The whole homosexuality debate (Page 2)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2015-01-26 11:48 AM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 Wow....You have some pretty strong assumption on my sexual history... Thinking back I remember the summer of 5th grade playing truth or dare with one of the neighborhood girls. I think that is when I decided kissing girls was way better that kissing boys. Before that I don't recall feeling differently between boys and girls. But honestly don't really know if the environment I grew up in led me to prefer girls or if I was born this way. So are you saying there is a conclusive study on "straight" gene? So for legislation, not one of those amendments in your link were pieces of legislation. All of them were ballot measures approved by the majority people of that State. None of those ballot measure are after 2006. Looking at it a different way, why should the States be in the business of licensing marriages? Why not work to eliminate the State's involvement in the institution of marriage? Would you be for that? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X Jackemy, when did you choose to be straight? How could you possibly make an informed decision without trying both? I propose you should take it for a test drive and go sleep with some men since its a choice. How does that sound to you? legislation: Because our tax laws involve marriage. If you want to change those and have no legal marriage for anyone that would be fine in terms of equality I guess.
|
|
2015-01-26 11:58 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 Wow....You have some pretty strong assumption on my sexual history... Thinking back I remember the summer of 5th grade playing truth or dare with one of the neighborhood girls. I think that is when I decided kissing girls was way better that kissing boys. Before that I don't recall feeling differently between boys and girls. But honestly don't really know if the environment I grew up in led me to prefer girls or if I was born this way. So are you saying there is a conclusive study on "straight" gene? So for legislation, not one of those amendments in your link were pieces of legislation. All of them were ballot measures approved by the majority people of that State. None of those ballot measure are after 2006. Looking at it a different way, why should the States be in the business of licensing marriages? Why not work to eliminate the State's involvement in the institution of marriage? Would you be for that? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X Jackemy, when did you choose to be straight? How could you possibly make an informed decision without trying both? I propose you should take it for a test drive and go sleep with some men since its a choice. How does that sound to you? legislation: Because our tax laws involve marriage. If you want to change those and have no legal marriage for anyone that would be fine in terms of equality I guess.
I would against that.....I think everyone should be forced to experience marriage......at least once. |
2015-01-26 12:05 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by dmiller5 agreed. Also, compassion doesn't mean letting someone do whatever they want. You can believe in whatever made up fantasy superbeing you believe in, and I have tolerance for that, and compassion for your beliefs...now go have them over there in your own home, and don't tell other people what they can and cannot do because your made up superbeing said so. wow... you mean like the same thing that is said about gays.... go do at long as it isn't public. Nice. No. If you translated what I said into the gay debate it would be more like. Go and have whatever relationship you want, just don't tell me to have a homosexual relationship. Pretty sure all sides would agree that what you want to do in your own life is fine, just don't try to impose it upon other people. Well... for arguments sake... isn't that what the gay community is doing? When you start from nothing, then anything becomes something. Yes, homosexuality has been kept in the closet. Now it's coming out. But how can you not think that is foisting someone's "lifestyle" on someone else? I seriously find this funny. Blacks used to always complain about there never being blacks in media. And rightly so. As a percentage of the population, they were certainly under represented in media... TV/movies. Then when hispanics became a economic block... bam, hispanics all over TV/movies. Well now, with homosexuality... um, WOW. I honestly believe it's a union rule in Holywood they can't produce a show with out gay representation. Seriously, they seem very over represented as a percentage of population. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Public awareness is a good thing. It's all good.... but many see that as forcing their beliefs on others. Nobody is making anyone have gay sex any more than anyone is making anyone accept Jesus and go to to church. But boths sides love to claim freedoms, then chastise the other for wanting to use them. One side is making laws preventing the other side from getting married. One side is trying to put their religious beliefs in textbooks. One side is constantly fighting to have prayers said in schools and courthouses. Why do people swear into office on a bible? "Public awareness is a good thing. It's all good.... but many see that as forcing their beliefs on others." I don't get this, being allowed to get married is forcing others to be homosexual? