Is homosexuality immoral?

Short answer: don’t be ridiculous.

I’ve been trying to read widely, including Christian blogs in my daily blog circuit, popping into the odd Christian forum now and then, as I don’t want to isolate myself from ideas I don’t agree with. It’s been difficult, though, to stop my head from exploding sometimes. This blog is not for religious comments, though. The purpose of this post is to address an argument I’ve seen people make who to justify without turning to the Bible why homosexuality is supposedly immoral.

Some STDs are much, much more prevalent among homosexual men than among any other population group in the USA. Those using this fact to try to justify their condemnation of homosexuality often choose not to notice that the formula

[STD] is more prevalent among [group A] than among any other population group

can be applied to a whole load of population groups with some or another common factor, sometimes really surprising ones. Southerners, women, men, lesbians, teenagers, black people, white people – the list goes on and on. So if you’re going to condemn group A for having a higher rate of disease X, you have to apply the same logic to group B, group C, group D etc. Following that road, we have to conclude that it’s immoral to, for instance, be a resident of a certain city. It just doesn’t make any sense.

What’s really sad is that ending the conversation with “Just goes to show, it’s immoral,” leaves you locked out of a vast and important part of the discourse. You don’t get to ask why? because you’ve already decided you know the truth. Factors ranging as widely as exploring how the stats were collected and learning fascinating things about this process will now never enter your mind. You will never be open to a deeper understanding of how society’s condemnation of homosexuality has influenced behaviour, and what changes are occurring as a result of increased tolerance. You will never get to apply your mind to how a culture of irresponsibility in certain gay communities can be combated, how things can be changed, because you’ve already condemned a group of people as beyond hope unless they play by your rules.

There was a time, not long ago in human history, when you could have replaced ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’ with ‘black’ and the article would have remained valid. I can only hope, as I’ve stated in my previous post on a related issue, that a day will come when anti-homosexuality will be viewed with the same disapproval and contempt as blatant racism is now.

There is another very valid point relating to this issue, but I’ll discuss it in a separate post.

8 thoughts on “Is homosexuality immoral?

  1. I think clumping being black and being gay together is very erroneous (just like my spelling probably is :) ). Being black is a matter of race while being gay is not. Martin Luther King Jr, and William Wilberforce stood for equality among races. These men were brave pioneers standing for truth. People parading for gay marriage and the likes are trying to tear down the fabric of the tapestry that makes us human. Having a code of ethics. If we as humans can do what we want without any sense of morality then we are nothing more than animals. Humans are the ones born with a sense of right and wrong.
    As far as standing on something other than scripture for our sense of morality, then there is nothing to stand on and we should do whatever we want, kill, steal and whatever “makes us happy’ at the moment. There is no morality unless it is based on something that doesn’t change. Because if humans are expected to all agree on one standard of morality apart from a religious standpoint then that will never happen. There has to be something outside of humanity to base our morality on or else it will change like the wind and be unstable. People will try to find reasons to justify whatever behavior they want, but just because there is a reason someone behaves inappropiately, doesn’t mean that it is moral. Anyone could find a reason to cheat on their spouse but that doesn’t mean it is a good moral decision.

  2. I think clumping being black and being gay together is very erroneous (just like my spelling probably is ).

    Don’t stress about spelling and grammar. I tend to be good about it because it’s what I do, but I’m more interested in your opinion than in pointing out when you miss an apostrophe.

    Being black is a matter of race while being gay is not.

    Being black is a matter of genetics, as is being gay. This is my opinion, not fact, though I base my opinion on research and discoveries which, though inconclusive, strongly suggest homosexuality is at least in part a physical difference. The brains of gay people differ from those of straight people. They are physically different, just like dark people are physically different from pale ones.

    On what do you base your opinion that homosexuality is immoral (I gather from what you’re saying that’s what you think)?

    People parading for gay marriage and the likes are trying to tear down the fabric of the tapestry that makes us human. Having a code of ethics.

    I want you to spell out for me what it is you mean with “trying to tear down the fabric of the tapestry that makes us human”.

    How do you define “a code of ethics”? Explain to me why you say gay people have no such code.

    Humans are the ones born with a sense of right and wrong.
    As far as standing on something other than scripture for our sense of morality…

    You need to make up your mind on where you think morality comes from. If we’re born with it, we don’t need the Bible for it. If we need the Bible for it, we can’t be born with it. You claim one in one sentence and the other in the sentence directly following. Which is it?

