Attitude Towards Homosexuality: Impact on Family

[biochemist]

Modern society has tended to adopt a more liberal attitude towards homosexuality. To what extent do you think this trend is damaging to traditional concepts of ¡®family¡¯?

 

[LogicalAtheist]

The changes in attitude of homosexuals in the past say, 50 years, has paralelled a change in the definition of family, and of marriage as the necessary first move of a family. They are independent, and probably caused my a third party invisible societal movement.

Sexual acts have become done for pleasure rather than or children. The percentage of sex happening for the purpose of a child is probably nearing zero, less than 99.90% percent for sure.

Furthermore, with advances on controling the biochemical reactions that cause a child, more and more will involve calculated medical changes rather than just a sexual act that's left to grow for nine month with little medical INTERVENTION.

Family - Marriages are less. More end in divorce, and less probably happen in the first place.

Let me cut to where I see the late future of humans in this respect, rather than saying all this.

I think that the idea of marriage will very much disappear. As the population of "old people" grows, and their health per age inreases, they'll probably be more interested in "dating and mating" than a settled down relationship, once it becomes more socially acceptable.

I think that sex will eventually be never used for childbirth, only for pleasure. In a very distant future, humans may opt for sterility at the age of 16 just like men get a cirumcision at birth.

Family will most likely never leave. It's such a geologically popular event.

SO, family might not change, but marriage and sex will.

As for homosexuallity, my point is that it perhaps might not be able to cause any more change than is already happening you know?

It certainly promotes sex for fun and not for childbirth, cuzz they can't have babies!

 

[LURCH]

As with all new concepts, it is quite devistating to "traditional concepts". If one person defines family as "a husband (singular, masculine) with a wife (singular, feminine) and their children (possesive; born from them), then two men with no woman and no possibility of children is utterly alien. If that definition is considered prescriptive, rather than descriptive, then the new definition is an offense.

However, I think the impact of modern views toward homosexuality on the "traditional familly" is somewhat mitigated by the fact that this type of familly was very nearly non-existant already. I have a decent-sized circle of friends and, in that group, there is one individual other than myself whose familly consists of a monogomous couple and their offspring.

 

[damgo]

Originally posted by biochemist
Modern society has tended to adopt a more liberal attitude towards homosexuality. To what extent do you think this trend is damaging to traditional concepts of ¡®family¡¯?

Not much at all. I don't see how accepting that it's OK for two guys to sleep together damages the family.

 

[kyle_soule]

There is no family in homosexual sex. Unless they adopt, that raises the question, should gays or lesbians be able to adopt children?

After growing up in a heterosexual home, I do not like the idea of growing up in a homosexual home. If it is indeed a sexual preference, not being the norm, then the child would learn that homosexuality is the norm and they would most likely feel different and perhaps sexually inadequate among peers, because chances are they would not feel any urges to have relations with the same sex.

Modern society has tended to adopt a more liberal attitude towards homosexuality. To what extent do you think this trend is damaging to traditional concepts of ¡®family¡¯?

I think it destroys the concept of family only in the homosexual relationship, they have no way of creating a family in the traditional way [sex].

 

[damgo]

There are numerous homosexual couples who have adopted children, you can read about them. Why would they think homesexuality is the norm? Most kids don't even think about their parents having sex; they get those norms from elsewhere. I think that children of homosexual couples are likely to be better sexually-adjusted; simply because their parents went through all the trouble and condemnation of coming out, and usually know what it's like to feel guilt or pain because others won't accept your orientation. They are likely to be very frank and nurturing of the child's sexual choices, whatever they may be. Much better than some conservative heterosexual parents who spurn or try and 'cure' their children when they come out.

I think it destroys the concept of family only in the homosexual relationship, they have no way of creating a family in the traditional way [sex].

So do infertile couples; I don't think this damages the family at all.

The acceptability of career women, the loss of the early marriage imperative for women, the desire of young professionals to put off marriage and childbearing for their career, greater recognition of dysfunctional marriages, social acceptance of divorce, birth control, and the legitimizing of sex-outside-of-marriage all have damaged the traditional family. But not, IMO, homosexuality.

 

[FZ+]

To what extent do you think this trend is damaging to traditional concepts of ¡®family¡¯?

The Traditional Concept of Family involved reproduction by asexual mitosis. I'm pretty sure life has moved on quite a bit since then.

 

[Hurkyl]

I agree with the general consensus; whatever your view on homosexuality may be, it is highly doubtful that it is a causal factor in the downfall of traditional family values.

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
I agree with the general consensus; whatever your view on homosexuality may be, it is highly doubtful that it is a causal factor in the downfall of traditional family values.

Well, I think that might be a slight overstatement. "A causal factor", certainly it is. But not THE cause, nor necessarily one of the main causes. Surely, the more relaxed attitude of modern society toward divorce and remarriage is far more antithetical to tradition. And the more widespread acceptance of polygamy has also had a strong affect on modern culture.

 

[DR OF DEATH]

(To what extent do you think this trend is damaging to traditional concepts of ¡®family¡¯?)

ok whoever said this has some seriously F*^ked up ideas about homosexuals, homosexuality and social attitudes has no affect on "traditional concepts of family" because everybody has different ideas about what family means. and as for social attitudes damaging concepts of family i would like an apolagy about that statement please cos homosexuals don't damage family or the concepts of it.(well at least neither me or my borfriend do). chow

 

[qwpoi]

Homosexuality defined as categorically separate from heterosexuality is a relatively modern one, beginning with the victorian age, although I could be wrong. Example--in Greek times, (a common example, I know), men were not 'homos' nor were they un-manly or 'effeminate' if they slept with men. There are tribal cultures wherein a man proves his manliness by having sex with another man. I don't know the full details about this ritual.

Why single out homosexuality?

Abusive parents damage the family.

Homosexuals are just like heterosexuals in that they are both people, have the same strengths and weaknesses, can be as uplifting or degrading as any other human.

This question is precisely the sort of cloaked homophobia that persists in society today.

 

[FZ+]

Abusive parents damage the family.

Human nature damage the family. Everything damages the family. We usually call it change, and it is a matter of fact that everything changes. The world does change, and the focus should be on adapting the traditional family to the very non-traditional world, and creating something that works better for all. Try hard to "preserve the traditional family" will not preserve it - there was never such a constant concept as the traditional family in the first place. All it will do is lead to stagnation, and the overall weakness of society.