ISSN 1995-5928Ingesluit LitNet Akademies
Tuis > SêNet-briewe

Aanvullend tot die weerstand teen homoseksualiteit-brief

Wouter 2013-07-12
  • 6
Shares0Pin0Print0LinkedIn0

Hello, 

As aanvulling en uitbreiding van die argumente aangebied in 'Weerstand teen die mites van homoseksualiteit' word die volgende bespreking gebied om die heilige fondamente waarop dit gebaseer is te formuleer en die argumente in die vorige skrywe te versterk. 

Eerstens word daar met die oorsprong van die woord begin. 

Die term "homoseksuele" is opgeneem in Engels vanuit Duits in 1892 en is nie afgelei van die Latynse homo (man) maar wel uit die Griekse homoios (soos of dieselfde is) en het dus te doen met dieselfde geslag oriëntasie en is die kerk verdeel in sy uitsprake oor die sondige menslike verskynsel en onnatuurlike gedrag in die samelewing en is daar net een geldige fondasie vir die beskouing van hierdie onderwerp siening wat aanvaarbaar is, naamlik dat alle homoseksuele dade as sonde gesien moet word en is die heilige tekste die hoogste gesag vir gelowiges in teologiese en etiese kwessies en kan die afvallige waardes van die samelewing nie as die norm aanvaar word nie as die gronde waarop die gelowige haar lewe moet skoei nie. 

Die basiese standpunt aangaande die gesag van heilige tekste is dat die gesag van die teks enige interpretasie voorafgaan en kan die leser se wil nie op die teks afgedruk wil word nie en moet die leser van die teks nederig wees teenoor die gesag en onfeilbaarheid van die teks en nie die mens se eie ervaring wil verhef bo die onfeilbaarheid en gesag van die teks. Hierdie is van kardinale belang aangesien later in die brief dit gesien sal word dat die skriftuurlike riglyne baie duidelike riglyne daarstel vir die mens en hoe die homoseksuele persoon die inversie daarvan is. 

Tesame met bogenoemde duidelike skriftuurlike riglyne is dit belangrik om die strominge in sielkunde die afgelope dekades ook in oorweging te bring wat nog meer bevestiging bied vir die aard van homoseksuele gedrag. 

1. Homoseksuele as 'degenerate', en is die verduideliking duidelik, homoseksualiteit is 'n sonde en het die  homoseksuele individu misluk in die potensiaal wat 'n gesonde inslag sou veronderstel.

2. Homoseksuele as siek. 

3. Homoseksuele as versteurd. Al het die Amerikaanse Psigiatriese Vereniging besluit om homoseksualiteit van sy lys van geestelike siektes te verwyder  1974 kan dit aangevoer dat dit nou 'n besluit is wat omstrede is aangesien daar wel 'n klassifikasie van "seksuele oriëntasie versteurings" behou is wat tekenend is van die diegene wat versteurd of in konflik met hul seksuele oriëntasie is en bevestig hierdie dat daar 'n patologiese toestand oor die ongewenstheid van homoseksuele oriëntasie is. 

4. Homoseksuele oriëntasie as 'n wanordelike toestand met geen kuur nie. 

Hierdie bring die leser nou by die skriftuurlike voorskrifte: 

In Gen 19:1-29 kom twee engele (manlik) na Sodom, en Lot, Abraham se neef, maak hulle sy gaste. Later begeer die manne van Sodom seksuele omgang met die gaste van Lot en aangesien hierdie tipe van omgang so 'n euwel is word Lot genoop om sy twee dogters te offer. Vir hierdie onnatuurlike daad bring die Here verwoesting oor Sodom en word daarmee opgeskryf die eerste daadwerklik optrede van God teen die homoseksuele en die gruwel wat dit is bevestig. 

In 'n soortgelyke verhaal word 'n Leviet uit Efraim na Bethlehem gegaan en is daar weereens die aandrang dat die manne van die dorp seksuele omgang met hom begeer. Die Leviet wat 'n gas is van die persoon wat hom herberg gebied het, bring ongeluk oor sy gasheer se tuiste aangesien die gasheer genoop word om sy maagdelike dogter te  offer, maar word die byvrou  uiteindelik uitgestuur en is haar lot om herhaaldelik verkrag te word totdat sy sterf. 

Bogenoemde waarskuwings moet gelees word in die lig van die verbod teen homoseksualiteit soos beskryf Lev 18:22 en 20:13. 

'n Man lê nie by 'n man soos 'n vrou nie. Dit is 'n gruwel.

Daar is twee tipes van menslike afvalligheid wat teen die heiligheid van God is en afstand skep tussen God en die mens en word hierdie verwydering tussen God en mens veroorsaak deur sonde asook onreinheid of onsuiwerheid.

Sonde is 'n doelbewuste, opsetlike, persoonlike houding en optrede teen God. Die wil van God word verontagsaam en is dit ongehoorsaamheid teen God uit die diepste afvallige sondige impuls van die mens. Sonde het sy oorsprong in 'n korrupte hart, die korrupsie van die mens se wil en begrip om gehoorsaam aan God te wees.

(Gen 3:1-7; Isa 1:2-5; Jer 7:13-14; 13:10; 17:01, 9-10). 

Dit is daarom niks anders as 'n godsdienstige, rebellie teen God (Jesaja 01:04; Jer 05:23). Dit is ook morele afdwaal vanaf God se wil en is dit 'n oortreding teen die menslike gemeenskap wat eenheid in God vind. 

(Amos 4:01; 5:11-12; 6:4-6).

Tesame met sonde moet onreinheid ook in berekening gebring word, daar waar daar in kontak gekom word hetsy met die fisiese voorwerp of ander dergelike daaglikse handelinge en is die fisiese kontak met die bron van hierdie onreinheid, 'n gruwel teen die wil van God en is die gevolge hiervan dat die afvallige mens nie mag aanbid in die heiligdom van God en voor die aangesig van God mag verskyn nie. 

(Lev 12:04; Num 19:13)

Hierdie bring dan die vraag na vore van, wat is die onreine in hierdie onreinheid? 

Die antwoord is te vinde in die instinktiewe afkeer wat hierdie dade en oortredinge in die mense tot gevolg het en verduidelik dit hoekom homoseksualiteit as 'n bron van onreinheid beskou word. Die doel van hierdie reinheid is om in ooreenstemming met die heiligheid van God te wees. Die menslike liggaam is ‘n perfekte, foutlose en onbesmette skepsel van God en verklaar dit hoekom die mens onrein is in die gevalle van seksuele ejakulasie en (Lev 15:16-30) ander liggaamlike uitskeidings (Lev 15:1 -12) en maak dit die mens onrein. Dit is daarom 'n oortreding teen die reinheid van die liggaam as 'n perfekte houer vir die wil van God in die mens.

Die soeke na heiligheid vereis daarom dat individue heeltemal voldoen aan die klas waartoe hulle behoort en het dit as vereiste van volmaaktheid volgens die wil van God dat klasse of kategorieë apart gehou moet word duidelike skeidings daar gestel moet word en nie gemeng mag word na willekeur. Dit beteken dat 'n individu kan nie behoort aan twee verskillende klasse of twee verskillende fundamentele rolle op dieselfde tyd vertolk nie. 

Vandaar dan is seksuele omgang met 'n dier (Lev 18:23), of bloedskande (Lev 18:6-18), asook homoseksualiteit (Lev 18:22; 20:13) die omverwerping van bogenoemde heilige voorskrifte. Dit is man en vrou wat saam mag gepaar word, maar nie man op man en vrou op vrou nie. So ook nie mens en dier nie in seksuele verwantskap nie asook ouer met kind of familie. 

Dit beteken die onreine in onreinheid of onsuiwerheid is daarom dan wanorde, verwarring, die vermenging van dit wat nie gemengde moet word nie en toon dit 'n gebrek aan die heelheid, eenheid in God en staan dit in konflik tot dit wat deur God heilig gemaak is. 

Die pertinente punt hier is dat homoseksualiteit in Lev gekategoriseer word as 'n bron van onreinheid en is daar geen onduidelikheid dat homoseksualiteit die mens verontreinig of onrein maak (Lev 18:24, 27) en word homoseksuele praktyk bevestig as 'n gruwel.  (Lev 18:22)

Hierdie kan dan soos volg opgesom word: 

Homoseksuele praktyk maak die mens onrein en verhoed die mens in sy vermoë om te assosieer met ander mense en in sy toegang tot die heerlikheid van God.

Homoseksuele praktyk is 'n belediging vir manlike eer.

Dit word gesien, veral in die eerste twee verhale waarna verwys is in die inleiding. Dit is 'n beter dat 'n vrou geoffer word, selfs al is dit 'n dogter van die gasheer. 

Homoseksualiteit is 'n bron van besoedeling of onreinheid en is 'n outomatiese besmetting. 

Hierdie bring die argumente dan op datum met die leringe van Paulus wat homoseksualiteit bevestig as sonde eerder as onreinheid in die historiese definisie. 

Homoseksualiteit is volgens Paulus dan 'n sonde aangesien dit sy fondasie het in verdraaide gedagtes en 'n korrupte hart (Rom 1:18-28) en is ook 'n persoonlike keuse gemaak teen die morele voorskrifte van God. Paulus bring daarmee homoseksualiteit binne die omvang van die sonde en die immorele en veroordeel dit sonder voorbehoud.

Daar is twee pertinente Nuwe Testament tekste en is die bekendste sekerlik Rom 1:21-27. In 1 Kor 6:9-10 noem Paulus die verskillende soorte oortreders wat nie die koninkryk van God sal binne gaan nie. Egbrekers, diewe en die wat gierig is en onder hierdie sondaars sluit Paulus twee ander tipes ook in, manlike prostitute (malakoi) en sodomiete (arsenokoitai).

Paulus se leringe hier is dat God kennis en waarheid oor God self beskikbaar vir alle mense in die wêreld gemaak het. Maar die mens in hul dwase en opsetlike selfbelang verwerp hierdie waarheid. God se reaksie op hierdie universele rebellie teen God is dat God dan die oortreders dieper laat sink in die gevolge van hul eie optrede. God verduister die menslike gees (1:21 b, 28h). God bekragtig die dwase menslike keuses gemaak deur die wat afvallig is en so word die sirkel voltooi, die mens oortree net soos Goddelike vasberadenheid die mens dieper in die verderf laat sink. En dit is waar van homoseksualiteit in die besonder. 

Paulus se siening dat die universele menslike rebellie en God se toorn en hul interaksie met mekaar, is die primêre oorsaak van homoseksualiteit en is menslike rebellie teen God se waarheid die oorsprong van hierdie afvalligheid van die mens.

Tesame hiermee bevestig Paulus se leringe dat homoseksualiteit in stryd met die natuur (1:26-27) is en in teenstelling met die wêreld soos geskep deur God en is daar net een een natuurlike seksuele aard, naamlik, die heteroseksuele.

In die lig daarvan veroordeel Paulus se leringe homoseksuele dade en persone as strydig met dit wat die ware natuur van die mens is en is homoseksuele praktyk verbode in alle omstandighede, net soos die heilige tekste se eenparige teenkanting teen homoseksuele praktyk hierdie posisie 'n spesiale krag bied aangesien dit konsekwent toegepas word. Homoseksuele praktyk is in stryd met die wil van God in die sin dat dit 'n skending van die natuur, 'n oortreding van God se kreatiewe ontwerp vir die wêreld. 

Die redes waarom homoseksuele praktyk teengestaan word, word soos volg opgesom: 

Die belangrikste rede is die openbaring wat God aan die mens bied en die gesag van die Bybel, heilige tekste. 

Die tweede rede is dat homoseksuele omgang is in stryd met die natuur. Dit is strydig met die natuur in die sin van God se ontwerp vir die verhouding tussen die geslagte. Hierdie ontwerp is deur God geopenbaar en bevestig in die Skrif. 

Baie dankie

Wouter

Shares0Pin0Print0LinkedIn0
  • 6

Kommentaar

  • Pieter Redelinghuys

    Beste Wouter,

    Dankie vir jou breedvoerige handeling oor die kwessie van homoseksualiteit uit die oogpunt van die Westerse Joodse-Christelike( Judeo-Christian)  oogpunt, aan die hand van die Ou en Nuwe Testament, die sg "heilige skrifte", maar wat moet die biljoene Chinese (Confusius)  hiervan uitmaak, en aanhangers van ander kulture soos die Boeddhisme? Is hierdie "Weltanschauung", dikteer deur die Joodse stamgod Jaweh vir sy uitverkore volk, die alfa en omega van die Waarheid van menswees op hierdie planeet. 

    En wat is die posisie dan as Jaweh net 'n versindsel is van die Joodse kollektiewe brein en verbeelding, en die "heilige skrifte" 'n argaïese versameling  van Joodse tradisies en praktyke is?

    Gelukkig is die trant in die Westerse wêreld vandag om afstand te doen van hierdie argaïese wêreldsiening met die bou van 'n sekulêre gemeenskap baseer op wette wat rasioneel voorkom en menseregte beskerm.

    Beste groete,

    Pieter Redelinghuys

    Reply
  • Wouter

    Hello PerdebyTjie en Pieter, 

     
    Soos ooreengekom die antwoord teen die 10 mites, dit is baie leeswerk maar is die teenpool wat ook aangebied moet word. Verskoning word ook aangebied dat dit nie vertaal en verkort is soos ek met die aanvanklike 10 mites gedoen het nie, maar nou behoort dit duidelik te wees dat beide kante van die argument probeer ondersoek was en het ek net die vorige artikel geplaas na ek hierdie kon bevestig het: 
     
    Die antwoorde gebied is waarmee ek in ooreenstemming is maar kan getoets word wat die ingeligte persoon weet. 
     
    Baie Dankie
     
    Wouter
     
    10 Anti-Gay Myths Debunked
     
    Ever since born-again singer Anita Bryant helped kick off the contemporary anti-gay movement more than 30 years ago, hard-line elements of the religious right have been searching for ways to demonize gay people — or, at a minimum, to find arguments that will prevent their normalization in society. 
     
    For her Save Our Children group, it was the alleged plans of gay men and lesbians to "recruit" in schools that provided the fodder for their crusade.   
     
     But in addition to hawking that myth, the legions of anti-gay activists who followed have added a panoply of others, ranging from the extremely doubtful claim that sexual orientation is a choice, to unalloyed lies like the claims that gay men molest children far more than heterosexuals or that hate crime laws will lead to the legalization of bestiality and necrophilia. 
     
    These fairy tales are important to the anti-gay right because they form the basis of its claim that homosexuality is a social evil that must be suppressed — an opinion rejected by virtually all relevant medical and scientific authorities. 
     
    They also almost certainly contribute to hate crime violence directed at the LGBT community, which is more targeted for such attacks than any other minority group in America. 
     
    What follows are 10 key myths propagated by the anti-gay movement, along with the truth behind the propaganda.   
     
     MYTH # 1   Gay men molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals.   
     
    THE ARGUMENT   Depicting gay men as a threat to children may be the single most potent weapon for stoking public fears about homosexuality — and for winning elections and referenda, as Anita Bryant found out during her successful 1977 campaign to overturn a Dade County, Fla., ordinance barring discrimination against gay people. Discredited psychologist Paul Cameron, the most ubiquitous purveyor of anti-gay junk science, has been a major promoter of this myth. Despite having been debunked repeatedly and very publicly, Cameron's work is still widely relied upon by anti-gay organizations, although many no longer quote him by name. Others have cited a group called the American College of Pediatricians to claim, as Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council did in November 2010, that "the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a [molestation] danger to children."   
     
    THE FACTS   According to the American Psychological Association, "homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are." Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation's leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.   Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because "he often finds adults of either sex repulsive" and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may "regress" to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.   The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.   Some anti-gay ideologues cite the American College of Pediatricians' opposition to same-sex parenting as if the organization were a legitimate professional body. In fact, the so-called college is a tiny breakaway faction of the similarly named, 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics that requires, as a condition of membership, that joiners "hold true to the group's core beliefs ... [including] that the traditional family unit, headed by an opposite-sex couple, poses far fewer risk factors in the adoption and raising of children." The group's 2010 publication Facts About Youth was described by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association as non-factual. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, was one of several legitimate researchers who said Facts misrepresented their findings. "It is disturbing to me to see special interest groups distort my scientific observations to make a point against homosexuality," he wrote. "The information they present is misleading and incorrect."   
     
    MYTH # 2   Same-sex parents harm children.   
     
    THE ARGUMENT   Most hard-line anti-gay organizations are heavily invested, from both a religious and a political standpoint, in promoting the traditional nuclear family as the sole framework for the healthy upbringing of children. They maintain a reflexive belief that same-sex parenting must be harmful to children — although the exact nature of that supposed harm varies widely.   
     
    THE FACTS   No legitimate research has demonstrated that same-sex couples are any more or any less harmful to children than heterosexual couples.   
     
    The American Academy of Pediatrics in a 2002 policy statement declared: "A growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with one or two gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual." That policy statement was reaffirmed in 2009.   
     
    The American Psychological Association found that "same-sex couples are remarkably similar to heterosexual couples, and that parenting effectiveness and the adjustment, development and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation."   Similarly, the Child Welfare League of America's official position with regard to same-sex parents is that "lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents are as well-suited to raise children as their heterosexual counterparts."   
     
    MYTH # 3   People become homosexual because they were sexually abused as children or there was a deficiency in sex-role modeling by their parents.   
     
    THE ARGUMENT   Many anti-gay rights proponents claim that homosexuality is a mental disorder caused by some psychological trauma or aberration in childhood. This argument is used to counter the common observation that no one, gay or straight, consciously chooses his or her sexual orientation. Joseph Nicolosi, a founder of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, said in 2009 that "if you traumatize a child in a particular way, you will create a homosexual condition." He also has repeatedly said, "Fathers, if you don't hug your sons, some other man will." A side effect of this argument is the demonization of parents of gay men and lesbians, who are led to wonder if they failed to protect a child against sexual abuse or failed as role models in some important way. In October 2010, Kansas State University family studies professor Walter Schumm released a related study arguing that gay couples are more likely than heterosexuals to raise gay or lesbian children.   
     
    THE FACTS   No scientifically sound study has linked sexual orientation or identity with parental role-modeling or childhood sexual abuse.   
     
    The American Psychiatric Association noted in a 2000 fact sheet on gay, lesbian and bisexual issues that "no specific psychosocial or family dynamic cause for homosexuality has been identified, including histories of childhood sexual abuse." 
     
    The fact sheet goes on to say that sexual abuse does not appear to be any more prevalent among children who grow up and identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual than in children who grow up and identify as heterosexual.   
     
    Similarly, the National Organization on Male Sexual Victimization notes on its website that "experts in the human sexuality field do not believe that premature sexual experiences play a significant role in late adolescent or adult sexual orientation" and added that it's unlikely that someone can make another person gay or heterosexual. 
     
    With regard to Schumm's study, critics have already said that he appears to have merely aggregated anecdotal data, a biased sample that invalidates his findings.   
     
     MYTH # 4   LGBT people don't live nearly as long as heterosexuals.   
     
    THE ARGUMENT   Anti-gay organizations want to promote heterosexuality as the healthier "choice." 
     
    Furthermore, the purportedly shorter life spans and poorer physical and mental health of gays and lesbians are often offered as reasons why they shouldn't be allowed to adopt or foster children.   
     
    THE FACTS
     
    This falsehood can be traced directly to the discredited research of Paul Cameron and his Family Research Institute, specifically a 1994 paper he co-wrote entitled, "The Lifespan of Homosexuals." Using obituaries collected from gay newspapers, he and his two co-authors concluded that gay men died, on average, at 43, compared to an average life expectancy at the time of around 73 for all U.S. men. On the basis of the same obituaries, Cameron also claimed that gay men are 18 times more likely to die in car accidents than heterosexuals, 22 times more likely to die of heart attacks than whites, and 11 times more likely than blacks to die of the same cause. He also concluded that lesbians are 487 times more likely to die of murder, suicide, or accidents than straight women.   
     
    Remarkably, these claims have become staples of the anti-gay right and have frequently made their way into far more mainstream venues. For example, William Bennett, education secretary under President Reagan, used Cameron's statistics in a 1997 interview he gave to ABC News' "This Week."   However, like virtually all of his "research," Cameron's methodology is egregiously flawed — most obviously because the sample he selected (the data from the obits) was not remotely statistically representative of the LGBT population as a whole. Even Nicholas Eberstadt, a demographer at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, has called Cameron's methods "just ridiculous."   
     
    MYTH # 6   Hate crime laws will lead to the jailing of pastors who criticize homosexuality and the legalization of practices like bestiality and necrophilia.   
     
    THE ARGUMENT Anti-gay activists, who have long opposed adding LGBT people to those protected by hate crime legislation, have repeatedly claimed that such laws would lead to the jailing of religious figures who preach against homosexuality — part of a bid to gain the backing of the broader religious community for their position. Janet Porter of Faith2Action was one of many who asserted that the federal Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act — signed into law by President Obama in October 2009 — would "jail pastors" because it "criminalizes speech against the homosexual agenda."   In a related assertion, anti-gay activists claimed the law would lead to the legalization of psychosexual disorders (paraphilias) like bestiality and pedophilia. Bob Unruh, a conservative Christian journalist who left The Associated Press in 2006 for the right-wing, conspiracist news site WorldNetDaily, said shortly before the federal law was passed that it would legalize "all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or 'paraphilias' listed by the American Psychiatric Association." This claim was repeated by many anti-gay organizations, including the Illinois Family Institute.    
     
    THE FACTS   The claim that hate crime laws could result in the imprisonment of those who "oppose the homosexual lifestyle" is false. The Constitution provides robust protections of free speech, and case law makes it clear that even a preacher who suggested that gays and lesbians should be killed would be protected.   Neither do hate crime laws — which provide for enhanced penalties when persons are victimized because of their "sexual orientation" (among other factors) — "protect pedophiles," as Janet Porter and many others have claimed. According to the American Psychological Association, sexual orientation refers to heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality — not paraphilias such as pedophilia. Paraphilias, as defined by the American Psychiatric Assocation, are disorders characterized by sexual urges or behaviors directed at nonhuman objects or non-consenting persons like children, or that involve the suffering or humiliation of one's partner. Even if pedophiles, for example, were protected under a hate crime law — and such a law has not been suggested or contemplated anywhere — that would not legalize or "protect" pedophilia. Pedophilia is illegal sexual activity, and a law that more severely punished people who attacked pedophiles would not change that.   
     
    MYTH # 8   Gay people are more prone to be mentally ill and to abuse drugs and alcohol.    
     
    THE ARGUMENT   Anti-gay groups want not only to depict sexual orientation as something that can be changed but also to show that heterosexuality is the most desirable "choice" — even if religious arguments are set aside. The most frequently used secular argument made by anti-gay groups in that regard is that homosexuality is inherently unhealthy, both mentally and physically. As a result, most anti-gay rights groups reject the 1973 decision by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses. Some of these groups, including the particularly hard-line Traditional Values Coalition, claim that "homosexual activists" managed to infiltrate the APA in order to sway its decision.   
     
    THE FACTS   All major professional mental health organizations are on record as stating that homosexuality is not a mental disorder.   It is true that LGBT people suffer higher rates of anxiety, depression, and depression-related illnesses and behaviors like alcohol and drug abuse than the general population. But studies done during the past 15 years have determined that it is the stress of being a member of a minority group in an often-hostile society — and not LGBT identity itself — that accounts for the higher levels of mental illness and drug use. Richard J. Wolitski, an expert on minority status and public health issues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, put it like this in 2008: "Economic disadvantage, stigma, and discrimination ... increase stress and diminish the ability of individuals [in minority groups] to cope with stress, which in turn contribute to poor physical and mental health."   
     
    MYTH # 9   No one is born gay.   
     
    THE ARGUMENT   Anti-gay activists keenly oppose the granting of "special" civil rights protections to gay people similar to those afforded black Americans and other minorities. But if people are born gay — in the same way people have no choice as to whether they are black or white — discrimination against gay men and lesbians would be vastly more difficult to justify. Thus, anti-gay forces insist that sexual orientation is a behavior that can be changed, not an immutable characteristic.   
     
    THE FACTS   Modern science cannot state conclusively what causes sexual orientation, but a great many studies suggest that it is the result of biological and environmental forces, not a personal "choice." One of the more recent is a 2008 Swedish study of twins (the world's largest twin study) that appeared in The Archives of Sexual Behavior and concluded that "[h]omosexual behaviour is largely shaped by genetics and random environmental factors." Dr. Qazi Rahman, study co-author and a leading scientist on human sexual orientation, said: "This study puts cold water on any concerns that we are looking for a single 'gay gene' or a single environmental variable which could be used to 'select out' homosexuality — the factors which influence sexual orientation are complex. And we are not simply talking about homosexuality here — heterosexual behaviour is also influenced by a mixture of genetic and environmental factors."   The American Psychological Association (APA) acknowledges that despite much research into the possible genetic, hormonal, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no evidence has emerged that would allow scientists to pinpoint the precise causes of sexual orientation. Still, the APA concludes that "most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."   In October 2010, Kansas State University family studies professor Walter Schumm released a study showing that gay parents produced far more gay children than heterosexual parents. He told a reporter that he was "trying to prove [homosexuality is] not 100% genetic." But critics suggested that his data did not prove that, and, in any event, virtually no scientists have suggested that homosexuality is caused only by genes.   
     
    MYTH # 10   Gay people can choose to leave homosexuality.   
     
    THE ARGUMENT   If people are not born gay, as anti-gay activists claim, then it should be possible for individuals to abandon homosexuality. This view is buttressed among religiously motivated anti-gay activists by the idea that homosexual practice is a sin and humans have the free will needed to reject sinful urges.   A number of "ex-gay" religious ministries have sprung up in recent years with the aim of teaching gay people to become heterosexuals, and these have become prime purveyors of the claim that gays and lesbians, with the aid of mental therapy and Christian teachings, can "come out of homosexuality."Exodus International, the largest of these ministries, plainly states, "You don't have to be gay!" Another, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, describes itself as "a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality."   
     
    THE FACTS   "Reparative" or sexual reorientation therapy — the pseudo-scientific foundation of the ex-gay movement — has been rejected by all the established and reputable American medical, psychological, psychiatric, and professional counseling organizations. In 2009, for instance, the American Psychological Association adopted a resolution, accompanied by a 138-page report, that repudiated ex-gay therapy. The report concluded that compelling evidence suggested that cases of individuals going from gay to straight were "rare" and that "many individuals continued to experience same-sex sexual attractions" after reparative therapy. The APA resolution added that "there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation" and asked "mental health professionals to avoid misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts by promoting or promising change in sexual orientation." The resolution also affirmed that same-sex sexual and romantic feelings are normal.   Some of the most striking, if anecdotal, evidence of the ineffectiveness of sexual reorientation therapy has been the numerous failures of some of its most ardent advocates. For example, the founder of Exodus International, Michael Bussee, left the organization in 1979 with a fellow male ex-gay counselor because the two had fallen in love. Alan Chambers, current president of Exodus, said in 2007 that with years of therapy, he's mostly conquered his attraction to men, but then admitted, "By no means would we ever say that change can be sudden or complete."
    Reply
  • Pieter Redelinghuys

    Beste Wouter,

    Dankie vir n besondere insiggewende artikel basseer grootliks op die bevindinge en uitsprake van die VSA  Academy of Pediatrics, 'n spesialiteit so na aan my eie hart. Jy het regtig baie moeite ondervind en tyd spandeer met jou skrywe, dus moet jy weet tot watter mate dit waardeer word.

    Die anti-gay brigade word, in die finale analise, gemotiveer deur vrees en haat, en hulle rigsnoer in die Weste is maar die Bybel wat vir hulle die alfa en omega van alle waarheid bevat. Dit is onrusbarend tot watter lengtes hulle sal gaan om hulle vooroordele en blatante leuens te versprei.

    Persoonlik het ek gemerk dat hoe hoër die opleiding (education) en ontwikkeling van 'n persoon is, hoe meer tolerant en "open minded" 'n persoon staan teenoor hierdie vraag.

    Vandag is dit is die taak van die regsstaat om die regte van hierdie  gemarginaliseerde groep te verdedig teenoor die wolwe.

    Beste groete,

    Pieter Redelinghuys

    Reply
  • Wouter

    Hello Pieter, 

     
    Ek is volkome in akkoord met alles in jou kommentaar en stel jy dit beter as wat ek kon. Met al drie skrywes was daar gepoog om so na as moontlik 'n geheel te bied oor die vraag en dan is dit nog steeds nie eers genoeg nie. Daar is maklik nog twee artikels wat ek onlangs gelees het wat ek nie in berekening gebring nie. 
     
    Jou opmerking oor die  "Weltanschauung" bring in gedagte Homosexuality and Civilization van Louis Crompton  se werk. Hierdie is op my Kindle en sal ek graag deur dit wil werk Sondag en 'n brief daarop baseer. 
     
    Dit is 'n studie wat as doelwit  het die geskiedenis van homoseksualiteit in Europa en dele van Asië vanaf  Homer tot en met die die 18de eeu.
     
    Twee hoofstukke oor China en Japan is 'n aanvulling tot die gewone Eurosentriese fokus terwyl Crompton se vergelykende studie ook toon hoe Judeo-Christelike se weersin in homoseksualiteit lyk in die konteks van die geskiedenis van die wêreld. 
     
    Baie dankie
     
    Wouter 
    Reply
  • Perdebytjie

    Beste Wouter

    Dankie vir die baie volledige skrywe. Lanklaas soveel sin oor die onderwerp gelees. Dankie vir die moeite.

    Ek is egter bevrees die anti-gay brigade sal dit nie lees nie, want dit kan dalk hul spirituele insig aantas! Netsoos wat bewyse daarvoor nie nodig is nie, is 'n studie van die werlikheid van homoseksualisme ook nie nodig nie ... "finish en klaar"!

    Groete

    Perdebytjie
     

    Reply
  • Wouter

    Hello Perdebytjie, 

     
    Baie dankie vir die reaksie en is ek akkoord met jou dat rede sal geen verskil maak nie, 
     
    'n Verlore stryd. 
     
    Baie dankie
     
    Wouter
    Reply

    • Reageer

    Jou e-posadres sal nie gepubliseer word nie. Kommentaar is onderhewig aan moderering.


     

    Top