Homo sexuality: Nature or nurture?

[santaro75]

Lets hear it…do you think homosexuals are born that way or do they become that way?

 

[santaro75]

I vote that they are born that way. This is based on conversations i have had with many homosexuals at a time when i lived amongst many of them.

I also contrast this to my own experience of being heterosexual. I never chose it. one day i just really thought women were incredibly beautiful and i wanted to impress them!!!

 

[Scottgun]

Don’t care. And wisely, the Church doesn’t really care about the why’s either. The only thing that matters is homosexual acts, whatever the explanation, are intrinsicly wrong.

 

[goofyjim]

My vote is that the attraction is nature. One can nurture oneself away from the behavior though therefore making the acts intrinsically immoral. I never woke up and said I would decide to be homosexual or heterosexual. In fact despite all the pressures to do such I have only tried to foster the heterosexual side with no success as far as a committed relationship goes. So now I live singly and accept what life has given me. If one chooses to blame everything on the homosexual community in general they better tkae a look at some of the other sins out there.

 

[renee1258]

All my life as a female, “they” have been trying to teach me that being feminine/woman was a socially constructed belief. For example girls are taught to wear dresses and play with dolls, but the same group claims if you’re gay you were born that way. I know I was born a heterosexual, yet I do know many confused heterosexuals who have engaged in homosexual acts. I do believe some people are “born gay” in the sense they have no attraction to the opposite sex, as long as they accept I was “born straight” and I have an uncontrollable physiciological human want that makes me like men.

 

[carol_marie]

I think some are born with that tendency - just like some people are born with a greater likelyhood of becoming an alcoholic. But that doesn’t make it right.

But haven’t studies been done on identical twins - where one is gay an the other isn’t? What’s up with that?

Also, isn’t it true that the majority of women identifying themselves as lesbians suffered sexual abuse as children?

And don’t most gay men come from families where the father was either physically absent or emotionally very cold?

(Please correct me if any of what I’ve heard isn’t true.)

 

[renee1258]

I’ve heard those same studies. I don’t think there is just one reason why someone actually engages in a homosexual act or identifies themselves as being gay.

 

[Other_Eric]

It doesn’t matter whether or not the condition is the result of either nature or nurture. St. Paul records that the condition is divine punishment for the sin of idolatry. That should be enough for any of us. What is important is that the condition is disordered and its only possible expression is one of intrinsic evil.

 

[goofyjim]

It doesn’t matter whether or not the condition is the result of either nature or nurture. St. Paul records that the condition is divine punishment for the sin of idolatry. That should be enough for any of us. What is important is that the condition is disordered and its only possible expression is one of intrinsic evil.

I guess all those who rigidly practice celibacy with the condition are going to hell then? I would tend to disagree. You are no saint proclaiming this. You may be surprised to find who gets into heaven. The same feeling was directed towards prostitutes and tax collectors, but remember the Lord’s words of comfort.

 

[Other_Eric]

I guess all those who rigidly practice celibacy with the condition are going to hell then? I would tend to disagree. You are no saint proclaiming this. You may be surprised to find who gets into heaven. The same feeling was directed towards prostitutes and tax collectors, but remember the Lord’s words of comfort.

The vocation to celibacy requires that the individual so called relinquish the positive good of parenthood and family for the sake of the Kingdom of God. It is therefore inappropriate in the extreme to identify the sexual suppression of one with same-sex attractions with this way of life. Such an individual cannot make such a sacrifice because he has no positive good to offer God. For him it would be like “giving up” murder for Lent. Celibacy requires sacrifice. Sacrifice requires that some good be given up. In the absence of a good, there is no sacrifice and therefore no celibate vocation. Like attempts at so-called same-sex “marriage,” there is only a sick and twisted parody of a life lived in Christ.

 

[goofyjim]

The vocation to celibacy requires that the individual so called relinquish the positive good of parenthood and family for the sake of the Kingdom of God. It is therefore inappropriate in the extreme to identify the sexual suppression of one with same-sex attractions with this way of life. Such an individual cannot make such a sacrifice because he has no positive good to offer God. For him it would be like “giving up” murder for Lent. Celibacy requires sacrifice. Sacrifice requires that some good be given up. In the absence of a good, there is no sacrifice and therefore no celibate vocation. Like attempts at so-called same-sex “marriage,” there is only a sick and twisted parody of a life lived in Christ.

You are missing the point altogether. If one is tempted homosexually all his life yet does not give in he is quite capable of attaining the heavenly kingdom just like the rest of us. To exclude someone from the kingdom based only on temptations is not Christian.

