Immorality of Homosexuality

Why is homosexuality immoral?I understand that "the Bible says so". The Bible also says don't cut your beard.One can easily make an argument for why murder or theft or rape are immoral without having to rely on a "Bible says so" type statement.What would be the non-literalist argument for why homosexuality is immoral?

I'm not sure I understand the basis for your morality.In the examples I sited above (murder, theft, rape) the acts are immoral because one is doing something to another which is unwanted.I'm not sure I understand how is immoral.Also, I don't get this "expected to" by who?

Gonna strip the drug stuff out of your comments, there's a drug thread.Health - Why homosexuality has had a problem with STDs in the past, this has more to do with a lack of knowledge about safe sex practices during the 70s and 80s than anything else. Currently the rate of infection among gays is lower than that among heteros. Does this mean straight sex is more immoral than gay sex?Cost to Society - I don't buy that homosexuality causes crime. Are you suggesting that all crimes are done by homosexuals?Unnatural - Is homosexuallity unnatural? More unnatural than nylon? Is Nylon therefore more immoral than homosexuality?

Thanks for taking up Devil's advocate, since clearly the Fundies are steering clear of this one.1) The idea that homosexuality some how disrupts the extended family structure is false on two accounts. First, if homosexuality is biologically determined, then it's been selected for genetically and, since we spent so much of our history here on either in tiny clan groups, must therefore be advantageous, or at the very least not disadvantageous to extended family groups. Second, this presupposes that homosexuals are incapable of having/adopting/raising children. Even the conservatives aren't trying to take away adoption rights.2) "God says so" - there are people whom God speaks to directly and says "Homosexuality is wrong." Oddly enough there is an equal amount of people who God speaks to directly and says "Homosexuality is a part of my great plan, stop attacking them." This is largely for the same reason they cut educational funding. Neo-cons have discovered that the mentally lazy are OVERWHELMINGLY conservative. One need look no further than the Fundies here on the board. How many of the strict Creationists vote far right? 90% 99%?

Traits which are disadvantageous to certain types of groups would either be weeded out, or the groups themselves would be weeded out.Either way, this has nothing to do with morality. If it's a biological condition, then homosexuality is no more immoral than having red hair. It sounds like your argument then is this: Homosexuality is immoral because it denies the ability to make cultures bonds between family groups.I disagree on the premise - Firstly, there's no reason that homosexuality necessarily denies bonds, in fact homosexual marriage and homosexuals in a hetrosexual marriage would both be solutions to this problem. Secondly, can an individual within a culture be considered immoral for not "fitting in" with that cultures norms? The Norm was segregation in the South, MLK didn't fit in. Was MLK immoral for opposing segregation? No. Your point 2 is simply "People claim God tells them that homosexuality is immoral". Firstly, we have no proof of their claim and no reason to believe it. My response was based on the fact that anyone can say anything at anytime and attribute it to "God". That is not how morallity is determined.As for the education stuff, we should probably hold off on that in this thread and maybe move it to another one.

re: Why is idol worship immoral, etc...Yes, you are right that idol worship or saying God's name in vain etc, results in a very similiar discussion. However, that's complete beside the point.The fundies are running presidential campaigns on the issue of Gay Marriage, not on the issue of Idol worship. States are not flocking in droves to pass amendments to their constitutions to prevent idol worship.The point is, since there is absolutely no foundation for this extreme bias against a particular group of American citizens, why is this such an active issue.It comes down to fundamentalists being bigots and holding up the Bible to try and justify their bigotry.And, so far, no one has even come close to being able to excuse this.Your suggestions basically boil down to: "We should also be bigoted again idol worshipers." That's not an answer, that's just more ignorance.

Here we go again... No one is forcing Churches to do ANYTHING. Here's something you fundy-mentalists need to understand. Churches DONT MARRY PEOPLE! Any church in America can "marry" any two people together and it doesn't mean a damn thing as far as the State is concerned.Marriage is only through a license from the State.Here's some examples:Couple w/ license married by an atheist Judge = Married.
Couple w/o license married by the Pope = Not Married.Allowing gay marriage is allowing free consenting adults to enter into a contract with one another.If your church doesn't want to preform a ceramony - NO ONE CARES! This is so blatantly false as to be laughable.If you justify bigotry against homosexuals because "the Bible says so" then you must also accept slavery and all the other crap that comes with it.You can't justify your bigotry by cherry picking the parts you want. If the Bible makes it okay for you to be a close minded bigot, then be a close minded bigot AGAINST ALL the people the Bible puts down. If by "condemn" you mean "observe" then yes.So far, the sum total of your argument for restricting the rights of 10% of the American population is that it says it's bad in a book. But you refuse to accept the other things in the book. It's no surprise that we generally disregard what you people have to say. Of course it is, because there is absolutely no foundation for fundamentalists to charge into people's bedrooms and start dictating who can do what with whom.by the way, haven't you noticed that ALL the leaders who are so feverently anti-gay are always revealed to be gay themselves? doesn't that raise warning bells with you?