    …As far as standing on something other than scripture for our sense of morality, then there is nothing to stand on and we should do whatever we want, kill, steal and whatever ‘makes us happy’ at the moment… Because if humans are expected to all agree on one standard of morality apart from a religious standpoint then that will never happen.

    Yes, all those societies that have no access to scripture are an endless orgy of killing, raping, murdering, pillaging and… oh, wait. They’re not. From the deserts of the Kalahari to the jungles of Borneo, all societies, even those who have never heard of God and worship other deities, have rules that govern their behaviour, and means to punish those who transgress these rules. There are commonalities to their codes of ethics which are intriguing: why is murder condemned universally, even among cannibals (even they have rules about killing and eating others, and do not allow killing on a whim)? I think, and as far as I know anthropologists agree, that such behaviours don’t contribute to a group surviving and thriving. Therefore, through both culture and genetic predisposition, all over the world, groups have independently developeded these things we call morals which govern our lives, and they’re strikingly similar worldwide.

    There is no morality unless it is based on something that doesn’t change.

    And if that was true, we’d still be okay with slavery, people would still kill people for not having the same religion as we do without anyone condemning them, women would still be considered men’s property, and on and on. Morality, contrary to what you’re saying, HAS to be based on a constant quest for “what behaviour promotes the optimum happiness and health for every member of the community, and the community as a whole?” Because no individual’s preferences can be accommodated if it’s detrimental to the greater good. Thus, murder is condemned whether you believe in God or not ,because if we are all allowed to kill when we feel like it the consequences for the group as a whole would be disastrous.

    I’m very interested in your answers to the questions I asked:
    1. On what do you base your opinion that being gay is immoral?
    2. Spell out for me what it is you mean with “trying to tear down the fabric of the tapestry that makes us human”.
    3. How do you define “a code of ethics”? Explain to me why you say gay people have no such code.

    Thanks for taking the time to comment.

  3. Well I’ll try to answer your 3 questions. As far as the other comments on different posts, I feel like we have way too many irons in the fire. If you would like to discuss those some more maybe we should continue our discussion on the lines of Christianity/Atheism. Because why would the other questions matter if that one isn’t discussed first.
    1. I base it on the Bible. The Bible says it’s wrong so it’s wrong.
    2. The Tapestry that makes us human is free will. Animals and other forms of life don’t possess this. They aren’t sentient. They don’t choose good or evil. So what I mean is that people claiming that being gay is good is calling bad things good. It’s that fabric, of some things being right and wholesome and others being bad, and our right to choose between them, that makes us human. You can’t have it both ways. We can’t just make up the rules. You said that civilizations have universally agreed on things like murder, so how about genocide? People make excuses to do bad things. It’s always been. But just because they justify doing bad with a “reason” doesn’t magically change the fact that it is still bad. Civilizations have wars over petty things sometimes, thousands upon thousands have been killed so how do you even begin to claim that civilization knows best?
    3. Choosing to be gay is immoral, so if a person lives a homosexual lifestyle then they are immoral. I mean if you keep an otherwise moral lifestyle but steal from your employer you are an immmoral person. So even if a gay person keeps up with other morals and commits homosexuality then he/she is still an immoral person.

    • Hey, and thanks for responding. I can squeeze a few more minutes out of this day, but not many!

      1. Do you forbid someone who’s been emasculated from entering the church? If not, why not? God commanded it in the Bible. (Deut. 23:1). And just after that, it says someone born of a forbidden marriage may not enter the assembly of the Lord, not even in the tenth generation. Are you sure your pastor has checked the ancestry of each church member? And will you cut the hand off a woman who gets involved in a fight and grabs someone by the balls? (Deut. 25:11-12) Do you shave? Oooh, that’s a no-no, too. (Lev. 19:27)

