Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
homosexuality-- biological?
hey guys i havent been here for a while so hopefully i will be welcomed again :)
neways i just read in my psychology book that researchers have found a correlation with biological factors and being homosexual
for instance, they found that when ppl are gay, they tended to be left-handed, had special fingerprints, and had a particualar gene that heterosexual ppl didnt have. Also, they found statistics with twins that led them to believe that when one identical twin is gay, there is a 50% chance the other too will be gay.
So yea this research baffled me because i have always been taught that being gay is a socially constructed condition, and that biology has no role.
Can someone plz give me more evidence and reason as to why our church doesnt think its a biologically- based condition?
neways i just read in my psychology book that researchers have found a correlation with biological factors and being homosexual
for instance, they found that when ppl are gay, they tended to be left-handed, had special fingerprints, and had a particualar gene that heterosexual ppl didnt have. Also, they found statistics with twins that led them to believe that when one identical twin is gay, there is a 50% chance the other too will be gay.
So yea this research baffled me because i have always been taught that being gay is a socially constructed condition, and that biology has no role.
Can someone plz give me more evidence and reason as to why our church doesnt think its a biologically- based condition?
Comments
hey guys i havent been here for a while so hopefully i will be welcomed again :)
neways i just read in my psychology book that researchers have found a correlation with biological factors and being homosexual
for instance, they found that when ppl are gay, they tended to be left-handed, had special fingerprints, and had a particualar gene that heterosexual ppl didnt have. Also, they found statistics with twins that led them to believe that when one identical twin is gay, there is a 50% chance the other too will be gay.
So yea this research baffled me because i have always been taught that being gay is a socially constructed condition, and that biology has no role.
Can someone plz give me more evidence and reason as to why our church doesnt think its a biologically- based condition?
Homosexuality might well be a combination of biological, as well as social factors. However, we must remember that even though people could argue that such behaviour is therefore "natural", this nature is fallen and mankind is prone to corruption and death.
Secondly we must remember that homosexuals, like all other people, have been given free will and reasoning faculties, which mean that - biological or not - they have a choice as to whether they act on their impulses.
There has also been shown that biological factors make people more prone to violence, theft, alcoholism, etc which are all sinful, but, while we should sympathise with such people because of the difficult position they're in, we nevertheless expect such people to control these tendencies and abide by the law - society's and God's.
so in that sense, what do we tell ppl when they ask us why we dont agree with homosexuality? I mean, aside from the evidence in the Bible, ppl are going to want to know why we dont agree with homosexuality and they'll ask us why we are discriminating against those who are 'born' gay.
So my question really is, what exactly does our church feel about biological factors in determining one's sexual orientation??
The fact of the matter is that being homosexual per se i.e. possessing a homosexual disposition, is not a sin. It is homosexual activity that constitutes sin. As His Grace Bishop Youssef says: "Our Coptic Orthodox Church does not condemn people but condemn their acts and would minister to homosexuals who wish to find release from this inclination." In this sense, being born homosexual or not, does not challenge our Church's stance on the issue.
Subsequent to the fall of Adam and Eve, disease and corruption was introduced into the nature of man. Hence, some people are born with aids, others are born with physical disabilities (maybe they're born blind), and others are born with pyschological disabilities. We can classify homosexuality as a psychological disease.
In this case, homosexuality is simply a Cross that a homosexual must bear. A homosexual is expected to live a celibate life, refusing his or her temptations.
I see no theological reason why a priest would insist on claiming that homosexuality is not biological. If he has engaged with modern science on the issue, and is making his arguments from a scientific point of view, then that is another issue. His Grace Bishop Youssef for example, states his opinion on the matter with reference to his understanding of the discoveries of scientific research:
"No one is born homosexual, nor is it something over which one has no control. It is a fact that our biological composition has a profound influence on our lives. Hormones have a great impact on our sexual drive. However, scientists have found that the hormonal level of male and female homosexuals to be the same as heterosexuals. There is no scientific evidence to support the notion that homosexuality is inherited. It is safe to say that one's genetic and biological makeup does indeed determine his or her sex, but not his or her sexual preference.
Homosexuality is a learned behavior. Homosexuals develop homosexuality by thinking positively of homosexual practices. Participating in such practices provides pleasure and consequently leads to acceptance and positive thoughts toward homosexuals."
I personally am not learned in this area of modern science to give you my judgment on the matter.
if u think about it...it does make sense...b/c God said that homosexuals will not enter heaven and yet on the other hand God wants everyone to go to heaven and He is a just GOd. so for HIm to create people that are Homosexuals disproves the fact that GOd is just b/c they have no chance of entering heaven
There is simply no theological relevance to this question...
If God says liars dont go to heaven, and i have a gene that causes me for some reason to ly (and a lot of ur character can be found in the genome!!!), does that make God unfair? No of course not!!!!
Everybody is called to strive against sin, no matter what the cause is! Everybody can be baptised, and everybody can receive the sacraments and grace, and become a new creation in Christ to trample on all sins. Everybody is called to put off the old man, and take on the new one!!
Besides, someone with homosexual feelings is not a sinner, its the one who does not strive against it and fulfills his/her lusts, which is the same with any sin basicaly, and all sinners dont go to heaven unless they repent.
so i really fail to see ur point here!!!!!
Forever,
Coptic Servent
The fact of the matter is that being homosexual per se i.e. possessing a homosexual disposition, is not a sin. It is homosexual activity that constitutes sin.
I'm sorry Iqbal, and please forgive me for you have helped me on many topics, but I must disagree on this point. If you have a homosexual desire, it is commiting adultry. Our Lord Jesus was talking about looking at woman lustfully in this quote:
"But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." -Matthew 5:28
I am not saying that if you have a homosexual gene (which is of now just a theory and is not definite) in you that it is a sin, but having the homosexual desire is a sin.
Please forgive me and pray for me,
Godhelpme3691
Lust is a sin, whether it be committed by a homosexual or a heterosexual; it is not unique to the homosexual disposition, so I fail to see the relevance that lust has to the issue of one possessing a specifically homosexual disposition. Lust is the active engagement of sexually related thoughts. One can be a homosexual, without engaging in any sort of homosexual activity, whether that be in thought or action.
As such being the case, consider one statistic;
Althougth idenitcal twins share 100% of their gentic structure, only 52% of twins, together, pursue a homosexual orientation. For the other 48%, only one twin was found to endorse in a homsexual relationship while the other had not. (Bailey and Pillard 1991)
While one may argue that due to societal homophobia and hostile expresssion, the other twin was inhibited from embracing his true inhernet aspiriations, one may invertedly counterargue that due to societal conditioning (stress, sexual relativism, the appease for sensual gratification, abuse...etc) the original twin felt compelled to purue a homosexual lifestyle.
Or, consider another proponent of homsexuality that can be brought into question. A study done by Dean Hamer, thought to clearly define homosexuality as genitically predominat. As aplogist Nick Pollard explicates best;
"It was the research of Dean Hamer and his team at the National Cancer Institute, published in 19936, that has led many people to assume that homosexuality is determined genetically - largely due to headlines in the popular press, such as Time magazine's front page feature, 'Born Gay: Science finds a genetic link.
Hamer studied 40 pairs of homosexual brothers. He observed that they had more homosexuals on the mother's side of their family than on the father's, and therefore investigated the X chromosome (which, in boys, is inherited from the mother and not the father).
They discovered that 33 of the 40 pairs of brothers shared markers on one part of the X chromosome - known as Xq28. This gave them 'a statistical confidence level of more than 99% that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.
"Once again, there are problems with this research. Neil Risch, a professor of biostatistics at Yale University (who developed the methods used by Hamer) questioned the statistical significance of the study in view of the small sample size. Others have found that they cannot replicate Hamer's results - even with larger sample groups. As George Rice said in the conclusion to his study of more homosexual brothers, 'We found no evidence of linkage of sexual orientation to Xq28.
But, even if we can take the research at face value, once again this does not mean that the homosexuality was directly caused by the genes. Indeed, the fact that 7 of Hamer's homosexual brothers did not share this gene shows that, in their case at least, their homosexuality could not have been determined by that gene."
There is also ample reason to believe that sexual orientation can very much be changed. While it is a popular idea that homosexuality is immaleable, one provacitive study defies this notion.
The very research psychologist, Geico Roberts Fitzer, who helped to eliminate homosexuality from the list of pychological disorders--who admantly opposed the idea that homsexuality could be a disease--endorsed new research that supported change in sexual orientation.
A new study, which he himself conducted, demonstrated that in 78% of males and 95% of females who had voluntarily undergone therapy, repoted change in sexuality. The study tested 143 men and 57 women. Now 66% of the men and 44% of the women achieved what he denoted as "good heterosexual functioning". This implies that these individuals remained heterosexuals and did not encounter any problems or discontentment in their "new" realtionships.
The public accused him as advocating a purley Chrisitan propaganda, due to this research. He retorted by explaining that he was actually an Athiest Jew.
His final written remarks were a such.
"My conclusion is that the door is open. I came to this study as a skeptic. I believed that a homesexual whether born or made is a homosexual and that to consider that orientation is a matter of choice was wrong. But the fact is, is that if I found even one person who could change, the door is open and a change in sexual orientation is possible." (Geico Roberts Fitzer-professor of psychology at Columbia univ)
Genetic causation for homosexuality is a type of Darwinian flawed theory that is based more on speculation than any concrete verification. Until clear and defintive evidence is provided, sexual orientation and it's link to genetics is a realtive propostion. Indeed "the door is open", our sexual orientation is prevelantly our choice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I leave you with this passage by the apostle Paul;
"Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,[a] nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. [shadow=gold,left] And such were some of you.[/shadow]But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Cor 6:11)
I hope this sheds some light on the situation at hand.
May God bless you
Another thing that is worth mentioning here is that we do not need to take things for granted whenever one claims something unless it is from a credible and trustworthy source.
Please pray for me? and GBU!
As you said we were first created in the image and likeness of God, who is perfect. But after Adam and Eve ate the tree in the Garden of Eden which they were not suppose to, our nature became corrupted; thus possibly the human nature commenced to originate that kind of disposition.
But then again after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ we got the potential to be like our original nature, which is, becoming children of God in other words being like His image and likeness.
It is like: “In John 1:42, "Jesus looked at him, and said, 'So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas'" (which means Peter). You are! You shall be! The actual and the possible! Realism and idealism! What is and what can be! And between the two, the Lord Jesus Christ. His presence is like a mighty bridge spanning the vast chasm between the actual and the potential.” For more read here. Btw that is just what I think and hence could be wrong.
Please pray for me? and GBU!
love lots,
CopticChica21