The golden middle has nothing to do for homosexuality as a social process and that is its curse. The attitude of the society to homosexuality has always been affected by its the social, economic and political order; it is absolutely impossible to image the Greeks persecuting homosexuality which they believed driving force of its art, music and literature.
And in its turn the reproductive process is one of the leading instincts of the society. The responses to homosexuality as a sexual variation can be various and these responses should be understood as reflections of the sociological factors that influence the perception of this sexual phenomenon.
Of course there always were and will be social groups disapproving this nevertheless it is necessary to admit that this neglecting is absolutely and entirely based on the type of society, which is evaluating homosexuality.
The word homosexuality has as its base a Greek word homo meaning the same and therefore implies affectionate relations of the members belonging to one sex. Luis Crompton reveals the reader the tremendous achievements that were ever made by homosexual representatives of the social structure. But his book also reminds the reader something he truly knows - the persecutions such people have experiences throughout the historical timeline.
During some times homosexual people were seen as a potential threat during communication. This is not specific to the society of one given country, but to all the countries which ever existed all over the world: For instance, Ancient Greece was basically the only culture that openly did not only accept homosexuality but also declared it to be the morally appropriate.
The same was made by Japan through its samurai tradition. The homosexual line can be traced throughout the masterpieces of the ancient Greece, which did not only resemble this topic, but also were brought to life by homosexuality. This is no surprise due to the fact that the Greeks had a lot of gods to worship and in spite of all the knowledge given by this race its moral constructs were instable and did not have one common route. In contrast it was in the sixth century B.
The Jewish by that time were a rather socially developed nation. Essay on Homosexuality by D. Homosexuality is in many ways an awkward subject to write about. In the old days, such things were not mentioned in polite conversation. Even today, the continual discussion of sexual orientation can grate: However, conservatives do not set the tone of public debate, and for good or ill homosexuality has become a high-profile topic of political discussion.
First of all, it is worth pointing out that homosexuality has not been recently invented. There always have been men who were attracted to other men. While strict homosexuality is found among a very small minority of the population, it is likely that the numbers of men who have been attracted to some other men, or who have experimented along those lines, is much larger than the core homosexual demographic group. It is difficult to cite accurate figures, as not everyone is sure of his own sexuality, let alone confident in discussing it with researcher.
From a strictly psychiatric point of view, a phenomenon often combined with high intellectual ability and otherwise normal functioning in society should not be regarded as a mental disorder. Furthermore, it is fair to say that homosexuality is so widely found in human societies and across the ages that, while not being the statistical norm, it must be described as a natural phenomenon.
Societies need to be reproduced, and should not be based purely around sexual urges, and so homosexuality cannot be thought of as a potential building block of society, but homosexuality is a human foible that will always exist in society.
It is an interesting question whether a more open social attitude towards homosexuality will lead to its greater prevalence, as people who would otherwise repress their urges do not feel the need to do so. The reason why some men—and homosexuality seems to be much more prevalent among men than women—are attracted to other men is ultimately unclear. But in fact no one really knows: The Christian church has long railed against homosexuality, whilst being a notable organisation in which homosexual activity has always flourished.
Before the Christian church embedded itself into the culture of Western Europe, homosexual behaviour was much more widespread in ancient Rome and ancient Greece, tending to show that genetic factors are not the key to understanding homosexuality, and that social and cultural factors are the main drivers of human sexuality.
I tend to believe that the genetic instinct gives us the sexual urge, without specifying in detail the kinds of human beings that are to be regarded as sexually attractive. There are many ramifications of this, but I wish to stick to theme of homosexuality here.
Greek and Roman homosexuality appear to have been connected to the warrior culture: There was no gay identity, and it is interesting to see that the main form that homosexual relations took in ancient Greece was of relations between an older warrior and a adolescent of years of age.
Such relationships between people of different age groups are not really the intention of modern laws decriminalising homosexuality, where adolescents under 16 years of age are not seen as capable of giving consent to sexual activity despite being almost universally engaged in it.
Clearly, relationships between men and older youths in ancient Greece were not unmanly; neither did they detract in any way from masculinity. There is a problem for conservatives here, in that England was traditionally a free country in most respects, and so we generally call for a restoration of our traditional cultural norms, and yet it is undeniable that the Christian narrative on sexuality had a deep impact on English culture.
One could argue, however, that despite the mainstream nature of heterosexuality throughout English history, some degree of homosexuality was part of the social norm. There always has been an undercurrent of homosexuality, and any attempt, legally, to create a society where all men adhered to heterosexual norms would in itself be a rejection of the realities of traditional England.
Quite apart from homosexual attractions in the upper echelons of society Richard the Lionheart, Edward II and James I spring to mind , there has for centuries been widespread practice of homosexuality among public schoolboys. Maybe this is why Roger Scruton in his England: An Elegy spoke of the homosexual nature of English culture. It would be a gross misunderstanding to state that homosexuality has always been accepted, but England would not have been England without its undercurrent of relationships or sexual activity between men.
Given that the Christian church is widely seen, even by its supporters, to have erred in many of the details of its teachings e. Whatever eventually emerges from genetic search on the reasons for homosexuality and whatever the rights and wrongs of church teaching on the subject, libertarians could not support the criminalisation of homosexual acts, giving the state, as it would, the right to investigate what is going on in private bedrooms and behind closed doors.
It is not necessarily something a cultured person would engage in, but we are talking about the laws of a free country here. Sex behind bushes in known gay cruising grounds is not at all the same thing as similar behaviour out in the open in a way that would offend most people. It is interesting to note that England did not always have laws against homosexual acts.
Of course, in mediaeval times, people depended on their children in older age, and in a largely agrarian society without pensions and other modern financial instruments, homosexuality as a public lifestyle, in contradistinction to furtive acts conducted by people who otherwise adhered to the general norms of family life, was unthinkable.
The number of people put to death for buggery was necessarily small, as evidence would generally have been lacking. The death penalty for buggery was abolished in , and an Act of Parliament extended the sanction of imprisonment to all homosexual activity between men and not just sodomy. Not all English conservatives seem to realise that homosexual acts the broader definition thereof were only illegal for 82 years, and so there is nothing really traditionalist about regretting the demise of the Act.
It is sometimes claimed that one cannot be a libertarian without supporting homosexuality. Is that really so? Surely libertarians should oppose attempts to criminalise homosexuality and vocal opposition to homosexuality in equal measure. The right of others to deprecate homosexuality was mentioned during the Parliamentary debate on decriminalisation of homosexuality in , where the Earl of Arran, a sponsor of the bill, said.
I ask those who have, as it were, been in bondage and for whom the prison doors are now open to show their thanks by comporting themselves quietly and with dignity. This is no occasion for jubilation; certainly not for celebration. Any form of ostentatious behaviour; now or in the future any form of public flaunting, would be utterly distasteful and would, I believe, make the sponsors of the Bill regret that they have done what they have done.
Homosexuals must continue to remember that while there may be nothing bad in being a homosexual, there is certainly nothing good. Lest the opponents of the Bill think that a new freedom, a new privileged class, has been created, let me remind them that no amount of legislation will prevent homosexuals from being the subject of dislike and derision, or at best of pity.
We shall always, I fear, resent the odd man out. That is their burden for all time, and they must shoulder it like men—for men they are. Decriminalisation did not mean that homosexuality was to be promoted in all arenas of life, much less than opposition to homosexuality was to be criminalised.
Yet the gay agenda has developed along more or less extreme lines that Lord Arran indicated would have made the sponsors of the Bill regret their actions. Not only can homosexual couples—or, worse, lone homosexual individuals—adopt children today, opposition to such adoptions from the biological parents of children who have been taken into care is also ignored. Much of this appears to many to be intent on creating a minority of people privileged by the state by dint of their statistically deviant behaviour.
How should libertarians view these matters? As far as the adoption of children is concerned, the forgotten subjects of state intervention are the children. There is little evidence that raising children in novel and innovative household units is good for them: In conclusion, religion is not the problem. The real problem is the complete lack of empathy both parties have for each other.
I know that God has a plan for all of us, but sometimes I wonder why that it has to be so complicated. The person who wrote this article clearly feels very strongly about same-sex marriage. And in The Bible it tells you to love everyone, that includes homosexuals. The Bible mentions homosexuality only six times and love over times. He has a plan for you, me and homosexuals. They aren' the same and we don't know what that is.
I rather choose love over hating on people because of what they are. I agree with what you're saying! This article, although biased in a lot of areas, does bring up a lot of strong points that the Christian faith fails to address. I like how strongly you feel about this topic; the passion burns through this piece.
You managed to spark a lot of controversy, which is good because it gets people thinking! Coffins don't have pockets. I am offended by this article because it is not only prejudiced against Christians, but also religion in general. I am a Catholic and am against same-sex "marriage" and homosexuality.
I am not "crazy. Marriage is one man and one woman. It always has been, and always will be. I'm sorry that you stopped believing in God. I will be praying for you. God did not decide to make some people homosexual. God created and intended everyone to have a right mind and act in a way that is pleasing to Him. But when Satan tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden and disobeyed God, that is when sin came into the world and started tempting people.
This temptation is what caused same-sex lusts. God did not create it. It is straight from Satan. And the Bible is not a substitute for our brains. I am a Christian and I am thankful God gave his own words for us. Without God's word, we would not have guidance on how to live our lives. I am grateful to have a lifebook full of advice for every situation I am in. It is a book full of love letters from Christ and we should appreciate it. Just as we should appreciate His sacrifice on the cross for us when we are no where near deserving it.
I do not judge homosexuals. I love them- just as Jesus does. I accept them but want them to know that is is a false longing to want to be with someone of the same sex. Jesus calls us to love the sinner but hate the sin and that is what I am doing. Morals can stay in their place. However, the world moves on. Your words were very well written and the point was very solid so yes, you definitely put your feelings into words. I strongly agree with your statement that same sex marriage is nothing to worry about and its not a big deal.
I am a christian and do believe in not only gay rights, but human rights for all. Morals can stay in their place, while the world moves on and evolves.
Why do you get to decide how other people lead their lives? If they choose to marry or love a person of the same gender, how does that affect you in any way? Is the world going to blow up if my best friend marries another girl? Keep in mind that not everybody shares your beliefs. I personally believe in the theory of evolution, and you telling me that my beliefs are wrong hurts.
Would you like it if I told you that your creationist views were completely illogical and the mere idea of a God is stupid? Also, please work on your grammar. It is worth mentioning that the Bible has been translated and rewritten dozens, if not hundreds of times. I've read "versions" of it that don't even include half of Leviticus. Human error as eroded and replaced the mission sections, so how could you really be sure that God instended for homosexuality is a sin?
There are sixty six books in the Bible, written over a span of years. And at no point was any of this written in English. It had to be translated. And the English language has changed a lot since the Bible was first translated. Anyone who is bilingual knows English is a very strange language that changes more than most.
Also, while there are a lot of congantes and direct translations, there are still idiomatic expressions and words that we have no version of that don't translate. In French, if I wanted to ask something, I'd use the verd demander. Je demande means I ask , not I demand.
Free Homosexuality papers, essays, and research papers. Passive Male Homosexuality in Pre-Christian Scandinavia - “The love that dare not speak its name” truly .
Homosexuality is a widely discussed topic nowadays, which brings up an abundance of arguments and discussions in societies around the world.
Homosexuality has been a source of constant conflict among many organizations of today's society. Perhaps the most prominent disputes of this issue exist within the disagreement of same sex relationships from the views of society, homosexuals, the Christian church, and /5(9). Essay on Homosexuality by D.J. Webb Published on the Libertarian Alliance Blog 7th May Homosexuality is in many ways an awkward subject to write about. In the old days, such things were not mentioned in polite conversation.
Free Essays from Bartleby | The way people ultimately view homosexuality, whether in religion, politics or modern popular culture, is all determined by. Custom truehuppv.cf custom essay writing services. Writing custom essays online. College and High school essay writing. Custom Essay - just for $ per page.