      Why do you choose to disapprove of homosexuality but you ignore these other, less convenient Biblical commands?
      2. How do you know animals don’t have free will?
      3. Right. I give up, and I’m sorry if I sound harsh, but I’m tired and I’ve been here and done this before, and seen it unfold more times than I can count. Here is what happens:

      a. An atheist makes an argument.
      b. A Christian comes along and states the opposing point of view, using a mountain of unsubstantiated claims, speculation and falsehoods.
      c. The atheist points out why the claims are dubious, anecdotal or plain false.
      d. The Christian changes tack from arguing the points to babbling about how Jesus is love and if only the atheist could find him, she’d change her mind. But oh, how sad, you can’t find Jesus unless you’re willing to completely stop using your brain, which the atheist is so silly not to do. The Christian further flatly ignores every single point laboured over and explained by the atheist, every single link to reliable sources, every effort made to show them why their arguments don’t hold water. They often repeat EXACTLY the same points they’d used before, the truth just seems to bounce off their skulls, they make zero – ZERO effort to address the points raised by the atheist.
      e. The atheist repeats requests for evidence, for logic, for reason.
      f. From this point on, the course is not set in stone, but it’s reasonably predictable. Most likely the Christian is now in full-on witness mode, and reverts completely to Church-speak with a “you poor, lost soul” shake of the head.
      g. The atheist tears her hair out in frustration, then sets it on fire.
      h. The Christian says: “See, she has no inner peace because she doesn’t have Jesus in her heart.”

      Well, this atheist has had enough of this. The conversation on this topic ended when you said: “Choosing to be gay…”, not even hinting that you may possibly have gone to the trouble of reading about the research done, the literal physical brain differences, the findings of higher incidence among genetic relations even when adopted, and so on and so on. You don’t even have the decency to say: “Well, the evidence is very strong, but it’s not conclusive” or some such.

      Why should I bother going to the trouble of laying out my point of view when all you’re going to do in return is say: “Well, the Bible says it’s so” and ignore EVERYTHING I showed you in my previous comment? Good God, man, you didn’t even take the time to properly read what I explained about evolutionary morality. “Oh, but there are genocides…” Yes, there are. And nobody in the entire world says they’re moral, unlike in the Old Testament.

      Yes, dear Christian, THAT TASK IS LEFT TO THE BIBLE, WHERE IT’S JUST GRAND TO OBLITERATE ENTIRE NATIONS AS LONG AS GOD SAYS IT’S OKAY. And you tell me humanity will descend into anarchy if we IGNORE the Bible? My friend, I absolutely shudder at the thought of a society based on the Bible. You also clearly just ignored the article I linked to for you, which showed through a very thorough comparison of all kinds of different factors that there is no correlation between religiosity and a better society.

      You’re right, this conversation is completely pointless, but that has nothing to do with me. Really, I am fed up with taking hours of my time to go to the trouble of laying out logical points, of giving you the benefit of days, weeks, months worth of reading, listening to talks and debates and hard-won self-education just to be answered with a shitty cop-out like “Oh, but the Bible says it’s true.”

      Next time we exchange comments, please, take a second to at least dignify the trouble I go to in thorough, researched, verified responses by throwing me a bone and acknowledging you even fricking went beyond skimming through it, racing to get to where you can just throw the Bible at me.


  4. As far as discussion goes Nadia, I think it would be pointless. You are a missionary athiest and I’m a Christian. I believe the Bible. I believe that God is good and kind and all together lovely. I believe that He always has our best interests at heart. I believe in life hereafter. I believe in redemption.
    I don’t have all the answers. I just believe. But the good news is no one has “all” the answers. You put your faith in humanity. I put it in Jesus. We can argue back and forth all day and not get anywhere. Because at the end of the day, I’m still going to be following Jesus. I love Him with all my heart and He loves me. Whether you believe in Him or not it doesn’t make Him not exist. He loves you with an everlasting love and if you ever decide to come back home, His arms will be open wide to love on you for all eternity.
    The only other thing I would like to say is that you made mention of me not accepting gay people. I accept them. I love them. I have had gay friends. I just don’t accept that their lifestyle is moral. Just like I had a friend that was sleeping with his fiance before they were married. He was still my friend but I didn’t condone his actions as moral and good.
    You did call me arrogant and ignorant I believe, maybe you are confusing those with confidence. I know that God “is” and that He is good.

