No one can cure themselves. Only God can do that. Nevertheless, being
agents with free will we do have the capacity to choose whether or not to
act on those desires. I am not gay, I am a heterosexual woman with a
strong sex drive but I can choose to remain celibate because I have free
will but also because I rely on the Paraclete's help. Personal
experience is never the rule to rely on when deciding something is sinful
I do know a variety of gay persons. Those who struggle with their
desires and those who cerebrate them. Some of these people I have known
for years. Knowing sinful people who struggle with sinful desires
doesn't change the clear injunction of God's word in both the Old AND New
Testaments. God doesn't tell us to embrace sin because we can't cure
ourselves. But it does impel us to stand in solidarity with those who
struggle against sin and point to the truth for those who celebrate their
sin for we know that we are all, without exception sinful and fallen
Since your brother is a psychiatrist, he surely knows the consequences to
his physical health of acting on his homosexual desires. Is that
something you really want to embrace on his behalf?
On Tue, 14 May 2002 10:26:54 -0400 "Shuan Rose" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I have a brother who is a psychiatrist and also gay. He
> didn't want to be
> gay-struggled with all his might to cure himself and hid it from
> his family
> for many years. He underwent psychotherapy and drug therapy and was
> ( and
> still ) is on antidepressants as a result of the struggle with his
> sexuality. A few years ago he decided to "come out", (much to the
> consternation of our parents) and be openly gay. He is not overjoyed
> his choice, but he is at peace within himself.
> I can assure you that being gay is not something he chose to do and
> he was
> unable to find a "cure". What gave him this predisposition? He does
> know-and he is a practicing psychiatrist. I would say science
> doesn't know
> either. What we do know is that it seems much more fundamental than
> who say its simply a "preference", like a taste for chocolate ice
> cream, or
> a "lifestyle choice".
> Frankly, I struggle with the rather clear OT injunction
> homosexuality. Before I was aware of my brother's struggle, I used
> blithely think that gays should just simply stop being gay. It might
> tough, like breaking the smoking habit, but it was doable. In the
> light of
> what I know now, I no longer think so.
> I think that Don and likeminded persons should get to know a
> variety of
> persons who are actually gay, before he makes pronouncements on this
> Those who take the time to know people who are gay are usually not
> so quick
> to conclude that this is a simple matter of telling gays that they
> stop sinning.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> Behalf Of JW Burgeson
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 9:12 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: RE: Is there a gay gene?
> >>JB: "I did argue that since it is NOT a "chosen" orientation, and
> that seems to be fairly well established now with he probably
> exception of
> the Exodus people, that arguments for "rehab" and "you can refrain
> from the
> behavior" are only valid if one can show that the activity , itself,
> sinful in God's eyes. And to do this one needs to argue from the
> Don P: "Again you contradict yourself. You say it is not
> environmental or genetic, but you say it is not chosen. Then what is
> JB: ??? It may have been that I wrote something (not the above) in
> haste and
> thereby wrote incorrectly.
> My argument is that since it is not (except in a few cases)
> "chosen," it is
> necessarily determined by either genetics or environment or some
> of the two, at least in most cases. Knowing a fair number (probably
> a dozen
> or so) gays and lesbians, the genetic factor seems most likely. But
> that not
> being a scientific sample, I defer to the studies. See my website.
> "In fact, it is a well established psychological fact that problems
> by genetics can be reduced by both pharmaceutical and psychological
> If you mean one can be brainwashed by torture or other aversion
> of course, I'll have to agree. But perhaps you are speaking of
> different here?
> "It is usually the "chosen" ones that are not. The reason of course
> obvious to anyone open minded. If you choose not to accept the
> then it won't work."
> Makes sense, but what evidence do you claim as grounds?
> "I am not judging those that are "afflicted" but unless you tell
> them they
> are wrong then so are you."
> OK. You claim I am wrong. Give me grounds for this claim. Just
> making it
> does not persuade me (obviously). Start by citing one or more
> mistakes in the sources on my website that argue as I do.
> Specifically, look
> at the arguments given in my friend George Hopper's website. His are
> easy to
> " To help someone commit a sin is a sin. And the same holds true
> when you
> look the other way while sin is committed."
> Yes, I agree. But I do not think all HB is a sin. Tell me why I am
> Don P:With faith in His word
> JB: As Don P interprets it, of course.
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger:
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 14 2002 - 15:50:17 EDT