We recently discussed the Indian courts reinstating the criminalization of homosexuality in that country. Now, the Indian National League, a Muslim political party, has reportedly launched a public campaign calling for all homosexuals to be killed under the nation’s death penalty. The posters appearing around the country also claims that freedom of expression is being abused by gays and lesbians in advocating their cause. This story has appeared on a couple of gay rights sites covering India but has not appeared in the mainstream press.
The Muslim party is capital punishment is the only punishment fitting gays and lesbians and quotes the Quran that “if a society does not destroy the evils in it, it will inevitably bear its consequences.” Thus, they want to kill thousands of people for loving people of their own gender.
The attack on free speech is telling. There continues to be a fundamental disconnect in the understanding of free speech between the United States and various Muslim allies. For many years, I have been writing about the threat of an international blasphemy standard and the continuing rollback on free speech in the West. For recent columns, click here and here and here. The Obama Administration has supported effort to develop a standard for the criminalization of speech with Muslim countries who view criticism of Islam to be blasphemy and an abuse of free speech.
The fate of gays and lesbians in India remains an acute international concern. However, the continued advocacy of the death penalty for homosexuals in the name of faith reflects with growing divide with some of our closest allies.
DavidM:
I do not subscribe to the view that genetics alone determines sexual identity. I believe that science is gradually moving toward a recognition that sexual identity is a spectrum, ranging from strictly heterosexual to strictly homosexual. I would place fetishes in a different category altogether.
DavidM:
My comment will be directed in large part by the views of Aquinas, as restated by Finnis and other neo-Thomists.
DavidM:
We have been here before. You confuse sexual identity with sexual behavior. You may make choices with respect to the manner in which you express your sexuality, but you do not choose your sexual orientation any more than you choose the color of your eyes. You reject the view that homosexuality is primarily genetic because your religious views tell you that homosexual conduct is sinful. And I believe that your “natural law” defense of your position is flawed for reasons which I will soon be addressing in a separate comment.
Mike Appleton wrote: “You confuse sexual identity with sexual behavior.”
I still have a hard time with the idea that homosexual = same sex attraction. When I first studied this subject many years ago, homosexuality referred to same sex behavior. I apologize for the confusion because I do keep falling back into using the term to mean what it originally meant. What term am I suppose to use for referring to same sex behavior?
Mike Appleton wrote: “You may make choices with respect to the manner in which you express your sexuality, but you do not choose your sexual orientation any more than you choose the color of your eyes.”
I see it differently. I do not think sexual choice is completely divorced from attraction. Our sexuality is developed over years.
Consider the example of heterosexual men who spend time lusting after women. Such are usually are more prone toward adultery. They are more likely to be unable to control their sexual appetite. Furthermore, as they start to expand their horizons concerning sexual experience, they may try same sex partners and find it even more pleasurable. They may develop fetishes for hands, or feet, or other body parts. They may find attraction toward large breasts or small breasts, red heads or blonds. They may develop sexual attractions for inanimate objects, sex toys, and what not. It all starts with the choices they make to explore their sexuality. The same kind of thing happens with men who become pedophiles. It starts with that decision to look at and explore sexual desires in regards to younger and younger people, especially for those things considered taboo. Taboo is often a trigger for breaking through sexual plateaus.
Mike Appleton wrote: “You reject the view that homosexuality is primarily genetic because your religious views tell you that homosexual conduct is sinful. And I believe that your “natural law” defense of your position is flawed for reasons which I will soon be addressing in a separate comment.”
As much as I have posted on the homosexual issue on this blog, you have NEVER seen me use the word sinful in regards to homosexuality. It is really frustrating how everyone wants to claim that religion explains my views. Even though I am a theist, I am not religious and am not bound by any religious creeds that declare homosexuality to be sinful. That is nonsense, so please do not go down that rabbit trail.
The reason I don’t believe genetics is the primary factor for homosexuality is because, 1) all attempts to define it as genetic has failed, despite a lot of money and time being put into the effort, and 2) the identical twin studies prove that much more than genetics is involved. If genetics was the explanation, we would have a very strong concordance of homosexuality between identical twins. The scientific data shows that not to be the case. There is a stronger concordance than by chance alone, so genetics plays a role, but clearly genetics does not play a significant role or identical twins would face the same sexuality in life regardless of their choices.
