Boy Being Raised as a Girl Fails

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Zappers, Feb 10, 2000.

  1. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    TS,

    What I'm trying to say is this....that I do not believe it is RIGHT or logical according to my faith to believe that just because society has labeled me a heterosexual or that I choose to be one, that it is ok for me or anyone else to arbitrarily label homosexual sex as something deviant. It's no more deviant than a lot of things that I do every day, and am trying to CHANGE MY BEHAVIOR IN LIGHT OF MY NEW PERCEPTIONS. And guess what? It works. Did I say I was perfect? No. Did I say I was trying to quit copping out, to bust all of my own paradigms all to hell and back, and to actually try to understand for once and try to make changes for the better? Yes.

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Also, I just thought that it was relevant that Flash came flat out and admitted to me today that the only reason that she wouldn't be with a man is because she doesn't WANT TO. Those are her exact words. THAT IS A CHOICE. I told her thanks for finally admitting it. That's the only point that I'm trying to make here. It's a choice.

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. truestory Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Lori,

    So, if others, "they" (emphasis added) consider homosexuality to be sexually deviant behavior, what does that have to do with me or Boris or our argument that homosexuality is just one of a number of natural forms of sexuality?

    I don't WANT to be with a woman, Lori. However, it's not a choice that I'm making... Being with a woman is not a viable option for me... not because I have a choice which I'm turning down, but because it is not part of MY natural sexuality. It is for others, however.

    Therefore, if someone is lesbian in their natural sexuality, being with a man would not be a viable option for them either. Hence, they would not WANT to be with a man.

    Believe it or not, there are many people who are naturally sexually attracted to only one gender. Most of the time, it is the opposite gender. Sometimes it is the same gender. Other times, people are strongly attracted to both genders.

    PS - I'm not "calling" you anything.

    [This message has been edited by truestory (edited February 11, 2000).]

    [This message has been edited by truestory (edited February 11, 2000).]
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Ok TS,

    I'm really trying hard here....let's see if you understand it better if I use myself as an example. I seem to be "naturally" a slut, a nympho, whatever. I happen to be "naturally" inclined to screw anything that gets to close to me. So are you saying that it's ok according to God for me to do that? Just because I'm genetically programmed to somehow?????

    What you and Boris are saying equates to this in my mind...

    anyone born with good hand-eye coordination MUST become a baseball player.

    anyone born double jointed MUST join the circus.

    anyone born with a chemical imbalance that causes them to be irritable, it should be totally acceptible for them to be irritable with everyone.

    anyone born with big boobs has to be a stripper.

    anyone born with a sexual attraction to horses, should screw a horse, and don't try me here, or I'll post a link that will make you puke.


    And one more thing....dogs have also been known to hump on my leg. Do you have a "gene" for that?

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.
     
  8. Boris Senior Member Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,052
    Lori,

    What I and truestory are saying, is:

    - if someone is born a human being, they shouldn't be FORCED to trot on all fours like a horse

    - someone with bad hand-eye coordination shouldn't be FORCED to become a baseball player

    - if someone is born with any size of boobs, they shouldn't be FORCED to work as anything

    - if someone is born a heterosexual, they shouldn't be FORCED into homosexual relationships

    As for animal sexuality, perhaps you could explain how rats "choose" their sexual preference?

    ------------------
    I am; therefore I think.
     
  9. tablariddim forexU2 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,795
    Lori,
    everbody has a unique, natural sexual orientation, whether it's hetero', gay, bi, or whatever.
    Now how they want to exercise their option to partake of the carnal delights available to them, is entirely their choice.

    They can either explore their sexuality, fully and to the max, or they can merely dabble. They can choose to change their own sexuality or they can choose to do whatever it is they do in moderation, the choice is pretty large.
    Is this what you're basically saying? 'cause I think this is what TS and Boris are trying to say as well.

    ...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!





    ------------------
    "The crows are already stoned", he said.
    With a look of dispassion on his sad face.
     
  10. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    YES HONEY, THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!! IT'S A CHOICE, A CHOICE, A CHOICE!!!! THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING!!!! EUREKA!

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.
     
  11. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    TS,

    Does Boris' answer work for you????

