Additionally, I tend to think choice isn't involved much because if you're making a choice to change your orientation, it seems like there's a lot more going on there than just changing your orientation. I mean, if you suddenly find yourself attracted to someone from a gender that you don't usually respond to in that way (emotionally and physically), then you haven't made a choice; it just happened.

If you go through a process where you're weighing the options and you decide "Nope, I'm going to be [heterosexual/homosexual] instead now." The question is why? What else is happening in your life? I have known people who have tried to change and genuinely wanted to make a choice, but it was because something else was wrong. They hated themselves, or felt as if someone they loved hated them, or they suffered from various forms of depression. Being gay wasn't the problem. All these other issues were the problem, "being gay" just got stuck with the check and seemed like the easiest fix for them. I haven't met one person for whom it worked out long term. It's not to say that it doesn't happen, but I think the circumstances for that kind of lasting change of identity made by choice are pretty darn rare.

My own theory ties into what I previously said earlier about the black and white arguments. I feel that groups such as the religious considered it a choice and a sin, therefore harmful and bad. I think that the reaction by the gay community and the progressives was to argue from the other side of the spectrum that none of it was a choice and it wall all chemical or genetic or what have yout. And while I truly do believe, as stated earlier, that there are a section of the population that is completely, genetically gay, there is a larger segment of the population that could in theory exhibit gay behavior for the sheer pleasure of it, but remain totally hetero to meet societal, religous, and moral standards. So in the end, for some people, it might be a choice because their urges are vastly reduced compared to the 100% homosexual for nothing other than what seems to be peer pressure on a grand scale.

I just think you have to differentiate between one's inherent nature and some occasional or transient behavior they may engage in. Homosexuality is not defined by sexual acts. As I believe I have stated before, my daughter attended an all-girls college that supported, if not outright celebrated, lebianism. As she described it, there were plenty of girls who experimented with different lifestyle choices, some just for fun, some to fit in with a particular group. Those types of people are not "gay".

And IMO, that's one thing that muddies the waters in these discussions. Because there are people like the ones described above, or others who have psychological or emotional issues that will result in them being confused about their sexuality. I suspect that 95% of those who claim they have "cured their gay" fall into this category (i.e. they were not really gay to begin with).

And the other 5% are lying -- they haven't changed at all.

Since we had this discussion recently, I (vaguely) remember some of the reading I did for it (yes, I often do homework before coming to class). The gist of it seemed like there was a difference between "genetic gay" and "developmental gay" (and by developmental, I mean before birth). Modern research was downgrading the incidence of the former and focusing more on the latter. The end result was still the same--people are born with their orientation--it was a difference of exactly when the development occurred.

And, as most have said, whether it is or isn't is irrelevant, IMO. Even if it were completely a personal choice, that would not make any difference, since their is nothing inherently wrong with it.

I don't think it's a choice because I personally don't feel that anyone can pick and choose who they are attracted to. I could TRY to be attracted to a woman the same as I am a man, but it wouldn't be the same. My lesbian friend can TRY to be attracted to men, and indeed, tried in the past to please her family, but she is who she is. Bisexual people can and are attracted to both sexes. Everyone is different. I can't explain why I like to eat black forest cake--I just like it. I can pretend to NOT like it, but I'd be lying. I'd be lying if I said I liked to eat lamb--I don't like the taste, and I have no idea why. Sexuality, in my opinion, is the same--it is different for everyone.

Why should anyone have to try to justify who they are attracted to?

I also tend to think that heterosexual folks that claim to be 100% are quite possibly choosing to deny any kind of same-sex attraction. Who knows. (*ducks* :flowerforyou: )

I remember either watching or reading an interview with Natalie Portman saying something like this. I think she said something along the lines of "I wouldn't limit myself to only being attracted to one gender, when the possibility is out there." I can't remember her exact words.

The emotion is not a choice.

Acting on that emotion is.

Care to elaborate more?

I meant to post this reply before 5 pm PST for Evan, but I forgot. I saw the comment saying homosexuality itself is not a choice, but acting on it is. This is a typical Christian statement regarding homosexuality as a sin. "Being" homosexual is not a sin, but engaging in the sexual act is- in the eyes of many Christians. To this I say, "So what"? So, you think someone else is sinning. What makes some Christians think they can go around pointing fingers at others' sins? We all sin. How about lying, stealing, cheating, judging? ALL sins. What makes Christian thieves think they are morally superior to homosexuals? What makes Christians who constantly lie think they are "better" than hosexuals? What makes heterosexual cheating spouses think they have any right making comments about homosexuality being a sin?

Any Christian care to debate these points with me?

As your suggested debate is a topic other than 'Is Homosexuality a Choice' and restricted to Christians only you should start a new thread.

As your suggested debate is a topic other than 'Is Homosexuality a Choice' and restricted to Christians only you should start a new thread.

Meh. The threads/topics in here usually go in different directions. I wasn't saying ONLY Christians could respond, just wondering if any wanted to.

Here's the Salvation Army's position - and it's fairly typical of that point of view. Hate the sin, love the sinner, and all that.

"The Salvation Army does not consider same-sex orientation blameworthy in itself. Homosexual conduct, like heterosexual conduct, requires individual responsibility and must be guided by the light of scriptural teaching. Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life.”

Sorry--I can't "love" these sinners, no matter how much I am supposed to.