I look forward to your comments about Natural Law. I hope you understand Natural Law in the tradition of Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, William Blackstone, and John Finnis. Another commentator here claimed to understand Natural Law Theory, but he clearly follows a different path of understanding with an overly strong emphasis on the views of Thomas Hobbes.
davidm2575: Sorry to disappoint you but your comment is filled with self contradictions. Try again please.:-). And do you mean,”My sexuality was chosen just like everyone else’S”?:-)
davidm2575: Did you choose your sexuality/your sexual lifestyle or were you born the way you are?
We can be honest and open about things here.:-)
Teji Malik wrote: “Did you choose your sexuality/your sexual lifestyle or were you born the way you are?”
My sexuality was chosen just like everyone else.
There are genetic factors, environmental factors, and cognitive factors at play with sexuality. A long series of choices about sex affect our sexuality, for both heterosexuals and homosexuals. Some people choose homosexuality very early in life, while others may be heterosexual until past 50 years of age before they decide to try homosexuality and from then on decide they prefer that form of sexuality. Some people decide to regularly engage in both homosexual and heterosexual behavior throughout their life. Some people choose to be celibate. Some people choose to have multiple partners and multiple wives. Some people feel compelled to be sexual with children. Sexuality is a lot more complicated than how most people understand it.
DavidM:
The phrase “gay lifestyle” is not a synonym for “gay culture.” It is used rather to reinforce the false notion that homosexuality is a voluntarily adopted mode of living.
Mike Appleton wrote: “It is used rather to reinforce the false notion that homosexuality is a voluntarily adopted mode of living.”
By the word “homosexuality,” do you mean sexual attraction / orientation, or do you mean same sex behavior?
I see the term “gay lifestyle” much like the term “healthy lifestyle.” Some people choose to live in the culture of a healthy lifestyle involving exercise and good food choices, while others people don’t care either way, and still another group of people claim they cannot live a healthy lifestyle because of their genetics, their innate metabolism, and the way they were born with an innate craving for food.
I fail to see anything inappropriate about the term “gay lifestyle.”
First things first, there is an old saying in India that the two opposite things can be true which relates to this topic. There are about 5 million Eunuchs/ transgender people in India who get special benefits from the government. They are called Hijras/Khusras in India. They are also known as the third gender/sex/ They were openly employed by the Muslim/Mughal emperors who ruled India for 400 years starting in the 15th century mainly for fellatio, commonly known as BJ. The same was true in thousands of Hindu reigned princedoms. The Hijras also engage in sexual activities which is accepted and not punishable. One can read more about them via Google.
Many Muslim boys are circumcised in very rudimentary manners which result in cutting the tip of the penis. These poor boys are castrated because of this and/or given to the Hijras to do it in a ceremonial manner.
It is ironic to notice that the same religions who hired them for their own sexual pleasures want to execute their homosexual brethren and sistren to enjoy theirs’.
First, alain vanhorne’s rant should be accorded all of the credibility to which it is entitled. Second, as the push for equal rights for members of the LBGT community gains impetus around the world, we should expect the adoption of indefensible and increasingly desperate measures among opponents. Third, in discussing homosexuality, the phrase “gay lifestyle” is inappropriate because it is not, and is not intended to be, descriptive.
Mike Appleton wrote: “Third, in discussing homosexuality, the phrase “gay lifestyle” is inappropriate because it is not, and is not intended to be, descriptive.”
What? Are you saying that there is not a gay culture?
Zappas a good pick gene,…. Crazy….. Next they’ll ban homosexuals in the US ……
The depraved folk that hijack religion in order to espouse their own personal bigotries and hatreds can only succeed when those that claim to speak for “God” remain silent thus making a mockery of the very religion they claim to be leading.
Thanks for the Frank Zappa poem. Its priceless! India is a funny place. In many ways it is very free. To suggest all good people leave India on the first comment is playing into the loonies’ hands. They don’t own India & never will. I think one should be able to debate if homosexuality is a choice or an abberation or something else. Treating it as a crime is ignorant and cruel. Don’t confuse India with Saudi Arabia.
doglover
1, December 30, 2013
Do dogs discriminate when sniffing butts?
… Or humping legs?
annieofwi
1, December 30, 2013
What davidm2575 is saying is that there is no sin greater than that of man love…
… Choices davidm2575. Choices. You have ’em too. Like bearing false witness.
davidm2575
1, December 30, 2013
Define “seriously inappropriate sexual behavior”.
Is that like being caught with a “wide stance”?
alain vanhorne
1, December 30, 2013
If your story is correct about your brother and the hate and disgust is real, that should be about him…
… Not all blacks look the same.
.