 

[Other_Eric]

This conversation is off the thread’s topic. Further, I have written nothing here about excluding someone from the Kingdom of God based solely on his temptations.

 

[Other_Eric]

You are missing the point altogether. If one is tempted homosexually all his life yet does not give in he is quite capable of attaining the heavenly kingdom just like the rest of us. To exclude someone from the kingdom based only on temptations is not Christian.

This conversation is off the thread’s topic. Further, I have written nothing here about excluding someone from the Kingdom of God based solely on his temptations.

 

[Riley259]

I think some are born with that tendency - just like some people are born with a greater likelyhood of becoming an alcoholic. But that doesn’t make it right.

But haven’t studies been done on identical twins - where one is gay an the other isn’t? What’s up with that?

Also, isn’t it true that the majority of women identifying themselves as lesbians suffered sexual abuse as children?

And don’t most gay men come from families where the father was either physically absent or emotionally very cold?

(Please correct me if any of what I’ve heard isn’t true.)

Yes to all of your questions. Please go to the NARTH website and review the works of Joseph Nicolosi and Richard Fitzgibbons for an explanation of the psycho-sexual basis for same-sex attractions. Indeed, some do have a predisposition to gender identity problems but if addressed early enough in life, it often can be overcome and the struggle and pain associated with same-sex attraction can be averted. Others have a powerful same-sex attraction but even some of those (30%) can experience successful heterosexual attractions and even become successfully married to a person of the opposite sex (ex., Steven Bennett). The genesis of homosexuality is complicated but the bottom line is that same-sexual relations are always wrong and sinful.

 

[joshua1]

To say nature is to imply that God made them that way, which doesnt make sense to me. For God is in complete control of nature. Especially when you look at Holy Scripture.
Leviticus 18: 22–You shall not lie with a male as with a woman: Such a thing is an abomination. (NAB)
The word abomination is a pretty strong word, implying God hates the very act or it is dreadful.
Now lets go to the book of Wisdom. Wisdom 11:24–For you love all things that are and loathe nothing that you have made. **For what you hated you would not have fasioned. **(NAB) Therefore, that says to me that God did not create anyone homosexual.

 

[Other_Eric]

To say nature is to imply that God made them that way, which doesnt make sense to me. For God is in complete control of nature. Especially when you look at Holy Scripture.
Leviticus 18: 22–You shall not lie with a male as with a woman: Such a thing is an abomination. (NAB)
The word abomination is a pretty strong word, implying God hates the very act or it is dreadful.
Now lets go to the book of Wisdom. Wisdom 11:24–For you love all things that are and loathe nothing that you have made. **For what you hated you would not have fasioned. **(NAB) Therefore, that says to me that God did not create anyone homosexual.

To my mind the etiological theories of NARTH are just about as persuasive as some of the biological or genetic theories that others may have. Personally, I would have absolutely no problem with affirming that same-sex attractions might have some genetic or “natural” component. Alcoholism and schizophrenia have both been shown to have genetic components so I don’t think it would be beyond the pale to suggest the same for same-sex attractions. If anything, I would welcome a discovery that would make the disorder more objectively discernable.

As for your scriptural exegesis, of that I cannot think much. As we know, people are born with any number of physical disorders such as Down’s Syndrome, diabetes, cleft palates or any one of a number of allergies. I don’t think that we can say of these disorders that they are not hated by God simply because they are found in nature. If I recall, Scripture also records that all of creation fell and became subject to disorder with Original Sin. Same-sex attractions might reasonably be said to be yet another one of these natural “malfunctions.”

Now, I suppose I must say here that the even if the condition of same-sex attractions has this “natural” component that it absolves those men and women subject to it of nothing. As I read the Scriptures, Church Fathers, Magisterial pronouncements and other authoritative works it seems that the Church has been calling them to correctly order their sexual appetite for nearly two thousand years. For a man so disordered to fail to work towards full heterosexual capacity can only be spiritual sloth, or worse, sinful presumption.

The clamoring for a genetic basis for the condition may very well be an attempt to provide a reason not to follow the path the Church has sketched out for them but this is not a scientific issue. Man has a long history of looking to science to absolve himself of whatever sins he happens to fancy at the moment. The point is that regardless of its origin, there is healing to be had for those who seek it. All it required for the healing on one woman in scripture was to reach out and touch the hem of Christ’s robe to be healed. Those with same-sex attractions are called to do the same. Reach for Christ and be healed. The only alternative is to hold back and remain mired in sexual dysfunction.

