Why is homosexuality wrong?

[Northern Dominus]

I don't care about race, religion, sexual orientation, gender or any of it. Each person has a right to their own life and property and has a right to live their life as they see fit as long as they respect the same right of others.

Agreed science should provide the cure.

How wonderfully hypocritical. If you really don't care about sexual orientation, then why do you feel the urge to cure it and treat it as a disease?

Because...

Because Ayn Rand didn't like gays.

Dammit, Ninja'd

[Ifreann]

How wonderfully hypocritical. If you really don't care about sexual orientation, then why do you feel the urge to cure it and treat it as a disease?

Because...

Because Ayn Rand didn't like gays.

Dammit, Ninja'd

Yeah, I'm awesome like that.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

How wonderfully hypocritical. If you really don't care about sexual orientation, then why do you feel the urge to cure it and treat it as a disease?

Because, objectively, unnatural things make him uncomfortable. Oh, and Ayn Rand said so.

The more you read into that woman the more unpleasant she becomes. Consider also:
"an ideal woman is a man-worshipper, and an ideal man is the highest symbol of mankind."

All of which raises the question: how can you support allowing people to pursue happiness and rational self-interest and then set about "curing" them?

It's cute to see a libertarian denying the right to bodily sovereignty.

[Northern Dominus]

Because...

Dammit, Ninja'd

Yeah, I'm awesome like that.

You're definitively something Iffy

Back to the topic at hand, there's a simple explanation for why some people view certain fellow humans as abominations due to a simple inconsequential difference between them; deliberate lack of education. Case in point...well me.

I was one of those religious kids that was taught to love the sinner and hate the sin, in this case homosexuality. I never made a big point of it but when asked I didn't exactly shrink away from that viewpoint when queried.
Two things started the process of changing that viewpoint however. First, in the church I attended (ELCA lutheran church for those who are curious) we received a second pastor that was...different. She was respected and liked well enough but some of the members of the congregation were put off for some reason by her. Years later after I had left the church and spoke with her (post 2009 when the ELCA voted to ordain LGBT pastors), she revealed her joy in regards to that particular church's inclusion of LGBT members, especially considering she is a lesbian. During my sophmore year of high school a friend of mine was thrown out of her home for revealing to her very pious parents that she was in fact bisexual.
The whole thing came to a head when I served in the USCG. A member of a team I was assigned to and an eventual close friend of mine was open about his orientation to the crew (I was the new guy), and it was treated as no big deal. By this point I was pretty neutral on the whole issue in the "not seen not heard" category of things, but that drove it home for me. LGBT humans are humans, no more and no less than anybody else, and to deride them in any way is demeaning and frankly an act of willful ignorant given the amount of free information and openness that is possible in this society.

To cap it all off, I'd like to share a particular biblical verse that I think encapsulates the argument not only for myself but for anybody attempting to use a holy book as a crutch for ignorant hate. I'm currently a dead-center agnostic, but I think most people will find it appropriate:
1 Corinthians 13:11, King James Version
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

TL;DR version: If you have a problem with LGBT human beings and think there's some sort of biblical justification for it, do what the bible says, grow up and educate yourself.

[Objectiveland]

How wonderfully hypocritical. If you really don't care about sexual orientation, then why do you feel the urge to cure it and treat it as a disease?

Because...

Because Ayn Rand didn't like gays.

Dammit, Ninja'd

People have a right to their own life and to live their life as they see fit. A person with another malady (OCD for example) has a right to live with it or seek treatment. The same would be true for homosexuals if the defect could be identified and corrected. No one would be forcing them to.

[Divair]

Because...

Dammit, Ninja'd

People have a right to their own life and to live their life as they see fit. A person with another malady (OCD for example) has a right to live with it or seek treatment. The same would be true for homosexuals if the defect could be identified and corrected. No one would be forcing them to.

Would you also allow people to do the opposite?

[Meryuma]

People have a right to their own life and to live their life as they see fit. A person with another malady (OCD for example) has a right to live with it or seek treatment. The same would be true for homosexuals if the defect could be identified and corrected. No one would be forcing them to.

As a person who's gay, autistic and has OCD, don't you ever.

[Objectiveland]

People have a right to their own life and to live their life as they see fit. A person with another malady (OCD for example) has a right to live with it or seek treatment. The same would be true for homosexuals if the defect could be identified and corrected. No one would be forcing them to.

Would you also allow people to do the opposite?

I suppose. But why would someone want their child to have Autism for example?

[The Emerald Dawn]

Would you also allow people to do the opposite?

I suppose. But why would someone want their child to have Autism for example?

Because I'm pretty smart, successful, and have managed to improve systems for not only the military but for my current employer?

Or should I just not exist, in your twisted little world?

[Divair]

Would you also allow people to do the opposite?

I suppose. But why would someone want their child to have Autism for example?

I don't know much about autism and I don't really care why you would or would not want to have it. The option existing is all I care about.

[Northern Dominus]

Because...

Dammit, Ninja'd

People have a right to their own life and to live their life as they see fit. A person with another malady (OCD for example) has a right to live with it or seek treatment. The same would be true for homosexuals if the defect could be identified and corrected. No one would be forcing them to.

There is no treatment for LGBT orientation because it isn't a disorder like OCD. It doesn't require therapy or change in any way, and to insinuate that it does is quite frankly callous and denigrating of all humans.

Don't believe me? How about the American Psychological Association
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx

As for homophobia...well I'll let Morgan Freeman handle that one:
https://twitter.com/MorgonFreeman/statu ... 1978929152

[Meryuma]

Would you also allow people to do the opposite?

I suppose. But why would someone want their child to have Autism for example?

For one thing, because they're not horrible people who want to eliminate the possibility of people who are different than them existing. Autism isn't even a disease.

[Raeyh]

People have a right to their own life and to live their life as they see fit. A person with another malady (OCD for example) has a right to live with it or seek treatment. The same would be true for homosexuals if the defect could be identified and corrected. No one would be forcing them to.

As a person who's gay, autistic and has OCD, don't you ever.

You don't see any advantage to not having OCD anymore or the others? I would imagine having obsessions and compulsions all the time would be a hardship.

[The Emerald Dawn]

As a person who's gay, autistic and has OCD, don't you ever.

You don't see any advantage to not having OCD anymore or the others? I would imagine having obsessions and compulsions all the time would be a hardship.

You get used to it, and there are times where it can be advantageous.

OCD isn't a "monolithic-bloc" disorder. You can have OCD where you absolutely must count your fingers before you dial a phone, or you can have OCD where your room can't have the color blue. It isn't a single thing.

[Meryuma]

As a person who's gay, autistic and has OCD, don't you ever.

You don't see any advantage to not having OCD anymore or the others? I would imagine having obsessions and compulsions all the time would be a hardship.

It is. It really fucking is. It's horrible, one of the worst things about my life.

Being gay and autistic are nothing like that.

You don't see any advantage to not having OCD anymore or the others? I would imagine having obsessions and compulsions all the time would be a hardship.

You get used to it, and there are times where it can be advantageous.

OCD isn't a "monolithic-bloc" disorder. You can have OCD where you absolutely must count your fingers before you dial a phone, or you can have OCD where your room can't have the color blue. It isn't a single thing.

You're wrong. It has had no advantage for me other than helping me brush my teeth more thoroughly sometimes.

[Objectiveland]

As a person who's gay, autistic and has OCD, don't you ever.

You don't see any advantage to not having OCD anymore or the others? I would imagine having obsessions and compulsions all the time would be a hardship.

Exactly.

[The Grand District]

Because God made the world for one Woman and one Man to be together and reproduce. He does not want man and man or woman and woman couples. But, although as a Christian i do not approve of homosexuality, i (and other Christians out there) must tolerate that people will be gay because of sin. Approval and Tolerance are two very different words.

[The Emerald Dawn]

You don't see any advantage to not having OCD anymore or the others? I would imagine having obsessions and compulsions all the time would be a hardship.

It is. It really fucking is. It's horrible, one of the worst things about my life.

Being gay and autistic are nothing like that.

You get used to it, and there are times where it can be advantageous.

OCD isn't a "monolithic-bloc" disorder. You can have OCD where you absolutely must count your fingers before you dial a phone, or you can have OCD where your room can't have the color blue. It isn't a single thing.

You're wrong. It has had no advantage for me other than helping me brush my teeth more thoroughly sometimes.

I've found OCD to be handy several times. My "compulsion" is that if numbers aren't aligned by value, or figures by size, I can't stop fidgeting with it. It sucks when I'm looking at raw data, but my bosses love me for how well I organize things. They've accepted that I'm "different", and they allow me the time to make sure things are perfect.

It gets better, Meryuma. I promise.

[Ivory Record]

Because God made the world for one Woman and one Man to be together and reproduce. He does not want man and man or woman and woman couples. But, although as a Christian i do not approve of homosexuality, i (and other Christians out there) must tolerate that people will be gay because of sin. Approval and Tolerance are two very different words.

Demonstrate the existence of God, and you have a case.

Moreover, explain how he can be perfect, and yet sin may still exist in the world. He is either wise, good, or powerful (pick two), but cannot be all three where sin=1.

There's being a Christian and there's following Christ. Do the latter rather than the former. It's very liberating.

Edit adds: The OP asked for an avoidance of "divine command theory", so your argument doesn't add any more to the conversation than my assertion that homosexuality is inherently good does.

[Objectiveland]

Objectively: "A person who by nature, rather than by choice, is more attracted to members of the same sex than the opposite sex still has the choice to recognize and act in accordance with this fact or to repress or act against it. If a person wishes to achieve happiness and promote his life, then he must, in a realm as morally important as sex, act in accordance with his nature. For example, it is morally right for a woman whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a woman she loves and desires. In contrast, it is morally wrong for a man whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a man rather than seeking out a woman. So there are contexts in which homosexual behavior is immoral (just as there are contexts in which heterosexual behavior is immoral), but there is nothing immoral about homosexuality per se."

[Farnhamia]

Because God made the world for one Woman and one Man to be together and reproduce. He does not want man and man or woman and woman couples. But, although as a Christian i do not approve of homosexuality, i (and other Christians out there) must tolerate that people will be gay because of sin. Approval and Tolerance are two very different words.

You're entitled to your opinion. I personally do not believe in the existence of your "God" and I deny that my sexual orientation is a "sin." I don't need or even want your Tolerance, and I care little for your Approval.

[Divair]

Objectively: "A person who by nature, rather than by choice, is more attracted to members of the same sex than the opposite sex still has the choice to recognize and act in accordance with this fact or to repress or act against it. If a person wishes to achieve happiness and promote his life, then he must, in a realm as morally important as sex, act in accordance with his nature. For example, it is morally right for a woman whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a woman she loves and desires. In contrast, it is morally wrong for a man whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a man rather than seeking out a woman. So there are contexts in which homosexual behavior is immoral (just as there are contexts in which heterosexual behavior is immoral), but there is nothing immoral about homosexuality per se."

Morality is subjective and irrelevant.

[Meryuma]

You don't see any advantage to not having OCD anymore or the others? I would imagine having obsessions and compulsions all the time would be a hardship.

Exactly.

Again, the opposite of my point. I'm saying I'm happy with being gay and autistic but having OCD sucks.

Objectively: "A person who by nature, rather than by choice, is more attracted to members of the same sex than the opposite sex still has the choice to recognize and act in accordance with this fact or to repress or act against it. If a person wishes to achieve happiness and promote his life, then he must, in a realm as morally important as sex, act in accordance with his nature. For example, it is morally right for a woman whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a woman she loves and desires. In contrast, it is morally wrong for a man whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a man rather than seeking out a woman. So there are contexts in which homosexual behavior is immoral (just as there are contexts in which heterosexual behavior is immoral), but there is nothing immoral about homosexuality per se."

How do you know the difference between someone who's homosexual by nature and someone who does stuff with the same sex but isn't a "real homosexual"?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Objectively: "A person who by nature, rather than by choice, is more attracted to members of the same sex than the opposite sex still has the choice to recognize and act in accordance with this fact or to repress or act against it. If a person wishes to achieve happiness and promote his life, then he must, in a realm as morally important as sex, act in accordance with his nature. For example, it is morally right for a woman whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a woman she loves and desires. In contrast, it is morally wrong for a man whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a man rather than seeking out a woman. So there are contexts in which homosexual behavior is immoral (just as there are contexts in which heterosexual behavior is immoral), but there is nothing immoral about homosexuality per se."

If you're going to quote, please link to the source material, or give appropriate attribution if a link is not possible.

[Objectiveland]

Objectively: "A person who by nature, rather than by choice, is more attracted to members of the same sex than the opposite sex still has the choice to recognize and act in accordance with this fact or to repress or act against it. If a person wishes to achieve happiness and promote his life, then he must, in a realm as morally important as sex, act in accordance with his nature. For example, it is morally right for a woman whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a woman she loves and desires. In contrast, it is morally wrong for a man whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a man rather than seeking out a woman. So there are contexts in which homosexual behavior is immoral (just as there are contexts in which heterosexual behavior is immoral), but there is nothing immoral about homosexuality per se."

Morality is subjective and irrelevant.

Objectivism holds that as long as no force is involved, people have the right to do as they please in sexual matters, whether or not their behavior is considered by others to be or is in fact moral.