Jump to content

Homosexuality And The Progressive Christian


Recommended Posts

A part of me wonders what would happen if you were to convince such a person that it is okay to find your own way on some issues. A part of me wonders if this wouldn't be a disaster, because they are simply not capable of doing it.

 

I think there is some validity to this. I had an employee years ago whose husbands past was full of drug, alcohol and woman abuse . He found "religion" in a fundamental church and became a good husband and father. Without the church continually telling him how to live and the fear of hell, I am certain he would revert.

 

I guess I don't view the bible as right or wrong but rather it is the product of the people who wrote it and as such it reflects all the views and hangups of the day. Plus, especially the letters, we are hearing only one side of a conversation. How many times have I said to my children if you do this there will be hell to pay. Perhaps they were hanging with the wrong crowd or not studying. Imagine hearing "If you hang out with boys you will ruin your life" with our knowing that "those boys" were involved with drugs .

 

So my question is this... do we know something that they don't know? And if so, what is that thing that we know?

Even the most fundamental of bible readers filter what they pat attention to. In addition to the verses that condemn homosexuality the bible is equally clear in condemning wearing of different types of cloths and condoning slavery but these are always glossed over these days. In a sense what we choose to ignore is a product of our culture. Growing up I noticed this fluidity of views through the years. During confirmation I asked our Pastor why sins change and he didn't have an answer (at least that I can remember). Truth shouldn't change through the years. If it does then it is not truth.

 

steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard an interesting twist from a fundamentalist yesterday concerning homosexuality. He was arguing along the lines that homosexuality is just like paedophilia from the point of view that he thinks that both are natural, in that just as gays are attracted to the same sex, paedophiles are attracted to little children. The fact that homosexuality is natural is not an issue because he believes we are all born into sin and depraved, so it is no suprise that homosexuality is 'natural'.

 

Of course he couldn't see that apart from the sexual attraction, one situation involves love and relationship, the other involves only selfish sexual satisfaction. One has a future whilst the other can only cause harm. One is consensual and the other is abuse.

Edited by PaulS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

one situation involves love and relationship, the other involves only selfish sexual satisfaction

 

I'm not sure I'd agree with this. I think it's possible some grownups have feelings of love toward children. Of course, that doesn't change the fact that acting on those feelings hurts children, and that it is wrong to act on those feelings for that reason. But I don't think that would be pedophils who do not act on their sexual desires are bad people. I just think they are cursed with a sexual desire for children... a very heavy burden to bear. And I think they need our love, support, and encouragement to help them bear the burden of celibacy for a lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one situation involves love and relationship, the other involves only selfish sexual satisfaction

 

I'm not sure I'd agree with this. I think it's possible some grownups have feelings of love toward children. Of course, that doesn't change the fact that acting on those feelings hurts children, and that it is wrong to act on those feelings for that reason. But I don't think that would be pedophils who do not act on their sexual desires are bad people. I just think they are cursed with a sexual desire for children... a very heavy burden to bear. And I think they need our love, support, and encouragement to help them bear the burden of celibacy for a lifetime.

 

You do seem to agree partly Stopman, where you recognse that to act on this supposed feeling of love towards a child (presumably in a sexual way) indeed hurts the child. Subsequently such an act can only be seen as selfish because to actually love somebody would mean an intent NOT to hurt them (IMO).

 

That said, I think I understand what you are saying - that is that the paedophile who doesn't act on his or her natural urge, isn't neccessarily being a selfish person seeking only sexual satisfaction. If that is what you are saying - I agree.

 

In that case I would say it's not so much about what sexually excites a person but rather what they do sexually that can create the harm.

 

There's also the urge to commit murder that probably many of us have had, but because we don't follow through on that natural urge, we're not held to account.

 

Which is how homophobes seem to deal with the homosexual urges of gays - they expect the homosexual not to carry such urges through. Most of us here probably answer that by applying the harm test - homosexual sex between consenting adults is regarded by most of us as not harmful, so there is no need to call for the restraint of such natural inclinations.

Edited by PaulS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most psychologists would suggest the almost 100% of the time pedophilic desire of one of aggression and not love and that to consider pedophilic desire on the same level with love/lust whether heterosexual or homosexual is misguided at best.

 

steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I think they need our love, support, and encouragement to help them bear the burden of celibacy for a lifetime

 

pedophilia is a mental illness there is nothing tender or loving about it. From the mass murder to the pedophile down the street.

 

Make no mistake about it pedophilia is a mental illness.... there is nothing tender or loving about it!!! ever!!!

 

steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

 

it seems to me that stopman may have made some possible valid points. At one time homosexuality was believed to be a mental disorder rather than a predisposition.. Of course it is no longer believed by professionals to be so. Perhaps pedophillia is also a predisposition even though many but not all professionals still hold that it is a mental disorder. It seems to me that stopman agreed that to act out that disposition (podophilia) from a sexual standpoint does harm but that there also may be some who have that disposition who do not act out the sexual part and as stopman said....have "a very heavy burden to bear". And may need our love and,support to get through life with such inclinations in a society where we consider such acts harmful.

 

It seems to me it is something to consider rather than emphatically calling it a mental illness or assuming that in all cases, there are no loving thoughts toward children or with those who may have been born with such an inclination or desire for those younger than themselves. I am personally open to further discovery and research of the issue. Of course society has every right to try to protect themselves from that which they consider harmful.

 

Joseph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me it is something to consider rather than emphatically calling it a mental illness or assuming that in all cases, there are no loving thoughts toward children or with those who may have been born with such an inclination or desire for those younger than themselves.

 

I suppose if one views this desire like you would view the desire to watch someone die. I see a much closer resemblance between these two desires than between the sexual desire for another adult and the sexual desire for a child.

 

This is the definition of mental illness I got from a google search

Mental illness or mental disorder is a condition that affects thoughts, feelings or behaviors of someone who is strong enough to make social integration problematic,

 

I am very uncomfortable with this definition because it is too tied to social values and customs. I would prefer it to be tied to hurt and damage to ones self and others

 

Of course we should view all people with grace as long as it doesn't put anyone else at risk. I do feel for all who struggle with thoughts that by definition will hurt others.

 

I stand by my statement there there is nothing at all loving about a relationship between an adult and an child. It is pure aggression.

 

steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it is up to us to define whether sexual feelings toward children are agression, love, mental illness, or anything else. Regardless of how you define it, two things will remain. 1) You and I do not have deal with these kinds of thoughts because we don't have these kinds of thoughts. 2) The would be pedophil must somehow make peace with these desires, and must do so in a way that does not harm children. So rather than talking only about what we expect of a person who has feelings for children - that he resist his sexual desires - let's also talk about what is expected of US. He has the heavy burden to bear, not us. I think the least we can do is to treat him like a child of God who is loved just like all the rest of us are loved, to let him know that he has our support in his struggle. This is no less than what we would do for someone who is stuggling with disease, a physical handicap, etc.

 

The reason I am writing all this is that I too often get the impression that people hate adults who have sexual desires for children. And from this perspective I think it's important to distinguish between the desire and the act. A person cannot control their desires, they can only control the way they behave under the influence of those desires. We must not condemn a person for the feelings they have, though we may condemn them for their actions. As for the feelings, we need to do our part and help them in their struggle with these feelings. Just as we expect them to be responsible for the welfare of children, we need to do out part to be responsible for the welfare of children. This means doing everything we can to help people with those feelings live a life of celibacy such that they feel happy, cherished, and valued by the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've certainly made me stop and think there, Stopman. If it's a paedophile's natural tendency to find kids sexually attractive, then it's hard to blame them for that - but our societal evolution recognises that acting on those desires is a negative both for the victim and for society in general.

 

However, I'm not sure whether it is a natural tendency or a mental illness. I know many paedophiles are themselves victims of paedophillia which I think points to them being disturbed rather than naturally attracted.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it is natural for pedophiles to seek sexual relationships with children is not relevant. These are relationships between the powerful and the weak. The weak must be protected because we hear reports that they are wounded by these relationships/

 

Dutch

 

I agree it is not relevant when considering what we allow people to do or not do in society. I most definitely agree that paedophillia is harmful and unacceptable.

 

But if heterosexual or homosexual inclinations are natural, couldn't paedophillia inclinations also be natural to a minimal percentile in society?

Edited by PaulS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

May or not be helpful to make some distinctions courtesy wikipedia

 

For the primary sexual interest in 11–14 year old pubescents, see Hebephilia. For mid-to-late adolescents (15–19), see Ephebophilia.

-------------------

Pedophilia is a sexual interest in children under 11.

 

Dutch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul,

 

Whatever the percentages the criteria is still wholeness.

 

Dutch

 

I'm not sure whose or what criteria you are referring to Dutch, or why. I'm not saying we should allow people to be paedophiles or saying that because they have a 'natural' sexual orientation towards children that society has to accept this because it's natural.

 

What I am questioning is the argument concerning justifying something because it is 'natural', an argument often used (as I have) to argue for homosexual wholeness. I am questioning whether that is a valid reason in light of my questioning concerning if paedophillia is a 'natural' sexual orientation too, as repulsive and disgusting as I find it.

 

It seems to me that perhaps the 'natural' argument is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spoke with a friend of mine who was a psychologist at a prison with a large population of pedophiles and thus spent the better part of 10 years counselling people who have been sent to prison for molesting children.

 

I presented the thought that a pedophiles attraction for young children might be similar to an attraction to an adult. His response was that they indeed have an attraction that seems to be hard wired but categorically disagreed with any similarity to an adults attraction to another adult. He said it was an attraction to dominate rather than an attraction to a person. Examples he used of similar attractions would be that of a serial rapist or one who gets satisfaction from torture, some serial murders and the like. He refused to say it was or might be genetic.

 

steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you Steve, that domination is much more apt to be the basis for pedophilia than attraction or genetics. In my book, any activity or behavior which brings harm or injury to an individual, particularly someone immature, is completely unacceptable and worthy of legal punishment. There should be no argument here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you Steve, that domination is much more apt to be the basis for pedophilia than attraction or genetics. In my book, any activity or behavior which brings harm or injury to an individual, particularly someone immature, is completely unacceptable and worthy of legal punishment. There should be no argument here!

 

Halinsalem, Do you think their desire to dominate comes naturally or do you think they have to deliberately develop it? Is it a choice or a natural inclination? Much like one doesn't choose to be gay, I am trying to understand if a paedophile chooses to be a paedophile or not? There is no argument from me as to whether a paedophile should be allowed or not to act on their sexual orientation, if indeed they are sexually oriented toward dominating children, but like a hetreo or homo sexual orientation, i am trying to discuss if paedophiles are born 'that' way.

 

Do you think paedophile attraction is natural, is a mental illness, or do you think paedophiles choose to be attracted to children rather than another sexual orientation?

 

Thanks for a meaningful contribution Steve. Much like a gay person knows at a certain point of their life that they are gay, I wonder if paedophiles know at a certain point they are paedophiles by natural inclination, or if they 'become' that way at a certain point in life because of their experiences such as being victims of a use themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree a new thread is needed.

 

I spent the weekend AI (away from the internet) and did a bit of thinking on why this thread sparked so much emotion in me.

 

It seems whenever the conservative Christians start to lose the discussion about homosexuality they play the pedophile card as a deflective move. ....The Catholic Church attempting to deflect their pedophile priest problem with clouded references to gay priests. The GLBT community has spent the last ??? years with the unfair comparison with pedophiles, to perpetuate that is not helpful.

 

I found the "natural" reference almost offensive..... not entirely sure why, but I did. Maybe I am uncomfortable with anything that might de-horrify the molestation of a child and humanize the pedophile.

 

steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

 

I think it is only 'natural' to be offended :)

 

I did try to be sensitive about my questions and I certainly do not associate paedophillia with homosexuality, other than my question as to whether paedophillia is a natural sexual orientation just as heterosexuality is.

 

As I mentioned, this was sparked by my conservative Christian friend diverging from the "homosexuality is un-natural" argument to now saying it IS natural, but that that's the problem (according to him).

 

If the naturalness of being a paedophile holds, and we expect them to control their natural sexual orientation, my friend is using that argument to say homosexuals should also control their natural sexual orientation because it is against God's.....whatever.

 

Along with you, my counter argument is that homosexuality is about love and relationship, and not power and abuse (except for certain individuals but they exist as heteros too). But as a way of dissuading him from the view he holds, I was/am looking for a counter argument to his view that even though gay is natural, it should be stood against/refrained from.

 

But as you see I started another thread to avoid associating the two subjects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

 

I think it is only 'natural' to be offended :)

 

I did try to be sensitive about my questions and I certainly do not associate paedophillia with homosexuality, other than my question as to whether paedophillia is a natural sexual orientation just as heterosexuality is.

 

As I mentioned, this was sparked by my conservative Christian friend diverging from the "homosexuality is un-natural" argument to now saying it IS natural, but that that's the problem (according to him).

 

If the naturalness of being a paedophile holds, and we expect them to control their natural sexual orientation, my friend is using that argument to say homosexuals should also control their natural sexual orientation because it is against God's.....whatever.

 

Along with you, my counter argument is that homosexuality is about love and relationship, and not power and abuse (except for certain individuals but they exist as heteros too). But as a way of dissuading him from the view he holds, I was/am looking for a counter argument to his view that even though gay is natural, it should be stood against/refrained from.

 

But as you see I started another thread to avoid associating the two subjects.

 

My apologies, I did not notice that you were a 'global moderator' and have expertise on the subject beyond mine.

Edited by minsocal
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service