Homosexuality ... How do the "Advocates" deal...

[TJJJ]

Disclaimer... Knowing there are some on this forum who advocate and even participate in the behaviour of homosexuality, I desire to start off the right way. I am coming from a viewpoint that is shared by the majority of America. If I get some of the wording wrong I do not mean this as a slam against anyone so, please, no offense intended. I start this thread in seriousness.

How do those who advocate homosexuality deal with the verse...

1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

If in a standard home,(heterosexual) the head of that woman is the man, how does a home with two men, (homosexual) work? Now there are two heads.

In a home with two women, (Lesbians) now there is no head.

So we have either a home with two heads or a headless home.

With any situations regarding homosexuality that I have ever dealt with there is always a dominant partner and a passive partner. Yet,... I notice that there is always a strife in these situations.

While dealing recently with two young ladies involved in a situation, I observed that there was always a struggle between the two as to who was going to be the "head". It seemed to me that both were trying to fulfill a place of headship that was not theirs and because of their situation they were always in a conflict.

Their fights in the apartment were something to hear about. Very very violent. Obviously their living together relationship did not last long. This is a common problem that happens with many of these situations.

I realize that heterosexual couples also have their fights. I am not saying that just by having a heterosexual relationship will do away with the fighting. It just seems to me that some of the tension that I have observed in the homosexual pairs that I have dealt with, either professionally or even on the job, stems from the problem of headship or lack of it.

What say some on this forum.

Again, I am not slamming anyone, I am asking a question that I feel has merit.

[coadie]

You ask a great question.
The frequency of domestic violence is incredibly high in gay households.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by coadie

You ask a great question.
The frequency of domestic violence is incredibly high in gay households.

And in single-parent homes, and in poor households, and in people of x race and in this geographic area. Do you just pull bigoted facts like this out of your backside?

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Socialite

And in single-parent homes, and in poor households, and in people of x race and in this geographic area. Do you just pull bigoted facts like this out of your backside?

You are absolutely right concerning the single parent homes, poor homes and in certain races.

Each present their own particular problems.

Single parent homes,..... where is the headship?

Poor homes... violent trends.

Rich homes .... tendency to higher priced sins is all. ie cocaine and etc.

Different racial profiles ... Cultural problems etc,

But what I am asking is... In Homosexual homes, how do they deal with who is in charge? How do they deal with headship? So far... I have yet to see a successful one. The change rate of partners is very high. Many times we see it thrown out there, from the heterosexual community, that the homosexual is just some sexual deviant that wants as many partners as possible before they all die from aids. ( I am just projecting a attitude of what I have seen).

Yet in my dealing with homosexual couples from a professional standpoint, I do not see the beforementioned promiscuity. I see couples that are trying, in their way, to have as similiar of a relationship as a heterosexual couple. ( Obciously I am not meaning single individuals but couples)

But... for all their trying, why is it that there is always a tension regarding who is in control? Much greater, again, than I have observed in heterosexual couples. I quote no stats as my faith in them is pretty low.

What say you?

[whoami]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

But what I am asking is... In Homosexual homes, how do they deal with who is in charge? How do they deal with headship? So far... I have yet to see a successful one. The change rate of partners is very high. Many times we see it thrown out there, from the heterosexual community, that the homosexual is just some sexual deviant that wants as many partners as possible before they all die from aids. ( I am just projecting a attitude of what I have seen).

Yet in my dealing with homosexual couples from a professional standpoint, I do not see the beforementioned promiscuity. I see couples that are trying, in their way, to have as similiar of a relationship as a heterosexual couple. ( Obciously I am not meaning single individuals but couples)

But... for all their trying, why is it that there is always a tension regarding who is in control? Much greater, again, than I have observed in heterosexual couples. I quote no stats as my faith in them is pretty low. What say you?

I haven't read all the replies, but there are two homosexuals in my family that I will give my examples from. One is a male and has been with his partner for 15+ years, and the other is female and has been with her partner for 8 years, so I haven't seen the high rate of partner change. Other gay couples that I know but am not as close to appear to have had about the same average of partner changes as most average American heterosexual couples.

In both, there is one that is a little more dominant in their attitude, but I don't really see the struggle there any more than in heterosexual couples. I don't think that headship and who's "in control" ever really occur to them. ("Them" being the two couples that I'm talking about.) In the female/female couple, one works and the other doesn't (due to health issues) so the one that does work is naturally more in charge of financial issues and they don't fight about it.

I don't think headship could ever even apply here because the only headship references I've seen in the Bible refer to heterosexual relationships. I don't "advocate" homosexual relationships, but I do advocate kindness, and freedom.

[Azzan]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

You are absolutely right concerning the single parent homes, poor homes and in certain races.

Each present their own particular problems.

Single parent homes,..... where is the headship?

Poor homes... violent trends.

Rich homes .... tendency to higher priced sins is all. ie cocaine and etc.

Different racial profiles ... Cultural problems etc,

But what I am asking is... In Homosexual homes, how do they deal with who is in charge? How do they deal with headship? So far... I have yet to see a successful one. The change rate of partners is very high. Many times we see it thrown out there, from the heterosexual community, that the homosexual is just some sexual deviant that wants as many partners as possible before they all die from aids. ( I am just projecting a attitude of what I have seen).

Yet in my dealing with homosexual couples from a professional standpoint, I do not see the beforementioned promiscuity. I see couples that are trying, in their way, to have as similiar of a relationship as a heterosexual couple. ( Obciously I am not meaning single individuals but couples)

But... for all their trying, why is it that there is always a tension regarding who is in control? Much greater, again, than I have observed in heterosexual couples. I quote no stats as my faith in them is pretty low.

What say you?

Based on my personal observation, on a general scale, homosexual couples manage mutually. I've seen relationships that have tension in them and I've seen relationships that didn't have tension. The ones who did have tension were a poor match, in my opinion, for any number of reasons: personality clashes, different value systems, etc.

I've not personally witnessed any abuse but I'm not denying it's not there.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Azzan

Based on my personal observation, on a general scale, homosexual couples manage mutually. I've seen relationships that have tension in them and I've seen relationships that didn't have tension. The ones who did have tension were a poor match, in my opinion, for any number of reasons: personality clashes, different value systems, etc.

I've not personally witnessed any abuse but I'm not denying it's not there.

In 2000, the New York Times in an article entitled Silence Ending About Abuse in Gay Relationships cites some information which may indicate that domestic abuse may be under-reported in the homosexual community.[4] The New York Times article states the following:

“ But the issue of gay domestic abuse has been shrouded by silence until recently...
For years, gay people have tried to keep quiet about the problem, said Dave Shannon, coordinator of the violence recovery program at Fenway Community Health, a gay and lesbian clinic in Boston.

Mr. Shannon said: People feel, 'Why should we air our dirty laundry? People feel so negatively about us already, the last thing we should do is contribute to negative stereotypes of us.' [4]

Coleman, in a 1990 study of 90 lesbians reported that 46.6% had experienced repeated acts of violence

10.↑ Coleman, V. The Relationship Between Personality and the Perpetration of Violence, Internet, Abstracted from Violence and Victims, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1994

The Journal of the Family Research Institute using data from the U.S. Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Center for Disease Control concluded that "married men who are not separated are at least 25 times less apt to be domestically attacked than a homosexual male in an 'on-going relationship.' Even if we include all married and separated husbands, the risk of domestic violence in a male-male homosexual relationship is still at least 18 times greater

5.↑ Gay Domestic Violence Finally Measured, Journal of the Family Research Institute, Vol. 16 No. 8, Dec 2001

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Disclaimer... Knowing there are some on this forum who advocate and even participate in the behaviour of homosexuality, I desire to start off the right way. I am coming from a viewpoint that is shared by the majority of America. If I get some of the wording wrong I do not mean this as a slam against anyone so, please, no offense intended. I start this thread in seriousness.

How do those who advocate homosexuality deal with the verse...

1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

If in a standard home,(heterosexual) the head of that woman is the man, how does a home with two men, (homosexual) work? Now there are two heads.

In a home with two women, (Lesbians) now there is no head.

So we have either a home with two heads or a headless home.

With any situations regarding homosexuality that I have ever dealt with there is always a dominant partner and a passive partner. Yet,... I notice that there is always a strife in these situations.

While dealing recently with two young ladies involved in a situation, I observed that there was always a struggle between the two as to who was going to be the "head". It seemed to me that both were trying to fulfill a place of headship that was not theirs and because of their situation they were always in a conflict.

Their fights in the apartment were something to hear about. Very very violent. Obviously their living together relationship did not last long. This is a common problem that happens with many of these situations.

I realize that heterosexual couples also have their fights. I am not saying that just by having a heterosexual relationship will do away with the fighting. It just seems to me that some of the tension that I have observed in the homosexual pairs that I have dealt with, either professionally or even on the job, stems from the problem of headship or lack of it.

What say some on this forum.

Again, I am not slamming anyone, I am asking a question that I feel has merit.

1 Corinthians is written to believers, read by believers, and practiced by believers. As under-shepherds, fellow brothers and followers of Jesus, we have every duty to promote healthy views of sex and marriage.

The other thread about personal liberties is not even in the same ballpark. And when you refer to "head" you should be interested to know what the "head" analogies were in Greco times. They were common. Paul was not original here. He used a popular metaphor to describe families. As Gordon Fee argues, this has nothing to do with hierarchy, one being dominant over the other. It has everything to do with "source of life," showing God's design (and preference). We are taking what is a common Greco-Roman analogy (the Body, Heads, etc) and following the analogy out further than it should be.

What does a "headless" home mean to you anyway? Sounds Stonekingish to me. Your anecdotes about two women fighting is interesting, since I could find the same tension in heterosexual homes. It's usually not about "who gets to be the head" as much as mutual submission and communication.

The fact is, single mother homes are "headless" by your definition as well. As are dead beat dad homes, as are orphans.... sin... it's an ugly thing.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Socialite

1 Corinthians is written to believers, read by believers, and practiced by believers. As under-shepherds, fellow brothers and followers of Jesus, we have every duty to promote healthy views of sex and marriage.

The other thread about personal liberties is not even in the same ballpark. And when you refer to "head" you should be interested to know what the "head" analogies were in Greco times. They were common. Paul was not original here. He used a popular metaphor to describe families. As Gordon Fee argues, this has nothing to do with hierarchy, one being dominant over the other. It has everything to do with "source of life," showing God's design (and preference).

What does a "headless" home mean to you anyway? Sounds Stonekingish to me. Your anecdotes about two women fighting is interesting, since I could find the same tension in heterosexual homes. It's usually not about "who gets to be the head" as much as mutual submission and communication.

The fact is, single mother homes are "headless" by your definition as well. As are dead beat dad homes, as are orphans.... sin... it's an ugly thing.

My friend, and to use your phrase... fellow brother, please do not think I am starting this here thread to bash anyone, nor to be mean. In many of my threads there is a lot of sarcasm, just venting I guess. I do want all to know that I started this thread in seriousness.

Now to your points. Paul used the meaning head, regarding headship. I know that this was written in Greek to people familiar to that day and age. Of that we are in agreement. But do you not see the principal of what he wrote? We are dealing with headship, of authority, and the proper ways of organization. Do you agree with this or no?

I will ignore the Stoneking reference, that has no bearing on this at all.

You make the comment about mutual submission and communication. I agree. Yet, why is it that the incidents of conflict are dramatically higher in homosexual homes as compared to heterosexual. Yes, there are fights, conflicts, divorces in heterosexual homes, yet... the rates are much much higher in homosexual relationships. I have yet to deal with one homosexual relationship that did not or does not have major strife in the relationship.

Now maybe you are different in what you have seen. I am coming from just my experiences in dealing with this situation. I would be interested in hearing what others think on this matter.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

My friend, and to use your phrase... fellow brother, please do not think I am starting this here thread to bash anyone, nor to be mean. In many of my threads there is a lot of sarcasm, just venting I guess. I do want all to know that I started this thread in seriousness.

Now to your points. Paul used the meaning head, regarding headship. I know that this was written in Greek to people familiar to that day and age. Of that we are in agreement. But do you not see the principal of what he wrote? We are dealing with headship, of authority, and the proper ways of organization. Do you agree with this or no?

I will ignore the Stoneking reference, that has no bearing on this at all.

You make the comment about mutual submission and communication. I agree. Yet, why is it that the incidents of conflict are dramatically higher in homosexual homes as compared to heterosexual. Yes, there are fights, conflicts, divorces in heterosexual homes, yet... the rates are much much higher in homosexual relationships. I have yet to deal with one homosexual relationship that did not or does not have major strife in the relationship.

Now maybe you are different in what you have seen. I am coming from just my experiences in dealing with this situation. I would be interested in hearing what others think on this matter.

TJJJ, I wasn't offended or taking occasion of an insult. The Stoneking reference was a humorous sarcasm not aimed at you, aimed at the concept.

Regarding 1 Cor being about headship,authority... this is not universally accepted. Not even by some Egalitarian theologians like Fee. But I see your point.

Outside of that, I'm not sure I see much of the rest of your point. 1 Cor indicates God's design for humankind. We fall short of that in so many areas of times through divorce, death, abandonment, drunkenness, abuse, etc... So this brokenness in the home is universal.

I live in a high-dense area of the country where homosexuality is more common (the phenom of city migration where oppressed groups move to for safety), I think we would need to see more research into violent homes. Honestly, it's the first I've heard of it being a unique problem to homosexuals -- and I can't recall any of my gay friends in the past couple years talking about domestic violence.

So I have 3 things:

1) The Text is not about having two heads, no heads or one head. There's more we can discuss about that. So to launch from this point, I can't even find enough there to do that.

2) The Text is to/for believers and followers of The Way.

3) Realization that the brokenness of homes and God's order is universal, not just reserved for homosexuals.

4) Really don't accept the idea that this is unique to homosexuals, or that there is some dramatic increase in rates... and at the end of the day, not sure that even matters.