SEXUALITY debate: Why can't people live their life - Page 3

Originally posted by: zorrro

what advantages or disadvantages if any do you see in a homosexual?

😆 I don't think there is any advantage in being homosexual, except maybe that since there will be no kids in such a relationship, the population of the world would probably come down😆 If there are any more, I'm not aware of it!

I really don't think you can view sexual orientation on an advantage or disadvantage basis. It is something that just is. It is akin to asking what advantages or disadvantages are there to being black. Of course socially, legally there are very distinct advantages and disadvantages you can list off – but you don't view your personal identity in those terms.

 

Sure there are several disadvantages to being homosexual.

-          Criminal offense in many nations

-          Limited legal rights in many nations

-          Viewed as sinful by many religious groups

-          Lack of social acceptance

 

As for health risks associated with sexuality, a lot of it comes down to practicing safe sex. Gay men and people born in certain AIDS afflicted nations are prohibited from donating blood because of high risk. However, with homosexuality being accepted and homosexual sex education and health services made available the gay male community is becoming safer.

 

Anal siphters are a risk for any couples engaging in a form of anal sex, anal sex is just more common in gay men. It is not always about the orientation but the "act" that is being practiced by the couple. Some acts are the same across the board. Health risk wise the safest might be being lesbian as they have the lowest STD and bruising risks.

If homosexuality is as positive and natural as someone earlier said why is it not generally  accepted or encouraged by religion or society?

Originally posted by: _twilight_

If homosexuality is as positive and natural as someone earlier said why is it not generally  accepted or encouraged by religion or society?

Is everything promoted by religion or society good and everything not promoted bad?

Originally posted by: _twilight_

If homosexuality is as positive and natural as someone earlier said why is it not generally  accepted or encouraged by religion or society?

It is positive and normal, it is just that not many people are homosexual or bisexual. Generally sex for pleasure is considered a sin. But in a hetrosexual relationship, especially between husband and wife, the couple can preted to have sex only for the purpose of producing offspring. Most relegions beleive that the aim of sex is to have offspring. Since homosexual relationships were not common and did not involve any "nobel" end product such as the birth of children, it was considered a sin. And something that was considered wrong for so many years cannot suddenly become right. It will take time for people to accept such views and to accept such people.

Originally posted by: Petrouska

It is positive and normal, it is just that not many people are homosexual or bisexual. Generally sex for pleasure is considered a sin. But in a hetrosexual relationship, especially between husband and wife, the couple can preted to have sex only for the purpose of producing offspring. Most relegions beleive that the aim of sex is to have offspring. Since homosexual relationships were not common and did not involve any "nobel" end product such as the birth of children, it was considered a sin. And something that was considered wrong for so many years cannot suddenly become right. It will take time for people to accept such views and to accept such people.

Sin or not, procreation was and is considered to be important . There would be social implications. The social impact was given priority  to individual cravings.

As the numbers of LGBT increase in a particular community or nation  the population growth of that region or group would decline. This could be a cause for some concern especially as the other less tolerant or accommodating groups could soon outgrow  the former. That seems to impart an evolutionary disadvantage to a community.

^^

Considering that a lot of lesbian couples do choose to have kids through artificial insemination that is not as much of a concern. Gay men also donate to sperm banks which are used by straight couples, single women and lesbians. So in modern society procreation is not as much of a concern as it was in the past.

 

As a matter of fact we have population explosion in many parts and too many orphan/abandoned children. In some parts instead of women (lesbian or straight) bearing more children, it would be better for society if all couples adopted unfortunate children.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

^^Considering that a lot of lesbian couples do choose to have kids through artificial insemination that is not as much of a concern. Gay men also donate to sperm banks which are used by straight couples, single women and lesbians. So in modern society procreation is not as much of a concern as it was in the past.

 As a matter of fact we have population explosion in many parts and too many orphan/abandoned children. In some parts instead of women (lesbian or straight) bearing more children, it would be better for society if all couples adopted unfortunate children.

I foresee a time when  no humans would be allowed to procreate . Its unfair to the women and they could  exert their rights not to.  With further advances in technology babies would be custom made as and when required... till then the bias is set to remain esp as people do go to great lengths to have their own biological and genetic child.

Originally posted by: angie.4u

I foresee a time when  no humans would be allowed to procreate . Its unfair to the women and they could  exert their rights not to.  With further advances in technology babies would be custom made as and when required... till then the bias is set to remain esp as people do go to great lengths to have their own biological and genetic child.

All Hail Bokanovsky! Bokanovsky! Bokanovsky!

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

All Hail Bokanovsky! Bokanovsky! Bokanovsky!

And who or what was that !!