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:


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.

Views: 276

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I believe in marriage, too. I recognize people don't "need" to get married to be in a committed, loving relationship that will last forever and ever. However, if you know you're going to do that, anyway, why not get married and reap the governmental benefits and reduce confusion that comes with children, deaths, property, etc.?
Because I don't believe that it's the governments business with whom I have sexual relations.
Because I begrudge paying $60 to the court house to file said paperwork of marriage.
Because I resent the fact that the government has designed marriage as a taxable institution. Because I resent the fact that the government has dictated that I need this piece of paper to ensure my wishes are followed after my death or while I'm incapacitated. Why can't I just have a living will? Why can't I just have estate planning? Why can't I simply pick a person I trust without being blood related or marrying them?
Didn't you get married recently?

I will readily admit that I have always just liked the idea of getting married. I recognize I don't need a "piece of paper" to truly make my relationship anything more (or less) than it's going to be. I admire your firm and valid stances, but I myself headed to the alter for the most simplistic of reasons: I wanted to get married and have babies and live happily ever after.

For that matter, I think everyone should have that right no matter what the sexual orientation might be. You want to marry your left Nike running shoe? Fabulous.
There's nothing but ignorance and bigotry behind the rejection of homosexuality.

Some of the ignorance and bigotry is willful. Most of it is not.

This will largely be a matter of waiting for the older generations to die off.
I don't see how "most" ignorance isn't willful. In this day and age with technology, there is almost no excuse in not continually examining what you hold true. If you refuse to do so, you are being willfully ignorant. The only people who I see as "accidentally" ignorant are those who are very old and those who are very young (or in bad circumstances). As soon as I began to near my teens I began to research my faith. If my life thus far hadn't been so hectic, I would have became an atheist much sooner.
I do sort of agree with you... but I would say you do have to give other people time to come to the conclusions you have. Think about it: if you would've been atheist sooner if your life had been less hectic, maybe the same is true of many theists. Not everyone is on the same page, right? So, to say all who are "ignorant" of certain thing are willfully so, is ignoring your own argument that a person's life may prevent them from fully delving in.

I probably would've been atheist sooner, too, but if you're a Christian, there's a lot of information you're shielded against. There's a lot of dogma to distract from real knowledge. There are lot of "answers" to some of the mainstream arguments against Christianity/religion that may be weak, but are sufficient enough to put a doubter's mind at ease, at least for a while. In fact, if I'd never taken a Critical Thinking class through the university I was attending, I wouldn't have known why so many theological arguments are weak and fail to really address the problem. I'd heard the terms "circular reasoning", "deductive reasoning", etc... but I had no real idea what those terms implied.

I do hold a lot of theists responsible for not being more educated (like my mother), but it's definitely difficult to even know any of their claims have been significantly challenged. We're all on a different part of our journey, so go easy on those who haven't caught up to you yet! :)
I do sort of agree with you... but I would say you do have to give other people time to come to the conclusions you have.
I agree Cara Coleen, but I would like to add something to that. It has been a year since I declared myself atheist [It's my deconversion aniversary! Yay - we ought to start celebrating that] anyhow... theists who have tangled their mind so badly that they can't absorb the truth need to untangle it before they can come to the conclusion that there is no god. It's quite similar to the problem I often have when knitting that drives me bannanas... my yarn becomes a hopeless mess of tangles that I have to undo.
Thanks! ^_^
I have a saying that I apply to people in general:
"The innocent do not know, and the stupid refuse to know."
Agreed... I've been waiting for sometime for the "old time family values" bigots to die off.
Keep It civil. ~Mod.
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.


© 2020   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service