Homosexsuals...

[piasabird]

Some psychologists have said that people are both gay and straight. They think that people have both qualities to some degrees as a kind of purely physical set of attributes. People tend to become who they are by overcoming nature or the natural man. People are more than instinct and nature it is upper reasoning that separates us from animals. Human beings are what they are because they have have overcome nature.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Some psychologists have said that people are both gay and straight. They think that people have both qualities to some degrees as a kind of purely physical set of attributes. People tend to become who they are by overcoming nature or the natural man. People are more than instinct and nature it is upper reasoning that separates us from animals. Human beings are what they are because they have have overcome nature.

That's a pretty loaded paragraph. What is this "nature" you're talking about? I thought gay + straight = bisexual. What does sexuality have to do with reasoning.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: newParadime
Being gay is a choice that goes against the biologigical use of the reproductive organs of the body. Thats ironic infact, reproductive organs will never reproduce anything in a gay relationship.

This from a guy who masturbates. Duh!

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: newParadime
Being gay is a choice that goes against the biologigical use of the reproductive organs of the body. Thats ironic infact, reproductive organs will never reproduce anything in a gay relationship.

This from a guy who masturbates. Duh!

I agree. Masterbation, condoms, birth control...etc...etc...
This has been convered before.

Oh and Paradime, being gay is not a choice, although homosexual sex is. But so is heterosexual sex.

 

[MaverikV]

I'm with Gandhi.

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians.

Do you think Jesus would condemn these people like you have? Homosexuality is not a Choice. If God made us all (according to you; I am an atheist), and God made everything good, follow the logic all the way through.

Next debate please.

 

[mithrandir2001]

The Right needs homosexuals. Otherwise there wouldn't be a boogeymen to scare the Flock into going against their interests and voting Republican.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
The Right needs homosexuals. Otherwise there wouldn't be a boogeymen to scare the Flock into going against their interests and voting Republican.

:thumbsup:

This is the only reason why Bush won the election. Kerry, even when advised by Clinton to come out in support of Gay Marriage Amendments in the States, refused.

 

[dripgoss]

I always like reading the first page of a thread and then the last page to see how far the discussion strays and luckily this one has stuck fairly close. Although the original poster did not ask about political or religious interjections...

Since millions of dollars have been pumped into the study of this very subject over ther years and there is still very inconclusive evidence to support whether homosexuality is a choice or a genetic defect, I think these discussions need to be taken in with a grain of salt. No one knows at this point - even homosexuals..

So I believe that it could be a mix of choice, environment, genetics, childhood events, biology, nurture, metal and/or possibly other factors we can't account for yet. The formula is too complex for us to pinpoint AND everyone's different.

 

[3chordcharlie]

I had a very good friend in public school, who chose to be gay in the 12th grade.

A year later, when he realized that he was not, in fact, gay, and never would be, he had some very serious regrets.

I think he bought into the lie that says homosexuality is a 'lifestyle choice' and tried to 'choose it' because of his support for civil and human rights, and as a way to thumb his nose at authority. He may have had sex with men, but he is definitely not gay.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I had a very good friend in public school, who chose to be gay in the 12th grade.

A year later, when he realized that he was not, in fact, gay, and never would be, he had some very serious regrets.

I think he bought into the lie that says homosexuality is a 'lifestyle choice' and tried to 'choose it' because of his support for civil and human rights, and as a way to thumb his nose at authority. He may have had sex with men, but he is definitely not gay.

Why do you say he is definitely not gay, out of interest?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
The Right needs homosexuals. Otherwise there wouldn't be a boogeymen to scare the Flock into going against their interests and voting Republican.

Of course. I said this all last year. But that didn't stop the pro-gay crowd, beginning with Multnomah county commissioner Diane Linn, for wrecking the entire election by pushing the wrong agenda in the wrong year and summoning up that boogeyman of the right for them. Did no one ever stop to think of that? I mean, seriously, the Democratic party's problem right now is that it just realized that, with friends like that, who needs enemies?

Originally posted by: dripgoss
I always like reading the first page of a thread and then the last page to see how far the discussion strays and luckily this one has stuck fairly close. Although the original poster did not ask about political or religious interjections...

Since millions of dollars have been pumped into the study of this very subject over ther years and there is still very inconclusive evidence to support whether homosexuality is a choice or a genetic defect, I think these discussions need to be taken in with a grain of salt. No one knows at this point - even homosexuals..

So I believe that it could be a mix of choice, environment, genetics, childhood events, biology, nurture, metal and/or possibly other factors we can't account for yet. The formula is too complex for us to pinpoint AND everyone's different.

Very good post. This is almost certainly true. Unfortunately, in our soundbite-driven world, people want to hear that complex issues have simple answers, and refuse to accept otherwise.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I had a very good friend in public school, who chose to be gay in the 12th grade.

A year later, when he realized that he was not, in fact, gay, and never would be, he had some very serious regrets.

I think he bought into the lie that says homosexuality is a 'lifestyle choice' and tried to 'choose it' because of his support for civil and human rights, and as a way to thumb his nose at authority. He may have had sex with men, but he is definitely not gay.

Why do you say he is definitely not gay, out of interest?

Because he never was gay, even when 'he was gay'. He thought it would be the cool counter-culture lifestyle to lead, but as far as I could tell, he wasn't attracted to men!

There's pretty good evidence that sexual orientation is not genetically determined (EDIT - not 100% determined, but certainly influenced), but whatever the series of causes that determines a person's sexuality, they made this guy straight, not gay, and that's really all there is to it.

I know all this 'my friend' stuff sounds like a fishy cover story, but this really was a friend - I had my own issues with sexuality, but they weren't as deep or personally troubling as his.

 

[Archman]

Originally posted by: dripgoss
I always like reading the first page of a thread and then the last page to see how far the discussion strays and luckily this one has stuck fairly close. Although the original poster did not ask about political or religious interjections...

Since millions of dollars have been pumped into the study of this very subject over ther years and there is still very inconclusive evidence to support whether homosexuality is a choice or a genetic defect, I think these discussions need to be taken in with a grain of salt. No one knows at this point - even homosexuals..

So I believe that it could be a mix of choice, environment, genetics, childhood events, biology, nurture, metal and/or possibly other factors we can't account for yet. The formula is too complex for us to pinpoint AND everyone's different.

It's human nature, anytime there is something we do not understand we are quick to judge without all the information or facts... look throughout history... People have been persecuted because the majority did not understand them... be it religion, ethnicity (or as most would say, Race), Politics, etc... this is similar in some regards, and dripgoss makes a valid point, although I wouldn't call it a genetic defect, I would choose the words genetic difference, defect gives it such a harsh negative conotation.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I had a very good friend in public school, who chose to be gay in the 12th grade.

A year later, when he realized that he was not, in fact, gay, and never would be, he had some very serious regrets.

I think he bought into the lie that says homosexuality is a 'lifestyle choice' and tried to 'choose it' because of his support for civil and human rights, and as a way to thumb his nose at authority. He may have had sex with men, but he is definitely not gay.

Why do you say he is definitely not gay, out of interest?

Because he never was gay, even when 'he was gay'. He thought it would be the cool counter-culture lifestyle to lead, but as far as I could tell, he wasn't attracted to men!

So he decided to call himself 'gay', even tho he was not attracted to males at all?

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
There's pretty good evidence that sexual orientation is not genetically determined (EDIT - not 100% determined, but certainly influenced), but whatever the series of causes that determines a person's sexuality, they made this guy straight, not gay, and that's really all there is to it.

So he's not bisexual to some extent, he is interested in females only, now?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
So he decided to call himself 'gay', even tho he was not attracted to males at all?

He didn't just call himself gay - he slept with men.

So he's not bisexual to some extent, he is interested in females only, now?

Yes.

He is still very supportive of gay rights, and has a number of gay friends (more than I do). He is not an 'ex-gay' if that's what you're asking

 

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: aidanjm
So he decided to call himself 'gay', even tho he was not attracted to males at all?

He didn't just call himself gay - he slept with men.

