posted
I just want to say that I am floored at how respectful and civil this thread has been. It does my heart good! It restores my faith in humanity to be respectful despite strong differences.
I think the biggest part of marriage is the comfort level. Sex or no, without being comfortable around your partner the marriage won't last long... or if it does won't be very happy, imo.
I've said it before... the sex drive and whatever direction it is orientated is a basic biological instinct...like hunger or breathing. It cannot be changed. People can overcome the drive through will power, but that doesn't make them straight.
I find it oddly amusing and interesting (not in a bad way) how all these people and the government are debating what to do with me and other gay folk. It won't change what I do or how I live. I'll continue to do whatever I want... all that lacks is the recognition. Which would be nice, don't get me wrong... but my marriage to my eventual partner is between him and me, as we will be living with each other. We are still multiplying ourselves into oblivion... I don't think some gay folk living together will destroy the race.
Now if the debate was whether or not to kill me or put me in a concentration camp I might be a little more involved. Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I was asking how central you feel sex is to marriage--a vital component, without which a marriage will crumble, or something that, while important, is not essential. What made me think of the question was Porter's response to my question about whether a person was better off eternally single or eternally in a homosexual marriage (which I was asking because both are situations in which children would not result, and so a nuclear family would not be possible).
In answer to your question, yes, absolutely. If my wife couldn't have sex for some reason, I wouldn't even think twice about whether or not to stay. The sex, with us, is more the garnish than the meat of our relationship, if you know what I mean. Well, not the garnish--it isn't irrelevant. Maybe "side dish" would be a better analogy.
Now, that said, I don't know whether a romantic relationship can develop without sexual attraction or tension being an element. It never has for me. I'll have to think about that.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, Noemon, I asked because, in general, romance for my husband and I always has sexual undertones. It is VERY possible that I am missing out on a good part of marriage, that maybe romance can be non-sexual and mean something very special to a couple because of it, but that's not within my realm of experience.
posted
Relationships are based on sex...otherwise they are just friendships. You can't have a romantic relationship without sexual over or undertones. It's not bad...it's just how it is. It's good!
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think for Porter and I, sex is an extra cement that binds us together even closer than the closest of friends. It is a symbol of the intimacy we share in our lives, our minds, our hearts. It is also dang wonderful.
As for an LDS belief in sex after mortal life (after ressurrection) the only sex being had will be between those married for eternity who have done all that was required of them to be worthy of that blessing. ("That blessing" refers to "exaltation", not sex.) The most important component being a strong faith in Christ that motivates to action in following His example. We believe all will receive a ressurrection of varying degrees, but no other ressurrected body will be capable or desirous of sex. There will not be homosexual sex in the eternities, according to LDS doctrine.
Telp, I don't think we or the government are particularly interested in stopping you from doing these things. Firstly, that just wouldn't be right. Secondly, you as an individual are probably not harming anyone. Though it is true that the nation is in the midst of a pretty major debate about the official recognition thing. I personally am more concerned about societal trends and fashions.
Edit: Thanks Telp! You are awesome, you know that?
posted
I also cannot imagine a romantic relationship without a sexual component. I think it's probably possible, but I can't envision it in my mind.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I forgot about the snarkiness thing, sorry. It wasn't salient. I just found it very odd that bev wants Lalo to respect her beliefs. I actually think it is an unreasonable thing for her to want, and I was trying to express that in a lighthearted way.
I think all of humanity suffers from selfishness, and I'd be hard pressed to think of a sin that doesn't reflect selfishness at its core.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
OT: pooka -- do you ever check the email address you have in your profile? I've emailed you several times but never gotten a response.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pooka, I want everyone on earth to respect my beliefs. I will try to respect theirs even if they don't respect mine. I want all of us to see eye to eye. 'Tis my dream, my deepest longing....
I know you all aren't debating about stopping me or gay folk... I just find it amusing and facinating that so many people are talking about this issue. I think part of it is the selfish aspect just talked about... I'm an instant celebrity! Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Telp you were a celebrity on Hatrack the moment you walked in the door. I wish everyone could learn from your natural love of others, your easy-going nature, the way you don't let things bother you too much. You are an example to us all. Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the same way that Hatrack is blessed with some of the best examples of the Mormon faith, we've got some really stellar homosexuals, too. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Beverly, you mentioned something in the beginning of this thread that I think is very important and fearfully true. When you said that your daughter is under pressure to show as much of her mid-drift as she can get away with, you are more right than you will ever know. Magazines, television and movie stars, singers, etc. put this junk in our heads. Even scarier than promiscuity are things like sexual relations at an almost sickeningly young age (let alone premarital sex, which I know is against many a religion) and drug use. These are the really "harmful" trends.
The world tries to influence youth in many different ways, but is it better for them to learn to accept homosexuals rather than grow to fear or hate them?
It is the models that harm society, not the homosexuals.
On the briefly mentioned issue of gay and lesbian adoption, I did a college paper that researched both its pros and cons. I came to the conclusion that at the end of the day, when all is said and done, it is in the best interests of the child to have a family (while unconventional, still people who love you) rather than reside in an orphanage without a parental figurehead. Like abortion, however, this is one of those issues that deserve respect and reflection from every side.
While I sound pretty far left on the political/moral spectrum, I am mostly playing devil's advocate. I tend to be very conflicted about controversial issues and often wonder how some people can have such a strong specific, single view of an issue. I chose to respond here because gay/lesbian adoption is one issue where my opinion does not waver, sorry that's a bit off topic though.
Take care all, Cyth
Posts: 117 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll go ahead and ask a question -- why is it referred to as either homosexual or gay/lesbian? Doesn't gay mean homosexual? Why not just use the term gay?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: The world tries to influence youth in many different ways, but is it better for them to learn to accept homosexuals rather than grow to fear or hate them?
I will do everything in my power to teach my children and others not to fear or hate those with different sexual orientation. I will not, however, teach anyone that I condone same-gender sexual relations in any form just as I will not condone extra-marital sexual relations in any form.
On the issue of adoption, I am torn. I want kids to have families, stable, good ones. Homosexual couples can provide that in part, but I also want children to be raised to seek to be heterosexual they are capable of it. Parents have *such* a powerful effect on their children. It is amazing, astounding. And I think far more of us are capable of bisexuality than we realize.
posted
Porter, I'm just adding my speculations... the term homosexual includes women and men, wheras gay could only be taken to refer to men in some instances. Does that make sense?
Posts: 117 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know what I love about this place? Half the time, when we discuss contentious topics, we degenerate into love fests intead of flame wars. Right on! Make love, not war!
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
She's actually an old-timer under a new name. I saw her in chat last night. She is waaaay before my time.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gay can be used in reference to all things homosexual but is most often used to reference homosexual men.
Lesbian is applied strictly to women and will never be applied to homosexual men.
Homosexual is the more commonly accepted catch-all to include both homosexual men and lesbians - homosexual women.
Why did it evolve that way? I don't have a clue - but that's how my buddy and his gay peers use the terms. Actually, they use a lot more terms, but I'll refrain from posting them here.
As to homosexuality being fashionable, there is a trend among young women to be "fashionably bi" - although I rather doubt the same trend will ever apply to men in the same fashion.
posted
That's true Trevor, two women together is considered a "turn on" to guys. However, for girls (especially the younger generations) gay guy friends are in high demand.
Even though I'm not technically new, I still was hesitant to respond to this thread. I just can't help myself from joining debates...which gets me in a whole lot of trouble sometimes!
