"she gave me from the tree, and I ate."

I recently read a book called something like "The Public Undressing of America." It was about how women's bathing suits have gotten skimpier as the years have passed. And that brought up in my mind my mom's mentality about this subject: bikinis are immoral because they attract the wrong kind of attention from men. Well, that could very well be true. But I don't really want to talk about women tempting men today. I want to talk about men and how people often portray them.

Men are often portrayed as idiots who are ruled by their passions. I'm not sure where this portrayal came from, perhaps Hollywood, but I really don't know. Men are victims of seductive women. They don't have the power to reject a seductive woman. But the thing is, men can refuse to lust after or have sex with women. The act of letting your mind think about those things or your body do those things is a choice.

The portrayal of men as drooling idiots functions to justify men's actions which are driven by their baser instincts. And justifying sin tends to perpetuate and amplify it.

Even Christian men try to justify their misdeeds or evil thoughts by putting the blame on women. They say things to the effect that women should dress in order to make sure they aren't seducing men. Well, that effectually moves the blame from the man who lusts to the women. Sound familiar? It should. Adam blamed his wife Eve for making him sin by giving him the forbidden fruit. So I guess in that respect not much has changed since the beginning of the world.

But the big thing to remember is this: in the situation of a man lusting after a woman, that man's lusting is his fault. The woman may be at fault as well, but she didn't cause him to lust; he chose to. 

Sexuality Part 3

Before I begin discussing the subject of sexuality again, I feel it necessary to convey to the reader that I’m not an unbiased writer (even though that's probably obvious). I have preconceptions about sexuality of which I cannot rid myself.

 

The Effects

Proponents of homosexuality contend that a loving and sustaining relationship can be maintained by a same-sex couple. Let’s look at the evidence:

This article outlines how homosexual relationships are “radically different from married couples in several key respects:

relationship duration

·  monogamy vs. promiscuity

·  relationship commitment

·  number of children being raised

·  health risks

·  rates of intimate partner violence”

 

According to the article, in all these respects, homosexuality is  more dangerous than heteresexuality. Though some may argue that this source is biased towards a particular worldview, evidence is presented which bolsters the claims made. Statistics from the National Center for Health Statistics are presented in support. The end of the aricle also lists an extensive bibliography which draws on many scholarly resources. 

From another source we gather that HIV/AID affects far more homosexual men than any other demographic.  The  Center for Disease Control and Prevention reports that men who have sex with men (MSM) “are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s. In 2006, MSM accounted for more than half (53%) of all new HIV infections in the United States, and MSM with a history of injection drug use (MSM-IDU) accounted for an additional 4% of new infections. At the end of 2006, more than half (53%) of all people living with HIV in the United States were MSM or MSM-IDU. Since the beginning of the US epidemic, MSM have consistently represented the largest percentage of persons diagnosed with AIDS and persons with an AIDS diagnosis who have died.” 

But let’s not forget homosexual women:
 
“Homosexual Health - Lesbian Health

• Lesbians have the richest concentration of risk factors for breast cancer than any subset of women in the world.
• They have higher risks for cervical cancers.
• They are more likely to be obese.
• They use more tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs.²⁴

A study of over 1,400 lesbians found the following:

• Lesbians experience higher rates of bacterial vaginosis and hepatitis C.
• They have more than twice the number of male partners than heterosexual women (only 7 percent who identify themselves as lesbians never have sex with men).
• They are 4.5 times more likely to have fifty or more male sexual partners in a lifetime.
• They are three to four times more likely to have sex with men who are at high risk for HIV—homosexuals, bisexuals, and IV drug users.
• They are six times more likely to • abuse drugs intravenously.^25”

This is also from a blog, but it has a wealth of scholarly information on which the author drew. Feel free to read that article to make sure. The idea is that homosexual behavior with women is detrimental to their health.

The Laws of Nature

One obvious drawback to homosexuality, and one which people often gloss over,  is that homosexual relationships do not produce children. As simple a drawback as that may seem, it seems rather important. Progeny are important if you want to perpetuate the human race. One could argue that infertile couples can’t bear children. Well, that’s different because homosexual couples can never bear children, whereas heterosexual couples can and often do bear children. It’s safe to say that God wanted people to reproduce as evidenced by what he said in Genesis.

The Psychological Aspect

I may be moving more into the realm of speculation, but bear with me. When God designed man, I think it quite likely that he designed with the psychological considerations in mind. It seems likely that he designed men and women not just to fit together physically (sex) but also to bond on a psychological level. If He did, then men cannot have that relationship with each other, and women cannot have that with each other either. 

If this is true, then it makes sense that homosexuals seem to have higher rates of dissatisfaction with their lives as evidenced through all the things listed in the quotes above. This seemingly would also explain the physical consequences of homosexual activity.

Sexuality Part 2

And then there are those who think homosexuality is fine.They support their position with arguments like, "well, I'm biologically attracted to individuals of the same sex as myself; that's not something I can help, so I choose to embrace it."

But there are problems with such a claim. Being biologically inclined to do something doesn't make it right or good. Let me assure you, those who commit adultery are biologically attracted to each other. What they're doing isn't right. It simply reflects that they've chosen to do something they both know is wrong. There even murderers who claim that killing is a part of who they are. This girl murdered her nine year old neighbor and claimed that it was an enjoyable experience, but that doesn't make it right. This girl also had a history of talking about how killing was one of her favorite things to do (even though, oddly, she only killed one person). All that to say, being biologically predisposed to act in a particular manner does not make it right.

Actually, claiming that your genetic predisposition  is responsible for your actions seems more like a method of shifting the blame from yourself.

I can't think of any more arguments for homosexuality right now...