Personally, I couldn't care less what you "think" about the morallity of homosexuality if those thoughts do not lead to action.You can think that peanut butter is an afront to God, but so long as you don't try to punish people who eat peanut butter, you are more than welcome to hold this belief. It's one of the things that makes America great.However, as soon as you start trying to pass an ammendment to limit the rights of peanut butter eaters, you step over the line.Just because you believe that two concenting adults should not be able to do what they want with their bodies in the privacy of their own homes, does not mean that you get to pass laws about it.Think what you want, and mind your own business.

Just a quick note. There's an estimate that 10% of the population is left handed. I am left handed. But I have not had the "Department of Statistics" come and ask me about it.You take a sample size of a given population, perferably a large sample, perferably from several different locations, then you apply that sample to the population as a whole.I will grant you that in an issue like homosexuality there is a probability for under-reporting. That is, people who are gay or bi claiming to be straight and thus throwing off the count.

The implication here being that I'm a bigot for NOT including other religeons in my REPLY to your statement which DIDNT INCLUDE THE OTHER RELIGEONS.Nice try. If you make a statement about cheese and I reply about cheese, you don't get to say that I'm biased for leaving out hotdogs.Further, I notice you DIDNT ADDRESS THE POINT. No one is forcing ANY religeous institutions to perform ANY marriages. Why? Because those institutions are COMPLETELY irrelevant when it comes to marriage. They simply are not a part of the equation at all. Come on, you and I both know that the RIGHT has a strangle hold on RIGHTeousness. It's IN the word!BTW, I like how you simply disregard my original post without grasping the point of the post at all.If the ONLY basis for taking actions against homosexuality is the Bible, and you want that to be sufficient justifications to change the laws of the land, then I want to know why you would not likewise take action against all other things the Bible condemns.Cutting of beards, touching of pigs, etc. etc. etc.Are we to go back to the bronze age and start burning cattle in the Cathedrals of our major cities so that God can be pleased by the smoke?Guess what? Society (some of us anyway) progresses forward. We disregard the ridiculous bigotry and superstitions of the past.If you and your kind can't manage to do so, please at least have the decency to keep your self imposed ignorance to yourself and not try to force it on the rest of the nation.Further, why haven't you address the fact that the leaders of your cause all turn out to be either homosexuals or the parents of homosexuals?

Well, I dunno, I think a lot of women want to marry someone "hunky"

Just in case...You are actually quoting a quote box within Nator post. Dunno if it was an oversight, just wanted to make it clear the quote you are responding to is something which Nator was also objecting to and that Nator is not a member of the "you, and your kind"

I completely disagree.Morality does not arrise from the Bible, the Koran, or any other book.Morality develops out of philisophical stance.The "Golden Rule" is not a concept exclusive to the Bible.
Utilitarianism does not stem from a holy book.Im sure someone better schooled in philosophy could name a dozen other positions.Further, the Bible is spectacularly BAD as a source of morality.MOST of what the Bible lays out is completely ignored by modern society.If we go under the premise that this is a text, laid down by God, then we must treat ALL of the instructions within as the "Word of God".That means no beard shaving. No crab eatting. Regular animal sacrifice. etc etcWe as a society don't even hold the 10 Commandments as a valuable source of moral code.So, relying on the Bible as the sole excuse for systematic legislative abuse of homosexuals is blatant hypocracy

You may want to tone down the snarky and tone up the smart.Christianity developed out of Judaism - which predates the iron age.And OBVIOUSLY the Cathedrals "of our major cities", like "our major cities" were built later. I cite Godwin's law and hereby declare myself the winner! Good game. That list is from blogactive, and that's just a couple seconds of searching.As for Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson - CLEARLY both these men smoke the pole!

You'll also not that the list above includes many many people who behave exactly like Nem_jug and are, of course, homosexuals themself.Beginning to see a pattern here?I think we can make some pretty basic assumptions about NJ's nightlife