Posts: 117 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
But Homosexuality isn't a symptom of society declining. There are even worse threats to society no one is really paying attention to that should be addressed... Furthermore, I find the term alien opposite sex to be a little strange... I haven't even been in a relationship with a woman before and I'd know that just because it's 2 girls it doesn't mean it would be easy... Plus, there's a lot of problems that come from a person trying to be be heterosexual when they are not... It's bad for the woman who feels she isn't good enough to satisfy her man. It's bad for the man who doesn't feel like he is getting what he needs from the woman and bad for the children because they do not have stable and happy parents. The children, most of the time would know... That's why I can't condone men with homosexual tendancies marrying women. It's wrong. It's the worse possible way to handle things... You have to learn to understand just how miserable a person can be when they are fighting their homosexual tendancies. It would hurt society even more, like the AIDS crisis back in the 80s... Think of what it's like for some young man growing up in a small town hiding his gayness. He goes off to NY and discovers a CARNIVAL of CARNAL pleasures. He will go wild in the city and this leads to disease. Gayness doesn't need to be fought or prevented it needs to be understood. As long as people view it from a only heterosexuality is right perspective they might not understand it...
There are other ways to go about taking care of the family. That is with inclusion and not exclusion But, I do applaud the efforts here...
posted
I would suggest that a fundamental reason for the discussion on this topic being so civil is that an amazing level of maturity, restraint and equanimity is being demonstrated by those who are gay. I'm not sure I would be able to hold back in the face of some comments made so far (not that I think anyone is trying to be offensive at all, it's just that I think people can easily be inadvertantly highly insensitive / derogatory when discussing topics like this one).
Anyone, kudos to both sides for not mud-slinging. I haven't seen too many discussions like this on Hatrack over the years that have been focused on this particular topic. Posts: 2945 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I just want to say that I am floored at how respectful and civil this thread has been. It does my heart good! It restores my faith in humanity to be respectful despite strong differences.
You know, while I do think that Beverly, mph, pooka et al are being very cool, calm and collected I have to agree with Ethics Gradient that I think Karl Ed and Telperion are being stellar, and I think more calm then I would be in their situation.
Mph, one of your posts on the previous page actually slightly offended me (though I am sure that wasn't the intent), in terms of what you would 'do' about homosexuality.
I was wondering how you would feel if such a sentiment was couched in terms of your religion and directed at you - that is, if I was to say that I believe that the LDS faith is fundamentally immoral. I believe that by you having that faith you are going against God's will, and that I believe that you should not be allowed to practice that faith. And if you insist on practising it, it shouldn't be at a level equal to how other faiths are allowed to be practised.
I realise that you may well have had such emotions expressed to you in your life - but I would imagine that you would also dismiss those emotions as hurtful, and perhaps bigoted.
Why then is it considerd 'ok' to express those same emotions about homosexuality as long as it is done in a civil fashion?
(Two things - I'm not trying to assert that sexuality is the same thing as religion. For some people, I know they consider religion more fundamental, for others the converse may apply. I thought the comparison worked as I think the LDS faith is as much a part of you as being homosexual is a part of homosexual people. So any answers based on that premise (or on the 'but religion is constitutionally protected and homosexuality isn't') line aren't really what I'm asking for. Secondly - I am impressed at how this thread is going. Still, I think hurtful words couched in nice terms are still hurtful.)
posted
But Mr potato head was specifically asked what he would "do" about homosexuality. It's not like he brought it up himself.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
imogen -- I normally wouldn't have been so candid about my opninions (they are opinions, not just emotions, btw), but Karl specifically asked my opninion. So I shared it.
I would say that if somebody asks your opinion, especially if they know it is likely to be offensive, then it is socially acceptable to share it.
That said, I have to agree that Karl, Telp, etc. have been very patient and understanding.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: There are even worse threats to society no one is really paying attention to that should be addressed...
I am not sure this is true. I think we are far more concerned about other threats to society than we are about homosexuality. But this is such a sensitive issue that it needs the utmost care in discussion so that the two sides can understand each other and not be hurtful. It's kind of a special case. There is a lot of difference between saying "this is the worst problem facing society" and saying "this is not a problem at all for society." I think most who are concerned about homosexuality hover somewhere between.
quote: Furthermore, I find the term alien opposite sex to be a little strange... I
I think this sentiment strikes true for my husband but not necessarily for others. You see, he was raised in a family of all boys with a mother who is not a typical female. He has always found girls "scary". So when he wonders what the reasons for same-gender relationships are, it makes sense to him that they are going into "safe ground" and avoiding that oh-so-scary opposite sex.
quote: That's why I can't condone men with homosexual tendancies marrying women. It's wrong. It's the worse possible way to handle things...
Hopefully no one feels forced. Hopefully if someone is trying to downplay their same-sex attraction and amplify their opposite-sex attraction they are doing it because they want to, they believe it is important rather than because people don't accept them or are pressuring them to. I hope that if I have a child who struggles with that they won't do so just to try and please me. That would make me sad.
quote: Gayness doesn't need to be fought or prevented it needs to be understood. As long as people view it from a only heterosexuality is right perspective they might not understand it...
I would like to understand it better. I hope that others who feel it is wrong also try. That is the only way to avoid blind prejudice. Too many of my faith just avoid it all together, don't try to understand, many of their statements are without compassion or sensitivity.
But we also can't abandon our beliefs. They are sacred to us, and forcing us to abandon them is at least as bad as trying to force someone not to be gay.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: You know, while I do think that Beverly, mph, pooka et al are being very cool, calm and collected I have to agree with Ethics Gradient that I think Karl Ed and Telperion are being stellar, and I think more calm then I would be in their situation.
Mph, one of your posts on the previous page actually slightly offended me (though I am sure that wasn't the intent), in terms of what you would 'do' about homosexuality.
That is one of the reasons I think it is so important to have these civil discussions. It gives us an opportunity to learn when we are being offensive and understand a POV different from ours.
So a big thanks to KarlEd, Telperion, Synesthesia and others for being so gracious.
quote: I was wondering how you would feel if such a sentiment was couched in terms of your religion and directed at you - that is, if I was to say that I believe that the LDS faith is fundamentally immoral.
That's easy. It's done all the time. Just check out threads about baptism for the dead.
Some handled the criticism gracefully. Others didn't. But even those who didn't were not "offended", just couldn't understand why the practice bothered anyone.
posted
mph - I do appreciate that you were asked, and were responding, not volunteering. I just - well, it just squicks me, and I was trying to explain how it squicks me. Would you not be offended if you asked someone what they thought about your religion and they told you my answer?
I'm not sure if I wouldn't be.
(Woah. Way too many double negatives).
Beverley - I have to say I like the distinction you are making between having beliefs and enforcing those beliefs in a legal manner. And I do agree, forcing you not to have the beliefs you do would be just as bad as forcing homosexual people not to be homosexual.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Why then is it considerd 'ok' to express those same emotions about homosexuality
If you say that it's not OK for each side to share its feelings, you are saying that there's no point in trying to undertand each other anymore.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Would you not be offended if you asked someone what they thought about your religion and they told you my answer?
If I asked someone their honest opinion about my religion and they answered that they thought it was evil, a twisting of God's will and that they wished there were no Mormon's at all, I would say, "Whoa. Sorry you feel that way." But it would be kinda silly for me to be upset since I asked.
There are people who feel that way, though. Religious sects that dedicate time to preach lies about us, spreading hate, fear and mistrust.
My best friend growing up got a lot of that in her chruch. Her mother pointed a finger at me and said, "YOU BELONG TO THE CHURCH OF THE DEVIL!!!"
I said nothing. I thought she was a bit nuts though.
posted
imogen -- Yes, I understand how what I said could be offensive. I can't imagine how I could put my opinions in a manner that would not offend somebody.
I know they are offensive, but that doesn't change my view as to what is right and what is wrong.
But even while you might find my views offensive, hopefully you don't find me offensive.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
kisses to you all![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
