Atheism and homosexuality

[CookieJon]

I was out drinking with my girlfriend, my mates and her mates and her gay friend actually grabbed my crotch as he walked past I told him in no uncertain terms that while i had no problem with his sexuality, I did have a problem with someone i've only just met grabbing my manhood!

And rightly so.

...One of my mates is at the complete opposite end of the "spectrum" with his homosexuality he doesn't openly flaunt it, It's just a part of who he is.

I do note, however, that you "openly flaunt" your heterosexuality, otherwise you wouldn't be seen in public drinking with your girlfriend, now would you?

Haha! a fair point CookieJon, flaunt was perhaps the wrong word....

Yeah I know what you meant - I was just being a bit naughty.

You've touched on one of my bugbears, however... When a man and a woman walk down the street holding hands, no comment. When a man and a man hold hands, they're "ramming their homosexuality down everyone's throat" (I've actually heard that said, btw, usually by people who fail to notice the pleasingly humorous imagery of their own complaint)

Similarly, a childrens' book about a king who'd rather live happily ever after with a prince ought to cause no more alarm than one in which a princess lives happily ever after with a prince, unless I've missed a good reason why it shouldn't. It's the same thing.

[...Idle]

I've experienced it first hand. Not being raped but gay men making advances on me.

Lucky for you.. it's nice when someone finds you attractive.

It gets annoying in a club/bar environment since you know most folks are just after a quick shag.

So you would have rather he been interested in a long-term relationship with you?

No, how does my comment even fucking imply that? you know what just fuck off mate.

[maiforpeace]

No, how does my comment even fucking imply that? you know what just fuck off mate.

Just a reminder to please play nice Idle.

[CJ]

No, how does my comment even fucking imply that? you know what just fuck off mate.

That sound like the sort of thing I'd say, and that's not good!

[Epictetus]

Hi there,

I've been an atheist for 3 or 4 years now, and I find that majority of atheists are either ardent supporters of homosexuality, are homosexuals themselves or don't really care much. In all my years I have found only a hand full of atheists who have had any objection to homosexuality. Why is there a lack of objection to homosexuality within the atheist community?

What is there to object to? If you’re not homosexual then what business is it of yours anyway? I personally have no objection to homosexuality because there’s simply nothing to object to, unlike, say, the rampant pedophilia within the "Holy" Catholic Church. Now, there's something I oppose "ardently"...

Also, why are some homosexuals proud of being homosexual? It makes no sense to me, it makes about much sense to me as a disabled person being proud of being disabled.

Nice, you’re comparing homosexuality with a disability.

[epepke]

Similarly, a childrens' book about a king who'd rather live happily ever after with a prince ought to cause no more alarm than one in which a princess lives happily ever after with a prince, unless I've missed a good reason why it shouldn't. It's the same thing.

I quite agree. I think it's terribly unfair that only heterosexuals are subjected to the extremely destructive "happily ever after" false-expectation myth. I want to see some homosexuals suffer from this as well. Maybe it will make them shut the fuck up about how privileged "breeders" are. Probably not, but I want the Schadenfreude.

This is the same reason I am in favor of same-sex marriage.

I want Yiddishe mamas kvetching and noodging about how their gay sons haven't settled down with some nice boy yet. I want gay men and women facing punitive alimony and child support from their estranged partners on the grounds that the partner showed up at two company dinners or threw their underwear in the wash every couple of weeks.

In short, I will enjoy it when gay people figure out that all the shit they've been attributing to hetties or het-boys or breeders or to the sex that they don't have to deal with are human and don't have shit to do with sex or sexual orientation.

[Trolldor]

That people still talk about it, either for or against, is the reason homosexuals face discrimination. When people learn it ain't a big fucking deal it'll go away.

[CookieJon]

Similarly, a childrens' book about a king who'd rather live happily ever after with a prince ought to cause no more alarm than one in which a princess lives happily ever after with a prince, unless I've missed a good reason why it shouldn't. It's the same thing.

I quite agree. I think it's terribly unfair that only heterosexuals are subjected to the extremely destructive "happily ever after" false-expectation myth. I want to see some homosexuals suffer from this as well. Maybe it will make them shut the fuck up about how privileged "breeders" are. Probably not, but I want the Schadenfreude.

This is the same reason I am in favor of same-sex marriage.

I want Yiddishe mamas kvetching and noodging about how their gay sons haven't settled down with some nice boy yet. I want gay men and women facing punitive alimony and child support from their estranged partners on the grounds that the partner showed up at two company dinners or threw their underwear in the wash every couple of weeks.

In short, I will enjoy it when gay people figure out that all the shit they've been attributing to hetties or het-boys or breeders or to the sex that they don't have to deal with are human and don't have shit to do with sex or sexual orientation.

Ah, the grass is always greener, eh? Well I suppose you may be right, but still it would be nice to have the choice.

[charlou]

I have no problem with homosexuals doing what they need to do in private, I see homosexuality as a disability, since there is no evolutionary desire for a homosexual to have sex with a woman and in turn produce off-spring, which is essentially the propose of all living species, i.e. to propagate their genes through asexual/sexual production. For lesbians this is not a problem in the sense as in evolution as rape of females within a species actually has an evolutionary benefit.

You must have a disability then if you fuck a woman with a condom or have oral sex

Well, fucking with a condom sometimes feels like a disability....

Having to fuck with a condom proves there's no loving god.

[A Monkey Shaved]

Even though I personally knew of at least one atheist who was also very outspoken homophobe a "homosexual atheist" strikes me as not where near as oxymoronic as a "homosexual Christian" even though there happens to be stacks of secular homophobes. Secular homophobes tend to dislike homosexuals for completely different reasons to fundies. Usually they feel that any expression of any sympathy of homosexuals kind of violates their sexuality and masculinity in particular in they happen to be male. Like I often hear plenty of homophobic insults in the crowd and football matches, especially in the Australian rules code, where the frequently drop the word "poofter" if a player appears to fake an injury or take a dive. For me it is not an issue and I could not care less if few football players announced they were gay.

[Epictetus]

On this matter, as well as on many others, I subscribe to Mills' "one very simple principle":

"The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right... The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign."

[The Curious Squid]

Hold on, you're not attracted to men all the time and you believe that nobody else can be straight all the time either? To me, and given the nature of the OP stating that most atheists don't see homosexuality as a bad thing so this is in no way an insult, it sounds like you might be a lapsed homosexual yourself but you've still got the whole religious guilt shit keeping you from accepting it.

Quite simply, if you find guys attractive anytime then you're probably at least bi and not believing that someone else can be completely hetero enforces that idea since you're subjectively basing that premise on your feelings and can't understand that other people may simply not feel the same way about men as you do.

[virphen]

For me it is not an issue and I could not care less if few football players announced they were gay.

Where we need to get as a society is the position where anyone coming out just gets a reaction of "so what?". It shouldn't even be reported on.

We're obviously nowhere near that stage yet.

[Trolldor]

Hold on, you're not attracted to men all the time and you believe that nobody else can be straight all the time either? To me, and given the nature of the OP stating that most atheists don't see homosexuality as a bad thing so this is in no way an insult, it sounds like you might be a lapsed homosexual yourself but you've still got the whole religious guilt shit keeping you from accepting it.

Quite simply, if you find guys attractive anytime then you're probably at least bi and not believing that someone else can be completely hetero enforces that idea since you're subjectively basing that premise on your feelings and can't understand that other people may simply not feel the same way about men as you do.

"You're just gay."

[Hermit]

Where we need to get as a society is the position where anyone coming out just gets a reaction of "so what?".

Actually, it is the position where "coming out" is as needless for homosexuals as it is for heterosexuals.


Speaking of positions, I am still waiting for Idle to reply to this:

I see homosexuality as a disability, since there is no evolutionary desire for a homosexual to have sex with a woman and in turn produce off-spring, which is essentially the propose of all living species, i.e. to propagate their genes through asexual/sexual production. For lesbians this is not a problem in the sense as in evolution as rape of females within a species actually has an evolutionary benefit.

You really need to reconsider the notion that if something is natural, it is therefore good. In this particular instance - the purpose, as you put it, to propagate - can be argued to be a very bad thing in terms of the survival of the human species. Our population is rapidly heading toward the 7 billion mark and the most conservative estimate is that it will plateau at just under 11 billion in 2100. Most estimates regarding sustainability indicate that we, as a species, are about to make this planet uninhabitable by sheer weight of numbers. We may be in the process of actually breeding ourselves out of existence. If something is natural, it is not automatically a good thing.