Gay as Choice

[The6thMessenger]

In light of the other thread about Homosexuality being wrong, i remember this little issue i heard over the internet. Probably this only applies to the liberal areas or something, like the USA where there is freedom, unlike some parts in the Asia like India or middle-east where parents can arrange marriages, force child brides.

"Being Gay is a Choice"

And I've been thinking.

There were people that agreed and disagreed about it, and then there were those that were angry about it or not. As far as my googling about this, there is scientific basis about homosexuality in our nature, so it's totally natural. And we can agree that being Gay is not a choice.

But what struck me is the question itself, and the outcry of a few (perhaps many more.)

There were those that quick to point that being Gay is not a choice. Is it like being a psychopath or OCD, that somewhat makes it "Okay" because it's natural? (Not that it's bad, but i am pointing out that it's like an appeal to nature or in a lesser intensity of insanity, and they feel the need to point it out as if it makes it okay.)

Why do these people (people who feel the need to point out that Gay-dom/Gay-ness/Being-Gay is a choice.)? Does it somehow justify them being Gay, and without it they have no reason to do so? I don't think they have to do that, it's quite unnecessary.

And then there were those that started this; people that insisted that Gay-dom/Gay-ness/being-Gay is a choice. And my retort is as follows:

So What? If they choose to be Gay, so what? They are independent human beings, they are capable to choose how they live, and if they choose to have a partner or who they love even to a person of their own gender, whether influenced genetically or by choice, they have the liberty to do so. Just as we don't force you to love and/or marry other people you don't want to love and/or marry, none of us have the right to prevent or force people to love one another.

I think the debate of whether Gay is a Choice or not is utterly irrelevant, and the following outcries for and against it are unnecessary.

--

If you're wondering, no i don't think gay or any other genders are wrong.

Also i am Bisexual by principle, but as much as possible I don't want to fall in love with the same sex.

[garrethdsouza]

Yup I have similar thoughts on this.

That sexual orientation appeal to nature issue. So if one chooses to be with a partner of the same sex, how does it matter to anyone or what wrong is it doing?

Homosexuality isn't a gender identity, its a sexual orientation.

Transgender is a gender identity.

[bobo0100]

There is a reason that many feel this is a valid, and important argument, and in some places the reason that this can be important is still true. I'm sure you know that the main push back against homosexuality where divine command theorists, who argued it was immoral according to gods will. From this came the existence of anti-gay "therapy." So if sexual identity was a choice, than such "therapy's" would work. Its, in part, because "gay is not a choice" that such "therapy's" do not work, and are illegal in most parts of the world. Not to mention that we only ever talk of mortality when we talk of choice, so if "gay is not a choice" than it is not on the table of morally questionable actions (I guess it can still be opposed to never finding a lover).

[Fluttershy]

I also think that it's not a choice you can't just chose to be gay like that you can't just start being attracted by the same gender because you decided to. I also don't think that it's wrong. It's natural.

[miniboes]

I also don't think that it's wrong. It's natural.

I agree on both points, but what I think Pink One's (OP) point was that this is not the reason being gay is not wrong. There is nothing about homosexualism that causes any sort of harm inherently (STD's are not a problem with homosexualism, but with unsafe sex). That is why it's not wrong, not the fact that it is natural. To state that natural=okay is to commit an appeal to nature fallacy.

[Red]

From what I've seen, it's not really used as a defence, it's more of a response to the "Being gay is unnatural" argument. So it's not really an argument, more of a counter argument. At least from what I've seen.

[knot]

Free choice is an illusion anyway. We can't base morality on some idea of "choice", it's not relevant in that context