I think some people are born gay and I think some people maybe change over time and I have no clue what the percentage of either group is. My question is, what does it matter? If someone is gay for whatever reason that is their business. Maybe we should start keeping our noses out of other people's business and there wouldn't be so much acrimony in the world.
Abn loves his relativism. Ok well I want to kill people.... .do I have that right?
Now onto the topic at hand. While I will concede possibly that some and I mean a small percentage of people could be born gay but at large it is a conformity to the norms of society and the constant barage from all aspects of that society.
The norms of society, even in highly LGBTQ accepting areas (Or whatever the currently accepted acronym is) are heterosexual. Almost no matter where on earth you go, It is still considered more normal for people to be straight than anything else, and people are are still pressured to be straight. I won't claim that the reverse never happens, but the culture doesn't seem to match your claim. No one has ever pressured me to change my orientation, can you or anyone else reading this claim otherwise? (No, simply being hit on doesn't count)
I have, on the other hand, on multiple occasions seen a heck of a lot of pressure for people to be straight. At one point, I actually ended up being publicly shamed as maybe being gay, simply because I refused to brag about sexual conquests involving girls. (The worst part about being on a high school football team in my estimation is putting up with high school football teammates.)
At "Worst", in some areas people who are a three on the kinsey scale (True bisexuals) might now be slightly more likely to focus on the attraction they feel for the same sex. But people in this category are notably fewer in number than those on either extreme end of the scale.
It is far, far more likely that any perceived increase in the number of homosexuals in society is a byproduct of there being a huge portion of the population who until relatively recently had to lie to everyone or face social condemnation at best. Ending the need for people to deny any hope of love in their life is and will always remain a good change in my opinion.
As to the question of moral relativism. Generally speaking, your rights end the moment your wants impact someone else's life. You don't have the right to kill another. You also don't have the right to define who another person can love. Okay, sure, you can have your own private definition if you really want, but you don't get to bloody do anything to impact another's life in this regard.
P.S. Nice touch there, comparing people loving each other to murder. As if the impact of those two things could possibly be comparable.
Edited: daishain on 16th Oct, 2017 - 3:49am
As far as your comments on homosexuality are concerned we must live in emtirely different communities. Society absolutely impacts the discussion. Society is full of influential systems. The media for instance normalizes homosexuality. Technology promotes sexual degeneracy. Government clouds what marriage is and should be. There is indeed a agenda and it is not in the direction of heterosexual norms.
Now as far as relativism. Who draws the line? Are you telling me that your rights and definitions are more important then mine? Do you define what is negatively impacting to another? Do I have a right to disagree? Does loving someone of the same sex justify sexual relations with that person?
Of course it impacts the discussion, but people trying to get others to accept the fact that homosexual inclination is a naturally occurring part of human life, is not the same thing as pushing otherwise heterosexual people to "Change sides". And if anyone gets persuaded by simple words, they were never really straight to begin with, and they probably always knew it, whether or not you did.
Homosexuality IS normal, whether you like it or not. Heck, I sure as hell hope it is normal, because there a lot more gay men out there than wierdos like me. People have always been born gay, they continue to be born gay, and short of rather radical changes to the way humans grow and develop, there will always be people who are born gay. To deny this, to marginalize them, to restrict their rights, is both pointless and cruel to the point that I must question the ethics of anyone involved in such evil.
Let me put it this way, what if the situation were reversed? What if you were told from birth that you could never be with the woman you loved? Could never touch her, never even look at her as more than a friend. What if you were ostracized, beaten, or even lynched as a result of holding a girl's hand? What if you found yourself in a situation where your only reasonable hope for having a marriage was with a man, because that was the only thing that society for religious reasons would ever accept. Horrified yet? Then maybe you have some idea of just what the position you espouse has done and is continuing to do to innocent human beings all across the world.
Here is my challenge for you. Without referencing religious beliefs or works, come up with an ethical, practical, or moral argument against a loving homosexual relationship that I cannot refute.
Well that is indeed a scary scenario you outlined there. However that being said the basic reason for a sexual relationship is reproduction not personal satisfaction or pleasure. Now I will assume you know the basics of how babies are made. What exactly is the purpose of a homosexual sexual act outside of personal pleasure?
You also mentioned homosexuality is a naturally occuring part of human life. How so? The truth of the matter is up until the 1970s in the united states at least it was treated as it should be treated in that it was a mental disorder. That means that persons born with homosexual tendencies were treated as anyone else who has a gambit of mental disorders however what we find now is the opposite, with a society that promotes these tendencies instead of hinder it. Also when you talk of society having an impact you tend to downplay what that impact is. What I am referring too is not simple words or personal beliefs. What I am referring to is the outright hostility to normal functioning and natural relationships. I am forced against my wishes to adhere to the standards of the homosexual lobby. Stores like Target making gender neutral toys eliminating seperate sections. Transgender bathrooms. Redefinition of the term marriage. Demanding an artist such as a cake maker to conform to the will of a minority against their wishes. A college system and companies enforcing gender identity and promoting it while at the same time degrading what is natural. That is the kind of social impacts I am talking about.
Now to your last "Challenge" it is quite simple as I would use my earlier example of the very fact that it has absolutely no biological necesity. The problem however is that you say without using ethics and morals to make my argument. Well there is the crux of the problem. We have different places we get these things from. What is the moral and ethical standard for you? Oh right we use relativism. Do whatever make you happy am I right?
Homosexuality boils down to who you are attracted to.
Can anyone say that they have chosen to be attracted to someone?