NationStates Jolt Archive

You're right, it does all come down to those who they disagree with being yucky, and i would prefer it if they could just be honest and admit that. I would still disagree, but at least they wouldn't be hiding behind their faith or their politics. Things that can actually be used for good if people choose to.

I don't have a proble with Christianity, or any other religion. I know some Christians and members of other religions who are wonderful and decent people. What i have a problem with are those who use their faith, or their politics, etc. as an excuse to hate and pass judgement on other people when they have done nothing to hurt anyone else. When i hear Christian fundamentalists open their mouthes i actually feel sorry for other members of the faith.

Unfortunately, a lot of fundamentalists can be hypocrites too. Opposing one thing (ie. homosexuality as a "sin") but not emphasizing another (ie. its a sin to eat seafood, a sin to wear certain clothing, etc etc). Sad, sad world...

Yeah, i know. They pick and choose what to believe, and they choose the parts condemning people, instead of things like "judge not lest ye be judged" or "let he among you who has not sinned be the first to cast his stone," etc.

Ok, perhaps it's not the end of the discussion. I want to clear one thing up. I'm not a racist, nor are any of my Christian friends or non-Christian friends for that matter. Where you come up with me being a racist is beyond me infact. I have quite a few friends of different races and nationalities. Incase, it's slipped by you, homosexuals aren't a race of people. As for my need to support my belief, my belief is based in the bible.

Now it's the end of the discussion for me, partially because I don't feel the need to argue, and partially because it's nearly 1:30 in the morning.

Ok, perhaps it's not the end of the discussion. I want to clear one thing up. I'm not a racist, nor are any of my Christian friends or non-Christian friends for that matter. Where you come up with me being a racist is beyond me infact. I have quite a few friends of different races and nationalities. Incase, it's slipped by you, homosexuals aren't a race of people.

We're not calling you racist. We're saying you're no better.

As for my need to support my belief, my belief is based in the bible.

Such an unoriginal excuse. You know, racists used that one as well. Worked as shitty for them as it does for you.

2. Therefore, it is due to genetics.
This really branches in to the whole Nature versus Nurture thing. Our social upbringing very definitely plays a role in defining our primary personality characteristics, and within heterosexuality it certainly influences what we find attractive in a potential partner. Is there any particular reason to assume that having a homosexual preference is any different? There might be a combination of factors; it doesn't necessarily follow that genetics must be the (or even the primary) underlying origin, just as is the case with any individual character trait.

It's all genetic plus it has some effect from your parents and people you care about also. Whatever they think is probably what you will think or be expected to think.:sniper: :( :gundge: :confused: :rolleyes: :p :sniper::confused: :confused:

I don't need to tell myself I'm not a bigot, I know I'm not.

Why do all bigots that are "Christian" always say that?

This really branches in to the whole Nature versus Nurture thing. Our social upbringing very definitely plays a role in defining our primary personality characteristics, and within heterosexuality it certainly influences what we find attractive in a potential partner. Is there any particular reason to assume that having a homosexual preference is any different? There might be a combination of factors; it doesn't necessarily follow that genetics must be the (or even the primary) underlying origin, just as is the case with any individual character trait.

Personality and attitude of a person is one thing, but sexual desire is another. You can't put those two on the same pedestal.

Why do all bigots that are "Christian" always say that?

It's the Dorothy effect.

As it is though, it seems to be a free-for-all on have a go at the Christian at the moment. Perhaps, it would've been better for me to have not mentioned anything at all then you could ramble on agreeing with each other until the cows come home, as it seems to me you either want to talk to a yes-man or a stereotypical Catholic/Christian punchbag.

End of discussion for me. ;)

Ahh the poor oppresed christian victim defense :rolleyes:

Why do all bigots that are "Christian" always say that?
It's the Holy War Syndrome. People get long-term righteousness poisoning due to some misuse of ideological weaponry that causes both physical and emotional damage. It influences their personal relationships with other people and make them think they're in a constant battle with "the forces of evil"; even when said forces are actually just the harmless couple next door or that young kid from down the street playing with his friends.

Such an unoriginal excuse. You know, racists used that one as well. Worked as shitty for them as it does for you.
Seriously. When will people get it through their heads: THERE IS A VERSE OF THE BIBLE TO SUPPORT ANY BULLSHIT THEORY YOU LIKE.

There are bits of the Bible that support pedophilia. There are bits that support rape. There are bits that support genocide. There are bits that support racism. There are bits that support slavery. And yes, there are bits that support hating on the gays.

SO WHAT?!

You can cherry pick verses of the Bible until you are blue in the face, and it won't change the fact that you're just flipping through to find bits that support the ideas you've already decided to hold.

You already have made up your mind that you're going to be a racist, or a homophobe, or a woman-hater, and now you're just trying to convince yourself (and anybody who will listen) that you've got a great big Creator-being on your side.

This is known as the "My big brother can beat you up" line of argument.

Ahh the poor oppresed christian victim defense :rolleyes:
Isn't it amazing how oppressed Christians manage to be?

They hold all three branches of the government in my country, as well as controlling every major industry, the public education system, and every branch of the media. Yet they are still oppressed.

Now THAT is a miracle.

Yeah, some people have touched on it already but I couldn't let it just pass-- whenever you start questioning what 'causes' homosexuality, the next logical question in how do we un-cause it? How do we 'cure' it? You don't look for 'pathology' unless you think something is a disease, or at least an undesirable trait.

So the answer to the question is: don't ask. Maybe it's genetic. If it is, then keep your hands off my genes. Maybe it's environmental-- in which case, the environment has been conducive to us for a long time, and with any luck will continue to be indefinitely.

If anyone told me he was looking for a 'cause' for my being gay, implicitly so that he could 'fix' it, I'd see him as trying to perpetrate a kind of genocide. As trying to exterminate me and those like me. In short, I'd see an enemy, determined to change who I am if not eliminate me outright. So I'd respond in kind.

Ok, perhaps it's not the end of the discussion. I want to clear one thing up. I'm not a racist, nor are any of my Christian friends or non-Christian friends for that matter. Where you come up with me being a racist is beyond me infact. I have quite a few friends of different races and nationalities. Incase, it's slipped by you, homosexuals aren't a race of people. As for my need to support my belief, my belief is based in the bible.

Now it's the end of the discussion for me, partially because I don't feel the need to argue, and partially because it's nearly 1:30 in the morning.

A dictionary is useful tool. Get one

Bigot

One who is strongly partial to one's own group(in this situation hetros) , religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

A dictionary is useful tool. Get one

Bigot

One who is strongly partial to one's own group(in this situation hetros) , religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
I guess it doesn't count as "intolerant" to state that you refuse to talk with or acknowledge the existence of a given group.

We really need to start printing up new dictionaries. The old ones are full of all these annoying definitions that conflict with reality as perceived by homophobes.

It's all genetic plus it has some effect from your parents and people you care about also. Whatever they think is probably what you will think or be expected to think.:sniper: :( :gundge: :confused: :rolleyes: :p :sniper::confused: :confused:

Not true.

No matter what issues you're talking about, I know plenty of people who do not have the same opinions as their parents.

Yeah, some people have touched on it already but I couldn't let it just pass-- whenever you start questioning what 'causes' homosexuality, the next logical question in how do we un-cause it? How do we 'cure' it? You don't look for 'pathology' unless you think something is a disease, or at least an undesirable trait.

So the answer to the question is: don't ask. Maybe it's genetic. If it is, then keep your hands off my genes. Maybe it's environmental-- in which case, the environment has been conducive to us for a long time, and with any luck will continue to be indefinitely.

If anyone told me he was looking for a 'cause' for my being gay, implicitly so that he could 'fix' it, I'd see him as trying to perpetrate a kind of genocide. As trying to exterminate me and those like me. In short, I'd see an enemy, determined to change who I am if not eliminate me outright. So I'd respond in kind.

Why hallo thar Magneto.

Isn't it amazing how oppressed Christians manage to be?

They hold all three branches of the government in my country, as well as controlling every major industry, the public education system, and every branch of the media. Yet they are still oppressed.

Now THAT is a miracle.

They aren't done yet. There is the pesky establishment clause they don't like since it oppresses them. They are chipping away at it. I never thought I would see tax funds going to them......

Why hallo thar Magneto.
Lol, well, you have to admit he's got a point.

What if there was a treatment that could "fix" black skin tone? What if we could "fix" the shape of Asian eyes to look more like "white" eyes? Would people still feel so comfortable suggesting that maybe these "cures" are ok?

Why hallo thar Magneto.

Chef? I thought you were dead????

They aren't done yet. There is the pesky establishment clause they don't like since it oppresses them. They are chipping away at it. I never thought I would see tax funds going to them......
Yeah, and I love how they are all for "states rights," until states start voting to allow gay marriage. Then there is this sudden burst of federalism.

Chef? I thought you were dead????
No, it's just Darth Chef now ...

Why hallo thar Magneto.

Magneto has a point. It's very, very hard not to sympathise.

Magneto has a point. It's very, very hard not to sympathise.
The one thing I always hated about X-men is it portrays the debate incorrectly. It sets up one side as saying, "We should go out of our way to protect the very people who are actively trying to take away our rights and our lives," and the other side is saying, "Kill all humans."

What about, "If anybody tries to fuck with us or 'cure' us, we stop them. If not, we just walk around being awesome with our kick-ass superpowers. Because living well, with superpowers, is the best revenge."

Lol, well, you have to admit he's got a point.

What if there was a treatment that could "fix" black skin tone? What if we could "fix" the shape of Asian eyes to look more like "white" eyes? Would people still feel so comfortable suggesting that maybe these "cures" are ok?

What? Blasphemy! Asians are hot. But, wait...Isn't there already a treatment to, yanno not be black and stuff?

What? Blasphemy! Asians are hot. But, wait...Isn't there already a treatment to, yanno not be black and stuff?
There certainly are cosmetic ways to alter such features, but (so far) there is no "genetic cure" for black skin tone or "Asian" eyes.

Magneto has a point. It's very, very hard not to sympathise.

True. So does the Juggernaut, the only reason I want to watch the movie...

The one thing I always hated about X-men is it portrays the debate incorrectly. It sets up one side as saying, "We should go out of our way to protect the very people who are actively trying to take away our rights and our lives," and the other side is saying, "Kill all humans."

What about, "If anybody tries to fuck with us or 'cure' us, we stop them. If not, we just walk around being awesome with our kick-ass superpowers. Because living well, with superpowers, is the best revenge."

Personally... I think we need a Dr. Xavier. :D

True. So does the Juggernaut, the only reason I want to watch the movie...

Bitch, you know who he is...

The one thing I always hated about X-men is it portrays the debate incorrectly. It sets up one side as saying, "We should go out of our way to protect the very people who are actively trying to take away our rights and our lives," and the other side is saying, "Kill all humans."

What about, "If anybody tries to fuck with us or 'cure' us, we stop them. If not, we just walk around being awesome with our kick-ass superpowers. Because living well, with superpowers, is the best revenge."

"If you're wondering how he eats and breathes
And other science facts (LA LA LA)
Just repeat to yourself it's just a show
I should really just relax for
Mystery...Science...Theater...3000!" :p

Personality and attitude of a person is one thing, but sexual desire is another. You can't put those two on the same pedestal.
Why not?

I, like many others, have an absolutely decimated sexual desire when it comes to women with horrendous personalities. Even if I can tell they are pretty (which I can sort of do on a very basic level with men, anyway), they are not attractive if they're abusive, loud and uncultured. This is probably a form of classism, and I admit that to an extent.

But what I perceive as a bad personality is entirely defined by my upbringing. As a Child, I don't know what is a good and bad way to behave. I'm a selfish little git as a toddler, an abusive son during my pre-school days and a right pain in the arse in the early school years. I know that now; I didn't then. The only reason I know that now is that I have learned it through experience. And this, in turn, has shaped what it is I find attractive in a woman.

I see no reason why this can't also extend into the sexual preferences of homosexuals. After all, what's the difference between them not liking any women/some men and me not liking certain women/any men (beyond the "icky-Factor", as Fass has put it)? Isn't it entirely possible that I might prefer men if I had experienced certain things in my youth that I did not? I don't discount that as a possibility. It doesn't change the fact that I currently find males repulsive, but that didn't always need to be the case. Perhaps if I was in a different crowd or picked on by different bullies as a kid, things would have turned out differently.

That's the thing though Llamartina, I do believe it's a crime. One of God's laws that has been broken. As a Christian, I don't agree with it. No matter how many other so-called Christians may do. You might not think so, but I certainly do.

Like I said, Grave_n_idle, I know I'm not a bigot because whereas I don't agree with what homosexuals do, I don't hate them as a person. They can happily carry on doing as they wish, I'm not going to stop them. Each to their own as it were.

Slightly out of context friend. But then, if taking things out of context to make yourself look good, whilst belittling others is your thing, then so be it.


Have you seen the movie "Clue"? THis little interchange reminded me, I can't think why - of Colonel Mustard telling Tim Curry he doesn't need anyone's help to look stupid...


I get along very well with fellow human beings. First you take me out of context, then you dehumanise me. Pity. A better future would be nice, but I know that's not going to happen, and loving my neighbour (platonically) is par for the course I would've thought, especially when you live next door to them. Unless, you mean neighbour, as in the general population of the world, then I have no problem there either. I treat others as I'd expect them to treat me, even though some people take liberty with that from time to time. I'm not them.

You disagree with what 'we' do - you left it open. Not all of the people who are arguing against your viewpoint are homosexuals - so one is FORCED to assume you mean 'what we do' collectively - homo and hetero, that opposes you.

ANd, let's face it - most people have no agenda other than trying to survive in a crappy world. And, people like you piling more crap on top of them isn't making it any easier.

There certainly are cosmetic ways to alter such features, but (so far) there is no "genetic cure" for black skin tone or "Asian" eyes.

Eh, it'd be difficult anyhow. But...ummm...What was I talking about again?

I disagree with homosexual marriage, I disagree with showing young children anything about sex until they're at an age where they can descern about things like that. A five year needs to be learning to read, not learning to read about sex. As for the military, that's really up to them. I couldn't care less one way or the other.

I agree with homosexual marriage, at least as much as heterosexual marriage - that is - if people want it, they should be allowed it.

I think sex-education should begin early. That doesn't mean explaining penetration to five-year-olds, necessarily, but it does mean STARTING the process early enough that young teens are aware what is happening when their bodies start changing.

