Is having homosexual acts illegal in a country correct or incorrect?

[Lion_IRC]

…Here are the two positions i’m having difficulty deciding over:

• It Should Not be illegal: Homosexual acts should not be illegal as you can’t make every sin illegal. Homosexual acts are on a par with adultery in Gods eyes (i think). Therefore, if homosexual acts should be illegal then so should adultery …and every other sin for that matter. In which case, we’d all be in prison. Homosexuals in this sense should not be unfairly discriminated against over people who commit adultery in same sex relationships.
• It Should be illegal: Homosexual acts should be illegal because our children should not be subject to two same-sex individuals kissing in the street in front of them. We should allow children be children and protect them at a time in their life when they are still developing their own character and trying to understand their own sexuality.

Very interesting Op Harry123

I believe western society already has a plethora of justifiable and good legislation regulating the unacceptable (immoral) sexual behaviour of certain people. So there is no obvious secular reason why governments should “stay out” of people’s sex lives. There’s a ton of precedent for making laws that prevent XYZ.

Even if a certain type of sexual proclivity is perfectly ‘natural’, and loving and affectionate and consensual, our governments still (thankfully) make it illegal to do those acts in public. One only has to look at our pornography censorship laws to see that governments have a huge stake in controlling people’s sexual behavior.

Pet brothels for example are illegal in most - but not all - western democracies. Having sexual intercourse in public is banned in most countries.
…no matter how much the two people ‘love’ each other.

The sex act we call adultery (like most other forms of deceit) still attracts legal support for the victim in many civil law jurisdictions even if those remedies aren’t criminal sanctions. And the adulterer, perhaps a person “born with” hyper-sexuality, cannot plead a defense that their freedom of sexual expression is being discriminated against if the court grants the divorce application and awards custody to the other partner.

This argument isn’t about homosexual behaviour being a sin.
It’s about where lines are drawn in the sand.

 

[PelagiathePenit]

Inappropriate and wrong. Not everyone is Christian. Those are personal issues. How do you know for sure someone is engaging in homosexual behavior? If you are turned off by gay behavior then limit your exposure to certain types of people and media. I guess this maybe one of those things that are at best ignored.

 

[Sarcelle]

Yes I believe we can see more fully now the severe harm that these acts cause our society. Less than 100 years ago sodomy was illegal all over the world and universally understood to be both harmful and disordered, damaging to ones mental and physical health and damaging to society as a whole.

In such a short time these acts are now regarded as equal to the act that has the power to create a new human life.

A natural consequence of the contraceptive mentality when the procreative aspect of sex is divorced from the unitive aspect. Now sex, at first heterosexual sex, is now primarily just for pleasure. Once this idea is firmly established than it won’t take long for homosexual sex to be normalized.

I don’t think it is homosexual sex that heralds the beginning of the end. It is the contraceptive mentality that started it all.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

Inappropriate and wrong. Not everyone is Christian. Those are personal issues. How do you know for sure someone is engaging in homosexual behavior? If you are turned off by gay behavior then limit your exposure to certain types of people and media. I guess this maybe one of those things that are at best ignored.

Wow, then one would have to block out practically all the media 24/7 except for Christian stations because of persistent promotion and bias. I would really prefer not to hear about homosexuality at all, or even to have to write about it. It caused enough damage in my life just being around certain people, one of whom was a music teacher. I am turned off by the homosexual agenda that was stated as a manifesto 30 years ago by Erastes Pill and Marshall Kirk, “The Overhauling of Straight America”:

*"Where we talk is important. The visual media, film and television, are plainly the most powerful image-makers in Western civilization. The average American household watches over seven hours of TV daily. Those hours open up a gateway into the private world of straights, through which a Trojan horse might be passed. As far as desensitization is concerned, the medium is the message–of normalcy. So far, gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the battle to desensitize the mainstream.

Bit by bit over the past ten years, gay characters and gay themes have been introduced into TV programs and films (though often this has been done to achieve comedic and ridiculous affects). On the whole the impact has been encouraging. The prime-time presentation of Consenting Adults on a major network in 1985 is but one high-water mark in favorable media exposure of gay issues. But this should be just the beginning of a major publicity blitz by gay America."*

 

[PelagiathePenit]

Wow, then one would have to block out practically all the media 24/7 except for Christian stations because of persistent promotion and bias. I would really prefer not to hear about homosexuality at all, or even to have to write about it. It caused enough damage in my life just being around certain people, one of whom was a music teacher. I am turned off by the homosexual agenda that was stated as a manifesto 30 years ago by Erastes Pill and Marshall Kirk, “The Overhauling of Straight America”:

*"Where we talk is important. The visual media, film and television, are plainly the most powerful image-makers in Western civilization. The average American household watches over seven hours of TV daily. Those hours open up a gateway into the private world of straights, through which a Trojan horse might be passed. As far as desensitization is concerned, the medium is the message–of normalcy. So far, gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the battle to desensitize the mainstream.

