For someone whose volunteered in sex clinics and mental health centers (CAMH in Canada), I'm againt homosexuality because it is a psychological disorder classified as "Sexual Orientation Disturbance" in the DSG III "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

It was reclassified as "Sexual disorder not otherwise specified" in 1987 due to popitical reasons (Gay people were being killed in the USA for being Gay, while the act of homosexuallity is not dangerous outside of the spreading of STD's). I'm not sure if it was ever removed entirely.

However Gay Marriage, I'm fine with. We have no cure for homosexuality, we don't even know the cause of it, and most treatments supress all sexual urges, not just homosexual ones (however that is begining to change). Since we have no cure for a non harmful psychological illness, then why should gay people be refused marriage? We might not find a cure for 50 more years, and that's longer then most marriages.

Also because it's a non-threating or violoent, and livable sexual disorder, if a cure were to ever become invented, it's the homosexuals choice to use it or not. So, if a cure comes up in 10 years, there is no reason why gay marriages should not be honored.

So Homosexuality, I'm against, it's a disorder, simple as that.

Homosexual behavior, I am indifferent to, however I do want to push safe sex between these people because not all homosexuals are purely homosexual, and STD's can spread to the heterosexual community.

Gay Marriage, I'm all for, keeps the STD's isolated LOL. No, they can do what they like.

Obstaining from an activity is not the same as engaging in an activity that is counter to the natural purpose of the activity, so I wouldn't see a good argument for Monks having a disorder. I do think calling homosexuality a disorder could be an overly broad application of the term, but still there are interesting points to be made either way.

Here is the definition of disorder you presented: 

"A medical condition involving a disturbance to the usual functioning of the mind or body."

How does abstinence not satisfy this definition?

Please explain to me how homosexuality is a psychological disorder. A psychological disorder usually must either 1.) prevent the person from functioning in society, 2.) cause the person discomfort, or 3.) endanger the self or others. Homosexuality satisfies none of those criteria, so how exactly is it a psychological disorder?

You could say homosexuality is a psychological disorder because it's uncommon. Well, if that's your criteria of a psychological disorder, then you must also classify left-handed people or monks as having a psychological disorder, merely because they are uncommon. By that token, are you 'against' left-handedness as well? Probably not.

So what is it about homosexuals that you're against that you can't say the same about other uncommon people (like left-handed people, and monks)?

timmah said:

Because their natural attractions would theoretically lead them to procreate if acted upon, they are making a purposeful conscious choice for some other reason, it is not necessarily something that is 'hard wired' into their mental process.

Theoretically, maybe, maybe not. I'm not too sure on the inner desire of monks, but I'm sure if I wanted to, I could find plenty of cases with experienced monks who have trained themselves to rid themselves of their sexual urges. Theoretically, would these monks have a disorder?

A disorder is generally something that exists in and of itself or is due to outside causes, not usually something you would 'train' yourself to do or think, so not a disorder in that case. No fun though for sure.