HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT A CHOICE

HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT A CHOICE

Love is love and in the end love wins,lets free ourselves from the unnecessary hate.

Creative hand background

The issue of homosexuality cannot be properly treated without visiting the forces behind the enormous hate it attracts. In our society, religion, ignorance the fear of change are some of the strong forces that back the unnecessary hate. Through the lenses of religion homosexuality is nothing less than an abomination and since religion as a whole has a lot of branches, our focus today is going to be on the two leading branches in Ghana. Both the Qur’an and Bible have a lot to say on this act and based on them a question arises; ARE HOMOSEXUALS WELCOME IN THESE TWO GROUPS?

Lets take a gentle walk through the bible and begin with Apostle Paul. In his letter to the Roman believers he began with common ground, the faith they affirm together (Rom 1:3-5) and the sin they condemn together (Rom 1:18-32), where he used same sex relationship as an example despite the numerous sins. In the letter, even though he suggested that their sins were no better, he didn’t pull back from his condemnation. According to his understanding same sex is unnatural and against God’s intent, an abomination he taught was worthy of death (Rom 1:32). Also Leviticus 18 & 20 throws more light on what Paul wrote in the book of Romans. With these evidences from the two testaments of the bible, we can conclude that the bible and Christianity have no intention to share bed with homosexuality.
The next to look at is the Qur’an. The book of Sura XI: 77-84 touched on Lot and Sodom which clearly portrayed the men of Sodom came to the house of Lot to seek to lay with his guests who were angels in human form of males. At the end of the story, just as the bible also indicates, Sodom was burned down to ashes. Now we know these two leading religions do not smile at this form of sex but are they right?

The notion by Paul that same sex is unnatural is false. If natural can be understood as not containing anything artificial or existing in nature and not made or caused by man then what is unnatural about the act? Is it because it was not common before as the other? Cross gender sex is based on feelings generated by either one or both of them towards each other and so is same gender sex. Is there something as artificial feeling? IF there is, how is it done and how is it determined? Let us not be too quick to declare something unnatural just because its new to our society or knowledge. If you believe Paul and the Bible’s assumption is justifiable then you should be ready to agree with me that a White-man/woman is right to call a Black-man/woman unnatural or abuse him or her racially on the fact that he or she is not used to such race. And for your information, animals also engage in homosexuality. You cannot be compelled to like the act, never, and that is understandable but its high time you embrace those who practise it. There’s no justification for hating or looking down upon someone because of a natural part of him or her which they cannot avert. No amount of prayer can turn a heterosexual into a homo and vice versa. Interestingly, there are a lot of so called straight men who cannot end a moment of sexual activity without penetrating their spouses’ anus. Are they better than the “Sodomites”?     

Feelings, attained in a blink of an eye or generated within a longer period of time are both natural. Again, there is a misconception that gays are rapists. This has no proper stand because there are straight rapists just as much as there are gay rapists.No matter how much we discriminate against these wonderful individuals, they are definitely here to stay. Every human on this earth is unique so are their preferences, learn to respect them.

6 comments

Posts Carousel

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

6 Comments

  • Thyword
    2nd May 2019, 5:14 am

    Your definition for natural is so shallow, plus you can’t interpret scriptures with common sense.
    stating Paul’s definition of NATURAL in one context is a little disappointing.
    The bible is originally written in a home language…the best way to understand it is tracing the original language and reading in context.
    You can’t conclude NATURAL to be "… not containing anything artificial or existing in nature and not made or caused by man …" and build an entire argument on it.

    The word "Natural" used by Paul in that verse is;

    Original: φυσικός

    Transliteration: phusikos

    Phonetic: foo-see-kos’

    which in context means:
    agreeable to nature

    which obviously is no close to "not containing…artificial…

    I suggest you do a proper study of Scripture before attempting using them to establish a non existing fact.

    REPLY
    • Anonymous@Thyword
      2nd May 2019, 6:10 am

      Thank you for leaving your comment, I am happy to see you’re participating.
      I wouldn’t be too quick say your argument is shallow, it’s not my place and I hope you read the write up with open mind.
      Why are you following the Bible if it was not originally written in your home language?
      Do you trace the original language for each verse you read in the Bible or you only use it when the verse is clearly off beat?

      I am happy you had the time to trace it and after tracing it you arrived at the conclusion that it means ‘not agreeable to nature’ , good. Now how do you describe nature?
      You can go round and round as much as you want but you cannot still run away from the English word nature. So if the word nature had a relationship to how I described it in the write up then what is your point now?

      And if the Bible cannot work with common sense then it is more problematic than i thought!

      I believe you are intelligent, before you conclude someone is shallow you should make much more sense first. Good day!

      REPLY
      • Thyword@Anonymous
        3rd May 2019, 3:24 am

        English language is not your home language, why are you following write ups which are not written in your home language? See? That’s not even a point to make in the first place.

        I don’t need a rocket scientist to tell me you don’t believe in the bible, but that’s ok. That’s what usually happens to people who are victims of religious preachers. But I’m glad you are an intellectual and if you can give yourself to the scriptures and study for yourself, you will realise all the junks you heard from religious preachers are not true. i never shy away or have double tongue about hating religion. Religion kills more brain cells than Marijuana has ever done. But God is true, so is Jesus and the Bible…

        And YES, every verse is translated from the original language. These translations have little errors and limitations in the English Language, and so to avoid a lot of these misinformation, it is best to trace the root of the words and find the accurate meanings, otherwise, you will end up trying to interpret just like the religious folks.

        You need the Spirit of God to understand scriptures.

        To this point, it is very clear to me you actually had no idea what the scriptures are about, and you build your arguments around religious speculations. But i will highly recommended you give intentional attention to studying the scriptures with the spirit of God guiding you and not make conclusions on what you hear some religious folks preach.

        note very well, Christianity is not a religion, and as long as you use COMMON SENSE to try understanding scriptures, you won’t get it.

        REPLY
        • Anonymous@Thyword
          3rd May 2019, 12:05 pm

          English language is my country’s first language, I read and write in English and anything official is done in English. You took your time to translate the word to Greek and what you didn’t realize was that you arrived at agreeable to nature. In this case, elaborate the big difference you see between these two "Not agreeable to nature, and Natural can be understood as not containing anything artificial or existing in nature and not made or caused by man". Since you were able to visit the Greek language, I’m sure perhaps you can help us learn that very big difference in this too.

          Don’t lie to yourself brother. You don’t hate religion, you just don’t accept the other religions as good or right!

          Does the concept of the English Bible differs from that of the Greek? If all of the concepts of the verses in the English Bible are the same as the Greek then I don’t need to visit the original language version to understand. You only visit it if the the word used in the sentence is not relevant to the situation or does not fit in. I don’t need an imaginary friend to teach me this.

          The Bible is a book containing the history and future promises of a one group of people among the many in the world. You don’t need a the voice of a non-existent man/woman to tell you the meaning of that book. Just as you don’t need no spirit to understand a Shakespeare book either. You can only Change my mind if you can answer the questions below with facts and no beating about the bushes.
          How does God guide you to understand the Bible different from how your mind will aid you?
          How do your tell the difference between the voice of the spirit of God and the voice you have been hearing in your head since you were born?
          Why is Christianity not a religion?

          If you need imagination to understand a simple book, the book is a threat to your brain and your existence as human.

          I hope you answer my questions and possibly with examples. Don’t flaunt your knowledge if it’s irrelevant to this case. Good luck!

          REPLY
  • Thyword
    2nd May 2019, 5:18 am

    Your definition for natural is so shallow, plus you can’t interpret scriptures with common sense.
    stating Paul’s definition of NATURAL in one context is a little disappointing.
    The bible is originally written in a home language…the best way to understand it is tracing the original language and reading in context.
    You can’t conclude NATURAL to be "… not containing anything artificial or existing in nature and not made or caused by man …" and build an entire argument on it.

    The word "Natural" used by Paul in that verse is;

    Original: φυσικός

    Transliteration: phusikos

    Phonetic: foo-see-kos’

    which in context means:
    agreeable to nature

    which obviously is no close to "not containing…artificial…

    I suggest you do a proper study of Scripture before attempting using them to establish a non existing fact.

    REPLY
  • ANDY
    12th May 2019, 1:53 pm

    Here we go again.. I find you controversial not in the essence of your being but controversial in the topics you write about having no indepth knowledge of what it entails. Don’t get me wrong this is not an insult, what shows I hate something I don’t like it? Humbly answer

    Also a very quick correction: old testament books don’t throw light on new testament books it’s vice versa. I think you might need that info if you want to reference the Bible in your subsequent posts

    REPLY

Latest Posts

Top Authors

Most Commented

Featured Videos

Booking.com