Bit by bit over the past ten years, gay characters and gay themes have been introduced into TV programs and films (though often this has been done to achieve comedic and ridiculous affects). On the whole the impact has been encouraging. The prime-time presentation of Consenting Adults on a major network in 1985 is but one high-water mark in favorable media exposure of gay issues. But this should be just the beginning of a major publicity blitz by gay America."*

I really don’t know what to do about how the media chooses to promote the gay agenda. the media in general does not always present christian values. I would not expect them to either.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

I really don’t know what to do about how the media chooses to promote the gay agenda. the media in general does not always present christian values. I would not expect them to either.

Big money and clout are behind promoting the gay agenda. There used to be Christian programs on regular TV like Bishop Sheen. Once smut came in, values went out.

 

[Polycarp1]

How do you propose we deter people from doing sinful actions that are dangerous to society?

By doing exactly what the Church and the gospels tell us to do.

 

[Polycarp1]

Inappropriate and wrong. Not everyone is Christian. Those are personal issues. How do you know for sure someone is engaging in homosexual behavior? If you are turned off by gay behavior then limit your exposure to certain types of people and media. I guess this maybe one of those things that are at best ignored.

These may be personal issues as is all sinful behavior, but they can have eternal consequences. Do we stand by and watch some one put their eternal life at risk and write it off saying people have the right to go to hell if they want too? Its none of my concern. If someone wants to cross a river on thin ice lets just wave, smile and go about our business. Lets not say anything so we don’t hurt anyone’s sensibilities.

 

[PelagiathePenit]

These may be personal issues as is all sinful behavior, but they can have eternal consequences. Do we stand by and watch some one put their eternal life at risk and write it off saying people have the right to go to hell if they want too? Its none of my concern. If someone wants to cross a river on thin ice lets just wave, smile and go about our business. Lets not say anything so we don’t hurt anyone’s sensibilities.

I think a lot of people are aware homosexual behavior is not encouraged in the Bible. If someone chooses knowingly to live a sinful life that will lead them to hell, that is their choice. Just pray for them. I know someone who refuses to believe fornications is a sin. He knows the truth but rejects it. We had unfruitful argument pointing fingers at who is worse and justifying our sins. You can provide people with the truth about sin without pressure. Just pick the right circumstances to do so.

 

[Strydersroom]

I believe it is not up to anyone to judge, nor anyone else’s business what happens between two consenting adults in their bedrooms. Therefore, no sexual acts between the said adults, gay or straight, can ever become “illegal” as much as another person sees them as unnatural, immoral, or strange.

 

[PRmerger]

I believe it is not up to anyone to judge, nor anyone else’s business what happens between two consenting adults in their bedrooms.

So if someone did judge an act between 2 consenting adults as a perversion of God’s plan for sexuality, would you judge that person as doing something wrong?

 

[Strydersroom]

So if someone did judge an act between 2 consenting adults as a perversion of God’s plan for sexuality, would you judge that person as doing something wrong?

Of course people can and will judge/have any opinion they wish, but the topic is making it illegal, which will never and should never happen.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

A natural consequence of the contraceptive mentality when the procreative aspect of sex is divorced from the unitive aspect. Now sex, at first heterosexual sex, is now primarily just for pleasure. Once this idea is firmly established than it won’t take long for homosexual sex to be normalized.

I don’t think it is homosexual sex that heralds the beginning of the end. It is the contraceptive mentality that started it all.

Yes that’s a good point. It was said of contraception “when married couples have the right to behave like homosexuals, it follows that homosexuals will want the right to behave like married couples.”

 

[exnihilo]

I believe it is not up to anyone to judge, nor anyone else’s business what happens between two consenting adults in their bedrooms. Therefore, no sexual acts between the said adults, gay or straight, can ever become “illegal” as much as another person sees them as unnatural, immoral, or strange.

That is certainly not a legal principle in our system. If those consenting adults agreed that one would employ the other for $3 an hour that would be illegal. The reason it is illegal is some people think that is immoral. Based on party affiliation most active homosexuals think it is right to regulate that behavior. I’ve never encountered a halfway decent argument that justifies why homosexual sex is an exception.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

I believe it is not up to anyone to judge, nor anyone else’s business what happens between two consenting adults in their bedrooms. Therefore, no sexual acts between the said adults, gay or straight, can ever become “illegal” as much as another person sees them as unnatural, immoral, or strange.

