Piano World Home Page Forums Restricted and Archives The Coffee Room To Christians

Yes, I'm following closely.

Dwain - Your analogies with self-centeredness, or with adultery, or other human traits and actions we must restrain are false. Egotism or adultery are commonly judged to be moral failings, and can be criticized in normal moral terms and shown to be bad. (Well, one could debate the meaning of egotism, but I'll allow for the sake of argument that it is commonly regarded as a moral failing.) If a family member acts selfishly, or steals, I might plausibly hate the sin but love the sinner.

Homosexuality is not like this. It is a normal, healthy aspect of human sexuality. It is not morally wrong in any respect at all. You have given no argument otherwise, nor have I ever seen on PW or elsewhere any actual argument (other than "God says so") to this effect. Therefore there is no distinction between hating the sin and the sinner on this topic, because it is only in the minds of the "haters" that there is any issue to begin with (unlike the other issues, which are plausibly regarded as independent moral failings, and can be argued to be such).

Also, you do not know if the injunction to self-hatred you propose for homosexuals is harder than what you put yourself through. You are not a homosexual. All the stuff about love and God and faith and etc. is off topic - your views are discrimination against homosexuals and morally wrong. If a religion preaches known falsehoods and moral errors, it may be judged accordingly.

Jeffrey,

What is the difference between my inclination to want to have sex with multiple females outside of marriage any different than a gay man's desire to have sex with multiple males? I know it is not just sex, but I also am drawn to love women, to care for them, to protect them, etc. I do not see the distinction.

Homosexuality is certainly not "healthy". I would also argue it is not "normal" even if fully 2-3-5% feel that way. Further, I would say that homosexuality seems to be a sin against God if you believe in that sort of thing or contrary to the theory of evolution if you ascribe to that.

double post

Nothing, but promiscuity has nothing to do with homosexuality, nor vice versa.

See! I told you I was afraid to wade in!

K: "Homosexuality is certainly not "healthy"."

Why do you say this? I saw no argument. It is not against the theory of evolution, since the human species is thriving, and many humans are homosexual.

One final comment on "faith" as it is used in these sort of debates: usually after all evidence and reason based arguments are exhausted, and one point of view (call it X) proven false, people say, "Well, it's just faith, you don't understand since you don't have faith, I still believe X." The word "faith" is used as a talisman against actually accepting a logical, evidence-based train of thought. This, at least, is my observation.

Actually, I think it does. I don't think it is much disputed that gay men are far more promiscious than straights and for the sole reason that men are much more driven by their libidos. Our own Johnny Moon is testament to that. So, in a hetero mix, you have a libido-raging male with the femme who keeps him in check, right? The man always wants it, and the woman is always holding back and restraining him? In a homosexual mix, you don't have the check and balance. That's one of the reasons I think gay marriage is a really good thing. Let's encourage commitment and monagomy. If gay guys strive toward comitted relationships, it can only stand to stablilize society - less sexually transimtted disease, more happiness all the way around, no?

Have you ever read "Sexual Personae" by Camille Paglia? She touches on this, and the breakdown of sexual mores in our society, in general, ultimately leading to a hedonistic, sadistic, death knell of ultimate destruction to the race. She's kind of out there, but I think she has a real sense of the evolution of human sexuality.

Fine, if you wish to discount roughly half of the homosexuals, who happen to be women. So, what, lesbians just never have sex because they're always reining each other in? :rolleyes:

HUH?!?! I dont get this "femme holding him back" thing. That sounds like the dynamics of a relationship, which ofcourse, is one partner, whereas promiscuity is about several partners.

Men with the raging libidos can have sex as often as they like. If there is some femme holding back, the raging libido can find it elswhere. there is no shortage of women available for cheap taudry sex. And I have known many straight men who's women count is staggering. And many gay couples (men and women) who are extremely commited and faithful.

Again, promiscuity and homosexuality are entirely independent of each other.

Sorry to not have clarified that, Matt. I was talking about men. I think lesbians are quite benign. Have you seen any of our contingent CW homophobes getting their dander up about them recently?


Really, do either of you (Sid or Matt) deny that men have a greater libido than women, speaking in generalities, of course?

And yes, Sid, men can go get it whereever they damn please, but they better be good players, have understanding partners, or just not care, because most women I know in supposedly monogamous relationships will not stand for their men satisying their primal urges outside the matrimonial bedroom. I trust the same holds for monogamous homo- relationships. That's all I'm saying. My point is very simple. Men are much more sex-driven than women. Put them together in sexual relationships (think bathhouses) and you have potential libido gone amuck, absent a committed monogamous relationship.

Yes, men seem to have stronger libidos.

But in your promiscous scenario, you seem to be assuming a significant other (who will or will not stand for it). Promiscuity occurs with single people too (if not predominantly). My point being, the topic is unrelated to a relationship.

Although I do have a friend who is cohabitating with a woman, been with her for about 3 years. They are supposedly commited. But he pretty much bangs a different girl every night. He works in the club industry, so he's around hundreds at all times. I've seen him operate, its amazing. He's brought them over to share. I have no idea how this relationship works. I've never met her (seen her, she does exist), but all I can think is she's playing prolifically on the side too. But he's been over here, with women, afterhours, and the cell phone rings every half hour "when are you coming home". "I'm just hanging with buddy for some drinks, we'll be done soon". How can that work?

I'd say in your friend's case, his SO is very much contibuting to the rules of the game.

Of course, and indisputably, promiscuity occurs among both sexes, but I believe (Pardon my lack of energy to prove this with citations) that most studies will show that the sex-drive is much stronger in men, and ergo - promiscuity. And, in sex studies, the curbing force of that is monogamy, which traditionally, comes in the form a wife, children, and family to rear. For homosexuals, the counterpart would be a life partner.

I don't think this is a correct conclusion. Libido has no direct link to promiscuity, only to desire for sexual activity. Two partners with equivalent libido levels would have little need for promiscuity, all other things being equal. I think that promiscuity is a personality issue, not a hormone-driven genetic issue.

Alas, no time at the moment to go and back myself up, but, a lot of what I've read would suggest otherwise. I think it's just a simple girl/boy difference thing. And, I am a strong proponent of the school of differences between the sexes.

The sex act in homosexuality is not as God or evolution designed. Please don't make me research the nasty things that can happen when going against nature. Not to mention HIV and AIDS.

Are you of the opinion that these are a consequence of homosexual activity? Someone needs a biology lesson....

I'd consult a medical doctor about the differences between the muscle structure of the vagina and the anus. I understand there is quite a difference, and the anal tissue is quite more susceptible to tearing. But I am not a doctor, and will leave that to the professionals.

Thanks for sharing. :rolleyes: