Replies

I've never quite understood the battle over environmental vs. genetic causes of homosexuality. Especially troubling to me is the religious right's committment to the environmental model. I think it stems from the corrupting influence of arminian theology... I'll explain below. The environemental model is considered more of a "choice" somehow--but either one really denies the choice of ORIENTATION. As a human, I decide how to act, and whom to have sex with, my emotional desires notwithstanding.......however who I'm oriented desire sex with is based on many complex things--and the environmental model says how a child is raised is what determines that. Either one doesn't address whether a person consciously chooses to the homosexual orientation--and I think the evidence is that the orientation, at least initially, is not chosen.

Here's why, from a religious/biblical perspective, I think the environmental/genetic argument is a false one: Basic (non-arminian) Christian theology (Catholic and Protestant) accepts the idea of "original sin." Each person, as Psalm 51:5 says, is born, no really concieved, with a sin nature. Sin is a basic part (really a basic flaw) of our personality--ask any mother, how kids don't have to be taught to be bad--and also how some kids--in the same family, and same upbringing--misbehave more (and in different ways) than others.

When we are grown, we don't think in such categories--however its still true. We all have to struggle with doing right--and what tempts you severely, may not temp me at all--however I too have my own personal pattern of temptation.

The good news of Christianity is that Jesus will give us a new life (really His life inside us) and the inner strength to change how we live day to day. Without this new life, we will often just continue in the same destructive (usually downhill) patterns of behavior--a nature that we were born with.

Arminian theology--heavily influential in the religious right--denies the idea of original sin, saying sin is basically learned--and always due to our conscious choices. Most won't come out and put it that way--however that is the assumption.

As a classical Christian, I'm not troubled by the shakey assertions that homosexuality is genetically based. Its not now proven, but even it it were, so what? That doesn't make it right or healthy for society. I'm a "natural" adulterer...that doesn't legitimize me going bed-hopping with various women! My old sin nature is being overcome daily by the power of Jesus' life inside me--and He helps me Not to follow that inborn nature, and TO do what is good and right.

When Newt Gingrich was loudly derided for comparing homosexuality to alcoholism, there's a reason the Left shouted so shrilly: Such strikes at the heart of their argument. Their assumption is, if homosexuals can be shown to have been BORN gay, than by golly, you better not say homosexual behavior is morally wrong. Yet like alcoholism, which science does think may have some genetic links (since it does run in families), something that your born with does not mean its healthy or even morally neutral. We all choose how we act too, regardless of our inclinations--be they from how we were raised, or our genetic inheritance.

Sinners need a Savior, and if homosexuals prove they were sinners from birth, hey, Jesus saves.

Bump, bump, bump, and bump.

Shalom.

Arminian theology--heavily influential in the religious right--denies the idea of original sin, saying sin is basically learned--and always due to our conscious choices. Most won't come out and put it that way--however that is the assumption.

Agree with everything you say except this. The religious right knows that all men are basically fallen and sinful by nature.

It's the left that thinks that all evil men do is a result of environmental handicaps faced by these poor unfortunate victims.