 

[Riley259]

To my mind the etiological theories of NARTH are just about as persuasive as some of the biological or genetic theories that others may have. Personally, I would have absolutely no problem with affirming that same-sex attractions might have some genetic or “natural” component. Alcoholism and schizophrenia have both been shown to have genetic components so I don’t think it would be beyond the pale to suggest the same for same-sex attractions. If anything, I would welcome a discovery that would make the disorder more objectively discernable.

As for your scriptural exegesis, of that I cannot think much. As we know, people are born with any number of physical disorders such as Down’s Syndrome, diabetes, cleft palates or any one of a number of allergies. I don’t think that we can say of these disorders that they are not hated by God simply because they are found in nature. If I recall, Scripture also records that all of creation fell and became subject to disorder with Original Sin. Same-sex attractions might reasonably be said to be yet another one of these natural “malfunctions.”

Now, I suppose I must say here that the even if the condition of same-sex attractions has this “natural” component that it absolves those men and women subject to it of nothing. As I read the Scriptures, Church Fathers, Magisterial pronouncements and other authoritative works it seems that the Church has been calling them to correctly order their sexual appetite for nearly two thousand years. For a man so disordered to fail to work towards full heterosexual capacity can only be spiritual sloth, or worse, sinful presumption.

The clamoring for a genetic basis for the condition may very well be an attempt to provide a reason not to follow the path the Church has sketched out for them but this is not a scientific issue. Man has a long history of looking to science to absolve himself of whatever sins he happens to fancy at the moment. The point is that regardless of its origin, there is healing to be had for those who seek it. All it required for the healing on one woman in scripture was to reach out and touch the hem of Christ’s robe to be healed. Those with same-sex attractions are called to do the same. Reach for Christ and be healed. The only alternative is to hold back and remain mired in sexual dysfunction.

Very well said.

 

[mlchance]

The vocation to celibacy requires that the individual so called relinquish the positive good of parenthood and family for the sake of the Kingdom of God. It is therefore inappropriate in the extreme to identify the sexual suppression of one with same-sex attractions with this way of life.

Celibacy simply means not being married. A celibate gives up the good of marriage as a sacrifice. Any unmarried person, heterosexual or homosexual, must remain chaste. As the Church teaches us, “Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.”

To answer the question, there is no convincing evidence that homosexuality has a genetic cause. The bulk of the evidence shows that environment is the key, but not necessarily determining, factor. Since sexual orientation can be warped by environmental factors beyond the control of the person affected, it is not appropriate to talk about a homosexual orientation as being a choice.

Regardless of the cause (which need not be an either-or situation as the OP’s question implies), homosexual activity, indeed any sexual activity outside the bonds of a marriage between one man and his one wife, is immoral.

– Mark L. Chance.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Crumpy]

There was a similar thread and it had a link to a very interesting scientific explanation of sexual orientation

I suspect that the link was lost like so many other posts.

The gist of the article was that each person is born with 0 to 100 % inclination towards the same sex, which varies with the individual. Then, what happens is a result of the environment, which puts one closer or further from the homosexual attraction and life style.

I don’t think the scientific answer to this question is anywhere near being settled, although many people have firm answers, with only anecdotal support.

Scientifically, it may be difficult to prove it possible to change anyone’s orientation, either homosexual or heterosexual, to the opposite.

Whether the basis of sexual orientation is genetic, there still may be a drug (which would be the ideal thing for such a difficult problem) in the future to change one’s orientation. Do we have any drug to resolve any deviant behavior? Is there a drug to keep us from sinning?

Scripture says that we are to bear one another’s burdens. Failure to do so is a failure to live up to our calling. The judgmental remarks in this thread are off the topic.

 

[siamesecat]

Because sex for women is so entwined in feeling loved and emotions etc., I believe lesbianism in many cases can result from abuse…they just can’t feel comfortable in a sexual situation with a male again…in these cases I think they sometimes might be able to change, but I don’t know, as I’m not a lesbian. For gay men, though, it’s so inbred. It’s intensely physical, and I’m sure most straight guys can testify that it’d be pretty hard for them to not be attracted to women, or to be attracted to men. For such a biological desire that can be purely physical on the part of men, I have to believe it’s somehow inbred and unchangeable. I think molestation around the time of puberty could indeed influence it, as maybe somehow biologically the body gets confused and associates sex with males instead. But I bet the distant father thing could come from having a gay son, who isn’t good at sports or into more feminine things (this is not all gay boys, of course, just a percentage), and the father bawks and can’t relate. I see this with gay boys I know…the fathers withdraw more and more.