quote:
Are there biological reasons for why gays are less likely to molest children? I don't know. I'm sure there are cultural reasons: For example, gay people are less likely to have children and molestation of children usually takes place at the hands of relatives. There is less access to children for gays (for lots of reasons) and thus, less opportunity.
Can we for a moment make a slight distinction between gay and homosexual? There are lots of homosexuals that get married and have children and they probably for the most part make great parents, poor spouses but great parents all the same. Then you have unmarried homosexuals that are in positions that require care of children. I'll give you an example of my Boy Scoutmaster being homosexual, I was told this years after I was out of the Scouts. It never occurred to me that this guy was homosexual and I don't think he was trying to hide it either. The subject just never came up and BTW he was also known as the best Scoutmaster in the area. The marginalizing of homosexuals is a recent phenomenon especially since the 1980 election.
quote:
On the other hand, gay people are fighting so hard against the stereotype that they are child molesters, many do everything they can to make sure there isn't even the slightest hint of impropriety.
I'm wondering what a gay person looks like anyway. Do you have any idea? Please tell me so I won't make anymore social gaffs. I'll give you another example out of my life. My uncle is a decorated WWII veteran, he looks nothing like any steroetype other than the fact he's been living with the same guy for the past 40 years and he don't look like a homo either. The biggest problem I have with the two of them is that they are too funny sometimes. They are very good with children as well. It never occurred to me that they were homosexual either until I was told. (Maybe I'm handicapped in that way, is there some special sense that people have in detecting homosexuals?)
Then Rei states:
quote:
Explanation? Explanation of what? I'm not aware of a single class of intersex conditions whose cause isn't known. Or are you thinking that the discussion about intersex children and how they fit into a biblical worldview was instead about homosexuals? I didn't touch on the causes of homosexuality - this is more of a theological issue that we're discussing.
The question is about how, with the discussion of what is "natural" and "unnatural", how do intersex people fit into God's plan? What commandments are they supposed to follow? And, if God would create people who are physically intersexed, is homosexuality that far fetched?
Genetic expression is a puzzle we have not come close to solving, I don't think you can accurately make the assertion that "not a single class of intersex conditions is not known" as there are many things about the human condition we do not know. There is much to be learned. The causes of many conditions are not genetic but we do know that exposure in utero to some things will cause changes in the offspring. These occur well after formation of the zygote. (Folate and neural-tube defects being an example of this.)
How do these fit into God's plan? I don't know but I would think that the same explanation we have for "why do people suffer?" would be the same. God doesn't cause the suffering, He only allows it to serve a higher purpose. Then you have to consider that human societies often practiced infanticide and they would kill any infant that did not meet certain standards.
Then you have the question of what is homosexuality. You have stated that the line between a clitorous and a penis is not all that clear. In this way I think that human sexuality is more of a continuum rather than a discrete state. The term I have used is "polymorphic sexuality" and I'll wager that most of us actually exist in a state between the two extremes. We can and often do participate in bisexual behaviors. You might note that the original lesbian was actually more of a bisexual than an exclusive same sex practitioner. Greeks by and large were bisexual although I would be careful about using them as a model of tolerance, they generally regarded women as sub-human.
I do think that most Christians would do well to observe the Bible in it's completeness. They have omitted some crucial teachings from the Bible in their arguments against percieved sin. My favorite is:
Luke 6:37--
Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:
I do think that you are correct in that the commandment is more against male prostitution than homosexual behavior. It makes no sense in an adaptive perspective to forbid this type of behavior.
------------------
Bringer of fire, trickster, teacher.
™ Version 4.2
