Are homos "born that way?"

In a previous post I wrote:

I'm indifferent to this whole "gay marriage" thing. It's not something that I want or need but I'm not religious so I don't have any serious objections...

But, when people start blaming "gay marriage" for destroying straight marriage, I have a chuckle because straights have done that very well all on their own through divorce...

...modern heterosexuals have decided to put their right to the pursuit of individual happiness ahead of the sacrament of marriage. And that's pretty much what gays are doing too.

Now I made it pretty clear that I was not making a case for "gay marriage" - it's a bad idea in many many ways. I was simply making the case that:

It's a free country and people can pursue happiness anyway they want as long as it does not encroach on other peoples' rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

There were a lot of comments most of which I agreed with but there were two with which I did not agree. The first was:

Divorce hasn't changed its definition.

I found that statement astonishing. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman till death. Mark wrote:

And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.

And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?

And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.

And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

It couldn't be clearer. The word "marriage" comes from the same root as the word "merge." The moment that union becomes less than forever, it is no longer marriage but a civil contract. I don't like using the word "marriage" to describe either straight secular marriage or gay partnerships. Marriage is the merging of a man and a woman into "one flesh" - only a man and a woman; not two men or two women. And marriage is forever. If it's not between a man and a woman and is not forever, it's not marriage. So to me, it's pretty obvious that divorce has changed the definition of marriage. Unless you think Moses' ideas were more important than Jesus' which I don't as I take the Old Testament with several large tablespoons of salt.

The other comment with which I disagreed was this one from Two Dogs:

Oddly enough, I posted my idiocy concerning this very thing a day ago because of a comment that I received.

I take issue with the "I was born that way argument."

My unsolicited opinion.

I responded:

Two Dogs, really truly honestly - some of us were born that way. Not all. Some get into the lifestyle because they are simply sex pigs. But some of us were born sissy boys. Fortunately my dad was worldly wise and told me I'd be beaten up if I didn't toughen up and he made me do boxing.

I won't go into detail here. I'll save that for later but my theory is that some of us are born queer and love other guys romantically. It's got nothing to do with sex. The sex part may develop later but is mostly blown out of proportion by homosexuals.

Well, now I well go into detail.

I've read studies saying that some people are born homosexual because of genes or because the fetus was affected by hormones in the womb and I've seen brain scans showing the difference between straight and queer brains but I take all these "studies" with a large sackful of salt not only because I know that they're motivated by a political agenda but because, after living in San Francisco for 25 years, I saw first-hand that there are as many different causes for homosexuality as there are different types of homos.

Some maybe were born that way. I know that I was "fey" (as they called "sensitive" boys in those days) from a very early age. I also knew a few seemingly straight guys who seemed to have been sucked into the "gay lifestyle" by the easy availability of drugs and sex and the fact that they need never take any sort of responsibility or conform to any moral standards but they are outnumbered by those who seem to have been "born that way."

Most homos were definitely queer from the get-go. Some American Indian tribes had a role for these "girly boys" - berdaches who would dress and live like women and become the mates of other men. The Hindus in India also had a role for them - hijras. As I said, "fortunately my dad was worldly wise and told me I'd be beaten up if I didn't toughen up and he made me do boxing." He knew that being a "girly boy" in our culture was a recipe for failure and misery.

So some of us were "born that way" but I cannot assert for sure that all homos are born that way. My observations in SF led me to believe that the one thing that most of those who seemed not to be born queer but who were seduced by the "gay lifestyle" have in common is that they are naturally profligate. Most are either drug or sex addicts or alcoholics with no morals and a distaste for taking responsibility. Only someone stupid or irresponsible would deliberately chose to be homo.

And not all queers are wild and promiscuous. Not all queers get into the "gay lifestyle." Not all queers are sex addicts and debauchees. There are plenty of "invisible homos" who don't get into the "gay lifestyle," who don't flaunt their personal proclivities, who don't like talking about their private lives and who detest promiscuity and reckless irresponsibility. I've known many. Their relationships are not based on sex but on mutual affection, admiration, trust and respect.

One last thing because I know this will probably be raised in the comments. I've read all the "talking points" of those who believe that all queers are immoral and have deliberately chosen to be sodomites because they are evil or mentally ill. One of those "talking points" of the Christian "ex-gay" movement is this:

Homosexuals have weak or aloof fathers and doting mothers. They do not love their fathers and are alienated from them. They therefore look for affection from other men to replace that fatherly love. They are usually corrupted by older homosexuals when they are kids.

The idea that any young boy can be "turned queer" by predatory gays is nonsense. Most gays are not pedophiles and you have to be naturally inclined or immoral to start with to be corrupted. Since the Sixties, thousands of Catholic boys were molested by pedophile priests. Although many were traumatized, the straight ones remained straight. As for the "lack of fatherly love:" that may be true for some but definitely not for all. I've known too many gays who adored their dads and who were in turn loved by them. My own dad was the warm, affectionate one in our family. My mom was very self-centered; the world revolved around her; everyone else was simply an actor in her personal play; even her maternal love was all about herself.

Once last thing. While I do not like to use the word "gay" to describe queers, (I do so because it is now widely used) I dislike the word "homosexual" even more. That word may accurately describe those who are obsessed with sex but it certainly does not describe the sort of same gender romantic attachments of the ancient Greeks like Socrates and Plato or Richard the Lionhearted, Michelangelo, Da Vinci and Walt Whitman. None of these men were obsessed with sex but they certainly loved other men.