It is a choice.

[changed]

Sorry, this OP was totally disorganized.
Long story short, I would like this thread to be about the agency of it all. It is a choice, everyone needs to know that.

You know it is from Satan if the argument is "you have no choice in the matter"... Only Satan would propogate the idea that we have no choice. That is afterall what the big war was over, Satan wants to take our choice away. Those who follow God know they have a choice though.

Read through the following links.

Born That Way? Facts and Fiction about Homosexuality

People Can Change - An alternative, healing response to unwanted homosexual desires

NARTH Home Page

Homosexuality and choice - Conservapedia


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Original OP
These are a few quotes I have recently read... thought I would pass it on. Please leave links/comments that support traditional families as you will.


A phenomenon well known to science and society- and proven every day in prison and other mono-sexual situations – those deprived of normal, healthy objects and outlets for their sexual desires frequently turn to available outlets, no matter how unhealthy or how unthinkable in a normal environment. ( Those supporting SSM are trying to change what our normal environment is. )

Pavlov proved that physical reactions can be disassociated from their original stimulus and re-associated with another stimulus.

People Can Change - An alternative, healing response to unwanted homosexual desires

NARTH Home Page

I think the Kinsey scale shows that the issue is not as black and white as you would seem to want to make it. The study suggested that sexuality was more of a spectrum of possibilities, that can change for people, in different degrees, over time or with different experiences, than a 'fact' that is unalterable.
The Kinsey Institute - Kinsey Sexuality Rating Scale [Research Program]


Isn't there an alcoholism gene? Scientists say so but say that it's never activated if you never have a drink...

If I wanted to impose my sense of righteousness on the world, I'd mandate Church as a requirement, compel people to tithe, set mandatory minimum temple attendance, require prayer and scripture reading, and institute a law against coffee and tea.I am a proponent of freedom then except when I in my best judgment believe that a certain course of action is dangerous enough to the individual or society that I think it's existence is a great threat to the freedoms I want to preserve.


voluntary sex between consenting adults outside of marriage should be criminalized. The burden to society and the destructive effects on our civilization brought about by decades of virtually unlimited sexual licentiousness are painfully obvious: more babies murdered each year than all the people murdered by Hitler in his entire horrible reign. Children raised in single parent homes without proper parental supervision, with a corresponding skyrocketing increase in gang membership and criminal activity. Less tolerance in society rather than more -- a greater polarization, not less. A society that has become far less civil, rather than more. Traffic in human slavery. The spread of horrible plagues with their attendant medical costs and care for their victims -- costs which must be paid by all of society, not just those who celebrate licentious behavior. Decadence in art and culture and a corresponding rise in illiteracy and ignorance. Addiction to destructive sexual behaviors, including the viewing of pornography.

We have declared that every child has a right to be raised in a family with a father and a mother. This is a fundamental human right, not to be lightly destroyed for the sake of your own sexual fantasies. It is a right as basic as any other right. We will continue to promote it and to promote legislation and even constitutional amendments to protect it, no matter how much the wicked, the licentious, or the oppressive may howl about it.

a must read
Homosexuality and The Church of Jesus Christ


Born That Way? Facts and Fiction about Homosexuality

Church Publications (HTML)


YouTube - YES on Proposition 8 (Prop 8) your rights

Bible on it
YouTube - Homosexuality is just plain wrong!

8 protestors
YouTube - Gay Marriage Mob Violently Attacks Elderly Woman
YouTube - Gay Activist Attacks Female Christian Missionary In SF
YouTube - Young people attacked while worshipping
YouTube - Radical Gays Storm Church!

It's judicial tyranny.
Tyranny - when a team of elitists overthrow the voice of the majority to compel them to act against their self-rule. Who rules us? Judges? Or the republic under which laws are enacted?

Mitt Romney responds to the ruling: “I believe marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman and the definition of marriage should be left to the people and not to activist courts.”
`
There is a funny notion amongst the gay rights folks that "civil rights" were something imposed by judicial fiat.
The reason for this funny - and mostly false - notion is obvious: It lends moral justification to current efforts by gay rights folks to utilize activist courts rather than the legislative process to foist same-sex marriage on the American people.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 "was a landmark piece of legislation in the United States that outlawed racial segregation in schools, public places, and employment." This act, of course, was made into law not by judicial activism (as Bardman and his fellows would have us believe), but by the legislative process that the Gay Rights folks so regularly eschew in favor of lawsuits that end up before judges who are politically sympathetic to the gay rights folks.

