Baptists & homosexuality

Observer's picture
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Baptists & homosexuality

What do you guys think of this? Is it dangerous to have somebody try to change their sexual orientation? Are baptists forcing their religion into the laws of the USA? The baptist take is below.


atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Observer wrote: What do you

Observer wrote:

What do you guys think of this? Is it dangerous to have somebody try to change their sexual orientation? Are baptists forcing their religion into the laws of the USA? The baptist take is below.


I am not gay.  Or lesbian.  To be clear.

My belief is a large portion of your sexual orientation is biological as there have been studies showing that one's response to human sex pheromenes is in line with one's stated orientation.  Since you can not control your response to sex pheromenes,  I think it is probably next to impossible to change your sexual orientation.

Can attempting to change one's sexual orientation be dangerous?  The American Psychological Association believes so. wrote:

Although sound data on the safety of SOCE [sexual orientation change efforts] are extremely limited, some individuals reported being harmed by SOCE. Distress and depression were exacerbated. Belief in the hope of sexual orientation change followed by the failure of the treatment was identified as a significant cause of distress and negative self-image (Beckstead & Morrow, 2004; Shidlo & Schroeder, 2002).

Although there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation, some individuals modified their sexual orientation identity (i.e., group membership and affiliation), behavior, and values (Nicolosi, Byrd, & Potts, 2000). They did so in a variety of ways and with varied and unpredictable outcomes, some of which were temporary (Beckstead & Morrow, 2004; Shidlo & Schroeder, 2002). Based on the available data, additional claims about the meaning of those outcomes are scientifically unsupported.

As for the Baptists forcing their religion into law, of course they are. 


-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.

Recovering fund...
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Observer wrote:What do you

Observer wrote:

What do you guys think of this? Is it dangerous to have somebody try to change their sexual orientation? Are baptists forcing their religion into the laws of the USA? The baptist take is below.


It's just standard cult practice. Whether it's your sexuality, or the number of body thetans you have, or whether you're "saved", or whatever - stuff like this has been used by cults since forever.

The purpose is to trick a person (who would otherwise be perfectly happy and healthy) into thinking they're "abnormal" or "evil" all along and just don't realize it - and the cult is the only one that can provide you with the cure - the purpose is to break down the person's self-esteem, and make them think they "need" the help of the cult - this makes it easier to control the members so that they can be persuaded to donate money, or do free "volunteer" or recruitment work for the cult.

Baptist Christianity is really no different than Scientology or any other cult. It's an evil organization that preys on the weak for the sake of political and monetary gain.

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical

Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
OK, lots to say here.   

OK, lots to say here.



First off, I think that it is harmful to define certain sexual activities as bad more or less in general. I don't at this point care where that comes from be it religious, secular or whatever.
However, that is in general. Really, leviticus does include a general prohibition against incest and I can see some validity there. Then too, it also condemns lobster, which I happen to love.


Past that, the linked article goes in a direction that I really wish theists would not do. Sure, if quoting leviticus make you feel good, that much is fine but if you are going to use the bible then please read the bible. The article specifically uses romans 1 24:27 as if it was a general prohibition against homosexuality. Let's clear that one up with a bit more from the same chapter. The context is all important.


18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

 19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

 20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

 21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

 23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

 24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

 25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

 26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

 27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

 28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;



Indeed, the passage does not say that gay is bad, it says that for other sins not specified, god punished whoever these people were by making them gay. Presumably, it would not be much of a punishment if they were made fully gay. Rather, in order to have punishment value, they have to still want “normal” sex but just not be able to do it.


Pretty much what is going on here is god saying “well, from now on, you will never sport wood again unless it is with another dude”. This is something that god did to them, not something that they were doing on their own.


NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."


Posts: 5
Joined: 2011-07-20
User is offlineOffline
 When I was about 11, I

 When I was about 11, I started getting these weird feelings when guys were around....or even if they weren't around. I could be just thinking about guys. I am a girl. It just happeed that way. I am past 50 now and so far, I haven't met or thought about a girl that way. It was not a choice. It just is. It could change, but so far, this is the way I am wired.


I am thinking if I were attracted to girls, or to both boys and girls, it would not be a chioce either. It would just be. 


Just sayin'