like I said, I would never deny you what you feel is an appropriate marriage; I just wish you would not try to deny other people what they feel is appropriate.
No Flame Wars Please!!

RSS

Gizmo Gadget - Purveyros of the finest gadgets this side of the Amazon

Events

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

Backup your stuff: Dropbox and SugarSync.

Atheist Web Hosting. TA members get 20% off
RFEHosting.com
We are in love with our Amazon
Book Store!

 

Check out our new mobile/tablet version of Think Atheist! www.ThinkAtheist.com/m

© 2013   Created by Morgan Matthew.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service