Same-Gender Attraction - LDS Newsroom

http://www.lds.org/topics/pdf/GodLov..._04824_000.pdf

[Elphaba]

This is another post of mine that has turned into a book. If you don't want to bother reading the whole thing, please scroll down to the bottom and watch the video at the end.

Originally Posted by changed

These are a few quotes I have recently read... thought I would pass it on. Please leave links/comments that support traditional families as you will.

Most of changed's quotes come from this thread at MADB. There is nothing wrong with that, except they should be cited as such, or at least I would have done so, given the volatile nature of the subject.

The point is, these quotes are people's opinions, and nothing more.

A phenomenon well known to science and society- and proven every day in prison and other mono-sexual situations – those deprived of normal, healthy objects and outlets for their sexual desires frequently turn to available outlets, no matter how unhealthy or how unthinkable in a normal environment.

So, if you were deprived of your normal sexual outlet, you would turn gay?

Prisons are segregated by gender; thus, it is obvious why they have sex with the same gender. It does not mean their sexual orientation is homosexual, and in fact, as is the same for the general population, only about two to three percent of the prison population’s sexual orientation is homosexual.

Pavlov proved that physical reactions can be disassociated from their original stimulus and re-associated with another stimulus.

So, using Pavlov’s classical conditioning, you could become a homosexual?

People Can Change - An alternative, healing response to unwanted homosexual desires
NARTH Home Page

NARTH is the last place anyone should go for accurate information regarding homosexuality. It’s like going to an anti-Mormon site for accurate information about the Church.

I think the Kinsey scale shows that the issue is not as black and white as you would seem to want to make it. The study suggested that sexuality was more of a spectrum of possibilities, that can change for people, in different degrees, over time or with different experiences, than a 'fact' that is unalterable.

This is not what Kinsey meant when he talked about people located on different points of the scale at different times in their lives. He was differentiating between sexual orientation and sexual experiences.

The scale builds into it an assumption that some heterosexual individuals may experiment one or even several times with someone of the same sex.

That does not mean the person is homosexual, or that the person’s inherent sexuality will move up or down the scale.

Additionally, it means many of these people are actually bi-sexual. The Kinsey Institute - Sexuality Information Links - FAQ - Kinsey Study Data [Related Resources]

However, those on opposite ends of the scale are either homosexual or heterosexual. That doesn’t change.

Finally, the methodology Kinsey used to create the scale has been criticized many times, and is considered unusable by many scientists. I admit, however, I don’t know how prevalent this is. I know in the total of two human sexuality courses I've had, Kinsey was considered a groundbreaker, but newer data and methodologies had replaced his.

Question: Where do you fit on the Kinsey scale?

Isn't there an alcoholism gene? Scientists say so but say that it's never activated if you never have a drink…

There are many studies in the works about the genetic aspect of alcoholism, and it’s far more complicated than just one gene. As far as being activated by one drink, that’s ludicrous.

If I wanted to impose my sense of righteousness on the world,>snip< .I am a proponent of freedom then except when I in my best judgment believe that a certain course of action is dangerous enough to the individual or society that I think it's existence is a great threat to the freedoms I want to preserve.

Oh, the irony.

We have declared that every child has a right to be raised in a family with a father and a mother. >snip<

As I’ve said many times before, I assume this poster has already adopted children who have been floundering in foster homes, as I assume s/he believes they deserve to be raised in a family with a father and a mother as well.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 "was a landmark piece of legislation in the United States that outlawed racial segregation in schools, public places, and employment." This act, of course, was made into law not by judicial activism (as Bardman and his fellows would have us believe), but by the legislative process that the Gay Rights folks so regularly eschew in favor of lawsuits that end up before judges who are politically sympathetic to the gay rights folks.

First, gay rights activists do not eschew the legislative process; they welcome it. Iowa’s legislature recently passed legislation that essentially said not allowing same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. The major gay activists, who are determined to go through proper channels, are ecstatic about Iowa’s legislature’s actions.

Second, while it is true this Civil Rights Act was created by the legislative process, it is disingenuous to intimate judicial review had no part in its creation. Prior case law set the precedents that would enable the Civil Rights Act to be implemented. Additionally, the drafters of the act purposely included language that allowed for judicial review:

SEC. 603. Any department or agency action taken pursuant to section 602 shall be subject to such judicial review as may otherwise be provided by law for similar action taken by such department or agency on other grounds. In the case of action, not otherwise subject to judicial review, terminating or refusing to grant or to continue financial assistance upon a finding of failure to comply with any requirement imposed pursuant to section 602, any person aggrieved (including any State or political subdivision thereof and any agency of either) may obtain judicial review of such action in accordance with section 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act, and such action shall not be deemed committed to unreviewable agency discretion within the meaning of that section

Same-Gender Attraction - LDS Newsroom

It’s unfortunate you didn’t just quote this article, and leave it at that. It’s a comprehensive response to same-sex attraction that shows compassion for members who are gay, but also firmly states the Church’s position. It involves none of the gay bashing you’ve quoted above.

http://www.lds.org/topics/pdf/GodLovethHisChildren_04824_000.pdf

I’ve never seen this booklet before, but with a quick read, I thought it was excellent. Everyone should read it as an example of how to approach same-sex attraction issues in the Church. It was especially sensitive to people who are gay in the Church.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Why, why, why must there be these incessant posts detailing every bad thing that can be said about people who are homosexual? They are two percent of the population who behave no better, or worse, than the 98 percent of heterosexuals in our country.

Even Church officials acknowledge some people are born gay. Why not follow your Church’s officials’ advice, and treat them with respect, instead of constantly demonizing them?

YouTube - Ellen DeGeneres Discusses The Recent Tragic Death

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by changed

YouTube - Gay Activist Attacks Female Christian Missionary In SF
YouTube - Young people attacked while worshipping
YouTube - Radical Gays Storm Church!

These videos are outrageous. The behavior exhibited by the gay activists is inexcusable. I don’t blame anyone for being angry at these people.

The following are also some examples of inexcusable behavior:

January, 2008, three gay men were attacked in the privacy of their dwelling by an angry mob who had days before threatened them if they did not leave the community in Mandeville, Jamaica. According to reports, two men were hospitalised, one with serious injuries, while another man is still missing and feared dead.

February 2008, Brazilian gay rights activist Alexandre Peixe dos Santos was attacked and beaten at the Sao Paulo's Gay Pride Association offices in Brazil. Activists estimate that more than 2,680 gay people were murdered in Brazil between 1980 and 2006.

February 2008, transsexual Duanna Johnson was beaten by a police officer while she was held in the Shelby County Criminal Justice Center. Johnson said the officers reportedly called her a “faggot” and “he-she,” before and during the incident.

November 2008, she was found dead in the street, reportedly gunned down by three unknown individuals.

February 12, 2008, Lawrence "Larry" King, a 15 year old junior highschool student was shot by a classmate at E.O. Green School in Oxnard, California. He was taken off life support after doctors declared him brain dead on February 15. According to Associated Press reports, "prosecutors have charged a 14-year-old classmate with premeditated murder with hate-crime and firearm-use enhancements".

In Rochester, New York on March 16, 2008 police say Lance Neve was beaten unconscious because Neve was gay. A man attacked Neve at a bar leaving him with a fractured skull, and a broken nose.

In Baltimore County, Maryland on May 29, 2008 eighteen year old Steven Parrish—a member of the Young Swans subgroup of the Bloods—was murdered by Steven T. Hollis III and Juan L. Flythe after they found "gay messages" on his cell phone. They felt having a gay member would make their gang appear weak and that by killing Parrish they could prevent that perception.

25 July 2008, 18 year old Michael Causer was attacked by a group of men at a party in Liverpool, England[61] He later died from his injuries. It is alleged that he was killed because he was gay. The case continues.

September 7, 2008 - Tony Randolph Hunter, 27, and his partner were attacked and beaten near a gay bar in Washington DC. Hunter later died from his injuries on September 18th. Police are investigating it as a possible hate crime.

September 13, 2008 in Denver, Colorado 26 year old Nima Daivari was attacked by a man who called him faggot. The police that arrived on the scene refused to make a report of the attack.

September 15, 2008 - An elementary school bus driver was charged with leading a homophobic attack on a 10-year old student passenger. The boy was taunted by the driver who then encouraged other students to chase and beat the child.

October 23, 2008 - 23 year-old gay hairdresser, Daniel Jenkinson, was left covered in blood after a homophobic attack in a Preston club. His attacker – Neil Bibby, 22, of Bramble Court, Penwortham, Preston – was sentenced to 200 hours' unpaid work, a three-month weekend curfew, and ordered to pay £2,000 compensation by Preston Magistrates after he pleaded guilty to assault. Daniel was left needing facial reconstruction surgery and is "now frightened to go out in the city".

