Re: Homosexuality (a condition) and homosexual activities

From: John W Burgeson (
Date: Fri Aug 17 2001 - 18:23:33 EDT

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Re: The Horror of Hammond"

    Iain wrote, in part: "Society "taught" me homosexuality is disgusting,
    but I don't feel nearly as strong a sense of revulsion as others do.
    Does that mean that the others have just "learned the lesson" better than
    I have, or is there really something biologically inborn that brings out
    disgust? I don't think you
    can prove your assertion here."

    No, I cannot "prove" the assertion, which is not mine alone, but the POV
    of many who have studied the issues. But there does seem to be pretty
    good evidence that the raciest attitudes of any person are largely what
    they are taught, and little to do with heredity.

    But even granted that one's revulsion at homosexual activity IS "inborn."
    That revulsion is certainly something to fight against, "inborn" or not,
    for it leads to an attitude of contempt towards a group of persons.

    "I once downloaded a copy of the notorious poem "The love that dares to
    speak its name", which was a gay "cause celebre", as the magazine that
    printed it got prosecuted under the blasphemy laws. On reading the poem
    (which was of considerable literary merit), I gained the impression
    directly from the text that the homosexual act was excruciatingly painful
    - one of the "moral messages" of the poem was that the sacrifices gay men
    make for each other was akin to the pain of crucifixion. Since this
    description came from a gay author, it cannot have been an ignorant
    attitude that was "taught" by

    Interesting. Do you conclude that on the basis of a single poem? I have
    never seen it; maybe I'll look for it. There are a number of possible
    "homosexual acts," of course, just as there are a number of heterosexual
    acts, so I don't see much in one poem to guide my thinking. I could be

    "In the case of a woman who has had a family, this would appear to be not
    the case - a deliberate choice was made (albeit perhaps under
    circumstances of disillusionment), to exchange heterosexual for
    homosexual activities, and therefore would appear to come under the
    category of Rom 1:26."

    Or maybe she just "grew up?" The two cases I am most familiar with have
    no apparent record of any activities such as led the unfortunates in
    Romans 1 to come under Paul's condemnation. In both cases, all the
    parties involved are Christians; one is even now in seminary.

    John Burgeson (Burgy)
           (science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
            humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 17 2001 - 18:27:23 EDT