# The Ethics of Homosexuality **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 29, 2000, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877 "2000-02-29T00:23:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2000, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/141 "2000-03-06T19:18:00Z")
Poly, You are seriously funny sometimes! Creative writing! Hey, if I ever see Bill in a speedo, Ill want some serious couch time, also! šŸ˜‰ ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2000, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/142 "2000-03-06T19:24:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by Polycarp: > > Esprix, a minor nit that I think deserves picking: ā€œRepressionā€ is denial, even to oneself, and usually causes significant psychological problems later. ā€œSuppressionā€ is honest admission that, yes, I do want to do something I feel is immoral or antisocial, and Iā€™m just not gonna do it, because I will be a lot happier in the long run exercising my willpower and not doing itā€¦ As far as being homosexual and marrying anyway, claiming to have changed, Iā€™m talking about **re** pression. Flinx doesnā€™t fit this criteria, but I wasnā€™t talking about his situation. Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2000, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/143 "2000-03-06T19:46:00Z")
Good. šŸ™‚ I was concerned that you not be one of those people who fails to draw the distinction and claims that everything not exercised is repressed. Obviously you had already seen and bypassed my point. ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2000, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/144 "2000-03-06T20:53:00Z")
Esprix: > [@](#): > > Which was the point of Winkā€™s article, that perhaps, since we have since realized that some Biblical directives (stated, implied or otherwise) are really quite abhorrent, perhaps we should take a look at others that may be equally so. ā€œRealizedā€? My, isnā€™t our society the ultimate in enlightenment. More accurate would be ā€œdecided.ā€ > [@](#): > > Not to in any way cheapen your peopleā€™s experiences, but can you see the parallels between your religious faith and my sexual orientation? I, and others, have been discriminated against, beaten, ridiculed, jailed, murdered, ad nauseum for just as long. Have I been trying to deny that such has occurred? > [@](#): > > ā€œDifferent rights?ā€ Is that what homosexuals are asking for? Iā€™ve been advocating equal rights, myself. If you re-read my post, youā€™d see that Iā€™m _agreeing_ with you on this score. Chaim Mattis Keller ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2000, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/145 "2000-03-07T15:02:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by cmkeller: > > ā€œRealizedā€? My, isnā€™t our society the ultimate in enlightenment. More accurate would be ā€œdecided.ā€ Fine, ā€œdecided.ā€ Are you disagreeing with these decisions? > [@](#): > > If you re-read my post, youā€™d see that Iā€™m agreeing with you on this score. {SIGH} Sorry, sorry - been reading too many posts by Orion\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*ā€¦ šŸ™‚ Esprix ``` Chaim Mattis Keller ``` [/QUOTE] * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2000, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/146 "2000-03-07T17:18:00Z")
Esprix: > [@](#): > > Fine, ā€œdecided.ā€ Are you disagreeing with these decisions? On slavery per se? Noā€¦because in a secular society, there is logically no ā€œhigher powerā€ to determine which people have more or fewer rights than which other people. Bear in mind, though, that the Bible does not describe a secular society, but rather one in which G-dā€™s will runs society. However, lest you think Iā€™m indulging in mere semantical games, there are decisions of our society that I disagree with. Take abortion, for example. Those who advocate abortion rights would say ā€œOur society has realized that a fetus is nothing but a mass of tissue.ā€ But thatā€™s not a factual **realization** , such as the heliocentric vs. geocentric solar system, or round Earth vs. flat Earth. Itā€™s a value judgment, a matter which society **decided** on. And decisions can definitely diverge from one another. Chaim Mattis Keller ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2000, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/147 "2000-03-07T19:47:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by cmkeller: > > However, lest you think Iā€™m indulging in mere semantical games, there are decisions of our society that I disagree with. Take abortion, for example. Those who advocate abortion rights would say ā€œOur society has realized that a fetus is nothing but a mass of tissue.ā€ But thatā€™s not a factual **realization** , such as the heliocentric vs. geocentric solar system, or round Earth vs. flat Earth. Itā€™s a value judgment, a matter which society **decided** on. And decisions can definitely diverge from one another. OK, fair enough. šŸ™‚ Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/148 "2000-03-10T22:00:00Z")
Not wanting to start yet another gay-related thread, and thinking this might have more to do with ethics than the simple matter of same-sex marriages, I mentioned this on another thread but it got buried, and Iā€™d really like to see what people think. A black man falls in love with a white woman, and they want to get married - this is a choice. There was a lot of fighting over allowing inter-racial marriages at the time over this choice. Now, some opponents of same-sex marriages use the argument that homosexuality is a choice, and we should not legitimize this behavior. Well, wasnā€™t putting an end to the ban on inter-racial marriages the same thing - legitimizing a behavior that, at the time, was a very hot-button issue that many people opposed on religious, racial and, yes, even biological/genetic/racial purity grounds? I see a comparison. Thoughts? Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![CalifBoomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CalifBoomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalifBoomer)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/149 "2000-03-10T03:52:00Z")
Esprix: Since you have brought up the issue of SSM again, Iā€™d like to make some observations, then ask a question. Iā€™ve carefully considered what has been written in defense of homosexuality in this and other threads, and am prepared to do a modified/quasi flip-flop on my former position. It is becoming increasingly clear to me that _real_ discrimination against \*real[/] people is occurring _soley on the basis of their ā€˜sexual orientationā€™._ However, I do not think that legislation allowing SSM will end that discrimination. Nor do I believe that ā€˜same sex marriageā€™, as an institutional concept is about to happen any time soon. It occurs to me, correct me if Iā€™m wrong, that homosexuals are more interested in the **benefits** (legal rights ie:lower tax rate, transfer of property ownership, medical, etc.) to be derived from a partnership equating to marriage. In other words, the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. It also occurs to me -living in California where the ā€˜Defense of Marriage Actā€™ Prop 22, just passed with an overwhelming majority- that traditional marriage NEEDS defending. Iā€™m not so sure, however, that the first line of defense should be against homosexual intrusion. Traditional marriage has enough problems of its own, including divorce, infidelity, abuse & family abandonment, to address first. (the mote in the eye clause). Iā€™ve heard the term Domestic Partnerhip Act, but have not investigated what it mean. How would take to some kind of legislation that would allow the aforementioned benefits to inure to same sex couples, outside of the concept of marriage? ---
**Author:** ![SqrlCub](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea5d25/32.png) [@SqrlCub](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SqrlCub)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/150 "2000-03-10T14:56:00Z")
Califboomer, ā€œā€¦However, I do not think that legislation allowing SSM will end that discriminationā€¦ā€ Alas, you are correct in that assumption. Only teaching in an open non-judgemental arena will expose the discrepencies between gay and straight life. ā€œIt also occurs to me -living in California where the ā€˜Defense of Marriage Actā€™ Prop 22, just passed with an overwhelming majority- that traditional marriage NEEDS defending.ā€ Well traditional marriage doesnā€™t really need defending because people get married all the time. It mainly needs things that you hit on in your second line of thought where you said, ā€œTraditional marriage has enough problems of its own, including divorce, infidelity, abuse & family abandonment, to address first.ā€ What really needs to happen here is that people need to know what they want and be ready to accept the consequences of married life, gay or straight. It is not something that is heterosexually nor homosexually exclusive. Marriages have problems, how the people deal with these problems is what married life is about. ā€œIā€™m not so sure, however, that the first line of defense should be against homosexual intrusion.ā€ That is how we as gay people see the radical right and their defense of marriage. Many gay relationships work out unsurprisingly similar to a straight relationship. They share chores, keep eachother company, help eachother out in times of need, etc. The only real difference is that the people in the relationship are of the same sex. ā€œIā€™ve heard the term Domestic Partnerhip Act, but have not investigated what it mean. How would take to some kind of legislation that would allow the aforementioned benefits to inure to same sex couples, outside of the concept of marriage?ā€ That is basically the concept. It is a little different from marriage because it is worded in a way that it is either homosexually exclusive (as is the case with the former Time Warner companyā€¦my bf used to work for them and I learned about that) or it is worded in a way that you can give a roommate regardless of sex benefits from your work. The former idea where DPā€™s are homosexually exclusive is defended by the fact that straight people can marry anyone of the opposite gender that they please, rather easily; whereas, a homosexual couple is not afforded those same benefits. Companies see the discrepency and to remain competitive in the workplace, they afford the same benefits to same sex couples that their heterosexual couples get automatically. Personally, I donā€™t like DPā€™s or marriages as they now stand because neither is all encompassing and does not afford equal benefits to the parties involved. I would support a DP if it afforded all the same benefits as marriage including recongition within the country. My idea would be that it would just be what a homosexual couple would call marriage. I am not fussy about that detail (some people are). ## HUGS! Sqrl [SqrlCubā€™s Arizona Adventure](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/005351.html) ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/151 "2000-03-10T15:20:00Z")
Boomer, I had to rub my eyes a few times when I read this and the other post you put up, but I have to say, well done. You asked: > [@](#): > > It occurs to me, correct me if Iā€™m wrong, that homosexuals are more interested in the **benefits** (legal rights ie: lower tax rate, transfer of property ownership, medical, etc.) to be derived from a partnership equating to marriage. In other words, the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couplesā€¦ > > Iā€™ve heard the term Domestic Partnerhip Act, but have not investigated what it mean. How would take to some kind of legislation that would allow the aforementioned benefits to inure to same sex couples, outside of the concept of marriage? First, allow me to point you to the ā€œDomestic Partnershipsā€ thread in Great Debates, where I just did a little research on some existing DP legislation in Philadelphia. I personally feel that DPā€™s are the next logical step to achieve equality. Second, as has been said in other threads, yes, the benefits, both positive and negative, are an extremely important part of any marriage (and I quoted the General Accounting Office as having discovered 1,049 marital status-related legal benefits upon request of Congress). Get this equal treatment under the law is vitally important. Third, and on the other hand, benefits are not the _only_ point of a marriage - there is that whole love/family/commitment thing going on. Although DPā€™s are necessary and desperately wanted from a legal standpoint, there is an ethical problem - by not calling it a ā€œmarriage,ā€ it sends a clear message that DPā€™s are second-class, not the ā€œmoral equivalentā€ of a ā€œreal marriage.ā€ So, do I think DPā€™s are acceptable? Yes. Do I think they will be the last word on the matter? No. My scenario is this: A state sets up a DP law equivalent to marriage; the Supreme Court will get a case and determine that ā€œseparate but equalā€ is unconstitutional (_a la_ desegregation); DPā€™s then become marriages; the Supreme Court will get another case and find the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (as every constitutional expert Iā€™ve heard says it is); all states with DoMA-like laws will have to discard them; same-sex marriages will then be legal. But itā€™s gonna take a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time, methinks. > [@](#): > > It also occurs to me -living in California where the ā€˜Defense of Marriage Actā€™ Prop 22, just passed with an overwhelming majority- that traditional marriage NEEDS defending. Iā€™m not so sure, however, that the first line of defense should be against homosexual intrusion. Traditional marriage has enough problems of its own, including divorce, infidelity, abuse & family abandonment, to address first. (the mote in the eye clause). On the one hand, this is a very impressive and enlightened statement; on the other, while you het folk clean up your own act, what _harm_ does allowing same-sex couples the use of the word ā€œmarriageā€ cause to your opposite-sex marriage? This question has never been answered to my satisfaction. Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/152 "2000-03-10T15:25:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by SqrlCub: > > I donā€™t like DPā€™s or marriages as they now stand because neither is all encompassing and does not afford equal benefits to the parties involved. I would support a DP if it afforded all the same benefits as marriage including recongition within the country. Sqrl makes a good point here, Boomer. DP laws on the books right now - company-sponsored, municipal, even the few state-wide - are, as they stand, not even _close_ to being the true equal to the institution of marriage. They afford a very few, very specific benefits. But itā€™s a start. Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2000, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/153 "2000-03-28T20:17:00Z")
I am bumping this thread up in the hopes that **Asmodean** will see and post some pearls of wisdom for us. (FYI, there are also threads on gay marriages, parenting, equal rights, and Christian viewpoints if you want to post something more specific.) Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![Sterra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8c91f0/32.png) [@Sterra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sterra)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2000, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/154 "2000-04-01T02:26:00Z")
you did that just for me? Ah well the only thing i can really say is i dont care at all. Im not homosexual and they dont seem to be opressing me so it doesent apply to me. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2000, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/155 "2000-04-03T13:33:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by **Asmodean** : > > you did that just for me? Ah well the only thing i can really say is i dont care at all. Im not homosexual and they dont seem to be opressing me so it doesent apply to me. Hmmm, ok. You had a few things to say in the ā€œNon-Judeo-Christian Viewsā€¦ā€ thread that would have better fit here, so I thought maybe this would pique your interest. Never mindā€¦ Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) ---
**Author:** ![Sterra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8c91f0/32.png) [@Sterra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sterra)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2000, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/156 "2000-04-04T02:57:00Z")
well like i said on that other thread i dont care šŸ™‚ ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2000, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877/157 "2000-04-04T16:22:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by **Asmodean** : > > well like i said on that other thread i dont care Actually, you said: > [@](#): > > the only thing i could care about homosexuality is why? the best arguement for why it happens that ive heard is personal choice > > and another thing those people that get in your face like oh say ā€œask the vegan guyā€ i find that to be annoying So I was pointing you here (and other threads) to point out that itā€™s _not_ a choice, and the current research into the topic. You brought it up, so I thought you might be interested. We also discussed ā€œin your faceā€ gay activism tactics as well. Esprix * * * [Ask the Gay Guy!](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001376.html) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ethics-of-homosexuality/17877.md?page=7)