debate-points, homosexualityWhen theists claim “homosexuality” is a learned behavior, and an abomination, that can be either
how do you go about addressing them? Assume for the purposes of this argument that the theists:
When theists claim “homosexuality” is a learned behavior, and an abomination, that can be either
- unlearned – further addressed with this question
- or, tamed
The first thing to understand here is that the argument that it’s a choice is a total red herring. Nevermind the input from 1000s of credible sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, and others who have already answered the question “is homosexuality a choice” firmly with a “no”. The argument regarding whether its a choice is a total red herring.
The correct approach here is to ask “why is homosexuality immoral”. Its pretty obvious why things like theft and murder are wrong, because they harm people in a very tangible way, but the wrongfulness of homosexuality escapes people. There are no secular explanations for how it differs in any way, shape, or form from consentual heterosexuality.
Until you get an answer, which you won’t, you really need to hammer on the point that people who disapprove of homosexuality don’t have rational reasons for doing so. In the process, you’re going to get a lot of red-herring, nonsense answers:
The list of reasons goes on and on and on, and every one of them will avoid addressing how or why homosexuality is immoral. That is, until you get down the ultimate answer:
BECAUSE GOD DISAPPROVES OF IT!
Well… why does god disapprove of homosexuality? I’m sure being infinitely intelligent and having access to all moral philosophy past, present, future, and otherwise, if he thinks its immoral, he could just – and I hope this isn’t too much to ask – tell us why. So, why does God think its immoral, where is the harm? Now we’re right back where we started.
Super Gross!
The more and more you pressure a person to just simply explain, in plain unobfuscated terms, why they believe there’s something wrong with homosexuality, the more you’ll find there is no reason.
At least in my interaction with bigots, I’ve found a good number of them are happy to admit that their opposition is non-rational, that they oppose homosexuality because they themselves are no attracted to the same sex. The argument against homosexuality is as simple as this: two dudes kissing is totally super gross!
They find it gross, disgusting, and they extremely uncomfortable with the subject. Its true, most heteros are totally disinterested or even grossed out by the idea of personally having sex with someone of the same gender. But, compare these two attitudes:
Homophobes thing that a private, personal rule that works for them (i.e. not having gay sex) is a general rule that applies to everyone.
Summary
You will never get a better answer than “its gross” from someone who opposes homosexuality – it just won’t happen.
Except as a psychological curiosity, it doesn’t matter whether homosexuality and heterosexuality are learned behaviors. As yet, there’s no good reason as to why a gay person would want to unlearn their sexual orientation in the first place.
Assume for the purposes of this argument that the theists: [believe lots of baloney]
Well, obviously disabuse them of their irrational notions. Otherwise you have to argue based on their skewed conceptions, and that’s one fight that you cannot win. As we know from mathematics, anything can be implied from a false statement (or in logic notation: F → x = T).
Put differently, the first step is to find a common ground to base your arguments on. If that cannot be fond, then the debate has failed from the outset.
What you’re asking for is an uphill battle. These people are only looking to justify their bigotry. And they will use any excuse to do so. However if you want to convince someone who is on the fence, point out that gay people exist in every culture and country on the planet regardless of the customs or laws there. Tell them that the surge in people identifying as gay int the last 20 years, is a result of acceptance and not environment. Suggest that gays can come from any family background, even wholesome ones(from their point of view). Asides from that keep in mind that most of these people don’t want to be convinced, their arguments are only to justification their hatred and fear.
When people say homosexuality (okay, and bisexuality, etc.) are learnt, sometimes the underlying reason is to say that this is not in the gene (thus, not natural) and thus suddenly you can blame people for bearing the particular characteristic.
There are quite a number of study in neuropsychology, for example, one of it is focused on imaging (PET/MRI) response to olfactory stimuli (testosterone containing male sweat). It was shown that there exist difference between homosexual male and heterosexual male, and little difference between homosexual male and heterosexual female. These can be inferred, that the brain is actually different, in a organizational manner, between homo and heteros. And these changes are not usually “learnt” in anyway, but rather directed by genes governing sexual differentiation of the brain.
I decided that I will not go into the disease-vs-condition debate in this answer.
God inserted the potential for sin in each human. So either:
god is omniscient: god knew precisely to what percentile an individual would be drawn to homosexuality (or any sinful behavior) and, furthermore, knew what that person’s probability of giving into sin would be, and still decided to make THAT individual with THAT knowledge of their failure being imminent only to castigate them for being as they were made (because, even with free will, god presumably will already know the outcome before the soul switch gets flipped)…meaning god is doing the equivalent of having a child and then abusing it for being alive; or,
god is not omniscient: god doesn’t know exactly when and where an individual will sin, but still knows the rough percentage chance of a person being able to be drawn to it. god is still creating the PROBABILITY for sin and then playing dice with the creations and persecuting the ones who (still by no actual fault of their own) fail the rolls…meaning god is a sadist with sentient playthings.
What is the ethical purpose of any creature who, with the power to create beings as is wished, injects the probability for error when error is not actually desired? Furthermore, what is the ethical purpose of being created with a system of understanding that can realize that these sorts of actions (were they to be done by any other being) are abhorrent?
Ask them to quote you what Jesus said on the subject.
1) Being a Christain is a learned behavior, that can be unlearned or tamed.
Is that a sufficient reason to go ahead and start unlearning Christians? I guess not.
2) Why is it an abomination? First of all, homosexuals generally do not consider it an abomination, many straight people do not either. So you need to ask, why do you Christians consider it an abomination? Then address their answers.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.