So he's not bisexual to some extent, he is interested in females only, now?

Yes.

He is still very supportive of gay rights, and has a number of gay friends (more than I do). He is not an 'ex-gay' if that's what you're asking

I guess I'd just call him "confused".

 

[Veramocor]

New scientific evidence shows that the brain of homosexual men responds different than heterosexual men.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7791888/


I guess you don't 'choose' your sexual orientation.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: Veramocor
New scientific evidence shows that the brain of homosexual men responds different than heterosexual men.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7791888/


I guess you don't 'choose' your sexual orientation.

doesn't matter, certain groups will never accept that people might be created that way, because "god" does not make mistakes, thus if people are created that way then it would not be a mistake, and they'd have to accept it.

 

[tokyo jesus fist]

I have never, ever, ever heard a reasonable, sensible or logical argument againts homosexuality. I have easily dismissed every single argument ever presented. That's all I have to say.

Most of the arguments are based on religion, and are therefore automatically invalid. Some of them are based on the "but it's not natural" argument which is just amusingly stupid.

 

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by: tokyo jesus fist
I have never, ever, ever heard a reasonable, sensible or logical argument againts homosexuality. I have easily dismissed every single argument ever presented. That's all I have to say.

Most of the arguments are based on religion, and are therefore automatically invalid. Some of them are based on the "but it's not natural" argument which is just amusingly stupid.

But then again, it doesn't really matter what you think. Everyone has their own opinions and that's what matters. Just because you don't agree with some doesn't make your opinions "more correct" than the others.

 

[tokyo jesus fist]

Originally posted by: Piobaireachd

Originally posted by: tokyo jesus fist
I have never, ever, ever heard a reasonable, sensible or logical argument againts homosexuality. I have easily dismissed every single argument ever presented. That's all I have to say.

Most of the arguments are based on religion, and are therefore automatically invalid. Some of them are based on the "but it's not natural" argument which is just amusingly stupid.

But then again, it doesn't really matter what you think. Everyone has their own opinions and that's what matters. Just because you don't agree with some doesn't make your opinions "more correct" than the others.

Opinions based on religion are, in this case, automatically invalid and the rest are otherwise invalid, such as the "homosexuality is unnatural" argument.

 

[dornick]

Originally posted by: tokyo jesus fist
Most of the arguments are based on religion, and are therefore automatically invalid.

Invalid by what standard? Yours? I guess the world should make decisions based on what you think is proper then. Nobody can ever come to a consensus on an issue like this because the competing parties are using distinct moralities that can never agree.

 

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by: tokyo jesus fist

Originally posted by: Piobaireachd

Originally posted by: tokyo jesus fist
I have never, ever, ever heard a reasonable, sensible or logical argument againts homosexuality. I have easily dismissed every single argument ever presented. That's all I have to say.

Most of the arguments are based on religion, and are therefore automatically invalid. Some of them are based on the "but it's not natural" argument which is just amusingly stupid.

But then again, it doesn't really matter what you think. Everyone has their own opinions and that's what matters. Just because you don't agree with some doesn't make your opinions "more correct" than the others.

Opinions based on religion are, in this case, automatically invalid and the rest are otherwise invalid, such as the "homosexuality is unnatural" argument.

Take your head out of your ass and quit just repeating your previous post. Just because you say "they are invalid" doesn't make them so. Your opinion counts for absolutely nothing. Just like mine.

 

[tokyo jesus fist]

Originally posted by: Piobaireachd
Take your head out of your ass and quit just repeating your previous post. Just because you say "they are invalid" doesn't make them so. Your opinion counts for absolutely nothing. Just like mine.

Well gee, let's stop posting completely, since saying something doesn't make it so and opinions are meaningless.

 

[Piobaireachd]

Originally posted by: tokyo jesus fist

Originally posted by: Piobaireachd
Take your head out of your ass and quit just repeating your previous post. Just because you say "they are invalid" doesn't make them so. Your opinion counts for absolutely nothing. Just like mine.

Well gee, let's stop posting completely, since saying something doesn't make it so and opinions are meaningless.

:roll: