The behaviors of homosexuality and polygamy

 

With the note that I consider it a “diluting” of “faith” to “justify” a position with reference to some scripture, I respect Phil Robertson’s recent statements as well as the choices of the heads of the TV network A&E to suspend him.

 

He could have simply said, “my position is that the behavior of heterosexuality is socially essential. Plus, I consider the behavior of homosexuality to be socially disruptive or even destructive.”

 

Actually, I do not know what he said. But that is what he could have said!

 

By the way, the idea that homosexuality is not a behavior is remarkable to me. It is like saying that bisexuality is not a pattern of behavior. All forms of sexuality are behavioral.

 

The idea that “homosexuals” are a fundamentally different kind of creature than “bisexuals” (for instance) is tricky to maintain when we realize that all “bisexuals” are only distinct from “homosexuals” because of a behavioral detail. I do not know if there is someone who is exclusively homosexual … in regard to their sexual behavior (did I even need to specify that?) … who is willing to openly admit that homosexuality is just a pattern of behavior, but that would be refreshing.

 

The background issue to me is a lack of intelligence. There is a lack of appreciation for the nature of language. It may all come down to a lack of respect (as in self-respect).

 

 

As I said, I respect whatever Phil said and however A&E responds and however anyone else responds. I also respect that some people who are exclusively homosexual in their behavior are interested in using terms like marriage and matrimony. However, they may not know the linguistic roots of those words, which refer to an impregnated womb.

 

 

The word marriage, when used by anthropologists, does not typically refer to a social ritual of a civil union of two people as life partners. Marriage would include at least one man and at least one woman (as in polygyny, polygamy, or heterosexual monogamy).

 

In the US, there are already laws for the civil union of an elderly woman (beyond child-bearing years) with a man. That is clearly a divergence from the last several thousand years of how the ritual of marriage has been used (for the protecting of the rights of the soon-to-be pregnant mother and the father-to-be, like if the husband is about to be drafted in to a war and will be traveling and at risk of death- then the bride gets legal right to death benefits).

 


Typically, the sequence is to get married, then have a lot of sex, and so on. However, the institution of marriage has certainly lost popularity… with vast amounts of non-marital heterosexual copulation, as well as plenty of unwed motherhood/fatherhood.

 

I would presume that many people favor the idea of a formal legal union prior to any pregnancy. Anything that distracts from that, including sexual activities that have no reproductive capacity, like masturbation or homosexual behavior, can be viewed as a distraction from the most important (most sacred) aspect of human sexuality, which is the same as with any other species: the capacity for conception.

 

 

 

 

 

 

English: DIGNITY & RESPECT (2001) is a U.S. Ar...

English: DIGNITY & RESPECT (2001) is a U.S. Army training guide on the homosexual conduct policy. PROBLEMS DEALT WITH: Homosexual conduct, evidence gathering and credible witnesses, admission of guilt, harassment, and additional army resources. This page deals with the definition of homosexuality. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

 

Advertisements

Tags: , ,

2 Responses to “The behaviors of homosexuality and polygamy”

  1. freestonepeaches Says:

    I’m not getting the relevence of all the topics you brought up. It’s like I missed something, and I don’t want to go back and find out what it is.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      I was commenting on language and “traditional” uses of the word marriage, which is a RITUAL about PROCREATIVE capacity and future CHILDREN (originally). I mentioned how homosexuality as a pattern of behavior contrasts “completely” with a legal institution for the protection of CHILDREN (born or unborn or even not yet conceived).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: