Skip to main content

Is it a choice?

Quite frankly, I spent way too much time and energy worrying about that question--"Is being homosexual a choice?".  But, this does comprise a large portion of the debate of the morality of homosexual behavior. Those who defend the "traditional family" argue that being gay is a choice and therefore those who are gay should simply choose to be straight instead.  Those who are gay, or support gay rights movements, argue that being gay is not a choice and therefore we can't just simply become straight or just start liking people of the opposite sex.  Perhaps one issue that might complicate the matter is bisexual people since they might at one point identify as straight and later as gay, or vice versa.

So, I spent a good portion of my "mormon life" convincing myself that the feelings I had for other men were merely a temptation and that I wasn't technically "gay" unless I yielded to those temptations, since being gay was a choice.  And, around the time I came to terms with my own homosexuality, I spent a great portion of my time trying to prove that my sexual orientation actually isn't a choice, that I was "born this way" and all of the other arguments given.  For the record, I do still believe that I was born gay just as much as any straight person was born straight.  But I don't think it matters anymore.

The question I have to ask is, if two people love each other, what business is it of anyone else's what type of activities they engage in together?  Why does it matter to Christian fundamentalists whether two people of the same sex sleep together in the same bed?  When I was dating Karen, I don't recall anyone having a debate over whether I was genuinely attracted to her due to biological reasons or whether I simply chose to be attracted to her.  I don't recall having been made to feel that I needed to prove that I was incapable of controlling my feelings for her.  (In fact, anyone that saw us together during any point of our pre-marriage courtship would be able to testify very confidently that I was most decidedly in control of my feelings for her and at no point in time let them get the best of me.)  So, why is it that gay people are made to feel that way?  Why does it matter whether these feelings are inborn?  Why does it matter whether they are mutable?  Why does it matter whether it's a choice?

All the time gay people choose to be in straight relationships--I did so myself.  And yet, they are never criticized for this (except for recently, I suppose I should mention that if it is a person who is out and still plans to marry heterosexually then they are likely to be criticized by some in the gay community) because this is believed to be the "right" thing to do.  And yet, the argument of "it's a choice" is what is used to oppose gay relationships.  If loving someone "by choice" is bad, then why is it encouraged in the case where that love is forced (or, at best, simply non-sexual) and discouraged in the case where it is genuine?  This is a double standard.

So, again, I say that if two people are in love they should be allowed to marry.  As far as I am aware, the question of whether the two members of a couple chose to be in love or were in love due to biological factors out of their control was never a criterion to determine their eligibility to marry each other, so why has it become so now?  I love Conrad dearly.  Did I choose to fall in love with him or was I just born predisposed to have fallen in love with him?  My answer is that it doesn't matter in the slightest.  The point is that I love him and he loves me.

Of all of my siblings and Karen's (and, just counting the ones that have been married, that's 16), I have never questioned anyone's choice in spouse.  I did have a strong personality clash with my sister's husband (they have since divorced, so I don't feel so bad about that now) but I never questioned her right to marry him.  I never asked any of these people whether they loved this person that they chose to spend the remainder of their life with nor, more particularly, whether that love was genuine due to their biological nature or superficial due to some immoral choice they had made.  So, I have come to the conclusion that asking the same question to someone who decides to enter a same-sex marriage is equally inappropriate and irrelevant.

Popular posts from this blog

What's a gainer?

If you haven't already done so, I would suggest reading my previous post before reading this one.  It's sort of an introduction and gives the motivation.  Also, by way of disclosure, this post is not sexually explicit but it does touch on the topic of sexuality and how that relates to the subject at hand.

So, what is a gainer?  I'll relate, as best I can, the experiences I have gone through myself to help answer the question.  I remember when I was a young boy--perhaps around 6 or 7--I would have various fantasies.  Not sexual fantasies, just daydreaming about hypothetical situations that I thought were interesting or entertaining.  I had many different fantasies.  Sometimes I would fantasize about becoming very muscular, sometimes about becoming very fat.  
These fantasies varied in degree of magnitude and the subject of the fantasy.  Sometimes I myself would change weight--I would become muscular or fat.  Other times, I would do something to make other people fat or musc…

The scientific method vs the religious method

I find it interesting when people cite the fact that science keeps changing as a reason to disbelieve it and to believe instead in the "eternal" doctrines taught by some church or other.  Let's examine why science keeps changing.  Here's the scientific method.

Develop a hypothesis (this means "have a belief").Design an experiment to test the hypothesis.Conduct the experiment.Determine whether the hypothesis is believable based on the results of the experiment. This is why science keeps changing--because people notice flaws in it and correct them.  People once thought the solar system was geocentric, but now know that it's heliocentric.  How did this happen?  By using the scientific method.  Scientists are willing to admit that they're wrong.  They're willing to give up a bad idea when they see evidence that it makes no sense.  Contrast this with the religious method (simplified version). Have a belief.Look for evidence to support that belief.Ignor…

Cancel the gym

After I went to the gym this morning, I pulled in to the McDonald's drive through.  While waiting for my food, I played out in my mind a possible conversation I might have with someone concerning just this.  In fact, I have had many real conversations of similar nature.
"How was your morning?"
"It was good.  I went to the gym.  Then I grabbed a late breakfast at McDonald's on my way to work."
"Won't that cancel out?"
"Cancel what?"
"Going to McDonald's after the gym.  Won't that undo all the work you just did?"

I understand the humor.  I laugh about it.  It's funny.  And I think humor is an important thing, and that we should all laugh a little bit more and be offended a little bit less.  And so I write this not up-in-arms, but in the attempts of perhaps reaching some of those who literally believe this line of reasoning.

To the person who asserts that eating "cancels out" going to the gym, I ask just this…