November 3, 2008 - Anji Dimitriou and Jane Currie were physically assaulted at an Oshawa, Ontario public school, while waiting to pick up their children. Mark Scott, the attacker, punched both women in the face, referring to them as "men," "**** dyke b****" and spitting in Dimitriou's face. He is in court in Jan. 2009, for two counts of assault causing bodily harm.

November 7, 2008 in Newton, NC the home of openly gay Melvin Whistlehunt was destroyed by arsonists. Investigators found homophobic graffiti spray painted on the back of the house.

November 14, 2008, transwoman Lateisha Green was shot and killed in Syracuse, NY because the alleged perpetrator thought she was gay. Local news media reported the incident with her legal name, Moses "Teish" Cannon.

December 7, 2008 Romel Sucuzhanya, a 31 year old straight Equadorean and his brother Jose, were attacked on a Brooklyn, New York street for appearing to be gay and for being Hispanic; they were walking arm-in-arm, which is normal for brothers in their culture. Romel later died from his injuries.

December 12, 2008 in Richmond, California a 28 year old lesbian was kidnapped and gang raped by four men who made homophobic remarks during the attack.

December 16, 2008 in Washington, DC Durval Martins, 35, was shot in the head and killed while walking home from a local gay bar. Police said Martins’ cell phone, cash, credit cards and jewelry were still in his possession.

December 26, 2008 in Indianapolis, Indiana, Avery Elzy and Michael Hunt, a gay couple, were killed in their home along with one of their three dogs. A twenty year old man, Christopher Conwell, was arrested on 31 December and admitted to the murders two weeks later.

December 27, 2008 in Dayton, Ohio 24 year old Nathan Runkle was brutally assaulted outside a gay nightclub.

February 15, 2009 in New York City Efosa Agbontaen and Branden McGillvery-Dummett were attacked by four young men with glass bottles and box cutters who used anti-gay slurs during the attack. Agbontaen and McGillvery-Dummett both required emergency room treatment for their injuries.

February 18, 2009 two men were arrested in Stroudsburg, PA for the stabbing death of gay veteran Michael Goucher

March 1, 2009 in Galveston, Texas three men entered Roberts Lafitte bar and attacked patrons with rocks. One of the victims, Marc Bosaw, was sent to the emergency room to have 12 staples in his head.

March 3, 2009 in Bickley, in the London Borough of Bromley 59 year old Gerry Edwards was stabbed to death by an assailant shouting homophobic abuse. His partner of over two decades, 56 year old Chris Bevan, was also stabbed and was left in a critical condition in hospital.

March 14, 2009 a gay couple leaving a concert in Newark, New Jersey were attacked by 15 teens. Josh Kehoe and Bobby Daniel Caldwell were called "faggots" and beaten. Caldwell suffered a broken jaw.

March 23, 2009 in Seaside, Oregon two gay men were attacked and left lying unconscious on a local beach. The men regained consciousness and were treated at a nearby hospital.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These violent attacks are only from the year 2008 to the present. It would be impossible to list all of them.

There are reasons people who are gay are furious. Focusing on their bad behavior, while ignoring the cold-blooded attacks, and murders, of gays is one of the reasons.

Elphaba

Violence against LGBT people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Heavenguard]

I don't think we can yet make blanket statements as why people are homosexual, but if people can hate themselves for being gay (because they are so rejected and demonized by society) to the point of suicide, I don't think anyone would choose it.

Edit: I'm not pro-gay rights, or whatever. I am pro-humanizing and understanding homosexuals. They are people too, and often they are good people. Homosexual acts are sins, yes, and so homosexuals have a greater inner-temptation to face than the heterosexual world. Rather than being slapped in the face and being called evil, sinners, wrong, abominations, etc, they rather need to be loved by the church first, and then taught that perhaps marriage is not a gift meant for them. Jesus ate and had fellowship with tax collectors and prostitutes, whose lifestyles were those of sin. But he loved them, rather than championing against them.

[Just_A_Guy]

Originally Posted by Elphaba

Second, while it is true this Civil Rights Act was created by the legislative process, it is disingenuous to intimate judicial review had no part in its creation. Prior case law set the precedents that would enable the Civil Rights Act to be implemented. Additionally, the drafters of the act purposely included language that allowed for judicial review:

I'll just point out that Section 603 is not talking about "Marbury v. Madison" judicial review, which gives courts the right to interpret statutes in light of the Constitution. Section 603 merely gives courts the right to review federal administrative actions taken pursuant to the Act, and this type of "judicial review" is pretty standard in both federal and state administrative law.

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by Just_A_Guy

I'll just point out that Section 603 is not talking about "Marbury v. Madison" judicial review, which gives courts the right to interpret statutes in light of the Constitution.

I understand the ramification of Marbury. But that is not the case law I am talking about.

I meant contemporary SCOTUS decisions such as Shelly v. Kramer (et al), Baily v. Patterson, and of course, Brown v. Board of Education. Without the precedents set in these cases, the precedent would have been from the like of Plessy v. Ferguson, the “separate but equal“ case.

I maintain that without these contemporary SCOTUS decisions, the Civil Rights Act’s detractors might have voted against it, comfortable it would not prevail in a judicial challenge.

Section 603 merely gives courts the right to review federal administrative actions taken pursuant to the Act,

thus my comment “Additionally, the drafters of the act purposely included language that allowed for judicial review.“

. . and this type of "judicial review" is pretty standard in both federal and state administrative law.

I did not know that, so thank you for that.

Elphaba

[changed]

People Can Change - An alternative, healing response to unwanted homosexual desires

People have changed, people can change. It is a choice. Everyone needs to know that it is a choice, that change is possible.

Homosexuality and choice - Conservapedia

[changed]

Originally Posted by Elphaba

This is another post of mine ...Elphaba

Elphaba, NArth is one side with one agenda, yours is the other side with another agenda. Each biased with agendas. No one can find out any truth anymore because nothing is published that does not have an agenda behind it.

The point is, for those who struggle with this, you can change. It might be hard, justlike it is hard for a drug attic to change, etc. You can change though, seek help, others have changed, you can too.

[cofchristcousin]

Originally Posted by changed

Elphaba, NArth is one side with one agenda, yours is the other side with another agenda. Each biased with agendas. No one can find out any truth anymore because nothing is published that does not have an agenda behind it.

The point is, for those who struggle with this, you can change. It might be hard, justlike it is hard for a drug attic to change, etc. You can change though, seek help, others have changed, you can too.

Is that your testimony? Serious question, I notice your user name is Changed.

[changed]

Originally Posted by cofchristcousin

Is that your testimony? Serious question, I notice your user name is Changed.

I have changed, the change that I underwent did not have to do with sexual orientation though... It translates though. Part of me needs to have a firm testimony that yes, people can change. On deep, emotional, physical, physiological levels they can change. If it is impossible for people to change, then I have no hope.

There is a book "Love Languages" that suggests that long marriage are only formed when someone "chooses" to love the other person as animal crush/instinct type of love does not last longer than 2 years. Most people who have been married for more than two years are then in a relashonship of choice rather than one of instinct. Nothing wrong with this. Do you want someone to be with you because their hormones are acting up? Or do you want it to be a conscience choice? People who are only in love with your body are not in love with you at all. They will not really know you, your personality, your character etc... this is not a meaningful relashonship. In short, the hormone love is selfish wanting personal gratification love, it is not love of the other person at all, it is love of sexual gratification.

Do you love the other person? or do you just love sex?

Real love is love for the person, not their body, not what sensations they can give you.

Chapter 3: Falling in love
Pg 30: the average life span of a romantic obsession is two years.

“in love” state gives us the illusion that we have an intimate relationship. The “in love” experience should not be called love
1. falling in love is not an act of the will or a conscious choice.
2. it is effortless, no discipline or conscious effort, instinctual animal nature, not selfless, no sacrifice, no thought or will in it.
3. one who is in love is not genuinely interested in fostering the personal growth of the other person. Our purpose is to terminate our own loneliness and ensure result through marriage – does not focus on our own growth or on the growth and development of the other person, instead feel like you are at the apex of life’s happiness and our only desire is to stay there….

We can recognize the “in-love” experience for what it was – a temporary emotional high, and now pursue “real love” with our spouse.
Real love – a love that grows out of reason and choice, (not instinct) effort, and discipline. We choose to be kind, generous – this is real love.

Obviously there are different degrees to things. For those who cannot change their preference (and I say this haltingly because I think the vast majority of people can change) I believe chastity is the correct option. What is wrong with being chaste? Plenty of nuns etc. have lived life without sex. Anyone can do this.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
on another thread, someone is discussing this article:
SquareTwo Articles: Sherlock-Marriage

I'll pass it along too.