I was born left handed and back in the early 30’s this was a problem. My grandmother insisted that we direct all uses to my right hand and I would outgrow it. My first year in school they actually tied my left hand to my side and I learned to write with my right. In the playground I was untied and played ball with my left. I still use my left hand when I reach for something, or catch something and my years of playing tennis I was a lefty.
I was born respecting the arts searching for the beauty of paintings, animals, music and the words of poetry. Did I show signs of insanity? absolutely not! I remember shopping with my grandmother for fabrics that I was drawn to and she made up pillows and even framing them for my room. My Mother being a musician I was drawn to Brahms and Bach. Artistically, my poor old left brain is uncomfortable and annoyed when I listen to the pop music that is nothing but repetitious rhythms rather than tones of beauty.
I am not gay but most of my close friends are. For what its worth, I am attracted to anything that is blue.
I’m left handed and can’t write worth a damn with my right hand. I play all of my stringed instruments right handed even though picking up the fiddle at first with my left hand. I learned to play right handed and taught myself to shoot right handed after years of picking up small arms with my left hand. I guess that makes me ambidextrous but it was a conscious effort. I’m also math dyslexic (see number sequences backwards) and still am, frustrating as hell. Royal blue and silver are my favotire colors once again, for what that’s worth. I also had friends and collegues who are homosexual as well as several students.
We must have been separated at birth because Math is next to Latin in my brain. I worried about this lack of numbers and made certain all my kids had tons of help in that subject. They are all wonderful at math and science. Being Blonde, I do prefer gold over silver but that is a girly thing. I had an accident that did some damage to my right hand which kept me from playing any musical instrument but I did manage a chamber music group (all strings) for several years in San Luis Obispo.
As a humanist, how do you view homosexuality? Especially when one tries to argue that the natural desire is for humans to procreate and ensure their genes are passed on? Even when any religious influence is removed from the equation, how is the homosexual to feel “normal,” biologically? For example, in reading an anatomy and physiology book, the author takes a stance that the reproductive organs exist for the sole purpose of, well, reproducing. How is the homosexual to reconcile this?
As a gay man, I try my best to feel one with mainstream society; however, even in secular society, I still feel the norm is for traditional family. Do humanist’s generally view the same sex couple and family just as valid? I have equated and justified same sex activity, that which does not have any potential to procreate, as similiar to heterosexual activity that also has no potential of procreating (i.e. oral sex, sex using a method of birth control) to be of a similar concept. After all, most of society does not devalue the heterosexual couple that participates in sexual activity that has no chance of procreating (i.e. when they habitually use a method of birth control or engage in a sex act that does not procreate). Should same sex sexual activity be viewed any differently, given that neither (in the aforementioned situation) has the intention of procreating? Do you all agree with my reasoning? Any further insight or views would be appreciated.
The world has done too well, IMO, in regards to procreating. From my perspective, more same sex couples are a good thing. They can adopt if they want kids.
I have no reason to be bothered with homosexuality any more than I have opinions on who lives in the snowy area and those who live in the desert. This was not directed to me. I’m sorry.
The world has done too well, IMO, in regards to procreating. From my perspective, more same sex couples are a good thing. They can adopt if they want kids.
`
They can also have their own children :) There are TONS of gay people who have produced their own biological offspring…...
I’m always a little gobsmacked when people talk about gay people as though they’re sterile! (not directing this at you in particular Tim, your comment just brought up the issue). It’s kind of amusing, given the number of gay people with their own biological kids :)
I’ve lost count of how many times i’ve heard the utterly ridiculous “homosexuality would lead to the end of the human race” ‘argument’. That, and the “if everyone were gay….” line, uttered by people suggesting that that’s why they consider homosexuality to be ‘immoral’......
to that, I always say “well, if everyone were female the human race would die out. Does that make being female ‘immoral’?? ”
It’s amazing how little actual thought some of the homophobes out there give their arguments :)
The world has done too well, IMO, in regards to procreating. From my perspective, more same sex couples are a good thing. They can adopt if they want kids.