  5. Wow, I don’t even know if you want me to comment again and If you don’t, I guess just erase it. It’s your blog and i’m not trying to Hijack it.I’ve been a Christian a while and have had the benifit of all the same atheist tactics and conclusions. I’ve heard it all before as well. Sorry to disappoint. I know you must think you have groundbreaking points to just blow my poor duped Christian mind out of the water. Poor little uneducated Christian that I am.
    I didn’t read all your links and so forth because I thought between the two of us we were aiming in ten different directions and I wanted to start with a better focus of what we were going to discuss.
    I get lots of people trying to “convert” me. in the church you have most everyone trying to convert you to their particular “brand” of Christianity. Outside the church you have athiests and agnostics proudly declaring how you are such a simpleton for believing something that they don’t believe.
    Being raised in America or probably the world at large, you get science and evolution stuffed down your throat till you could puke. I would have to have been raised on the back end of nowhere to have not heard how science has proved this and that and blah blah blah. Of course science is a funny thing too. I’m assuming by athiest you also mean you believe in “evolution”. Wow has science really shown how smart it is there, boy. They have all this inconclusive “evidence” as to how we all got here. There are the little diagrams of evolution going from monkey to man. Of course, Oh yeah, there is no real fossil evidence of the missing link. Then there is the whole carbon dating thing. Which has been proven to be faulty but these “smart” scientists claim that fossils are this many millions of years old. Of course the only accurate way to test to see if these carbon tests are factual is to have positive evidence of something that has existed “millions” of years ago (your constant)and then to test it to make sure it works right. Otherwise it’s all bunk! It’s like bad science is acceptable. Have you seen the documentary “Expelled”? It’s even called “The Theory” of evolution but it’s taught like it’s the truth.Evolution doesn’t even make sense but people lap it up like water in a desert.
    Oh my gosh you really surprised me with your Bible verses. I mean really! Who knew that stuff was in the Bible? All those times I read it, I’m just amazed how you dug up such verses that no one has ever noticed before. Wow, you blew me away there. The first ones you mention were regarding being a priest. There were lots of silly little laws that were important to being a priest. Most were things that were shadows of a deeper truth but some I just don’t understand. But since the “priesthood” was done away with in Christ, it doesn’t really matter why those things were important. We also don’t sacrifice animals anymore either so you had better release yours you had saved up for your atonement. And you can also eat pigs, just in case you were wondering. Didn’t want you worrying yourself over your bacon.
    As far as the woman grabbing the balls thing, that was the law then. They also stoned people which we also don’t do now, crazy I know. Guess I’ll just put my rocks back in my garden. You are grabbing at anything to justify your lack of faith. Well actually you have more faith than I do, because in the scheme of things atheism takes a lot more faith to believe in. Insert hand clapping here.
    All I can figure is you must have been hurt by someone in the church or maybe a whole church to have so much bitterness and resentment. Which all sarcasm aside, I am deeply sorry for. But you shouldn’t judge someone by their kids, no matter how screwed up their kids are. God is still good and deeply in love with you.
    As far as your outline goes, I didn’t know you had read the “modern christian handbook of atheism conversion”. You beat me to the punch knowing all my little tactics. Although I did actually enjoy points g and h. It was nice to have a little light heartedness in your rant.
    Just to let you know. I will be unsubsribing to your blog. Not out of trying to “get” you, but somewhere on your blog I read how you were moving your anti-christianity -ness to another blog called devil’s advocates or something. Anywho, some of the non-Christian bashing stuff was pretty good, and I liked the sound of your book, thought about trying to get a copy but it sounds like your anti-God whatever leaks into your stuff. And I don’t particulary care to pay to be insulted, some people are into that I know. You can look up my book “Embers of a Burning Heart” and maybe get some other God haters into having a book burning or something. Anyway, have fun being bitter!

    • I don’t think I need to add anything to your elegant confirmation of every problem I pointed out in my previous commment. Especially your rant against evolution is revealing: it’s like someone boasting about how they know all about those people way over there in Africa, man, they’ve seen so much of their purple skins and that creepy single eye in the front of their heads they could puke at the sight.

      As for the god-bashing, scroll back up and have a quick look who brought religion into this discussion.

      Cheers, and honey, I really wish you all the best. Have a happy life in your little cocoon.

  6. Even if being gay were a choice (which begs the question, when did you choose to be straight?) would it be ok to discriminate against people on the basis of their skin color if you could take a pill to change it?

    I think it’s pretty clear that at least for most people, sexual orientation isn’t a conscious choice. Maybe it’s genetic, maybe it’ develops in the womb, or maybe it’s early nurture. Or some combination. But WTF cares? If two people love each other, are’t hurting anyone, who are we to tell them they’re wrong?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s