Despite societal discrimination and religious persecution, homosexuality and bi-sexuality, like heterosexuality, are inborn traits that cannot be changed and are not a choice. Attempted suppression does not work. It always pushes through. Human sexuality is very complex. It is not simply one moment or one single dividing cell, that affects one’s sexuality but a series of changes and combinations of androgens released prenatally at specific times (or not) which establish a person’s sexual orientation.
Many years ago it was believed by some that sexual orientation could be changed or molded based on training and conditioning a child to identify as a male or female, and that they would then be attracted to the opposite gender. However, this has been proven to be false.
Brian S. Mustanski, reports on a case study in, A Critical Review Of Recent Biological Research On Human Sexual Orientation. In 36 boys surgically made into girls due to injury or malformed penis, only one patient maintained a female identity and reported sexual attraction toward males. Although these patients had sex reassignment surgery at birth, [including female hormone treatment throughout their lives, being influenced as girls and raised as girls], the sexual attraction toward females seems to have been determined from male typical hormone levels en utero. Prenatal androgen activity, or absence of the activity, is extremely indicative that sexual orientation comes from prenatal neurohormonal effects (Mustanksi).
Confirmed by Mustanski, as well as Emmanuelle Jannini…, et al, in Male Homosexuality: Nature or Culture, is a certain study, which has been replicated many times, and the findings reproduced by several groups of scientists and doctors in different countries around the world, is called the fraternal birth order study. This study has conclusively established that homosexual men are more likely to have one or more older brothers. The finding has proven to be true, even when the biological brothers were not raised in the same household or did not know one another. The prevalence is not affected if they have older sisters–only older brothers. The rate of homosexuality among brothers is 9% higher than in random population samples. These findings discredit homosexuality as a choice and make evident its biological nature (Mustanksi; Jannini…,et al). In a research paper by Marc S. Breedlove called, Homosexuality and Finger Length, Dr. Ray Blanchard comments, approximately 15% of homosexual men are gay because they have older brothers. He concludes it is absurd that a person should be unable to marry the person they love just because their Mom had sons before them (Breedlove…,et al). There are theories being researched as to why and how this occurs, one is called the maternal immune hypothesis.
In the maternal immune hypothesis, scientists believe that fetal cells or cell fragments from the male babies entering maternal circulation, common during childbirth, triggers the mother’s immune system to produce antibodies against these male specific molecules. The strength of the maternal immunization increases with each male fetus and so increases the probability of homosexuality with each younger brother. Similarly to the way it remembers Rh factors, the mother’s body remembers each male fetus. The maternal immune hypothesis does not explain the orientation of all homosexual men. “There are other aetiological factors, which probably include polymorphic genes and possibly include atypical hormone levels at critical stages of fetal development” (Blanchard; Bogaert).
In studies by Franz J. Kallmann, with identical and fraternal gay twins verses non-related adopted brothers found that when one identical twin [of twins raised separately] self identified as homosexual 52% of them both self-identified as homosexuals, 22% of fraternal both self-identified as homosexual verses only 5% of the non-related adopted brothers were so. This data is conclusive evidence that the more genetically linked the pair is the more likely they will both be gay or straight. Later experiments for females found evidence with similar results (Kallmann).
Bruce King reports in Human Sexuality Today, there are numerous individuals born with ambiguous genitalia, and approximately 1 in 426 babies are born with unusual sex chromosome combinations. XX is associated with females and XY is associated with males. However, about 1 in 500 male babies have one or more extra X chromosome. These people can be XXY or XXXY. This unusual chromosome combination is known as Klinefelter’s syndrome. Approximately 1 in 65,000 babies is born as a hermaphrodite, having some or all of both sex organs. Even a child with a normally male associated XY chromosome combination may not have male genitalia at birth.
Here is a real scenario: A person who does not start menstruating as expected during adolescence goes to a physician to find out why. The physician discovers that this person—whose outward appearance [including no penis] and [belief] of self are both female—has no uterus or ovaries, but instead has male XY chromosomes and internal male genitalia. Is this person female or male? This information indicates there is not necessarily a direct relationship between sex, orientation and gender. No matter how an individual’s genitals appear or what their chromosomes are, their sexual identity is a function of the genetic-endocrine forces and is prenatally determined.
To those who use the Bible as the answer to the question of whether homosexuality is right or wrong, I ask this: What answers does the Bible have on the issues of sex chromosome abnormalities, ambiguous genitalia, and hermaphroditism? In your eyes, God’s eyes, the eyes of the church, who are these people allowed to love, marry and have a family with? What if the doctor and the parents decide to do surgery on the hermaphrodite baby to make it more clearly one gender or another, but that child grows up to love someone of the same gender they were surgically made into? From the standpoint of the church, are they going to hell for sinning? This is not a tiny amount of people we’re talking about here. With over seven billion people on this planet, that means almost 108,000 people right now on earth were babies born as hermaphrodites. What if no surgery is done on the baby? Then in that case, with both gender characteristics in one person, do they get a free pass as far as the church is concerned? Whatever sexual orientation they have is ok?
The point being made is that there are numerous issues related to sexuality that were completely unknown thousands of years ago when the Bible was being written, and therefore not addressed. Modern medical science is an amazing thing. Modern Psychological science is an amazing thing. It is time to trust science, while following the MESSAGE of the Bible. Love thy neighbor as thyself. Homosexuality as we know it today is about two consenting adults loving one another. The Bible verses used to condemn homosexuality are either from Leviticus, which is no longer followed in modern Christianity, or they are in reference to combinations of violence, rape, and prostitution, not loving committed relationships. Homosexuality in modern times is equivalent to heterosexuality. People meet, they go on a few dates, they perhaps fall in love and decide they want to spend their lives together and wish to marry.
In a New York Times article by Frank Bruni, referencing the rights we have [in America] including the right to bear arms, he said, “Among adults, the right to love whom you’re moved to love—and to express it through… marriage, is surely as vital to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as a Glock. And it is much less likely to cause injury.”
Let all people pursue their own love and happiness.
Please “like” our Facebook page here.
Works Cited
Blanchard, Ray. “Review and Theory of Handedness, Birth Order, and Homosexuality in Men.” Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis Group. http://www.psypress.com/laterality, 29 Nov. 2007. Web. 2 Apr. 2012.
Breedlove, S. Marc, Cynthia L. Jordon, Tessa J. Breedlove, Nicholas J. Breedlove, Andrew D. Huberman, Bradley M. Cooke, Scott E. Christensen, Michelle E. Pepitone, and Terrance J. Williams. “Homosexuality and Finger Length.” University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Department of Psychology and Graduate Groups Neuroscience, Endocrinology, 30 Mar. 2000. Web. 28 Mar.2012. <http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/readings/homofinger/homo_finger.html>.
Bruni, Frank. “Genetic or Not, Gay Won’t Go Away.” New York Times Sunday Review, 28 Jan. 2012. Web. 12 Apr. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/opinion/sunday/bruni-gay-wont-go-away-genetic-or-not.html>.
Jannini, Emmanuele A., Ray Blanchard, Andrea Camperio-Ciani, and John Bancroft,”Male Homosexuality: Nature or Culture?” National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, Oct. 2011. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21053405>.
Kallmann, Franz J. “Twin and Sibship Study of Overt Male Homosexuality.” Nih.gov. Columbia University, New York. Web. Apr. 2012. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1716443/pdf/ajhg00421- 0084.pdf>.
King, Bruce M. “Chapter 8 Becoming a Woman/Becoming a Man: Gender Identity and Gender Roles.” Human Sexuality Today. Seventh ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 2012. 199-204. Print.
Mustanski, Brian S. “A Critical Review Of Recent Biological Research On Human Sexual Orientation.” Annual Review Of Sex Research 13.(2002): 89. Academic Search Complete. Web. 31 Mar. 2012
Image by Ono Kono
allydavidstevens
apeene
blazingbeau
guestposting600
kzottarelli
Ono Kono
robw77
thomsense
evoL = 
I have checked your website and i’ve found some duplicate
content, that’s why you don’t rank high in google, but there is a tool that can help
you to create 100% unique articles, search for; Boorfe’s tips unlimited content
Reblogged this on The Outraged Progressive.
Hi to all, the contents existing at this web site are truly amazing for people knowledge, well, keep up the nice work fellows.
My personal theory is that a child being a spirit being, reincarnates into a mother’s body through conception, depending on that child’s spirit history would make them bisexual or homosexual or straight. I had a daughter whom, even at one month old or a half showed signs and interests of being bisexual with female babysitters.
The father was bisexual so technically she could have been because he was, but she projected an aura that clearly stated what she wanted from females, even myself the mother and it was a bit freaky. I had never been there before, and trust me never want to go back.
I just wanted to leave this comment here. I am not really open to homsexual lifestyle, but i am not here to cause discord, I was just wanting to comment it about it being a spiritual decision due to reincarnation as well as genetics.
An interesting discussion is worth comment. There’s no doubt that that
youu should publish more about this issue, it might not be a taboo subject but typically people don’t speak about such subjects.
To the next! Kindd regards!!
Thhis post is truly a pleaxant one it helps new
the web people, who are wishing in favor of
blogging.
Does your website have a contact page? I’m having trouble
locating it but, I’d like to send you an email. I’ve got some sggestions for your blog you might
be interested in hearing. Either way, greaat site and
I look forward to seeing it grow over time.
If you are the first time to shoot a short movie, you can choose to shoot a short drama.
They claim there were no clinical trials (there were), and that it has serious adverse reactions (it
doesn’t). They offer more advanced features that allow videographers
to explore all of their creative options including the highest quality image capture, with less noise for great
pictures in all shooting conditions – perfect for fast-paced news capture,
event videography and movie production.
What resonated with me was the finding regarding gay men resulting from having an older brother. My mother had a child out of wedlock, something I did not know until I was eighteen and had to have a copy of my birth certificate in order to register for the draft. The sex was not mentioned on the certificate, and neither was it mentioned on a notification that was issued by a Catholic orphanage at the time of the transfer of the child. It was just noted as Baby (my mother’s maiden name). My parents would not speak of it, to me, and only family gossip suggests it was a boy by another father.
We are for people to enjoy SEX with anyone at anytime in history. But we’re not stupid. Homosexuality does not have to be ‘proven’ – merely enjoyed. How does this pseudo-psuedo-science sort of obsession PAN OUT for YOU and others who are more common and waywardly drifting in sexual confusion? This sort o of nonsense does not help. Best to follow Jimi Hendrix: Wave Your Freak Flag HIGH – and end it there.
xesenta.com
Thank you for reading my article.
I so agree with you that homosexuality does not have to be “proven”. I have no issues with any sexual orientation or behavior (as long as it’s consensual). However, sadly, there are MANY people out there who are fighting against the rights of people who do not identify as heterosexual, and those people seem to need or want some kind of proof that sexual orientation is not a choice someone is making. So, that is the purpose of my research and writing of this article.
Also, the article was heavily researched and I assure you it is not pseudo science. In fact, I cited all of my sources at the end of the article if you would like to check them out. But if you are stating that a lot of this information is not proven, and is theory, you are correct. That is how science works, theory, research, peer reviewed scholarly articles, more theories and research, etc.
I wish you the best.
APeene
Pingback: Sexual Orientation is Developed in the Womb | Essence of Pride, Inc.
Reblogged this on It Is What It Is and commented:
How can anyone, in their right mind, choose a life that is destined to difficulties, persecution, discrimination and even death? It’s not logical …. “#BornThisWay ….
First of all I want to say fantastic blog! I had a quick question which I’d like to ask if you do not mind. I was interested to find out how you center yourself and clear your thoughts prior to writing. I have had difficulty clearing my thoughts in getting my thoughts out. I truly do enjoy writing however it just seems like the first 10 to 15 minutes are generally wasted just trying to figure out how to begin. Any recommendations or hints? Cheers!|
Thank you so much for reading the article and our blog.
I want to come clean right away and let you know I am only the author of about 4 articles on this blog, and there are other friends of mine who have written the rest. Most of the articles have been written by Rob Watson who writes as “a gay dad” and has a fantastic perspective! There are about 7 or 8 of us who started this blog a couple of years ago, and Rob has been by far the most diligent!
As far as my own writing– I love to write, for me it is the WAY I center myself and clear my thoughts. That’s not to say I don’t go back and edit, believe me, I do! I usually ramble about something that is on my mind, and then I go back and polish it, keep what is good, take out what is not good. Sometimes if I am not in a place where I can write, or I do not have time to start writing (b/c once I start, I can be sitting at the computer for hours!), I will jot down a few notes or phrases/comments that are in my head, so I can be sure to capture what it is that is insisting to be written. It’s terrible to have something good, not write it down, and then later when I have time to write, not be able to remember it!
As far as this particular piece you commented on–about sexual orientation beginning in the womb– I wrote a good portion of this when I was in a college English class where I had to do a research paper about something of controversy. I honestly worked on this research paper for about 4 months, and I enjoyed everything that I learned in the process!
Good luck in your writing.
I wish you the best.
APeene
I agree with having a pocket journal handy all the time to write thoughts that might be long forgotten and paining yourself for not remembering later on. A lot of times I might jot down a phrase or topic when out walking or running in some of the best think tank environments and later remember all the other thoughts that are associated with it. Think tanks are the one of the best way to finding something to write. To reach down in your mind and pull something out. Observe and listen. Then drive yourself to create. Make it fun. Something that grabs people’s attention. Good grammar, time, patience, pen, pocket journal, computer, internet, Word Process and finally Google are your tools. That’s how.
You desire to grow your followers and community, spamming people is not the method
it, end of story. Collateral losses for Google are already reflecting China’s angry reaction following the search
results made its announcement; news media reported so far that Chinese cell phone
companies will drop Google or Android, its new mobile operating system.
But, its too early to conclude between Facebook and Google+.
Excellent, what a webpage it is! This web site gives valuable data to us, keep
itt up.
Unquestionably believe that which you said. Yoour favourite reason apppeared to be oon the net the easiest thing tto be
mindful of. I say tto you, I definitely get annoyed while other people consider concerns that they just do not know
about. You controlled to hit the nail upon the highest
ass neatly as outlined out the entire thing without having side-effects , other people can take
a signal. Will proobably be back to get more.
Thanks
I’m glad that you appreciated the article & I hope you continue to read our blog here at Evolequals. Peace to you.
apeene to Covertsociologist: “I am sorry you were disappointed in this article. I agree that there was not enough information about lesbians etc. That was mainly because there is little to no research out there that I could find addressing gay women from birth or childhood.”
Apeene is mistaken. Multiple studies have found that homosexual women, on average, have more masculanized 2D/4D digit ratios than heterosexual women. A couple of studies have also found that homosexual women, on average, have masculanized otoacoustic emissions (that is, sounds produced by their inner ears) compared with heterosexual women. Also, women who were exposed to high levels of androgens in the womb due to congenital adrenal hyperplasia are more likely to be homosexual or bisexual than non-CAH women. All of these studies indicate that prenatal androgen exposure is a factor in female homosexuality.
Examples:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10212421
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v404/n6777/full/404455a0.html
http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/a0018764
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18157628
I hope one of the bloggers will see this comment!
Hello Fill-in-the-gaps-er
Thank you for posting those wonderful links to research. When I wrote this research paper I had specific guidelines I had to follow, and I was not able to use all of the sources I found due to the age of the research, or the inability to verify them etc. And sometimes because the research had to be purchased, which I couldn’t do. But most of these you posted I had not seen, and I appreciate you sharing them with us! Thank you!
Hi apeene,
I am lucky to have residual access to the databases with my university login. Let’s hope all of this research will become publicly accessible in the future! Until then, abstracts will have to do….
Hi apeene,
I came upon another interesting study about both men and women: “PET and MRI show differences in cerebral asymmetry and functional connectivity between homo- and heterosexual subjects.” (http://www.pnas.org/content/105/27/9403)
Just wanted to share! : – )
— Fitger
What most everyone is ignoring (it seems to me) is that “sexual orientation” is not the same as “committing sexual acts”. Orientation expresses basically the same thing as when we say a compass needle’s orientation is North–it just naturally points that way. I was born gay. I have never been attracted to males. I was not abused or exposed to any inappropriate sexual situations as a child. I have a sister three years younger who was born straight. We had the same upbringing by the same parents in the same home, were taken to the same church, went to the same school, watched the same TV shows, etc. I am in my 50’s now. About 20 years ago I got fed up with all relationships and simply stopped dating. But just because I am celibate does not mean that I am no longer gay. And I certainly have not developed any interest in males just because I stopped dating women. I don’t understand how anyone can believe that they (or anyone else) is able to CHOOSE what they are attracted to. I may really crave ice cream but force myself to eat broccoli instead. What I desire and how I act may be totally different. An act may be chosen. To me, it completely defies the definition of “orientation” to claim natural desire can be chosen.
Leigh, thank you for commenting. I agree with what you are saying.
Hi Leigh,
It was very refreshing (almost relieving) to read your comment. As an exclusively homosexual woman who’s been living in denial since puberty (and suffering the psychological consequences thereof), I’m so tired of seeing people dismiss female sexuality as “fluid,” using the dating behavior of bisexual women as evidence, or even the relationship histories of women who were simply repressed prior to confronting their orientations. These lines of evidence aren’t even distinguished from one another, since, as you said, people conflate sexual orientation with sexual behavior, as if there were a one-to-one correspondence between internal and external experiences. It should be obvious to everyone that sexual/romantic orientation is a psychological phenomenon, and that outward behavior can be concordant with it, discordant with it, or absent altogether—due to all sorts of other factors.
In addition to being a mere annoyance to people who know better, the dismissal of female sexuality as “fluid” feeds into the wishful thinking of repressed gay women who truly will never be attracted to men, encouraging them to continue anticipating the arrival of feelings that are never going to come. It obscures all of the psychological suffering gay women, like gay men, go through when living in denial and trying to maintain a facade of a heterosexual life.
Again, thank you for sharing your very straightforward thoughts!
— Fitger
I can’t agree with this entirely. Homosexuality cannot be attributed to “nature” or uncommon circumstances in the womb while in utero. In the past 15 yrs of working with people over 95% of those that are questioning their sexuality, identify as homosexual, or have gender dysmorphia have experienced some sort of sexual abuse and/or complicated trauma associated with abuse.
I have nothing against homosexuals but the socialization of homosexuality cannot be ignored because just because we want to say “there is no choice”… I’m sorry you are not born this way, there is always a choice, and homosexuality is a sexual preference for a myriad of reasons based on human experiences that are rooted in either childhood or adult relationships. Needless to say, I believe many homosexuals want to have this caveat that “you are born this way” as if it would help people be more accepting… but people are strange and don’t don’t accept things that they don’t understand… biracial marriage is still an issue for some… and this too is socialization, we are not born bigots or racist.
Funny how you take such great pains to reserve your right to stand in judgement. Did you read the article? It’s actually pretty clear that some people people are born gay and unless you can provide evidence that this isn’t the cae, all your doing is stating your opinion.
Thank you for sharing your beliefs. But that is all they are. People struggle with accepting their orientation because of the hateful, judging condescending attitudes they have had to endure in their lives. Not being accepted as who you are is pretty painful & traumatizing.
It may be true that there was abuse, etc. among the sample group of people you were “working with – who were questioning”. Actually it’s very likely. Otherwise, why would they be questioning or seeking help? Normal healthy people who are are well-adjusted and self-accepting do not seek out help or change. They live their normal quiet lives like they always have. Studying abused people is not the same as studying healthy humans of any orientation. We could say that the largest percentage of pedophiles is made up of straight (often married) males. But this does not mean that all straight married males are pedophiles or that being exposed to marriage causes pedophilia.
Black girls are extremely exotic and, they are
an extremely different type of ladies. There are so lots
of stereotypes associated with black ladies and, you will find the girls really
interesting. Black girls have a dark skin and, they are understood for their nature of being aggressive.
It is very interesting how black girls have a tendency
to stimulate curiosity and argument. The ladies can be found in
all parts of the world and, the most popular black women are African Americans.
African females are understood to be really calm and humble.
Since they have similar features, it often becomes very difficult to inform the females apart physically.
African American girls are kids of former servants who were generated from Africa,
several years back. They have a very long history of battle and final victory.
The black community in America has actually had to battle many
battles simply to be heard.
Little known fact. Areas where people have to marry withing their religion medical issues where children’s sexual traits are deformed or gender is unclear becomes more common. The reason is because the population within the faith is often small and it isn’t long before everyone is a first cousin even if they don’t know it. Gender abiguis conditions are closely connected to incest over many generations. This leads these communities to have children almost solely for the purpose of disowning them.
That is interesting. I have read a little about that. It is something to be concerned about. I think diversity might be a better way to go. Marry way outside of your religious circle and community.
What a plrusaee to meet someone who thinks so clearly
Reblogged this on Of Love and Life.
Wonderful. I hope it can reach and help many people.
Reblogged this on JerBear's Queer World News, Views & More From The City Different – Santa Fe, NM.
Wonderful. I hope it can reach and help many people.
I read this posting with interest, hoping to find that you had not made the same mistake others make when talking about this issue: that studies done with male participants can be extrapolated to women. You haven’t quite made this mistake, because you haven’t mentioned women at all in regards to homosexuality. In addition to this, the studies you’ve discussed and your posting do not cover bisexuality, pansexuality, or asexuality… So, if you could just change your title to ‘male homosexuality is formed in the womb’, that would be great. A bunch of studies done about homosexual men cannot be extrapolated to other areas of sexual life. Men are not the default.
I am also at a loss as to why you’ve included data about the sex of people in the womb. It is a mistake to believe that sex=sexual orientation. The two are not connected.
I have been following this blog for a while now, and I am disappointed to see this posting has fallen so far from the standard of other postings here. I hope this is a mere aberration.
Hello Covertsociologist,
Thank you for reading our blogpost. I am sorry you were disappointed in this article. I agree that there was not enough information about lesbians etc. That was mainly because there is little to no research out there that I could find addressing gay women from birth or childhood.
I certainly agree with you that sex does not equal sexual orientation and I’m so sorry that was the impression you got from this article. To me it’s very obvious that the article is stating sex and sexual orientation are clearly unrelated. I believe there is even a quote right before the article goes into those who believe in the Bible, where it states there is no relation between gender and sexual orientation. And perhaps it is the word gender you don’t believe belongs, but that came directly from the research, so that is why it uses that term.
Again I am sorry you were disappointed and I hope you will keep reading the blog. Most of the articles are personal opinions and thoughts. This is one of the only ones using scientific research. All of the sources are cited at the end of the article, if you would like to check them out.
Thank you.
Your article is so misleading, first off you cannot put the general public with it’s questioning homosexual tendencies or those who are bisexual or those who live a homosexual life in the same category as those people with true birth and developmental anomalies such as sex chromosome abnormalities, ambiguous genitalia, and hermaphroditism, This stands on it’s own and exclusively for this group of people yes, perhaps sexual orientation is more complicated but in that same vein then, for a hemaphrodite granted the right to grow up and have the liberty to choose their own sex (having both) and how they wish to live is still a choice. The only time this choice is robbed from these people is when the decision is made during infancy and that complicates their entire life, and only then can you argue that this was not a choice… but at the end of it all, they will inevitably choose.
I totally agree thecovertsociologist
Thanks for your attempt at a response Chika. The only point that you answered, and I am assuming your ignoring the rest is due to the fact that you had no answer, was incorrect. I can only assume that your “crystal clear” Bible seems to have omitted 2 Timothy 3…. Other wise you would not have embarassed yourself with “Apostle paul NEVER blamed woman for anything. ” I am afraid you are the one who doesn’t get it. Pompous is not prophetic.
Chika: Let me address #1. You are right when you say “The man heading the woman was God’s judgement in Genesis 3” Eve was not placed in submission to her husband until after the Fall. But didn’t Jesus come and die to erase the Curse of the Fall? I have heard many sermons about Jesus wiping out the Curse, but I’ve never heard one that applied to it to Eve. Are only women still under the Curse? Doesn’t the Bible say that we are neither male nor female but all are one in Christ Jesus? Instead of submission to her husband, are they not both to “submit yourselves therefore one to another” in an equitable relationship, and not as the culture of the then times called for it? Are not we all to be as in union with each other as God the Father is in union with God the Son and God the Holy Spirit?
Chika Raphael Christian: I am filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues. I have for over forty years, now. I have been a born again Christian for 58 years. And I am telling you that you have misinterpreted the Bible. God’s word is not “inaccurate”. But you are missing so much by not knowing Hebrew idioms and euphamisms, and more. The Holy Spirit will lead you into ALL truth, but you must seek it and study to show yourself approved. Let me give you a tidbit. Hebrew, like Spanish and French, has masculine and feminine articles. The rare word that is neither exclusively masculine nor neutral is the word for God. The names of God and the attributes of God are some masculine and some feminine. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.” Genesis 1: 27. The Hebrew pronoun for God is accurately translated S/He. The feminine names and atrributes of God are embodied in the Holy Spirit. In Hebrew the Holy Spirit is feminine. If you are filled with the Holy Spirit you are filled with the feminine nature of God. When Jesus left us to be with His Father, He left us in Her care. She is the Spirit of Wisdom spoken of by the Psalmist. Be carefull that you do not denegrate women because they are the female representation of God, created in His/Her image.
@cheryl, thank God you said so, i was only quoting some comments made below with sarcasm. My stand has always been that God’s word is ACCURATE. Many thanks.
Your stance and opinion don’t have the force and effect of our Constitution, therefore, your stance and opinion, are irrelevant to public policy and how we conduct ourselves under our government. I therefore submit that without any hard scientific evidence, your stance and opinion are wrong and so is your religion.
The bible is a collection of different stories, a few songs, histories of Hebrew rulers, and in what you’d call the “new” testament, which insults Jews, such as Jesus. At the time those were written down by the handful of literate people among a population of thousands there were no gaps between words. The original manuscripts were long strings of letters and the reader had to try to decide where the gaps might be. Example: “Godisnowhere.” It can correctly be read as either “God is now here” or “God is nowhere.” See the dilemma faced by translators? Also, documents that were copied for distribution to the early Christians, such as Paul’s letters, often were copied by scribes who couldn’t read but only copy the strings of letters. Over the years when all books were written by hand, before the printing press, errors crept in. Some changes were made on purpose by copiers, too, either to clarify a passage they agreed with or to change something with which they disagreed. The King James version of the Bible was a translation of a sloppy translation from the Greek language by a man who wanted to rush his Bible to press, just after the printing press was invented, before his rival could retranslate everything from the early and most accurate original manuscripts. And even they were not originals. They were copies of copies of copies. Our earliest copies of new testament come from a couple of centuries after Jesus lived so of course some inaccuracies crept in, even if by accident. The bible is a wonderful book. We have no other document that tells such a comprehensive story of any other people, their rules, thoughts, religious rite, etc. But if you want to obey every one of the Hebraic laws, not just picking and choosing, then every woman who has her monthly period is unclean and cannot touch or handle much of what we’d call regular household objects until she takes a live dove (a common pigeon will do) and has her preacher kill it on the alter at the church. For other reasons a person might have to get a sheep, goat or bull calf for the pastor to slaughter on the altar. The temple was a slaughterhouse. In the Bible God told the tribe of Levi not to farm or raise animals the way other people did but to get all of their food from the sacrifices on the altar at the temple. Do read the Bible for yourself, carefully, and don’t just take someone elses’s word for what it says, even if that person is your pastor.
Hi Chika Raphael Christian,
Your perspective on life, human sexuality and The-Bible-As Re-writen-by-Chika-R-Christian has been amusing. You have no standing on your comments regarding the naturalism of homosexuality except what amounts to a self-serving sputter that you are heterosexist. Your utter disrespect for “99%” of LGBT people who earnestly publicly reveal that their sexual instincts are innate is disputed by you with nothing more that a “well, you know better”. If arrogance was intelligence, you won this debate hands down.
That cocky perspective is most evident in your absurd interpretation of the Bible. No this, as just one of the many examples of your self-serving misinterpretations, is not accurate: “Women ‘silence’ does not connote women inferiority to men. It simply tasks ALL women to play supportive roles towards the men. Like adam and eve, the women should be helpers, not usurpers.” Paul in the Bible defines women as “deceived”, and that is the reason for his insistence on their silence. He blames Eve for the Fall, he does not see her as a “helper” at all. He sees her worth only in the ability to give birth. Now, I understand how adhering to the Bible as written would not be helpful in your agenda to proclaim superiority, but that does not validate your point.
Don’t feel bad (not that you would– that would require humility), I have never met a Christian who TRULY believes in “the consistency and accuracy of the bible”. They believe in such things when they are using out of context passages to attack but not in how they themselves live and interact. Your own attitude here is evidence of that… but then so is the fact that hopefully you do not believe in the death to non-virgin brides, prohibition of 15 and 30 year home mortgages, death penalties for Sunday Walmart workers AND to disobedient children, and the outlawing of Christmas trees. Someone who TRULY believed in the “the consistency and accuracy of the bible” would believe in exactly those things. Thankfully, I have never met such a believer… they would be a monstrous person.
But back to the superficial bias in your arguments… you might try reading all of the first two chapters of Romans, and not just the select, out of context passage you cite. A basic reading of the whole makes clear the fallacy you harbor:
> The people described first rejected God, worshiped idols and then had promiscuous heterosexual sex
> God gave them over to their lustful nature, their “nature” (which was described as going against their nature, actually) was a reaction to God, not a cause
> Romans 2 condemns people who have done what you have done here– criticized the people of Romans 1 and held yourself superior
No gay people have ever rejected God, worshiped idols and then after having lots of heterosexual sex…turned gay. That is not the experience, it is just your wishful thinking so you can hold yourself higher and keep a firm grasp on your bias.
Chika Raphael Christian
I’m not sure what kind of uneasiness you sense. I do not feel uneasy about anything that I can think of. We disagree, and I feel fairly certain we will continue to do so, but that is the way things go. Not everyone can agree on everything.
I never mentioned anything about the earth’s “roundness” so I am not sure what you are talking about. I was talking about Galileo being arrested and charged with heresy for agreeing with Copernicus about the earth rotating around the sun, vs the other way around. And then I quoted the pope from the 90’s who apologized for the Church’s mistake.
I will agree with one thing, I am definitely on a gay crusade and your belief in the literal words of the Bible is definitely not going to change my belief that the entire LBGTQ deserves the right to love and marry who their heart brings them to.
You said:
“Heterosex is humanly natural, homosex sure isn’t. Its counterfeit heterosex. Two consenting adult males (or females) playing the role of ‘male’ and ‘female’.”
There is plenty of documentation– actual video of animals in the wild having homosexual sex, even long term relationships, and this is even when they have opposite gender mates available and accessible. It happens IN NATURE, so by definition that makes it natural. The animal most human like is the Bonobo (similar to Chimpanzees), and they are VERY sexual animals and participate in homo, bi and heterosexual relationships in quite a carefree manner. They use sex often to create compromise, cooperation, if they hurt one another’s feelings, they make up by having sexual relations, regardless of their gender. Fortunately for them, they have no judgmental “Christians” to shame them. I will post a news article below about the documented 1500 animals who naturally engage in homosexual relationships.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx
Thank you for reading and for conversing. I can see clearly that you are one of the people in the world who feel more comfortable just doing what you are told. That is your choice and your right. I am a person who feels more comfortable using the brain God gave me to think critically. And I KNOW in my deepest heart and soul that love, kindness and acceptance is above all the message God wants me to project to the world. I will continue to do so.
Peace to you
APeene
Chika Raphael Christian: I urge you to study the Bible outside of English. I will reiterate the request that you also study the history of how the Bible came to be. Paul’s injunctions against women speaking in church, were not Paul’s words. They were added in the third century by a Greek scribe. We still have proof of that in old manuscripts (codex). Some of the books ascribed to Paul were not written by him at all. If you were more educated in your Bible, you would know that. Even if you took some seminary courses you would learn this. Untill then you can only argue the English Bible and it is very different from the earliest manuscripts. You are saying things that are inaccurate.
@cheryel, thanks for your response. King james being gay does not add or remove any truth from the bible. In all these hebrew translations you make, apostle paul knew his time and the law well, yet, he condemned gayism in romans1v21-28. How do you respond to this? Thanks.
Hey chika raphael,
There’s no way I can compete with your Biblical knowledge. But how do you know the Bible is right?
Thanks!
Dave
hello Dave, time and events in history, coupled with my experience with the lord, and to an extent, scientific knowledge, proves the consistency and accuracy of the bible. The bible is a guide amidst life’s complexities, while scientific reasoning only tries to explain in details, aspects of this complexities.
Let’s talk about
Homosexuality & The Bible
There are 7 verses that are sometimes used to say homosexuality is a sin.
But there are also 12 verses against divorce
and 4 against having sex with someone who is menstruating
and there are 2350 verses about money.
300 about social justice and the poor
and 24 verses about immigration.
We need a new conversation about “homosexuality and the bible”
BTW Dave…I feel the same as you about whether or not the Bible is in fact right.
Hey chika,
Thanks for responding!
So, if there are other texts that correspond with history and science, and give one an experience of the Lord, then they would be correct also, right?
I respond to it by saying that a man called Paul several thousand years ago expressed his opinion which was documented in a book collated by human beings.
@cheryel, thanks for your response. King james being gay does not add or remove any truth from the bible. In all these translations you make, apostle paul knew his time and the law well, yet, he condemned gayism in romans1v21-28. How do you respond to this? Thanks.
chicka raphael christian: I gave you the example of King James being gay to show you how over the centuries the Bible has been mistranslated and misinterpreted by man for various reasons. In Romans 1: 21-28, Paul is talking about pagan sex worship. which was still going strong in his time. He talks about heterosexual people who would commit acts that were against their heterosexual nature, for the sake of pagan sex worship. He is not talking about people whose sexual orientation is homosexual. This is much clearer in the original language, as the English translation is lacking. I urge you to take a course in Biblical Hebrew and Greek. You will change your mind as yoou learn what God originally said.
he Bible has been mistranslated and misinterpreted by man for various reasons. In Romans 1: 21-28, Paul is talking about pagan sex worship. which was still going strong in his time. He talks about heterosexual people who would commit acts that were against their heterosexual nature, for the sake of pagan sex worship. He is not talking about people whose sexual orientation is homosexual. This is much clearer in the original language, as the English translation is lacking. I urge you to take a course in Biblical Hebrew and Greek. You will change your mind as yoou learn what God originally said.
Time has proven over and over again that medical ”facts” CHANGE from time to time. Today its A, tomorrow its Z, the day after, it is small letter ‘s’. Who made those researches? How constant and accurate are these researches? The bible is crystal clear on the wrongness of the LIFESTYLE of gayism, some gays that i know admitted that it started as an adventurous or force idea before sticking into their heads as a chronic habit. They are free from it now but they are still cautious as to not being drawn into it again, just as we have sex addicts, alcoholics and drug addicts.
Mind you, i don’t hate gays. i understand the plight of the intersexed(based on genetic deformities) which needs surgical and psychoanalytic corrections, however, am of the opinion that majority(99percent) of LGBTs either subliminally or consciously CHOSE gayism. The bible does not contradict itself, compare that scripture in leviticus to Romans1v21-28. GOD DOES NOT CHANGE. Science, though interesting and educative, changes with erratic inconsistency.
Maybe this would answer your questions concerning EX-GAY THERAPIES as you seem a supporter.
The initiator of it disclaims calling it a flawed research and apologizes to the LGBTI community.
http://preliatorcausa.blogspot.com/2012/04/scientist-renounces-his-own-notorious.html
Chika Raphael Christian
Thank you for reading. I understand that you have a strong belief in the Bible. That is your right as an American. It is also the right of Americans to have OTHER religious beliefs, or no religious beliefs at all. Furthermore laws cannot be made based on the Christian Bible or any other since we have freedom of religion here in the United States. If you believe that it is a choice to be gay, please tell me about when you made the CHOICE to be heterosexual? How old were you? What was it based on? Males are strong and have muscles and deep voices, females are beautiful and soft and smell good…? Tough decision.
It is not a choice.
There is no way someone would make a choice that would condemn them to ridicule, being disowned by family and friends, and being marginalized and ostracized by their community, church and often society. Even without science behind it at all, logically nobody would make that kind of a choice.
You asked about who the researchers were who did the studies and I want to point out that a very large citation list followed the article. It was not just one doctor or scientist, and it’s not just American ones either. There are many researchers and research that has been done world wide.
If you choose not to believe science, that is fine. You have that right. Certainly in the days of the Bible and before and since there have been people burned and tortured as witches for talking about microscopic germs and bacteria causing infections and the importance of hand washing. These germs and bacteria could not be seen since there were no microscopes, so those who did not understand were fearful, as people often are today in light of new information they do not understand.
I would like to point out that there are many MANY numerous passages in the Bible that are cast away and not followed by modern “Christians”, and only certain cherry picked verses are heralded as THE WORD OF GOD. Do you ever wear clothes of two fabrics? Do you or have you ever braided your hair, or know anyone who does? What about wearing jewelry? Do you picket women who speak in church or who in any way try to teach men? These are also in the Bible.
Consider and ponder within yourself why you choose to follow only SOME of the messages of the Bible, but not all.
I believe in following the MESSAGE of the Bible which is to be of service to others, to help and stand up for those in need, and to love thy neighbor as thyself. Do not judge, lest ye be judged.
I wish you well, and I hope that you will consider my response.
Thank you
APeene
thanks apeene for your response. However, you seem to have omitted some points i made in my previous post.
1. Scientific ‘facts’ change from time to time.
2. The researches made in are not guaranteed accurate or consistent at all times.
3. Apostle paul was well versed in theology and the law of moses. He re-echoed the wrongness of gayism in Rom. 1v21-28. See Eph.2v20 if the issue of choosing jesus against paul arises.
4. The Spirit of God is one. ‘the letter killeth, but the Spirit gives life.'(2Cor3v6), i understand the bible as having spiritual accuracy as regards what is abomination to God or not. The scripture never contradicts itself. Marriage is intended for the man and the woman only. if gayism was acceptable by God in bible times, i need a scripture for that please.
Sorry Apeene but homosexuals and heterosexuals made that choice and it’s based on human experiences weather conscious or unconscious. To some extent there is bisexual tendencies and some people like to explore and live that out to the fullest even if it is frowned upon by the homosexual and heterosexual communities… some folk live out their whole life in limbo between their fleeting attraction to both sexes, some eventually make a choice to settle with one or the other because they find “the one” that truly becomes their soul mate. People struggle with their homosexual tendencies as much as the overweight person suffers from the painstaking choices of what to eat daily, the doughnut or the apple? No one is born programmed to desire and only crave doughnuts. At every moment in your existence you have a choice, even if you will get ridiculed or if it’s deemed right or wrong, It doesn’t matter. I’m not here to say homosexuality is wrong or right, it may be perfectly fine for all I care but to say that you are born this way and you don’t have a choice is a little much. Broaden your sample selection a re-do your research to also consider social factors and bluntly ask how many homosexuals were sexualized as children, sexually abused, molested and if it was a good experience or a bad experience… how many were in abusive relationships with the opposite sex, many women decide to go lesbian after severely abusive relationships with men… expand your research and you’ll find more conclusive evidence. Other than that, homosexuals are perfectly fine in my book, as long as there is not this type of hype to explain it all away… homosexuals are not deformed people we have to learn to exist with and I feel like this research is doing that, trying to lead people to believe we need to accept homosexuals because poor them, they were born this way, like a person with spinal bifida or a down syndrom individual or someone with autism. please, don’t do that.
Heimer, I still have to disagree with you. If you are not in another persons brain then you do not know how they feel inside & how they have felt since birth. I think, even besides all of the scientific evidence, we need to start believing people when they talk about themselves & how they feel inside. You cannot decide for them whether they like or dislike coconut, or whether they are attracted to the same gender or other gender. I have more to say, but I’m typing on my phone & it’s too hard. 😄
I agree that it is extreme vanity to presume to know what another individual feels or thinks or is. It’s absolutely ridiculous. Why is it that society seems to always ask those who are NOT homosexual what it feels like to be homosexual or how it develops? If you wanted to know what it’s like to be tall, wouldn’t you ask a tall person and not a short person? Duh. One of my favourite quotes from Prather’s “Notes to Myself”–“I cannot disagree with what you say about yourself. Only with what you say that is NOT about yourself.”
Heimer, You seem to take offense with the references in the article to those born as intersex, and other sexual abnormalities, such as unusual sex chromosome combinations, and ambiguous genitalia. You asked me not to compare these situations to sexual orientation because, you indicated, those things could be SEEN, but orientation could not be. (And so because of that you can’t believe it? That is how it seems). My question to you then is this, do you believe that everything there is to know about the human body and about human psychology has been discovered and found out? Or is it possible there is more to learn?
Please recall that hundreds of years ago people were burned at the stake as witches for believing that there were tiny germs that could not be seen by the human eye (prior to the invention and common use of the microscope), which were causing infections. And yet, years later those poor souls were proven right.
Again I encourage you to believe people when they tell you who they are. And believe them without judgment. Why do you care who someone else is attracted to, who they want to sleep with and maybe marry?
One more thing I will mention. You said something in one of your comments about bisexuality, and people deciding at some point they were attracted to one of the other. To clarify, sexual orientation is on a scale (which I believe you mentioned that, but it is like you don’t really believe it yourself). Not many people (if any) are all the way to one side (homosexual) or the other (heterosexual), but instead all of us are along the scale. Most of us are closer to the heterosexual side, but some people are actually equally attracted to both male and females. Just because they settle down with one gender or another, that does not take away their attraction to the other. Someone’s behavior is does not always line up with their orientation. Many people who know they are homosexual marry the opposite gender to follow what their church, or their parents, or community will find acceptable, but that does not mean they change their orientation. It very often means they lead unhappy, unfulfilled, unauthentic lives. All to please other people.
I still cannot grasp why it matters who someone loves. Love is a good thing.
Heimer, there are also other biological studies that are being done that addresses the possibility of sexual orientation being determined in the womb as well. Why be so afraid of what Scientific studies appear to reveal? And what if science actually does point to the idea that Homosexuality is indeed a biologically determined state of being? What is such the threat about that? I guess I am not understanding your headstrong belief that there is no way that someone could be born gay but also in the same breath say that you have nothing against homosexuality. Although the research may not be all conclusive, it is not all inconclusive either. I think anyone with any level of logic could see the mere possibility. Therefore if there is a possibility, then why continue to hold such a stance that there is absolutely no possibility. At what point in your life did you make the choice to be heterosexual? Sure you made the choice to maybe go out on a date or buy a girly mag, but did you “chose” the internal and psychology factors that gave you the propensity to make those choices? Maybe what you confuse as making the choice to act on a feeling is the same as actually having the feeling. Do we really get to chose what emotions we feel about anything. If I’m afraid of dogs, do I get to chose the fear that comes or only chose how I react to the fear? Yes if someone has an unhealthy fear of dogs, it is likely something that occurred with a dog that caused that. But what if they just genuinely are afraid of dogs, nothing happened, they are just afraid. Did they chose that fear? I have to also disagree with your idea that most homosexuals had to have gone through some level of trauma that was the underlying factor in them choosing to be gay. I am gay and I went through nothing of the sort. I have an older brother and my father was in the home while I grew up. I spent a lot of time around many male cousins. I don’t represent the notion of what you tend to suggest as you mentioned in an earlier post that 95% of homosexuals are choosing to be gay because of something that happened to them. Here is a healthy perspective from someone who is actually gay themselves, a minister and grew up in the church. I agree that yes we have the power to chose which we want to do, but that choice can cause great internal conflict especially when you chose the direction that is going against what your sexual orientation to the core would not chose. I have been on both sides of the spectrum. I have foreced myself to chose not to engage in homosexual acts, all the while my attraction never ceased. It never ceased at all. Looks like my power to chose didn’t work. I believe, that homosexuality is naturally determined for most, and environmentally determined for others like those who really have been molested, etc. I think those who are naturally homosexual will explore coming out and acting on their attraction differently depending on their nurture. I was nurtured in the church and so it took me 25 years to be comfortable enough to chose myself and not the nurture of culture. So in that you are right, their choices will be based on their environment and experiences. But that has nothing to do with their innate internal desire and attraction. You can’t choose your attraction. I can’t look at a nude male and a nude woman and chose which will caused me to be aroused. But I can chose which one to have sex with. That I can chose. This is not theory nor a hypothesis, but this is my life and my REAL experiences. So I find it humorous when straight people try to concludes biases about a demographic that are not a part of. That’s like a European saying that an American shouldn’t have felt anything about 9/11. But the issue of homosexuality is not about homosexual acts but it’s about the homosexual desire. And that is far too complicated for any heterosexual to, with good faith, try to understand, unless they themselves have had some level of experience with it. I’m not talking about experience counseling others who are gay, but I mean being attracted to the same sex strong enough for it to be a conflict in your life. I’m sorry, being gay myself, your opinions and thoughts are respected, but I feel they are without merit because you don’t give me the impression that you are gay and that you perhaps understand the internal workings of attraction verses the external action on those attractions. One you can say can be chosen, the other, you can’t say can be chosen unless you yourself have been internally presented with the choice to be attracted to women or men. As for me and my body, I don’t ever recall being presented with the option to chose being attracted to boys or girls. Never, at 3 years old, in pre-school, I knew that I enjoyed looking at the boys more than the girls. A 3 year old doesn’t have the ability to make such a choice. Look at it like this, liking men or women is like having a taste in cabbage or mac n cheese. Let me tell you, if you place two plates one with cabbage and the other with mac n cheese in front of me, the mac n cheese will smell better and when I taste the cheese, the neurotransmitters that are released when we eat cheese will pleasure my senses more and ultimately I will always chose the mac n cheese, because for one, I can’t stand cabbage! There is no reward system in my brains pleasure center that goes off when I eat cabbage. So, Although I ultimately chose mac n cheese, it was something already at work inside of me that I didn’t chose that caused me to choose mac n cheese. I think the Neurotransmitter is called Dopamine. Sexual orientation can be modeled after that. If I am already coded to find pleasure in the site of men and male parts, then when I see one over the other, my internal code will respond in a way that makes me more adept to chose the male. Of course the more I see So yes you are right, there is always a choice but there is always something beyond the choice that we may or may not have any control over. It takes being really closed minded and unlearned of the complexities of the human nature and human body to believe that there is no possible why that our bodies cannot and don’t contribute to sexual orientation whether it be by DNA, chemical exchanges in the brain, or our prenatal development. Because the human body is so complex, should not be a reason at least to say that you can’t be born gay. How do you know? If you’re stance is that you don’t believe you can because the research in the blog doesn’t answer the question of “how do you know” then likewise, how do you know you can’t be born gay? And you base your answer on the fact that people make observable choices to be gay. Well of course they will if internally they are gay, but that doesn’t prove they chose their sexual orientation.
chika raphael christian, chika raphael christian, I applaud you for your firm and unwavering faith in the Bible. It is obvious that you have had an undeniable encounter with the living God. I have, also. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior. I believe that the Bible as God gave it is the timeless Word of God. God’s message of salvation through the blood of Jesus, and His injunction to us to share the Gospel, love and serve, feed and clothe, still comes through loud and clear today. However, if you know the history of how the Bible came to be in your hand, you will know that what you have is the result of centuries of politics, egos, errors in translation and transcription, and honorable but mistaken men. It is well documented in records of his day and in his own hand, that King James was a flagrant homosexual, and in his political desire to bring peace to a kingdom torn by war between Protestants and Catholics, ordered the scholars of his day to combine both the Protestant “Calvinist” Bible with that of the Latin Vulgate. In their disgust for his scandalous behavior, they saw in their task an opportunity to shame and control the king. They purposely mistranslated the passages we have against pagan sex worship to mean homosexuality. For instance all the words in your Bible translated “sodomite”, are “kadesh” in Hebrew. Kadesh is the Hebrew word for holy or sacred. Why would a word for holy or sacred be translated sodomite? It’s the same as we refer to priests in pagan lands as “holy men”. The kadeshim (pl.) were priests of Baal who “received” a worshipers “offering” to the fertility god. King James scholars knew that, but the king did not. I can explain more, if you like. Such as Leviticus 18:22 and 20: 13 are forbidding sex with a zachar, not a man or “ish”. What is a zachar? And did you know that the Hebrew word for homosexual, “saris” does not appear in any of these passages? Your English Bible forbids homosexuality, but until you can read your Bible in the original language you will not know that God does not.
Chika Raphael Christian
I understand that we disagree and have different beliefs. I do not wish to argue with you endlessly. I will attempt to address what you have asked in this recent comment, even though you did not address what I asked you.
1. I would not agree that scientific facts change but that sometimes there are new discoveries that change the understanding of the previous facts. I will point out an example here. During the time of Galileo– the early 1600’s, he supported the theory Copernicus had about the earth rotating around the sun verses what the church believed based on Bible verses, which was that EVERYTHING rotated around the earth. Galileo was accused of heresy and sentenced to house arrest for the rest of his life. And then many years later “On 31 October 1992, Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, and issued a declaration acknowledging the errors committed by the Catholic Church tribunal that judged the scientific positions of Galileo.” It turns out everything does NOT rotate around the earth and Galileo and his friend Copernicus were correct.
So it appears, the Bible and/or it’s interpretation does indeed contradict itself sometimes.
2. I mentioned that even if you chose not to believe the scientific research and evidence, would it not be best in following the teachings of Jesus Christ to love thy fellow man and not judge? Isn’t that actually the Christian way?
3. I understand and acknowledge that you believe the literal word of the Bible, by Paul, etc. Not everyone does.
4. I don’t believe that gayism is a word, but maybe that will catch on. I appreciate that you can quote scripture, but you did not acknowledge all of the many scripture and verses I mentioned that are NOT followed by most Christians (and I suspect yourself).
Here are some of them:
“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” (I Corinthians 14:34-35)
1 Timothy 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
1Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
1 Corinthians 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
There are others, of course, but I think you get my point. I don’t know any Christian women (of which I consider myself to be also!) who cover their head or shave it. I know many women who DO wear jewelry and braid their hair. I do not know women who believe they must be silent in churches, but I know many women who teach and have authority over men— teachers, principals, female managers with male employees, etc.
What I want is for people to be able to love who their heart brings them to and marry them if both parties wish to do so. By the United States Constitution, they are allowed to do this, whether your belief in the literal word of the Bible says it is a sin or not. You do not have to like it. You can continue to hold onto your bigotry and prejudice about something you do not understand, but if you want to live in the United States, you must accept that the LAW according to our constitution says that everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I’m certain that the pursuit of happiness for many people would include being able to marry the person they love.
I wish you well.
APeene
Pingback: Gay Pride - Page 28 (politics)
Pingback: https://evolequals.com/2012/09/04/sexual-orientation-is-developed-in-the-womb/ | My Straightjacket's Bedazzled
There some thing wrong with that study ‘This study has conclusively established that homosexual men are more likely to have one or more older brothers… The prevalence is not affected if they have older sisters–only older brothers.’ I have 6 older sisters & NO brothers & I’m gay! So I’m the ‘lest likely’ according to it. Its a bit rubbish as I have an older lesbian sister too & assuming the reverse is true for lesbians. Please stick with posting real science, not pseudo science or you loose credibility.
Hello Globaloo1,
Thank you for reading. I assure you, this is NOT pseudo science, and all of the very credible sources used for this research paper are noted at the end, many of them even have web links directly to the sources, so that people may read them and do their own research.
I appreciate your commenting, but it seems like you may have skimmed the article because it clearly states:
“homosexual men are MORE LIKELY to have one or more older brothers”– not that it is 100% the only way a man could be gay.
Also:
“Dr. Ray Blanchard comments, approximately 15% of homosexual men are gay because they have older brothers”,
so, this is in no way negating that a man with a bunch of sisters couldn’t be gay, or that a man with no siblings could be gay, or that a man who is the oldest of his siblings couldn’t be gay. Just that 15% of the gay men out there, it is likely related to the fact that they have older brothers.
And if you understand pregnancy and child birth and the way that a woman’s body does indeed remember Rh factor, (which used to cause death in infants until they figured out why and developed a solution), the theory they are studying about a woman’s body fighting the male cells that get in their system really makes a lot of sense. It has not been proven, but it is one theory.
And one more quote from the article to point out:
“The rate of homosexuality among brothers is 9% higher than in random population samples.”
This is not pseudo science, my friend. This study has been replicated all over the world by different doctors and scientists.
And the last thing that I want to say person to person is that I do not care why my fellow human beings are gay, straight, bi, trans, or whatever. It doesn’t matter to me or make a difference to me. But the problem is, it makes a huge difference to a lot of people out there who insist on condemning and marginalizing a whole group of people because of who they are born to be attracted to. I think that is just dumb, but sadly, it is happening. I have done several years of research on sexuality, and specifically homosexuality, and again, I can assure you, these findings and studies are all completely legitimate.
Have a wonderful night. Peace to you.
APeene
Thanks for your work on this APeene. It has meant a lot to thousands of people.
Hi Global001,
I am the oldest in my family and gay. If my situation were the only one being studied, I too could cry foul. Science does not work that way however, and is describing a condition most likely to predisposition a human. Your mother and my mother may have had hormonal situations that were similar to ones created by a woman who had multiple male births… who knows. In any case, this study does not attack the fact that you and I are gay, so there really is no need to get so defensive. Thank you for reading.
Pingback: Sexual Orientation is Developed in the Womb | Daily Queer News
Regarding this statement:
“That answers does the Bible have on the issues of sex chromosome abnormalities, ambiguous genitalia, and hermaphroditism? … are they going to hell for sinning”.
If I’m reading correctly, that sounds like sarcasm. But please forgive me if I misread. Regardless, I’ll answer the question sincerely.
The Bible has an excellent response here,
“‘Teacher,’ his disciples asked him, ‘why was this man born blind? Was it a result of his own sins or those of his parents?’ ‘It was not because of his sins or his parents’ sins,’ Jesus answered. ‘He was born blind so the power of God could be seen in him’” (John 9:2-3).
Cobalt, I appreciate your reading this article and commenting. It is good to get a dialog going. I was indeed NOT being sarcastic, but asking a very real question. I have come across so many people who use the Bible to condemn people (who, in actuality, they do not even know), based on information they believe and follow, often blindly, without giving it critical thought.
I see the scripture you put in your comment, and while I appreciate it, it doesn’t answer my initial question. Does the bible have answers or even address the issue of sex chromosome abnormalities, ambiguous genitalia, and hermaphroditism? And I believe the answer is, No, it does not.
Blindness is something fairly apparent in a person, if you are around them for any period of time. And it is something the writers of the Bible addressed because they had some familiarity with it, some understanding of what it meant to be blind. The issues I have brought up were not addressed or given any thought or consideration to in the Bible. My entire point is, thousands of years ago when the Bible was written, the authors had no concept of medical science.
Interestingly, in many ancient cultures, homosexuals, or eunuchs (as some believe they were called), were honored as special and unique, not condemned and harrassed.
I understand that you have different religious beliefs than I do, and I respect that. I have friends of several different religions and love and respect them and their beliefs very much. My desire is that we can all come together to love all HUMAN BEINGS regardless of religion, age, skin color, or sexual orientation. There is no reason to condemn your fellow man. Just because you are not just like them, and they are not just like you is no reason to have any expectation of them to change to your liking. And the fact is, sexual orientation cannot be intentionally changed.
I wish you well. Thank you again for reading.
APeene
Hi there, I found your website by way of Google whilst searching for a similar subject, your site came up, it appears good. I’ve bookmarked to favourites|added to bookmarks.
The data regarding boys who were reared as girls (often, I believe, from circumcission debacles) does not, in my view, prove your point. It shows that sexual identify is DEFINITELY determined in the womb, but sexual identity is NOT THE SAME THING AS sexual orientation.
For example, I fully identify as a man, have no traditonally feminine interests and I am gay. A lot of gay men are not the least bit more feminine than the great majority of straight men.
Although I disagree with you, I think you are the greatest (The post about your brother’s wedding was fantastic)
Hello David. Thank you for reading and for posting a comment, it means a lot. I do want to clarify that I did not write the article about my brother, my friend and co-blogger David did. There are I believe… 6 or 7 of us involved in this blog, so articles are written by different people at different times. And David is indeed awesome. I appreciate your view and I want to let you know that in no way am I saying or thinking a person would have to have feminine traits if they were a homosexual man. Believe me, I understand that is not the case.
I hope that you will continue to read our blog and that it may give you some support and encouragement when you need it.
Have a wonderful day.
APeene
I am sorry if I got you mixed up with the guy who wrote the essay about his brother. I am a bit of a techno ignoramus and some of this stuff escapes me.
In any event, I have many ideas re sexuality, some of which I think may be original (Yeah, I know I sound like a pretentious a hole). I invite you to read some of them on here. (There isn’t much stuff on my blog as I only started posting stuff about a week ago)
My blog is divided into three categories, Ideas, Poems and Autobiography. Some of my ideas re the etiology of homosexuality can be found in the “Ideas” category, sub-category “Sexuality.” BTW, although I posted a batch of poems, I feel constrained to note that the vast majoriity of the stuff is metered and rhymed.
Now I am really gonna betray the fact that I am a techno-know-nothing. I am not sure if you can identify my blog from this message. My blog is on WP and it is Gunsandnobutter.
Dear Apeene, As a sister of an aging brother with ‘developmental disabilities’ I thank you so much. (You may have saved your brother in ways you’ll never know!) It really is the same issue. Okay so how about folks with special needs who fall in love, are they ‘allowed’ to marry now?
In a military/blue collar/southern community 1974 I started the first Ballet and Modern Dance classes for adults with varying special needs classifications of the day. Folks with Downs Syndrome were Mongoloids…Holy cripes remember? This was a pilot program and the highlight of my life. The presence and joy that all brought to our short time together has been unsurpassed. I was 22 at the time.
Two of my “dancers” were a couple. They loved to be partners in class. Diane was gone for weeks. Donnie and I partnered. When she returned, I was told that she had been given a Hysterectomy…to make it easier on her parents in dealing with her monthly cycles which were never going to produce children!!!! She had gone into post-surgical menopause and depression…hmmm. I never forgot this.
( I had lived in Germany twice and been to East Berlin in 1968. Perhaps it was being a Military dependent and the kind of upbringing that comes with that that allows me to draw the parallels to what we as Americans feared the most from the nazi regime. Things like killing the disabled, or experimenting on them, incarcerating them strapped to beds and so on. Yet it was accepted Medically to take out a young woman’s internal reproductive organs for someone else’s convenience. One profound response was,” Well if she gets raped, at least she can’t get pregnant.” Sorry to lay this out with emotion instead of Scientific studies…)
It has just been too long for me to hold this in any more.
Just really, did you mean All people?
See any similarities
Wow, 1 in 65,000, what a great base to creat new rights, instead of calling it marrage why not just be creative and call it gayage or something, why try to overturn 3000 years of human history? And if Gay is in the womb, when will science give parents a choice? After all, according to the same progressives, it is not really a human until it exits the womb!
If I am understanding you correctly this sounds like sarcasm. Forgive me if I am mistaken. I agree that science will probably start giving parents a choice in many things– as they already do with some choosing the gender of their baby– but if you know anything about the issues that China is facing right now, you will see that these choices do not always have the best outcome. My point is that people are born who they are, and have the right to love who their heart leads them to, without others condemning them.
Thanks for reading.
Oh, gosh, Mike Sanchez, where to begin?
There are at least three basic religious disagreements about when life begins. The term “life” really means soul in this context. Religions differ as to when the soul enters the human body. Some believe that it enters at conception when biological life begins. Some argue for viability, which is variable, time-wise. And the third group holds that man does not become a living soul until “God breathes into him the breath of life”, or when a baby takes its first breath after birth. So, a baby is biologically human at conception, but soul wise is the basis of theological dispute.
As to “3000 years of human history”, there has been homosexuality throughout history (Sappho 625 BC), and different societies have handled it in different ways. For instance, it is sanctioned in Native American tribes as “Two Spirit” people and considered sacred. At various times in history gay marriage was not unheard of. And consider the union of the Byzantine Warrior-Emperor, Basil the First (867-886 CE) and his companion John.
And finally, as to parental choice, if modern society frowns on abortion for sex selection and genetic reasons, why wouldn’t we include sexual orientation?
In the end we will have have all the answers to the universe, and shock at the answers to some of our questions we thought we already had the answers for. I believe in genetic memory that carries on through the generations of families, so what your saying may also be true, but I’ll put it on the shelf for now and ask the creator of us all when I get there. great article I liked reading it
Always and interesting read.
Dana,
I will quote directly from Human Sexuality today by Bruce M. King.
“Hermaphrodites are usually genetic females, and even though a uterus is almost always present, they often have an ovary and Fallopian tube on one side and a testicle and a vas deferens and/or epididymis on the other. The external genitalia are usually ambiguous in appearance, but because the phallus is often enlarged, nearly two thirds of these individuals are raised as boys, with complications arising at puberty when they begin to develop breasts and to menstruate. This is a rare condition, occurring in about only 1 in every 65,000 births.
It does go on further to say that “a more common condition is known as pseudo-hermaphroditism, in which a person with an XX or XY chromosome pattern is born with the proper set of gonads (ovaries or testicles, respectively), but whose external genitalia are either ambiguous or that of the other sex (King).
And it goes on from there. Very fascinating reading actually.
While it may still occasionally turn up in medical literature, the term ‘hermaphrodite’ is offensive to some intersex people. ‘Intersex’, on the other hand, seems to be fairly universally accepted.
Ambergris, Ah, ok, in that case I sincerely apologize, as this article is most certainly not meant to be offensive in ANY way. Ann was questioning the existance of true “intersex” people, and so I quoted directly from the text book I got my information from, to show that it does happen. And to clarify most definitely, this article was meant to bring to light that these are real people who have every right to love and be with whomever their heart brings them to. Again, my apologies if I offended anyone, that certainly was not intended.
Sorry, not Ann, but Dana, was questioning. Also, thankyou Ambergris for that link. It is always good to learn and understand, so I appreciate the opportunity to do so.
“Approximately 1 in 65,000 babies is born as a hermaphrodite, having some or all of both sex organs.”
Proper term is “intersexed.” I don’t think anyone is ever born with both testes and ovaries, the mark of true hermaphroditism.