” not of a state of being.’
Actually, it is the state of being arousable by the same sex and not the opposite sex. It’s not a preference, it’s a response.
I don’t know about you, but I’ve had women I was very attracted to, who later, I didn’t find very attractive at all. Human attraction is a complicated thing—and the evidence is heavily in favor of enviromental factors and habits initially forming it, and also, subsequently feeding and/or changing it. Humans are not made of stone—they can and do change—and this is all that persons who formally performed sodomy, and now don’t, claim.
I really don’t understand the abosolutist dogmatism that says a person’s inner desires can never change—even if they are motivated to change.
The odd thing is, no one ever questions a visa-versa change in “orientation.” The sodomist Episcopal bishop for example has an ex-wife AND CHILDREN. He must have been able to um, perform, at one time heterosexually—impossible without desire—before he chose to follow (and feed) his desires the other direction.
Personally, I must have been born with a polygamist orientation—so society needs to make room for my having multiple super-model concubines...or wait, maybe morality and civilization help me to live happily otherwise.
Humans both follow, and feed, their desires—and desire is not fixed in cement—or there is no hope at all for any of us.
BS,
You put a mechanical stimulator on any healthy penis and no matter what the person claims their orientation to be they are going to become stiff and finish the deed.
Sexual orientation is a myth!
Hmm... Lets think about this. Is it cause? Or is it effect? Are you aroused because of the preference or is it your choice to be aroused?
Merely declaring it to be one way or another is meaningless. Moreover, we don't consider other compulsive behaviors with the same sanctity as we do "gayness." If I am compelled to count my steps everywhere I go, or constantly wash my hands, we call that a disorder. Why don't we call being compulsively attracted to the wrong gender a disorder (politics of course).
I wouldn't rely on the illusion of certainty about human behavior based on today's version of science. I think 5000 years of human experience is probably a better gauge on the normality of conduct as opposed to a full blown creation of the most suspect century in the history of humanity (20th). The 20th brought us National Socialism, Soviet style communism, the nanny state, "free" sex, the drug revolution, secular humanism, the unfettered right to abortion and the norming of perversions. Considering the death toll, I'll take the Spanish Inquisition any day.