As for the military - I don't think it should be 'up to them'. I think anyone who wishes to risk their life for their fellow man/woman deserves a medal, no mater which side of their bread they like buttered.


The reason I say all this - is just to point out that there ARE other opinions out there... different, even opposite to yours. And the beauty of being 'civilised' people is... like it or not, we just have to put up with that.

Well in decent discussion, I would genuinely talk to you all. As it is though, it seems to be a free-for-all on have a go at the Christian at the moment.

Because Christians are the victims, here?

Or - no wait, let me think... didn't the hijack start with a so-called Christian spewing his (her... it's?) vitriol over a discussion about the GENETIC (Note: NOT 'moral') context?

Why not?

I see no reason why this can't also extend into the sexual preferences of homosexuals. After all, what's the difference between them not liking any women/some men and me not liking certain women/any men (beyond the "icky-Factor", as Fass has put it)? Isn't it entirely possible that I might prefer men if I had experienced certain things in my youth that I did not? I don't discount that as a possibility. It doesn't change the fact that I currently find males repulsive, but that didn't always need to be the case. Perhaps if I was in a different crowd or picked on by different bullies as a kid, things would have turned out differently.

Personality/attitude is built from the environment and how you were raised.

Sexual desire is another thing. Sure, a straight guy may have had some sexual experience with a man in their youth and they may enjoy certain acts with men, but that still doesn't make that person gay. They have the capability of sleeping with a man, but they still wouldn't have the strong sexual passionate desire to sleep with a man as they woudl have with an attractive woman.

Its simple, homosexuals don't desire opposite genders, because they just don't. If they did, then they would, but obviously they don't, that doesn't mean that can't experience sex with the opposite gender.

Almost definitely genetic, most probably also "nurture".

The one thing I always hated about X-men is it portrays the debate incorrectly. It sets up one side as saying, "We should go out of our way to protect the very people who are actively trying to take away our rights and our lives," and the other side is saying, "Kill all humans."

What about, "If anybody tries to fuck with us or 'cure' us, we stop them. If not, we just walk around being awesome with our kick-ass superpowers. Because living well, with superpowers, is the best revenge."

Well I'm flattered by the comparison to Mr. Lensherr-- I always found Magneto pretty inspiring. 1990's/movie Magneto, anyway.. before that he was so over-the-top, calling himself 'evil' and all. Bleh. But after Muir Island when he re-surfaced and lost the 'evil' cliche, just started seeing himself as a more militant defender of mutants, I became a big fan. And that's the point of this post-- Magneto wasn't about "kill all the humans!" Just any humans that actively threatened his people. He didn't mind humans' existence, as long as they let mutants be. And as a function of mutants being 'superior' he felt it only natural that, if their abilities made them more fit to lead society, then they be allowed to do so without being held back by 'normals.'

Anywho, I don't think that gay people are necessarily more qualified to lead the world, but there are certainly parallels as far as tratemtne by society and those in power. And as a group of people, innocent of harming no one, arbitrarily targeted for unjust treatment (even extermination) by some of the most powerful people even in the 'free' world, I think we're entitled to defend ourselves in order to survive and claim our status as equal human beings.

And now for some inspiring quotes.

"You can't drive a knife into a man's back nine inches, pull it you six inches, and call it 'progress.'" --Malcolm X

"You can't separate peace from freedom because no man can be at peace until he is free." --Malcolm X

and finally, though it was about a different group of oppressed people...

"A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something 'special' for him, to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis." --Martin Luther King jr. (emphasis is mine)

...pull it you six inches...

Always thought X was a better speaker...

Personality and attitude of a person is one thing, but sexual desire is another. You can't put those two on the same pedestal.

Sure you can.

My wife is a great person. The fact she married me says a great deal. ;) We have been married for many years and I find her just as sexually desirable when I met her if not more so.

Ahhhh Sicilians. :D

Personality/attitude is built from the environment and how you were raised.


It is an influence and heavy one at that; however, it is not the defining aspect.

Take my wife. She is extreamly outgoing. Her parents are introverts and rather stoic. Her father will not try new things.

She has no problem with that.


Sexual desire is another thing. Sure, a straight guy may have had some sexual experience with a man in their youth and they may enjoy certain acts with men, but that still doesn't make that person gay. They have the capability of sleeping with a man, but they still wouldn't have the strong sexual passionate desire to sleep with a man as they woudl have with an attractive woman.


The argument of "they could" means nothing. The fact we have the equipment means we can have sex with anything. Men, women, animals, dead people.

A boy experimenting, could be a case of confusion. Could be he just couldn't tell. It could be that he is gay by Religion makes him to the straight thing.

I have been propositioned by a couple men in my time. The first time I gave it a thought as to seek the answer to the question "Am I?" I was brought up Catholic so I had my share of the Hell talk. In the end I didn't. It just didn't appeal to me.

I am confident in my sexuality to not run screaming from the room because a gay man found me attrative.

