another long one =0)
Submitted by sally on April 8 2002 21:55:32
In reply to I can't disagree more submitted by Dakota on April 5 2002 17:27:13
|
If a person has ANY desire for someone of the same sex, they are at least partially homosexual. You must be kidding. What do you think all those men in prison are doing with their pretty boys? They desire sex and they don't care who it is with. In that instance they desire sex with other men and they act on that desire. But they are not homosexuals. I don't know anyone else who defines homosexuality as any person who has any desire for the same sex. Many people have desire for the same sex in some circumstances and then change their desire to opposite sex in other circumstances. I know people who have had homosexual sex and enjoyed it who are not homosexuals by any stretch of the imaginations. If you are recommending that people who are celibate call themselves heterosexual, or people that have fewer lustful thoughts about kids call themselves non-pedophiles, you are recommending that they lie to themselves. I'm not sure what I'm recommending. I don't see such a clear line between homosexuals and heterosexuals, I guess. I think we are all just sexual and we all have warped (fallen) tastes. It seems to me that the Bible speaks of homosexual activity not homosexual desire. By that I mean that it seems like it says that if two men lie together the way a man should lie with a woman then that is wrong. But it doesn't say that there is such an animal as a homosexual who is a completely different orientation from heterosexual as far as I can tell. I don't think that the man who has sex with a child is necessarily any more warped in his tastes than the man who engages in extra-marital affairs with women. (there are degrees to sin and it is more heinous to hurt a child, but I don't think the DESIRE for the illicit sex is any worse in one case than the other.) Further I think the man who desires to have sex with a little boy but refuses to act on that desire is not as sinful as the man who actually engages in extra-marital sex with a woman. I guess what I'm saying is that I think that any variation from legitimate sexual activity (between a man and wife) is sinful. And after that I think that the desire for illicit sex is sinful even if not acted on. But I don't see a whole lot of difference between desire for a dog or a boy or a same-sex partner or an opposite sex partner that one isn't married to. We, as a society put degrees on these that I don't think God did. People caught in adultery were to be stoned as surely as men lying with men or men practicing bestiality. I disagree totally, and so do most psychiatrists. Modern psychology never communicated it's view that it would be cool to lust after kids. On the contrary, I was brought up to believe this was only desired by the lowest of the low. I was taught by society, parents, friends, televion, EVERYONE, that I should grow up, fall in love, and marry a nice woman. On the one hand you go to the psychiatrists to make your point and on the other hand you claim that you have not bought into their lie that you cannot change. Even then... everyone you know might have made you feel lower than low but psychiatrists have for years told us all that are no more than animals who can go through behavior modification but who cannot really change at heart. Well, they are wrong. They are completely at odds with God's word. Then why did Adam mate with Eve and not the scores of animals around? There was no one there to "teach" him who he should desire and what he should think. God made the animals male and female and they reproduced after their own kind. They all were paraded in front of Adam and none was suitable. Do you think he couldn't see that they were male and female and he was just male? Of course God taught him who he was supposed to marry. This is why the church calls homosexuality a sin against nature. Totally disagree. Think of a sexual desire you are sure you have absolutely no interest in. Homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, whatever. Now can you honestly say to me that with "sustained effort" you could force yourself to desire it? And can you honestly say that with "sustained effort" you could force yourself to prefer anything over heterosexuality? This is not a rhetorical question. Please answer. Oh absolutely I think I could. Of course I understand that by saying that some of you will think I am a frustrated homosexual. Not so. I have no desire to have sex with women, children or animals but I am quite sure that I could learn to love any of those things. Would I PREFER them over sex with a man? I'm not sure if I would automatically "feel" that I preferred them. But I believe that I could love one way just as much as another and which one I PREFERRED would not be a physical matter but a matter of which one was socially acceptable or acceptable to God or perhaps which one was most risky and therefore appealing... I think we can train ourselves to physically enjoy just about anything and the battle of what we prefer is fought in the mind. I like ice cream quite a lot. But most days I prefer to eat skinless chicken breasts stir fried with broccoli and cauliflower rather than ice cream. Does this mean I like the taste of the chicken breasts better? I like it as much, only in a different way from the ice cream. But I am serious when I say PREFER the chicken to the ice cream. I love the taste, it satisfies my hunger, it is healthier for me... So do I love the chicken as much as the ice cream? Sure. I even love it more because I choose to love it more. I understand that what we have felt for most of our lives is hard to shake. I understand that it feels like we are terribly deprived when we are not allowed to have what tastes good to us. But we can retrain our tastes. We really can. And after a bit, it is not a matter of gritting our teeth and doing that which we believe is right but feels all wrong. After a while we really begin to enjoy that which we thought we hated. Here are just a few links of the many I had to choose from. But I don't think the testimonials will convince anyone. In our hearts we tend to believe our own emotions over other people's tales. But if we become convinced that God is able to give us beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning and the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness, then we will change. http://www.sbministries.org/tract.html http://www.exodusnorthamerica.org/testimonies/pastors/a0000638.html http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/9l4/9l4084.html Disagree. I'm not trying to beat you up here with disagreements. I just wish you could acknowledge that we are doing the best we can with what we are. It's frustrating to hear you say "you can change, you can change, you can change, when I know I can't. Well, I'm sorry. Perhaps my terminology is not the best. I think that you can change but more than that I think you can be changed. I think that God desires to change you. I'm sorry for making you think that I don't think you are doing your best. I think that you are doing admirably. And besides that it is not up to me to judge your efforts. I don't know how heavy your burden is and I don't know how much it has cost you to restrain yourself from acting on your desires. I am not trying to make your burden heavier by accusing you. I am not saying that you can change if you only want to or that you are not trying. I'm saying that I think you are wrong to believe that you can't change. I'm saying that I think your trying has been misdirected if it hasn't born fruit, I suppose. Whether we come to any agreement on this or not, I hope you know that I am not saying you have to carry your burden alone. I've been praying for you since I found this board, and I feel quite privileged to be allowed to do that. sally |
Follow ups: