Skip to comments.Yes, gay is a choice, get over it.
Posted on 12/24/2012 8:14:04 AM PST by SeekAndFind
According to Peter Schmidt in the Chronicle of Higher Education, yet another individual working in higher education has been demolished for saying the wrong thing about homosexuality. The basis on which to define people as "anti-gay" has, however, taken a turn to the absurd (and eerie).
Unlike Angela McCaskill, who was nearly fired from Gallaudet University for signing a petition on gay marriage, Crystal Dixon of the University of Toledo was fired for writing an editorial in a local newspaper. She referred to Exodus and mentioned people who chose to leave the gay lifestyle.
For this column I will stick to the gay male angle, since I have but 1,200 words. Even if we accepted, for argument's sake (which I do not accept), that McCaskill was "anti-gay" because she signed a petition, the case against Dixon is based purely on wild assumptions about sex. To fire Dixon, one must accept that gay men cannot stop themselves from having anal sex or engaging in fellatio. Without anal sex or fellatio, it would seem that a gay couple is tough to distinguish from roommates who like to kiss each other once in a while.
These assumptions bestialize and infantilize gay men. While I have tired of penning editorials about gay controversies, the situation is dire. I feel compelled to write a column once again emphasizing a basic reality: gay sex is a choice. Nobody lacks the power to refrain from having gay sex. Get. Over. It.
Dixon said that gays had the choice to leave the lifestyle (in other words, stop engaging in anal sex and fellatio). According to her detractors, such was tantamount to being anti-gay. Her detractors are following the lead of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which lists "conversion therapy" as a hate crime.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Teenagers and young 20's are blood-doped by their own bodies. Powerfully directive hormones cloud their judgment and impulses, and their perception of reality is dimmed by what one writer once described as "a green haze of concupiscence."
Age 30 was merciful to me, personally, as the teens and 20s began to recede gently.
Sidebar/OT: A psych study done by a California university (I think it might have been Stanford) showed that teenaged girls are powerless to resist the hormonally-directed urge to pick up an unattended baby. Every. Single. One. of them went straight to the baby and picked it up as soon as she saw it. No exceptions, zero, none.
This particular hormone recedes and disappears by age 28. Women who care for others in their 30's are on autopilot or "muscle memory"; and in their 40's they snap out of it and, it is suggested, suddenly rediscover themselves, recover their inner Gloria Steinems (or Sarah Bernhardts) and bounce their comfortable, settled-in, and utterly surprised husbands out of the house.
Of course it’s sin, but as you allude, most people today don’t even know what sin is.
Fine, people experience strong urges. That does not change the fact that they decide to act on them, and it doesn’t change the fact that they often decide to put themselves in situations that stimulate the urges.
I am extremely dubious about any studies that purport to provide scientific information about women’s hormones over a period of time. It is impossible to assemble an experimental group of reasonable size, of women whose hormonal systems are a) testably alike and b)unaltered by externally-consumed hormones, and then to continue to measure the same women over many years.
Remember the “scientific proof” that women’s fertility peaks around age 27? It was all over the MSM. There was one study, in a group of fewer than 200 women of a plain-living German evangelical sect. The “proof” that their fertility, their physical capacity to conceive, declined was that the spacing of their children increased. There was no measure of the husbands’ fertility, or of the frequency and timing of intercourse, or of the effects of breastfeeding or nutrition ... just, “The first two babies were 18 months apart, but then there was 21 months before the third and 23 months before the 4th.” This was “proof” of a generalization about all women, everywhere, in all conditions.
In summary, if you have a link to the studies behind your statements about girls and women, I’d be interested in seeing them. However, even if every contention could be proved with rock-solid evidence, human being STILL choose their behaviors.
They do too!
(It’s not re-cycling!!!)
many homosexuals are addicts - sex addicts. The cure for addiction is abstinence.
“There is no in between”
(Its not re-cycling!!!)
Lol. I'm an unabashed sinner then.
This is the point I make whenever I'm involved in these kinds of discussions. Boil it down to the ONLY thing that defines a gay person - the sex act itself - and all of a sudden all of the high sounding moralistic arguments made by the pro gay people ring real hollow.
I wonder if she bouuht into eating feces and drinking urine at 71?
Gays can't change but hetero can? Hmmm. The hypocrisy of the left.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.