    Boris,

    I don't think that anyone should be "forced" to do anything. I think that is always futile at best. Change or decision making should come only through understanding. Lots of people just don't WANT to understand. All I'm trying to argue here is that it is absolutely ridiculous for anyone to claim that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a man and a woman to have a great sexual relationship simply because of how they are "made", unless they are made without sex organs, or even influenced by their environment. I'm not saying that there are not physical or mental or emotional problems, differences, hang-ups, fears, preferences, whatever that may make it a DIFFICULT thing, because it isn't easy, hey, even for us heterosexuals huh? BUT it's NOT impossible at all.

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.
     
  12. truestory Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Lori,

    No. It would not be "impossible" for me, as a natural heterosexual, to merely engage in a sexual act with another female. However, given my natural sexuality, which I would have to first "deny" it would certainly be "unloving" of myself and the other person and "unnatural" for me to do so. (Not to mention revulsive).

    In the same light, it would not be "impossible" for a natural homosexual man to merely engage in a sexual act with a female. However, given his natural sexuality, which he would first have to "deny" it would certainly be "unloving" of himself and the other person and "unnatural" for him to do so. (Not to mention revulsive).

    Got to go...

    I'll get back to you as to whether Boris' answers work for me.


    [This message has been edited by truestory (edited February 11, 2000).]
     
  13. Boris Senior Member Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,052
    Lori,

    truestory summed it up nicely. Of course, people can be coerced or coerce themselves into all kinds of behavior. Somewhere, you said that you give head. Does that mean that having a choice between do and don't, you actually prefer "do"? (be honest with yourself, now...) As I mentioned somewhere else, with a great deal of "persuasion" and "support", a person may be "changed" into walking on hands instead of feet. But that wouldn't be natural, would it?

    And regardless of coersion, people's sexual orientation does not change. There are many known cases of mature married people finally having a "break-through" and realizing they have been repressing their homosexuality all their life. Through social and religious pressure, these particular people find themselves late in life walking on hands instead of feet. Just goes to show you that even a lifetime of re-education and religion does not change a person's sexuality.

    ------------------
    I am; therefore I think.
     
  14. truestory Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Lori,

    There seem to be two different discussions going on here. One deals with sexuality with respect to natural human conditions and how people might or might not use their human sexuality outside the concept of God and the other deals with sexuality with respect to living in right relationships through love as taught by Jesus Christ. I will focus on the latter.

    In the context of sexuality with respect to living in right relationships through love as Jesus Christ taught, my answer to your above question is: No, I am not saying that it is OK according to God for anyone to screw anything that gets close to them. For a person who is "wired" the way you describe yourself to be, there are "options" which you need to consider given your natural sexuality. Within the context of your relationship with Jesus Christ, you will be shown the right way of living in right relationships through love.

    However, Lori, everyone is not naturally "wired" as you are. A person who is wired in a way that causes them to only be sexually attracted to one gender does not have the same "options" as you have to consider, given their natural sexuality. If someone is not at all naturally attracted to the opposite gender, they cannot be forced to become heterosexual. (So, in this respect, I agree with Boris... you cannot force someone who does not naturally have good eye-hand coordination to become a baseball player). When someone is only sexually attracted to one gender, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual, within the context of their relationship with Jesus Christ, like you, they will be shown the right way of living in right relationships through love.



    [This message has been edited by truestory (edited February 12, 2000).]
     
  15. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    TS,

    I for one happen to know that NO ONE is WIRED. I'm assuming that you're not actually referring to us humans as nothing more than a breathing computer, garbage in, garbage out. So why don't you try to explain to me IN REAL TERMS, what you are trying to say. And please for crying out loud don't try to tell me it's magic again, or that we're just wired that way, it's getting real old.

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.
     
  16. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    You know what TS? I just realized something. If I were to accept what you are trying to say regarding this issue, then I would have to give up my faith. Issue being that ANYTHING we choose to do, any action or intention that we choose to do or entertain, is somehow "wired" or programmed into us, and is unchangeable. Because if that were true, being saved in Jesus Christ wouldn't work. What you are saying totally denies the underlying principle of faith that we are taught. So, I'm sorry, but I'm never going to accept that answer, and with good reason. And also, you basically answered your own question when you referred AGAIN to homosexuality as revolting to YOU personally. I don't think for ONE MINUTE that that has ANYTHING to do with some genetic predetermination, and I'm not trying to be flippant or judgemental when I say, that I don't really think that you guys have given this issue a lot of thought.

    There is absolutely no reason to believe that we are inherently "at the mercy of" our "natural" sexual desires any more than any of our other "natural" desires. Just because someone has a "natural" desire to have sex with a person of the same gender, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do according to OUR faith. Just like because someone has a "natural" desire to lash out like a big mean asshole when someone hurts their feelings or screws them over (which I think it's safe to say that we ALL have THAT natural desire), it's still NOT the right thing to do according to our faith. Now I know that we are not perfect, none of us, not one. And I also know that we are ALL subject to given "natural" desires that are in reality NO GOOD for us or God or anyone else besides maybe Satan, so what does that mean to you? Why in the blankity are you arbitrarily choosing this ONE thing to pick out of the rest and make an exception for it? I think I know. Cause you have a conflict, in that you have known gay people, and they are not anymore twisted, diabolical, or crazy than the whole lot of us, and you don't want to admit that what they are doing is sinful. No, on second thought, that's not it exactly. The reason why you WANT to believe that it's some "magic" thing that happens to people, or that you have to be "wired" a certain way is easy to understand. It's because you think of it as revolting yourself. But I happen to know that it's not any more revolting than a lot of other things that people "get used to" or choose to take pleasure in. It's a matter of perspective, of perception, not "wires". And TS, perspectives and perceptions change all the time. YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THAT FIRST HAND. Or are you trying to tell me that your perceptions haven't done a 180 like mine have upon being born again???? Listen, I know gay people that have had much better, and more close to the "ideal" relationships that I'm talking about than heterosexuals do. That's NOT what I'm arguing here. The quality of said relationship on an emotional level. I think that the ideal regarding the emotionality, trust, respect, and all of that is the same no matter what type of relationship you're talking about. But the fact remains, that sex, from the biological aspect, ISN'T IT FLIPPIN' OBVIOUS???? LOL!

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 14, 2000).]

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 14, 2000).]

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 14, 2000).]
     
  17. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Oh yea, and one more thing....I think that Mulder and Scully should get married in Roswell, and just do it already!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.
     
  18. truestory Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Lori,

    Hmmm... I don't know when I ever told you that anything was "majic"???

    As for using the word "wired", my intent was to emphasize that we are all different... We are not all "made" the same way as Lori... therefore, we do not all always face the same "choices" in this life. (We don't all have the same options. Some have no alternatives).

    You must admit that just as we are all similar in many respects, we are also all very different in other respects... (Thank God for individuality!)

    Thus, although we are all made in the image and likeness of God, we are all made (wired) differently in many respects, including our gender and sexuality (biological gender and sexuality being two disctinct concepts as far as I'm concerned).

    You have indicated that you consider homosexuality to be a sin within the framework of "OUR" faith, to which I must object. It seems that you consider homosexuality to be a sin within the framework of "your" faith. That's fine for you. However, it is not a matter of "my" faith in salvation through Jesus Christ that because someone was born as a specific gender, that they must only engage in sexual activity with someone of the same gender. It is a matter of my faith that we live in right relationships through love.

    In an attempt to emphasize the difference between gender and sexuality, I will one more time use an extreme but very real condition and refer to those who were born as hermaphrodites... Suppose for one moment that you were made (wired) as a hermaphrodite, please, Lori. Your gender could not possibly determine your sexuality.

    That is the whole point... Biological gender does not determine sexuality and it by no means defines one's faith in salvation through Jesus Christ.

    Just where would your sexuality fall within the framework of "your" faith if you had been "wired" as a hermaphrodite?




    [This message has been edited by truestory (edited February 14, 2000).]
     
  19. Lori Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    TS,

    I'm working on a response, but in the meantime, let me just ask you this....

    What did you think the first time you ever saw a man's penis? Like asthetically speaking?


    For that matter, what did you think about the whole concept of sexual intercourse with a man when you first found out what it was all about? Like when you were a kid and your parents or whoever told you about what sex was? Like asthetically speaking, what was your "mental" reaction?

    Oh, and do you think that there is some "internal predisposition" (otherwise known as magic) that makes a "heterosexual" redneck white girl puke at the thought of having sex with a black man?

    What about a big nose? Are there persons who are "internally magnatized" with a repulsion for big noses?

    What about the elephant man? If his thingy still worked, and for the sake of arguement assumed that it wasn't mis-shapen or the size of his right leg, do you think that anyone would be "internally wired" to have sex with him?

    Oh, and another question...what if someone is "wired" as you say, to only be sexually attracted to members of their own family? Sorry, but I called in sick from work yesterday, and unfortunately caught the Jerry Springer Show.

    And what does it say about someone's internal wiring, when the person that they have the most sex with is their own hand? Is there a "predisposition" to be attracted to your own hand?

    What about someone who is "wired" to want to have sex with animals? Is that ok with you too?

    I guess that what I'm trying to say is this...that these labels, this "magic" attraction/repulsion that you're trying so hard to buy into is nothing more than gender discrimination. Did you ever think of it this way?

    And last but not least, are you seriously trying to tell me that you believe that God gave a man his penis, with the intention that the man should stick it into someones ass? Same for lesbians, do you really think that God gave a woman her sex organ so that it may be licked, manipulated, and violated with various "man-made implements or fingers? Uh, sorry but no cigar.

    ------------------
    "Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

    I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 16, 2000).]

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 16, 2000).]

    [This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 16, 2000).]
     
  20. Peter Dolan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    113
    WOW! What a debate. I could throw a few "radical" theories into the pot, but I'll just stick in one and then run away before it really explodes. These aren't my personal views, but I've heard them expressed before. This theory holds that populations are self-regulated in total numbers by having members of its species be sexually oriented in such a way as to preclude reproduction. The benefit is that supposedly overpopulation is less likely to occur and that some "negative" traits aren't carried over into the next generation.(I did mention these were radical, didn't I?) Anyway, judging the world around us, I don't put too much stock into this one. Personally, I always thought the lemmings had a pretty effective means of population control; don't think it would go over to well with people though.
     
  21. 666 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    378
    Peter,

    I don't see it as radical!
    It's just the natural order, but it is also the natural order for us to try and find a way to beat it. Now I know this next part is not going to have anything to do with religion, but I'll try to link it any way. Nanotech is shaping up to promise much longer life spans and posibly even wipe out the notion of a life span, imortality (SP?). I think that this sort of eveoltotion will almost wipe out religion as we know it. If we don't die what need will there be for a heaven or? Of course this doesn't count out accidental death, but will almost do a way with it. Only quick and sudden death will kill. I call this evolotion becuase it is us who will spur our own evolotion into high gear by using this kind of tech. What sort of impact will it have on religion? Well I don't know for sure will just have to wait and see. Whats your take?

    ------------------
    All I know is what I understand. All I understand is what I know.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Peter Dolan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    113
    666, It's an interesting concept, an eternal life given to Man by Man and not by God. I believe if such were possible, religion would still be present as a set of morals to live by if nothing else. The aspect of sex would change to one of "recreational pleasure" more so than that of procreation, since the need to replenish numbers wouldn't be as great unless there were a thermonuclear war or something as equally catastrophic befalling us. The psychological aspect would be the hardest part of it I think. Would you actually want to live in a physical body forever? The thing about religious belief as it relates to eternal life, is that you are finally free of a physical body; the spirit or "life force" is free to evolve whereas the physical body is pretty much a stagnant form. To look at it another way, I can maintain my 1987 Chevrolet forever, but I'm ready for the next model so to speak.
     
  23. 666 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    378
    Peter,

    i realy don't see what the problem with being in a body that can stay healthy and moble is. The evoltion of the soul can happen with or with out the body sence they are to seperate things. I accualy enjoy being here in this body. Ther are things that I may not particuraly like, but hey thats part of what makes life so interesting.

    ------------------
    All I know is what I understand. All I understand is what I know.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page