Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
If one's sexuality is not a choice, then why are there no matri-sexuals?
Many young boys absolutely LOVE their mothers. So why does this not translate into heterosexual romantic attraction later in life when both are adults? Could it be that the cultural perception of such a practice has a way of influencing the development of one's desires and choices in this regard? And for those who appeal to nature, animals do engage in such things. So what makes matri-sexuality any different from homosexuality from a moral point of view? And how about this - the bible doesn't even say anything about it ! !
Those who would want to weigh in with ad hominem attacks should understand that their response will be understood as a statement of your intellectual vacuity.
Obviously I'm not advocating this. I'm just examining the rationale of arguments that some use to justify the moral acceptance of homosexuality. Some say that since animals do it, it must be ok. Some say since Jesus didn't mention it, it must be ok. And the prevailing argument is the well-worn "born that way argument". Just saying that one could just as well be born with a sexual attraction toward one's mother, and if they are, then what is the moral grounds for saying there is anything wrong with that? Especially after the mother is post-menopausal. It's perverted, yes. But so is homosexuality in the opinion of many people. So, what's the difference?
@ pyrofoam - my argument is that homosexuality is prevalent because it has become socially acceptable to act upon those impulses. (not denying that some may have the impulses) Any activity becomes more ingrained the more one practices it. Thus, the attraction to homosexuality increases with the lack of societal moral restraint and the increase in practice. I guarantee that pedophilia and incest would become just as prevalent if it were as acceptable. And people would eventually feel such a strong pull toward it that they would insist they were born that way. You can't claim "born that way" for one aberrant behavior, and deny it for all others. The sense of freedom to engage our impulses determines how strong they will become within us to some degree. Does it hurt anyone? Ask God how He feels about it. He's someone - our Creator.
5 Answers
- RicardoLv 78 years ago
Many young boys absolutely LOVE their mothers. So why does this not translate into heterosexual romantic attraction later in life when both are adults
- Three are, your grasp of reality is getting tenuous isn't it.
And for those who appeal to nature, animals do engage in such things
- Far more rarely than with people.
So what makes matri-sexuality any different from homosexuality from a moral point of view
- Very little.
And how about this - the bible doesn't even say anything about it ! !
- There is a lot about fathers and daughters, obviously you have never actually read the bible.
- PyriformLv 78 years ago
I do not know that there are no matrisexuals. If there are none, I imagine it is an evolutionary instinct to avoid in-breeding.
"And for those who appeal to nature, animals do engage in such things."
What applies to some animals does not necessarily apply to all.
"And how about this - the bible doesn't even say anything about it ! ! "
What about it?
Edit
"I'm just examining the rationale of arguments that some use to justify the moral acceptance of homosexuality."
But you have not attempted to address the one rationale that is generally used, that homosexuality does not hurt anybody, provided it is between consenting adults.
"Some say that since animals do it, it must be ok."
I do not know anybody who says that. I have only heard people responding to the homophobic argument that 'It is not natural', by pointing out that since animals do it, it is natural.
'And the prevailing argument is the well-worn "born that way argument". Just saying that one could just as well be born with a sexual attraction toward one's mother, and if they are, then what is the moral grounds for saying there is anything wrong with that?'
Other than the fact that incestuous relationships are likely to lead to birth defects, I can't think of any. But bringing up cases which are not an issue, as,. by your own claim, nobody has that attraction, is irrelevant. Why don't you tell us what your actual objection to homosexuality is, if you have one.
- BobbinLv 78 years ago
Nature discourages inbreeding by providing a psychological block to sexual attraction, called bonding, between immediate family members, strongest between parent and child. It rarely ever breaks down or never develops on the part of both parent and child. Sexual attraction is not just random, it is predominantly between people of similar age and opposite sex, and to a much lesser extent between members of the same sex.
- Anonymous8 years ago
I thought there was a part of the brain that renders one's mother sexually non-attractive. I forgot what it is called.
I don't really care if a mother has a consenting sexual relationship with their adult son as long as they don't have children - I'm sure you know why.
These arguments by homophobes are pathetic.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
