YES! Hell yes! As a gay mormon man who has decided to remain a celibate member of the church for the sake of his family (most of whom don’t even know I’m gay), I wish there had been some miracle “Straight Baby Drug” when I was in the offing.
But I also wish the bishop who promised me that if I would serve a mission that God would fix me, had been less full of crap. Mission served –– still queer as a three-dollar bill.
As it is, I haven’t worn a seatbelt in over a year (just in case I get in a lucky accident), I take way more over-the-counter painkillers than are justified (making sure those kidneys are trashed in case something serious comes along), and cancer is a frequent matter of prayer for me (why does it always go to those who don’t want it?). Come on, Swine Flu!]]>
#34) @Tom: For someone who is comfortable with the language of genetics, you are surprisingly unimaginative when it comes to discussing the genetic ramifications / implications of homosexuality. In our current cultural milieu, romantic love enjoys a widespread and profound popularity… but it wasn’t always so — and is still not without exception. For a large part of the human experience, familial expectations and survival were the key drivers behind coupling and childbearing. In these situations, you didn’t have to fall in love — you just needed to successfully negotiate intercourse. So until very recently, homosexuality did not necessarily interfere with spreading one’s genetic code.
In fact, some have hypothesized that the genetic component of homosexuality protect younger male siblings from incurring the wrath of older, stronger brothers — thus allowing them to grow old enough to procreate. I could go on, of course, but won’t… the point is clear, I hope: I’m not at a genetic loss, just a cultural one. I live in a time when romantic love is the norm… so there is little or no support to sustain my wife and I in what would otherwise be an untenable relationship.
As for the religious perspective, I would have to concur… being gay is certainly a stumbling block in my pursuit of the standard. But I manage — and even thrive — just as so many others who have their own crosses to bear.
#38) @Nick: Thank you, and well-said.
#41) @Bret: I fear, sometimes, that I might take it too far… but I realize the difference between setting bones and futzing with a person’s genome. Of course, this unrighteous dominion (and it’s not a perfect parallel, but it works well enough) is not just found in medicine… but also in agriculture and other practices that insist on doing end-runs around the natural order instead of embracing it. It brings to mind a passage from a Hugh Nibley book I read 10 or 15 years ago that suggested that the sins of the people of Noah’s time was boasting that they didn’t need God to water their crops because they had invented/perfected irrigation. Such hubris… such short-sightedness… it’s apparent in so much we do as humans. It’s at the heart of our mortal condition, I guess.
#42) @Ben: “If we weren’t supposed to overcome these problems, God wouldn’t have allowed medicine to advance like it has.”
So I can surf porn on the net, engineer neurotoxins in my basement, bleed rivers dry, drive my car with abandon… any number of horrors, because God hasn’t stepped-in personally to circumvent our agency?
#46) @arj: Folic acid is a supplement that mothers eating a diverse and healthy diet wouldn’t need to take… so comparing a vitamin (or just living well) to doing something that would have to fundamentally alter a child’s genetic make-up — with numerous and unknowable consequences — is just plain silly.
#52) @Marcus: Female homosexuality is another matter entirely… and some studies suggest that latent female bisexuality may be fairly pervasive — which would allow environment to be a large determining factor. But I’m not an expert — merely an invested observer. For the record, though, it’s generally thought/advanced/said that around 5% of the male population is gay and 7% is lesbian… so it’s certainly perceived to be more prevalent.
Anyway… sorry about my hiatus. Was distracted.
For me, this is still not a question about homosexuality, but a question about hubris.]]>
garry finds a way around the Church’s prohibition on abortion!]]>
Please tell us you’re just a troll, and you don’t actually mean what you just said.]]>
if i were a woman and carrying a child that was certain to be homosexual and there was nothing that could be done, i think i would consider blowing myself up.]]>
We all need to be careful as outsiders, when we look at another couple’s marriage. What may appear as “successful” may not be at all.
I am not just an “outsider” to the successful marriages that I mentioned. Of course, I am not privy to every detail in anyone else’s marriages(not suggesting that!), but those people have discussed frankly their own challenges and triumphs. I have been made aware by their own disclosures, that the SSA individual in these marriages has made a conscious committment to put their spouse and their marriage vows above all other temptations or desires. I say that these marriages are successful because at this point they remain committed NOT because they don’t have struggles. I did not make that comment by my mere observations, but based on their own declarations. Of course, anything could change at any time and good marriages can go bad. That is true of any marriage, even between couples who are both extremely straight.]]>
If I had much self-respect before, I don’t think there’s much left now.
But believe me or not, as you choose.]]>