`
They can also have their own children There are TONS of gay people who have produced their own biological offspring…...
I’m always a little gobsmacked when people talk about gay people as though they’re sterile! (not directing this at you in particular Tim, your comment just brought up the issue). It’s kind of amusing, given the number of gay people with their own biological kids
I’ve lost count of how many times i’ve heard the utterly ridiculous “homosexuality would lead to the end of the human race” ‘argument’. That, and the “if everyone were gay….” line, uttered by people suggesting that that’s why they consider homosexuality to be ‘immoral’......
to that, I always say “well, if everyone were female the human race would die out. Does that make being female ‘immoral’?? ”
`
yes it does…...original sin started with women, don’t ya know….Lilith, Adam’s first wife was a slut, even though there were no other men around.
My father, born in 1906, had his knuckles rapped by the Sister when he picked up a pencil with his left hand so he wrote right handed but did everything else with his left. I was left handed from birth. My father told my mother that when she brought me to school she should tell that teacher that she was NOT to try to change me nandedness, so I’m still left handed. Oh, and I LOVE math.
One of the major problems we are moving into is overpopulation so, as I see it, homosexuality is of great benefit to society.
One of the major problems we are moving into is overpopulation so, as I see it, homosexuality is of great benefit to society. :)
`
the thousands of gay people who have their own biological offspring would get a chuckle out of that :)
the only (potential) difference between the biological kids of hetero people and the biological kids of gay people is that the latter never involves any ‘accidents’ :)
Procreation is the occasional consequence of sexual activity, not its purpose.
I think the problem is with different meanings of “purpose”. I meant it as function, not as moral directive.
I think it’s sort of like the purpose of pheromones in sweat to attract others of the same species. Following your reasoning, we could say that we should not wash ourselves to remove the sweat. The purpose of sight is certainly not to read or hearing to listen to music. If there were no reason or motivation to engage in sexual activites other than to procreate, most animals would have become extinct. I believe the purpose of the pleasure is to get animals to engage in sexual activities, not specifically in those that always result in procreation. Since heterosexual copulation is a relatively easy method of achieving sexual satisfaction, and it does, at times, result in procreation, then continuation of the species is the result. However, just because that happens doesn’t limit sexual activity to that particular method.
Good explanation, but I believe it needs to be taken even further. The word “purpose” itself is actually meaningless with regard to biological evolution. Think about it: nothing in the natural world has a purpose because having a purpose implies that some agent imbued it with purpose. That’s just not how the world works. We tend to think in terms of form following function, but in evolutionary terms, it’s actually the other way around. First a random mutation is expressed as a change in some anatomical feature, then that feature may result in the organism being more fit as the result of basically stumbling on some way to use the changed anatomy in some way. It’s not as if “God” or “Mother Nature” purposed for that to happen—it just happened.
There are all kinds of examples of anatomical structures that were used in various different ways as they evolved over time. Which of these was the “true purpose”? None of them, of course!
So back to the original question—it is ludicrous to use an appeal to “purpose” to declare any human activity as being moral or immoral, especially when there are much better standards upon which to base such things.
Homosexual people are mostly smart or talented. This is probably because they are those who really express what they really feel. Generic online pharmacy
Aha, now it comes out. While all of his other responses were for up-to-date threads, magus searched out one that dealt with homosexuality, even though no longer active, to discuss. Apparently we have someone who’s strongly religious and feels uncomfortable about his orientation, but wants to make a positive comment about it.
Homosexual people are mostly smart or talented. This is probably because they are those who really express what they really feel.
Not all homosexuals are out of the closet and none would be the wiser. Therefore I suggest that your statement be modified to include “Self declared homosexuals…..............
And in general, I can agree with that. The homosexuals I have had the pleasure of meeting, were for the most part smart and artistic, with a few exceptions.
There are TONS of gay people who have produced their own biological offspring…...