Some people just know. Be that straight or gay. Some take time to figure it out. Some even get married and then figure it out. There is no general rule of defining the human mind and desire.


Its simple, homosexuals don't desire opposite genders, because they just don't. If they did, then they would, but obviously they don't, that doesn't mean that can't experience sex with the opposite gender.

It's not that simple. The body was still designed to respond. Some gay men can be attracted to certain women and would consider sex with them.

Even our dear Fass has confessed to one. ;)

It is an influence and heavy one at that; however, it is not the defining aspect.

Take my wife. She is extreamly outgoing. Her parents are introverts and rather stoic. Her father will not try new things.

She has no problem with that.



The argument of "they could" means nothing. The fact we have the equipment means we can have sex with anything. Men, women, animals, dead people.

A boy experimenting, could be a case of confusion. Could be he just couldn't tell. It could be that he is gay by Religion makes him to the straight thing.

I have been propositioned by a couple men in my time. The first time I gave it a thought as to seek the answer to the question "Am I?" I was brought up Catholic so I had my share of the Hell talk. In the end I didn't. It just didn't appeal to me.

I am confident in my sexuality to not run screaming from the room because a gay man found me attrative.

Some people just know. Be that straight or gay. Some take time to figure it out. Some even get married and then figure it out. There is no general rule of defining the human mind and desire.



It's not that simple. The body was still designed to respond. Some gay men can be attracted to certain women and would consider sex with them.

Even our dear Fass has confessed to one. ;)

Confident about your sexuality? :rolleyes:

Even our dear Fass has confessed to one. ;)
Yet I have not. :)

Yet I have not. :)

Exactly. Thats just Fass. Fass is Fass.

Even our dear Fass has confessed to one. ;)

Roisin is not a woman. She is a goddess. My love for her is not physical, it lies on a completely different level.

That said, while a wish to do her may be there, the actual ability to consummate the interaction may not be. One can try, I suppose.

That said, while a wish to do her may be there, the actual ability to consummate the interaction may not be. One can try, I suppose.
Some things are just doomed to failure. ;)

Roisin is not a woman. She is a goddess. My love for her is not physical, it lies on a completely different level.

That said, while a wish to do her may be there, the actual ability to consummate the interaction may not be. One can try, I suppose.

LAWLZZZZZ... :p

Some things are just doomed to failure. ;)

There are injections one can use to inflate the equipment, should it be necessary. Those don't make one climax, though...

There are injections one can use to inflate the equipment, should it be necessary. Those don't make one climax, though...

Injection? Oh the pain... the pain---!!!! :eek:

Wouldn't it just be easier for you to think about hawt guys before and during the process? :rolleyes:

There are injections one can use to inflate the equipment, should it be necessary. Those don't make one climax, though...
Thereby omitting one of the best parts of the whole experience. It just won't do. Boys are more fun. :)

Thereby omitting one of the best parts of the whole experience. It just won't do. Boys are more fun. :)

Have you seen the video? Boys may be more fun and better at it, but they don't look any way near as good as her in a dress made of mirrors!

Injection? Oh the pain... the pain---!!!! :eek:

The needles are thinner than a human hair. You're not supposed to feel the prick at all.

Wouldn't it just be easier for you to think about hawt guys before and during the process? :rolleyes:

That works surprisingly poorly the more sex you've had with said hawt guys.

Have you seen the video? Boys may be more fun and better at it, but they don't look any way near as good as her in a dress made of mirrors!
The dress wouldn't be on for long anyway if it got that far. ;) Then you're stuck with a woman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CSGJXgRXZ4&search=Lambretta%20Bimbo not too shoddy if it's like her though.

The dress wouldn't be on for long anyway if it got that far. ;) Then you're stuck with a woman.

And a mirror dress in the reflection of which I can get off at myself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CSGJXgRXZ4&search=Lambretta%20Bimbo not too shoddy if it's like her though.

I hate Lambretta. Another Swedish product that should have been aborted...

And a mirror dress in the reflection of which I can get off at myself.
Nice way to put a narcissistic twist on the whole thing. ;)

I hate Lambretta. Another Swedish product that should have been aborted...
Haha...I find the lyrics of the song quite cute.

And a mirror dress in the reflection of which I can get off at myself.


Pardon me, but thats the most vainest thing I've ever heard of... :eek:

Pardon me, but thats the most vainest thing I've ever heard of... :eek:
You're talking to gay people, remember. Narcissism is most befitting of us. :)

You're talking to gay people, remember. Narcissism is most befitting of us. :)

:eek: *attempts to change facial expression but unsuccessful at doing so*

Nice way to put a narcissistic twist on the whole thing. ;)

Oh, you knew it was coming.

Haha...I find the lyrics of the song quite cute.

I like Creep better than that song in that respect, but you listen to their early work. (http://www.lambrettarock.com/media/rm/absolutelynothing.ram) Tack-o-rama.

Just out of curiosity...

Gay men and narcissism... why?

Just out of curiosity...

Gay men and narcissism... why?

Gay men are men who get off on men. It's not a stretch to find oneself attractive from there.

Oh, you knew it was coming.
Indeed. The mirrors never lie. :)

I like Creep better than that song in that respect, but you listen to their early work. (http://www.lambrettarock.com/media/rm/absolutelynothing.ram) Tack-o-rama.
Bah, neither of my media players seem to want to run it. No loss, I'll look them up on YouTube.

Hmm, interesting.

Confident about your sexuality? :rolleyes:

Sure. How many hetro guys would turn to violence or be creeped out by being approached?

God didnt creat gay people it is a choice people make pure and simple genetics have nothing to do with it.

Thats nonsenss I never chose to be gay. I never chose to like man better then woman but still it is so. I can't help it I get excited from man and not from woman it is so and has always been so with me.

I think it's a bit of both, and partly even consciously chosen.

Always thought X was a better speaker...

Bugger, I miss one typo out of-- like-- 30 posts and suddenly all my credibility's gone out the window :-P "pull it out," obviously, "pull it out"

its genetic, it been proved by science (oooooh science, ooooohhh).

but no it is genetic, and is an evolutionary mutation that naturally occurs and aids in keeping the population from rising at an uncontrollable rate. the only choice involved is whether to follow how you feel.

who the hell would choose to be gay, they are bullied and ridiclued by most of society for something they cannot control. its like being black except much worse because rascism thankfully is almost dead. ( well against black people, now everyone is rascist against arabs.) imagine being a gay arab, then you would have it hard

but no it is genetic, and is an evolutionary mutation that naturally occurs and aids in keeping the population from rising at an uncontrollable rate.
That is bollocks. Evolution does not favour mutations that make their carriers have fewer children, since that leads to the carriers becoming a smaller portion of the population, and thus to such genes being bred out of humanity and never making a difference.

This does not mean that there aren't genetic factors that influence sexuality, but your explanation was made up by somebody who don't know squat about biology.

EDIT:
who the hell would choose to be gay, they are bullied and ridiclued by most of society
By this logic you could also prove that certain religious groups must be genetic.

Environmental. There is no gene for sexuality, one because two gay men cannot have a child together so that gene cannot be passed along, and two because if you grow up around three homosexual people for a good portion of your life, you will begin to see their views on the subject and view them correct. Though there are people who have never had anyone who was gay in thier immediate family, it's simply a different type of human nature that deals with emotions and where the heart lies.
Personally, I'm straight, but I would completely allow "gay marriage" in my nation. Love is love no matter how you look at it, or, if you perfer a more political stance, if someone is allowed to marry their car, or a tree, they can sure as hell marry another member of the same gender.
I would also provide sperm banks and invitro fertilization for those who may want to have children but can't becuase of their partners sexuality.

its genetic, it been proved by science (oooooh science, ooooohhh).

but no it is genetic, and is an evolutionary mutation that naturally occurs and aids in keeping the population from rising at an uncontrollable rate. the only choice involved is whether to follow how you feel.

who the hell would choose to be gay, they are bullied and ridiclued by most of society for something they cannot control. its like being black except much worse because rascism thankfully is almost dead. ( well against black people, now everyone is rascist against arabs.) imagine being a gay arab, then you would have it hard
It's not like anyone has a choice to be gay. It's how your mind is set and what your human nature tells you is morally right for you.

In another thread, he linked to a part of a site I couldn't access and which redirected me to the front page. I assumed he wanted me to go to that front page, and thus I misunderstood what he was saying. You know what he did when I told him I got redirected? He called me a liar.

So, let me have my retaliatory little fun and let me make my point by accusing him of lying about dyslexia or lazy eye or whatnot, or at least of using them as crappy excuses... because, you know, misunderstandings never occur, and people are automatically liars. :rolleyes:

Lets see - was that the thread where you claimed the hypertext link didn't work even though it worked for everyone else? That was right after you insinuated I was a racist simply for having an opinion other than yours.

Nah - can't see why I'd want to play nice with you. As I said before - I'
m man enough to admit when I've made an error. You apparently think you're the Fonz (http://www.dcmilitary.com/navy/tester/10_24/commentary/35384-1.html).

The needles are thinner than a human hair. You're not supposed to feel the prick at all.


Sounds to me like that'd be missing the whole point.... :o

That is bollocks. Evolution does not favour mutations that make their carriers have fewer children, since that leads to the carriers becoming a smaller portion of the population, and thus to such genes being bred out of humanity and never making a difference.


You might want to research bees.

You might want to research bees.

Or...anything, really.

You might want to research bees.

And ants, and pack animals.

Environmental. There is no gene for sexuality, one because two gay men cannot have a child together so that gene cannot be passed along,


Homosexuals still have the genetic capacity to pas on their genes... just not with their chosen partner...

Which is irrelevent, anyway - since the gene situation might not be ONE 'on/off' position... it could be hundreds of combinations that line up to specific orientations.


and two because if you grow up around three homosexual people for a good portion of your life, you will begin to see their views on the subject and view them correct.


But - since most homosexuals grow up in heterosexual families... if this 'logic' held true, they would all be 'straight', right?


Though there are people who have never had anyone who was gay in thier immediate family, it's simply a different type of human nature that deals with emotions and where the heart lies.


And this counteracts the last...


I would also provide sperm banks and invitro fertilization for those who may want to have children but can't becuase of their partners sexuality.

This is good.

Or...anything, really.

This is true. I like the bee example, though. :)

And ants, and pack animals.
And the War of 1812. It couldn't hurt, research is always good.

First of all, people are not simply "gay" or "straight", or "homosexual" or "heterosexual." Most scolars now agree that sexuality is a gradual specturm of various sexual attractions. Furthermore gender is beginning to be seen in the same way, and so how can we even say that people are attracted to either "men" or "women" when gender can be a very complex issue.

Second, many of you are assuming that genetics actually works in the way that your 8th grade science teacher told you. Now, I am not a biologist, but I do believe that if genetics were to be a factor in something as complex as sexuality, there would have to be many many genes involved, some might be dominant, some might be recessive, but you can't try to explain this using the idea of one "gay" gene and apply the same rudimentary genetics excercises that might work for eye color or something.

Third, just because enviroment could influence sexuality, it does not mean that every "gay" person must have had the same parenting, and every straight person had different parenting. No two people in the world have the same experiences. Even if everything that happened to two people was EXACTLY the same, they would have different experiences because each individual has their own perceptions of the world which are influenced by their personality, their intelligence, their hormones, all sorts of things that are dependant on genetics.

My point is that most of you are oversimplifying a very complex issue. My guess would be that both genetics and environment play roles in the development of different sorts of sexuality, but the ways that each does that could have as many variations are their are people on the planet. We must have respect for everyone and for their choices, because ultimately we can never know what it is truly like to be in someone elses brain.
A few examples of people who might complicate the issue of sexuality:
-Men who are only occasionally attracted to other men
-People who are into "shemale" porn
-Men who become women so they can be lesbians
-Women like men but hate sex
-Men who love their wives and also watch gay porn
-Morrissey!

You can't expect to understand what turns people on to be congruent with who the chose to be with, or who they love, nor can you expect to be able to explain any of this with some simple arithmatic.

-Men who become women so they can be lesbians

And this is a regular occurance? Or even an occurance, and not just something you dreamed or imagined?

No two people in the world have the same experiences. Even if everything that happened to two people was EXACTLY the same,

Maybe no two people are ever the same, but two mules (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/06/04/cloned.mule.races.ap/index.html), on the other hand..........:eek:

Again, this has fuck-all to do with the issue.

EVEN IF being gay was a choice, nobody would be entiltled to discriminate against us. Goths make a choice to dress like that. Members of religious minorities choose to follow their faith. People with uncommon political affiliation choose to do so. AND IT'S THEIR DAMN RIGHT. No one, no matter how fundamentalist and frothing at the mouth, has any right to tell them they're wrong or immoral or inferior. It's the same for gays and lesbians.

You americans need to keep your fundies on a shorter leash. THAT'S the real issue. "Choice or not" is an illusion, a mere pretext. And you're falling right into their game when you accept the fact that they can bitch and discriminate against someone if that person chooses to be that way. They're putting you on the defensive, making you bear the burden of the proof that it's not a choice, instead of them being on the defensive, justifying their illogical, prejudiced, irrational prejudice.

Stop playing into their game. Nobody gets to be a holier-than-thou asshole and discriminate against fellow human beings, period. Whether the pretext for that discrimination is a choice or not is completely irrelevant.

[/rant]


Can I just point out that not all us americans agree with our fundies? Some of us straight ones are working our asses off to end the discrimination. Other then that DAMN STRAIGHT!

However I can not help but notice that even though you argue against the holier-then-thou assholes you discriminate against us americans in the same comment. Might want to watch out for that in the future

To me and many other devout Christians, it would be considered 'inflamatory' to say that 'homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle'; it is condemned through out the Bible and so I hate it.


Alright I can't resist this one. *ahem* I know this is not news to you, However this country has more then one religion. You believe what you believe that is true, however there is no need for you to blatently insult several people on this thread by telling us that our way of life, merely because it is DIFFERENT THEN WHAT YOU AGREE WITH is satanic. No I am not telling you to give up what you believe in. But again your religion is far from the only acceptable one and this thread was for a debate as to what causes homosexuality not for some crackpot overly religious name calling (rest of this sentance has been deleted to keep from offending the decent christians who might read this thread.) :headbang:

Well, being a Christian, I don't like it. However, there is no reason to not let people do it. It's not going to affect me, so I don't care.

Biological.

Next question!

It is possibly a choice though heterosexuality is also a choice. It's all in the way you view it and, as such, true liberty is to respect these choices (as long as choices made don't infringe on the liberty of others such as, say, being a religious fundamentalist could lead to your infringing on the liberties of others but if you just speak out with those beliefs, it is not restricting on the liberties of others but an exercise in freedom of expression). Then again, homosexuality and other issues of sexuality might be genetic or it could be both. If it is genetic, I just hope people don't start trying to "clean out" the "homosexual gene".

It is possibly a choice though heterosexuality is also a choice. It's all in the way you view it and, as such, true liberty is to respect these choices (as long as choices made don't infringe on the liberty of others such as, say, being a religious fundamentalist could lead to your infringing on the liberties of others but if you just speak out with those beliefs, it is not restricting on the liberties of others but an exercise in freedom of expression). Then again, homosexuality and other issues of sexuality might be genetic or it could be both. If it is genetic, I just hope people don't start trying to "clean out" the "homosexual gene".

The only problem with hetrosexuality being a choice is how do you handle animal kingdom? Are they choosing to be hetro?

As to a cure? You know it will happen. Religion will say "Wow it's real? Now that we know what to look for; we can cure it."

Those that don't choose to be cured are obviously deviants. :rolleyes:

In which case, the people trying to "cure" it are criminals against freedom of conscience, etc. if they resort to murder or compulsory eugenics.

Why is it so difficult for people to understand that being homosexual is not a choice? People are born gay, plain and simple. It is all biological. Some know right away at the beginning of puberty that they are attracted to members of the same sex, while others may take longer to realize they're indeed homosexual.

And for those who argue that god didn't create homosexuals. Of course god created homosexuals. Why wouldn't he? After all, children are born with a certain skin/hair/eye colour, some children are born as albinos (lacking or having no melanin on their body), some children are born with certain diseases or disorders (Tourette syndrome), and some kids are born with mental retardation. Now if you asked those people, did they choose to be that way? Of course not, because its all biological, and the same goes with homosexuality. Being homosexual is 100% inherited.

In the argument of nurture vs nature, one would argue that homosexuals were "raised" in an environment whereby they "chose" to be homosexual. This is entirely and utterly false. Think about it. In any given society in this world, at any given time period, you will have homosexuals. Even in the most desolate place on earth, you will have individuals who are homosexual (like in the Arctic, you have gay Inuits). Even in the most anti-gay society on the earth, you will have homosexuals (gay Arabs, etc).

Being homosexual is certainly not a choice. I can't understand why people would choose a life of being discriminated against. You have had homosexuals that have committed suicide because of the fact they realize they are different from the majority, thus ending their life because they cannot live a life of being "unnatural." Certainly if it was a choice, they would choose to live a heterosexual life instead, yes? But then you have had homosexuals get into heterosexual relationships and end up becoming married, thinking they can be "cured" of their "unnaturalness" but ultimately, there is no "cure" and they are forced to come out to their loved ones and end the relationship.

Ask yourself, did you choose to be straight? Of course not, neither do homosexuals.

god? What is this "god" you speak of?

god? What is this "god" you speak of?

God in general. Whether you believe in one or not.

This is a topic that has always confused me. Is sexual orientation due to genetics, or environment?
....

And is it possible that our sexual orientation will change at some point in our lives?



Yes. To both. With a very strong statement here that "enviornment" is a totally different thing than "learned behavior." Enviornmental experiences whether from an outside source such as prenatal exposure to extraordinalry levels of certain hormones or an internal source - such as the biochemical response that is produced in response to experience shape the neurological makeup of an individual - especially in the very early years. To what degree these enviornmental factors influence (and in the some case to what degree they are produced as well in the case of individual body chemistry) is shaped by genetic predispostion as well as how predisposition + enviornmental factors have influenced a individual up to the point of time of any specific influence.

This goes for the range of human sexual expression - which is far more varied than just what gender(s) one feels drawn to. Personally I've never understood defining orientation solely by gender preference - I mean there may be some people out there who have a prefernce for any [fill in gender(s) in any way, shape, or form] but I haven't met any. I will conceed that gender prefernce may be "more" genetically influenced than other prefernces, but that is a difficult call to make since our culture is steeped in a very sharp divide between what is considered "male" and "female" and "natural" as far as sex and gender goes (studies have shown that infants will get treated differently depending on whether or not people think they are male or female), so a greater degree of nurture factor can't be ruled out just because gender preference seems more "basic" and is generally more difficult deny or have relations that don't match up to preference than is the case with other specific preferences.

I don't think it is possible for orientation to change. Most people know what they like and what turns them on even before they know the specifics - and often in the case where prefereces run outside of the heteronormative standards visible in society that such prefernces even exist in others.

How strongly people feel those preference will vary. It is usually a scale. Even within the subset of heterosexual and "normal" there is a range. For example, some people can only be happy with people who fit certain appearance standards, even if it means compromising in other areas of compatibility while for others physical appearance may not even matter, some want both, and some have every every point in between of where preferred looks and preferred personality can or can't be compromised for things to work.



*