I agree with you in the sense that the government should not invade people’s privacy with some reservations. As long as they are not abusing others, children, spouses, exploiting them, which would be violations against person and property, then consenting adults should be left alone.
The nanny state is already too much of a busy body, has overreached its power and influence. The US had no business in prohibiting the consumption of alcohol in the 1920’s. In fact the problem went underground and became worse, as it did with drugs.
This is the result of legislating morality which is not the function of government.

 

[Sarcelle]

I agree with you in the sense that the government should not invade people’s privacy with some reservations. As long as they are not abusing others, children, spouses, exploiting them, which would be violations against person and property, then consenting adults should be left alone.
The nanny state is already too much of a busy body, has overreached its power and influence. The US had no business in prohibiting the consumption of alcohol in the 1920’s. In fact the problem went underground and became worse, as it did with drugs.
This is the result of legislating morality which is not the function of government.

The government already legislates morality. After all there are laws against murder, stealing, fraud, bigamy and rape.

The question is how much of morality is the government allowed to legislate.

 

[PRmerger]

Of course people can and will judge/have any opinion they wish, but the topic is making it illegal, which will never and should never happen.

So I’m confused…

Are you saying that we can judge an action as being a sexual perversion?

Or that it’s not “up to us” to do so?

Because you just said this:

I believe it is not up to anyone to judge, nor anyone else’s business what happens between two consenting adults in their bedrooms.

 

[MatthewTrainor]

Ok, I think there should be some kind of perspective here.
Mt 7:1-3:

"Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?

Homosexual acts are morally the same as any other form fornication, in my opinion. The comparison of homosexual acts to adultery is a false one as adultery is primarily a violation of the marital oath of fidelity. Any laws that sanction sexual conduct between two people of the same sex should likewise sanction similar sexual conduct between unmarried people of the opposite sex. So if two twenty-something dudes hooking up for a night will result in a criminal prosecution then a similarly situated guy and girl hooking up should get the very same charges. Any other conclusion is just shameless hypocrisy.

For those concerned with “protecting children” from viewing homosexual activity, what exactly do you mean? If kids are being allowed to watch two people having full penetrative sex then I don’t care what their relative genders are, it needs to be stopped. The same can be said about excessive forms of PDA involving overt and prolonged groping, petting, slobbering etc.; boy-boy, girl-girl or girl-boy it doesn’t matter, get a room. But casual expressions of affection in public are a non-issue when it comes to protecting children. There are many cultures where two straight men will often greet each other with a hug and a kiss or walk down the street arm-in-arm and nobody bats an eye, but for some reason here in America if the same thing happens people freak out and start fainting, gasping and/or covering their kids’ eyes. People need to calm down.

I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that no jurisdiction in the United States will ever enforce criminal laws prohibiting fornication between two consenting adults of opposite sex, regardless of what the Supreme Court says. Most would agree that this would be a blatant violation of our basic human rights of free association, privacy etc. So, according to that old saying, “What’s good for the goose and gander is good for two ganders, or two gooses.” (something like that anyway)

 

[PRmerger]

Homosexual acts are morally the same as any other form fornication, in my opinion.

Yes.

The comparison of homosexual acts to adultery is a false one as adultery is primarily a violation of the marital oath of fidelity.

No.

It is, like homosexuality, a violation of God’s plan for sexuality.

 

[Strydersroom]

Ok, I think there should be some kind of perspective here.

Homosexual acts are morally the same as any other form fornication, in my opinion. The comparison of homosexual acts to adultery is a false one as adultery is primarily a violation of the marital oath of fidelity. Any laws that sanction sexual conduct between two people of the same sex should likewise sanction similar sexual conduct between unmarried people of the opposite sex. So if two twenty-something dudes hooking up for a night will result in a criminal prosecution then a similarly situated guy and girl hooking up should get the very same charges. Any other conclusion is just shameless hypocrisy.

For those concerned with “protecting children” from viewing homosexual activity, what exactly do you mean? If kids are being allowed to watch two people having full penetrative sex then I don’t care what their relative genders are, it needs to be stopped. The same can be said about excessive forms of PDA involving overt and prolonged groping, petting, slobbering etc.; boy-boy, girl-girl or girl-boy it doesn’t matter, get a room. But casual expressions of affection in public are a non-issue when it comes to protecting children. There are many cultures where two straight men will often greet each other with a hug and a kiss or walk down the street arm-in-arm and nobody bats an eye, but for some reason here in America if the same thing happens people freak out and start fainting, gasping and/or covering their kids’ eyes. People need to calm down.

I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that no jurisdiction in the United States will ever enforce criminal laws prohibiting fornication between two consenting adults of opposite sex, regardless of what the Supreme Court says. Most would agree that this would be a blatant violation of our basic human rights of free association, privacy etc. So, according to that old saying, “What’s good for the goose and gander is good for two ganders, or two gooses.” (something like that anyway)