General Acceptance of Homosexuality Causes End of Civilized Culture
80
To Accept or To Reject... is That the Question?
I've been engaged in an interesting debate with one of my facebook friends. His status line stated:
"Not just homosexuality but the GENERAL ACCEPTANCE of homosexuality is one of the final indicators of the end of a culture or state."
My initial reaction when I read that statement was kind of a "WTF!?" reaction. How can acceptance of others lead to the demise of a civilization. Of course, I had to challenge his thinking... cuz that's what I do ... I was curious what his definition of "acceptance" is. Does that mean acceptance of people who are homosexual? It may just be my issue, but I don't understand how you can accept a person but reject who he is... ???
My friend explained that you can accept and even love a homosexual, but not accept his or her lifestyle as being okay. Again, I am confused. If we were to flip this over... imagine that homosexuals make up the majority in society and heterosexuals are in the minority. So I am a heterosexual woman and I fall in love with a man. Since the laws do not permit me to "marry" him, we live together in "sin". My homosexual mother loves and accepts me, but cannot accept my lifestyle as being okay. So this part of my life - this very big part of who I am is unacceptable to her. I wonder how she would communicate that to me? I wonder if as I was growing up, if I would have felt loved and accepted by her knowing that she hates the way I am.
I don't know for certain if everyone is like me, but my sexual orientation was not a choice. I know that I did not decide one day that I would be attracted to boys. I just was. I cannot imagine choosing to be sexually attracted to girls... I just wasn't. Of course I had the choice whether to act on my heterosexual feelings or not. Anyone can choose to be celebate. Very few make that choice, and those who do, usually do for religious reasons. So in my example above, my mother may believe that she rejecting my lifestyle CHOICE, but in reality she would be rejecting who I am, and I would likely have been aware of her hate long before I engaged in any sexual "lifestyle".
Does acceptance have to mean embracing or encouraging? To my heterosexual friends I ask, did you need your sexual attraction to others to be accepted, embraced or encouraged by society? I suspect that there are activities occurring in the bedrooms of adults that would not be acceptable to me. If I find something unacceptable I just refrain from engaging in it, but I do not expect other adults to hold or live by my standards. To do so would be absurd.
Loss of values, morality, integrity and purpose
My Facebook friend states that he is concerned that society's general acceptance of homosexuality as a lifestyle is leading to a loss of values, morality and integrity and "perhaps even purpose". He fears that because a majority of people are more accepting than in the past, that some teachers will teach little children that homosexuality is an acceptable alternative lifestyle.
Well, here in Canada, our children do get this kind of education. Not only in school, but it has even been seen in children's programming on television. Such programs (Sesame Street was one) teach children that family composition can take many forms. There are children being raised by single parents, by gay parents, by grandparents. There was a popular sitcom as well entitled "My Two Dads". Teaching children to value others and to respect differences is not a bad thing. How can it be?
There are certainly those groups in Canada who share my Facebook friend's concerns and fears.
In some schools children have been read stories promoting tolerance. Those stories have included stories about children with same sex parents. Perhaps my friend is afraid that such stories are used as a means for "recruiting" children into the homosexual lifestyle, but I submit that they are used as a means of teaching acceptance and tolerance of others. I personally have no problem with my children understanding sexual orientation, and no fear of them being "swayed" one way or the other. Their biology will take care of that.
Out of curiousity I asked my children (9 and 11 years old) if they think that same sex couples should be allowed to marry. Without hesitation they both said "yes". When I asked them if the same sex couple should be allowed to adopt children, I was a little surprised when they both said "no". Each had one reason:
- that kids should have both a mom and a dad.
- that the kids would get teased
I am sure the first reason (the 9 year old's) is based on her inability to imagine her life without one or the other of her parents. The 11 year old's reason (#2), tells me that we still have a way to go in teaching children acceptance and tolerance. While each child had their own reason, they each agreed with the other's as well.
Interestingly, there was an article in last week's Macleans magazine where it was reported that in Canada fewer teenagers are engaging in pre-marital sex or doing drugs. According to these statistics, it would appear that our young people have higher moral standards than previous generations. This is truly no surprise to those of us who believe that education is key. The increased communication and education, which has resulted in the increased acceptance of homosexuals and basic human rights, is paying off, and in ways quite contrary to the fears presented by my Facebook friend.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Ironically, when a gay couple moves into my neighborhood I am glad because my experience is that the gay couple will fix up their house and their property beautifully and my property values will go up.
I like what you write. People are people and just like their political views or their religion or lack thereof, such things are best left out of the realm of the opinions of others. I personally see no difference in people I know other than the personal quirks they exhibit. I don't even know if some of my friends are secretly homosexual or not, but here in Spain it's generally really no big deal.
I have to wonder if your Facebook friend is drawing a parallel with the demise of ancient civilizations such as Greece and Rome. These civilizations certainly did engage in a variety of hedonistic behaviors -- both homosexual and heterosexual. And they did ultimately crumble under their own sins.
Here's what you said, "My Facebook friend states that he is concerned that society's general acceptance of homosexuality as a lifestyle is leading to a loss of values, morality and integrity and "perhaps even purpose".
I do agree with your Facebook friend that society today seems to suffer from an eroding of values. I see it as much more related to our greed and focus on material things over human kindness and compassion. If God didn't want Homosexuals he would not have created them. Simple as that.
Lgali, the only thing that has changed is honesty. It is safer now for homosexuals to come out, but they've always been among us.
Tom, that is 2 funny! Great slogan for a Gay Parade... Increase Your Property Value ...
Ivan, I agree... when people are set on pushing their opinions and ideals onto others - THAT is what causes the demise of society.
MM, you are exactly right. He is drawing the parallel with the ancient civilations. Truthfully, those civilizations were not "civilized".I disagree that society is suffering from erosion of values. It is a different world today, but I am very encouraged by the studies such as the one done in Macleans magazine that clearly shows teenagers (in Canada anyway) have higher moral standards than past generations.
That sthilly nilly!..... The end of culture and state is caused by greed and abuse of power. Good Hub.....thanks! :)
Next thing you know there's going to be a homosexual as president and its still not going to make any difference in my life!
How can we get some dissenters over here? Where are you hiding, you protectors of the family?? Come on out and debate us!
I can't think of how it would impact you... or even why you would need to know your president's sexual orientation...
Well Karen its makes all the difference in the world! What would the first lady be! How can we have a government that is strictly determined to just set policy and regulate commerce? We need to know the sexual orientation because otherwise we might worry about real issues.
G'day Karen, you got no dissenter here either.
GT good one , real issues. LOL
Could it be the fact that the "civilized" societies that did collapse where collapsing before the rise in homosexuality and people turned to homosexuality as a distraction from the looming disaster.
Karen your hub gives much food for thought.
You're right of course Toad... the next president should be a lesbian... then you'd still have a first lady and all the heterosexual American men can obsess over what's going on in the presidential suite!
agvulpes, I think homosexuals are scapegoats for the greed and corruption as Tom so eloquently stated...
LOL MM... I had my flame suit and was all geared up for a big battle! Then Toad got me a little excited when he "appeared" to be a dissenter.
Love your avatar - that was one of my favorite books as a kid, and my kids favorite too!
I don't believe your choice of sexuality, or religeon, or politics, should be anyone's business but your own. The law is supposed to apply to 'people' not to groups or 'selected' categories. The only issue I can see is that politicians refuse to accept that.
I will fight over politics or religion, but a persons sexuality is entirely different as it is not chosen.
Hi Earnest,
I don't think my Facebook friend had any input into the choice thing. His contention is that the general acceptance by society that living a homosexual lifestyle is okay, is a sign of our society's demise.
Great hub - thanks and yes, I too believe we have a long way to go. I find it funny that the end of civilization, 9/11 and so many other things are attributed to homosexuality. I wish we were that powerful because if we were we would do better things with our "powers" than end the world, etc. we'd make it happier...isn't that what "gay" means anyway?
Wow, Wow, Wow, My standing ovation for this one Karen just loved your hub, the way you invert society and it's views is something I use in my daily life when questioned when the word choice is put on the table. Thank you for sharing such wonderful views and opening the page for this type of discussion, great, simply great. Society has to grow up and evolve and gradually does, as one of my favorite singer sings: " Nothing stays the same, the only thing that stays the same.. is change" Melissa Etheridge
Bravo! really great hub !
you have a fan in me!
I am not against any ones choice of lifestyle, but I do think that whatever area you are from might have an influence on how someone feels. I live in a very small town and there are alot of older people who refuse to change their beliefs. They are against homosexuals and also interacial relationships. We do not have hardly any homosexuals where I am from but if we did it wouldn't bother me at all.
judyann - I can relate. I live in a VERY conservative Christian small town in redneck county LOL. I have at least one homosexual nephew who has suffered ridicule and non acceptance by his own family. Sad... very sad. I am pleased to say he seems to be turning out to be a well adjust man in spite of the adversity.
I consider myself to be a Christian too. But my God does not abhor good and decent people just because they are attracted to members of their own sex.
I don't see how anyone who calls themselves a christian can condemn people for falling in love. Sexuality is a personal thing but being with someone you love and care about and can make a committment to is something that christianity and most other religions encourage. It is human support for their fellow human beings which makes society function. Whether that human is male or female is irrelevant. The relationship and committment is what glues society and communities together. When christians condemn homosexuality they are condemning an aspect of themselves which they reject and are unable or unwilling to express. The human society becomes a lesser place because of this hatred of aspects of ourselves.
the fact we even have to discuss this is moronic. i think we'll be looking at a sea change in public consciousness in a few years. this is a personal issue, as are many others. for example, what substances one chooses to put into ones body ie drugs. the rule is, as i understand it (and our country was founded on this idea fyi) if youre not bothering anyone, and it infringes on no one elses rights, its nobody's business.
Dennis, at the risk of pissing someone off, it seems to me that many who profess to be Christians are the most hypocritical and condemning people...
artfuldodger: MYOB... good motto to live by...
The comment of your facebook friend is in part true, but not just in the context of homosexuality, especially when you look at the demise of previous Empires(such as the Roman Empire). Empires tend to crumble when the become too idealogically heterogenous(they start allowing to many non-allegiant minority groups to have citizenship rights). In the case of the Roman Empire, every culture they conquered they then allowed to assimilate into their citizenry. This diluted the overriding value structure of the initial Roman system. Since these minority groups did not view themselves AS ROMANS they held none of the values of a true Roman citizen, the Empire became , valueless, directionless, decadent and non-disciplined, which eventually led to the slow takeover by stronger ,more ethnically pure, more dicsiplined Mongol races from the East. The same thing is currently happening to U.S. Society. As we freely allow different minority groups(Illegal immigrants, 'disenfranchised African Americans', gays, openly Socialist Liberals, etc..) that hold radically different value systems then the original "Constitutional American Values" that have made our country great, we dilute what America was originally intended to be. It is only a matter of time until our society will become unrecognizable and, therefore, not really America at all.
As with everything in life Karen, People make judgements and throw stones because of ignorance or prejudice. The fact that the christian religion is ineffective in reducing ignorance and prejudice flags the structures and application as being at best ineffective and at worst dangerous.Although religions tend to be good at certain things and less good at others depending on the context in which they were born.Christianity is not particularly good at promoting acceptance of others unless they profess the same specific views as the person doing the judging. Most of us probably grow up with a kind of inbuilt radar for things that are diffewrent and possibly challanging to our underlying belief systems. My personal choice is to accept the challange and possibly learn something about myself and others in the process. It took a personal rejection of my catholic upbringing at the age of 14 to enable my life to begin. I just wish a few more pople of my age had done the same thing.
I agree with your facebook friend
Care to elaborate Joe?
The comment of your facebook friend is undoubtedly true. Of course the first thing that comes to mind is the Word of God. Homosexuality is an abomination. I understand that those who support/practice such life styles are not Christian and thus not inclined to the Word of God. However, the authors purposed confusion of how a person can love the sinner and not the sin is unwarranted. Every person sins, yet Christ loves us. Homosexuality is a sin like many others. However, it is one that is quite visible and because of this can spread like cancer. Men's hearts are inclined to darknessm, so they fall prey to the temptations of the devil.
I'm not following your logic Me. If we are all sinners, homosexual and heterosexuals alike, how can you say that those who support/practice homosexuality are not Christian?
Does the visibility of the "sin" make a difference? If homosexuality is an abomination, why did God create homosexuals?
Omg. I'm a bit late but I can already see the basic divisions in ideology: family-based conservatism, which basically creates nations, aka the "right" and the generally intellectually irresponsible and unpricipled "left", or "gauche" (you know what I mean) whose primary call-out to anyone who doesn't accept their "progressive" (humanist, socialist) views as "ignorant".
As to the fall of societies due to the general acceptance of homosexuality, it's only one of the facets which cause the fall. The others were general lax, debauched lifestyles of their elites which included corruption, greed, sexual licentiousness, indifference to towards the welfare of the state, basically what I'd call the onset of the ancient version of the "Me" generation.
Greek homosexuality in the elites was primarily pederastic, i.e. older elite men would seduce younger, gullible boys. Just like homosexuality, it was nothing more than a "pitcher" and "catcher" relationship.
In the early days of Rome, homosexuality was condemned and considered a degenerate Greek act. As Rome grew large, elite Roman males would choose male slaves for partners. Little is said about the working class though. The whole thing basically fell apart upon the imperialization of Rome, which came about following internal strife (modern parallels anyone?). Emperors were expected to be homosexual.
What the facebook commentors SHOULD have written on their facebook discussion is that IMPERIALIZATION is the fall of a nation and a large part of its fall is due to the necessity of acceptance of factors which have been kept down during the the time of their pre-imperialistic nation, one of the most important of which being homosexuality.
Since emperors are not elected, they must submit to the will of the people as a whole else face revolt. They essentially submit to the ritchest and most powerful citisens and will play along witht he masses only when necessary.
As nations become complacently rich and powerful, they forget the founding principles which they built upon, namely the family, and I don't mean the "new-age" version of it, I mean a true father, mother and their biological children type of family, not some running experiment like having one dad and his butt-plug boyfriend. Recall, unless you're a test-tube baby, you can't have more than one dad, one daddy can't get the other one pregnant. Remember that.
As for homosexuality, the disgust towards it is primarily felt by what I would term, the "working class morality". In essence, the Judeo-Christian morality, since all of its central characters were generally either ex-worker slaves, working-class or elite detractors. I have to agree with this, simply because we know how to build a nation. Homosexuals simply know how to mess one up.
As to accepting a person but not "who they are", it's simply the act of hating the sin but not the sinner. Homosexuality is a choice, the individual can change if they want, so as they can make that decision, we're best hating what they do and not them themselves, we can in fact gain an ally in doing so. Everyone makes mistakes of course. In fact, it's not gender and race that are a construct according to humanists and socialists, it's homosexuality. And a failed, flawed construct it is.
P.S.: What's best yet is the good news that science has finally agreed that there is no such thing as a gay gene. Which is pretty obvious, since "gay" couples who produce infants through artificial insemination with the sperm of homosexuals and eggs from lesbians do not incur a larger percentage of births which translate into homosexual adults. The same for homosexual men marrying heterosexual women or vice-versa, which was common before the mass-acceptance of the 90s.
P.S.2: Honestly, so Canadian kids are engaging in less premarital sex and drug use under this new liberalized education. Wow. Actually, kids have been engaging in less premarital sex and drug use before the late 60s, that's before the "new age" movement hit the West. And the "new age" movement is a topic on its own.
P.S.3: Good things come in threes. Honestly, I don't see why we're having this debate either. A responsible, contractual, long-term relationship-based philosophy should the the only thing promoted in society. Homosexuality should be discouraged because in men it is absolutely disgusting (and the all to recent trend in involving heterosexual couples and anal sex simply makes me go psycho with anger, literally angry-enough to kill, because homosexuals defiling eachother is no big deal, but men defiling women in such a way, that's a line you're not supposed to cross), homosexuals should be converted or shunned socially or even imprisonned in mental wards lest they change. We have absolutely NO need for their corruption. And before you go blazing about me sounding like some short, squat, mustachioed german, note that much of the founders of German National Socialism were homosexual, and the NSDP was a thoroughly homoerotic cult, to say the least. More proof that empires are run primarily by faggots and their acceptance is in fact national suicide. So your friends were in a large part correct.
Scuse the double post. Just means it's doubly important ;D
I barely know what to say - this is just so... out there.
Really. A typical feminist response. Thank you though. I took my facts from history (I didn't quote, should have, will do at another time you're free to research it) and homosexual sites. Honestly, if it weren't for the general climate of fear from political reprisal from the pc-crowd, what I just wrote would be the defacto sentiment accross society. Here's the link to the "no gay gene" statement I made:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=
Enjoy the read.
Will this thing post properly?
Apparently not.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=
The remainder of the url is: "205608"
Omit quotes.
You have a problem with feminists too Michael? Not surprising I guess, but no, I am not a feminist, I am a humanist, which may by your definition make me feminist since I do believe woman are human and worthy of equal rights.
I have no doubt of your intelligence or that your "facts" are your interpretation of history, or that you believe passionately everything that you say. Of those things I am certain.
Whether or not scientists find a "gay gene", the choice issue is rather beside the point. I don't agree that it is a choice, but even if it were we live in a free society that allows consenting adults to make those choices when they don't infringe on the rights and freedoms of anyone else. Your anger over what consenting adults do in private is frankly a little frightening.
And for the record, I don't consider those whose views differ from mine to be "ignorant". Some are, but so are some who share my views! Others simply hold an opposing view, and some are very extreme in their thinking. I once had a college prof who said that people who hold extreme views - on either end of the spectrum, are often highly intelligent and walking that fine line of genius/insanity (think Hitler). I tend to agree.
Karen, God didn't create homosexuals. God created humans and some people choose a homosexual life-style. The practice goes against the created purpose of men and women. Even for those not sharing my belief system, but rather choosing evolution, you would be hard pressed to find a reason why it would be accepted. In that scenario as well it serves no purpose and would be rooted out by natural processes. As for your question about how I can say no person choosing such actions can be Christian lies in 1 Corinthians 6:9.
"Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men."
Abusers of themselves with men - Arsenokoites
- one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual
among other passages in Scripture.
The visibility, I would suspect, does play a certain role. However, I tend to think it probably has more to do with the overt disregard to law and design (not human law). A person cannot claim to love God and disavow everything He says. The visibility comes into effect when they start modeling such behavior for others to see and encouraging the perversion to spread.
I must reiterate though, homosexuals are in need of a savior just like all unrepentent individuals, and Christ died for them the same as for me. This is how a person can love the person and hate the sin. I hate what they are doing, but greatly desire for them to be saved.
A humanist! Even better, though the "we can do it" icon generally is generally associated with feminists, i.e. "women" men don't want. No wonder you would post something so completely ridiculously inane as your homosexual acceptance spiel. You guys are real pros at "accepting" and complete failures at critical thought and lasting social principles.
Sooo...you have no doubt "of my intelligence or my facts as an interpretation of history" (the interpetative part of course being a typical humanist flight response). First of all, everything I wrote is verifiable and not some personal interpretation you idiot. Not that you'd bother to check it out as it would burst your happy little humanist bubble. For all your self-professed love of humanity, you people hate the truth, simply because you tend to be a bunch of whiny little brats who simply can't take a challenge to their mousy little belief system.
"Whether or not scientists find a "gay gene", the choice issue is rather beside the point." IT IS THE MAIN POINT YOU IDIOT! The secondary point which derives directly from it is how to deal with homosexuality now that it is in fact an acquired behavior. I mean, alcoholism and other drug addictions are considered moral and psychological problems. Homosexuality therefore enters the realm of deciding whether it is a benefit to the individual or a problem. Given that it is primarily a sexual preference and in men revolves primarily around the utter filth that is anal sex, i.e. deriving pleasure from penetrating the orifice whose ONLY purpose is the evacuation of human organic waste
As for the latter part, as to "extreme" individuals being "...highly intelligent and walking that fine line of genius/insanity (think Hitler)." Sooo...are you telling me Hitler was a genius and I'm comparable to the guy? Being from a people on Hitler's WW2 racial hit list, I have to say that you just stepped in a landline, let's just hope you don't publicly make the mistake of calling Slavs or Jews you disagree with NAZIs just because they are racially white, you might be more than just a bit dis-appointed, especially considering what their grandparents had to go through in WWII. How can you, or your professor, assume that Hitler was anything but a complete stooge taking orders from people far more intelligent than he himself (note, he was refused a college education for lack of talent). You guys worship him in secret or something?
Seriously, anything you complete and utter fools write bounces back at you! You're completely illogical and basically act like chickens with their heads cut-off. You don't think, you just react based on what makes you feel good. You're disgustingly stupid, at least where it concerns your stance on homosexuality. As far as I and I would bet the vast majority of most western nations are concerned, we will see the day when homosexuality, lesbianism, bi-sexuality will again be made illegal and treated as the psychological disease it is.
Wow! Your angry little rant there complete with name calling certainly demonstrates that YOU are exactly what you claim I am! LOL I think the biggest difference between you and I is that you believe anyone who disagrees with you is an uneducated idiot. Yet you claim that I lack the ability to think critically. You have to be able to hear another point of view to actually consider it. YOU cannot do that.
I in no way, shape or form compared you to Hitler or his ideas. If there was a comparison to be made, it was about his mental state. He has been said to be highly intelligent and insane. Of course I do not know if you are for real or if you just enjoy attempting to push buttons, but I'd categorize these comments as crazy.
Since the topic was mine, I think I am qualified to state whether or not the topic I started had anything to do with the "choice" debate. It didn't. In YOUR mind it does and therefore I am an idiot ... things that make you go hmmm..., but since you insist, you do realize that I can find as much "proof" that it is not a choice as you can find that it is... right?
And BTW, with regard to the study in Canada concerning the sexual behavior of teens... it shows that the decrease in teen pregnancy, and the decrease in pre-marital sex, is highest in this current generation. Again, you prove yourself to be what you claim I am - "you don't think, you just react based on what makes you feel good." And since we're on that topic, shouldn't it make you feel good to see statistical evidence that teens are holding themselves to a higher moral standard than previous generations?
I sincerely wish you well Michal. The anger you carry has got to be a huge burden, and I do wish you peace.
I am so completely impressed with your response Karen.
I've always found it interesting how conservative extremists resort to petty threats and name-calling at their last attempt at creating a mockery of liberal ideas and statements.
The fact that his opinion was well-sculpted with an engaged thought-process near the beginning was enjoyable to debate in the conventional democratic manner.
After reading this heated argument (most of the fire coming from one side...wink...wink) my respect for you has gone through the roof.
However Michal, as your opinion is as important as any other educated individual, your true colors leave me disheartened.
Very mature and open minded. I agree with everything you said here. Makes me wonder where you've been hiding since we really could've used your help in California on prop 8.
Lgali says:
8 months ago
This is big change in our society everybody is now equal, still this is a taboo in some places, Good hub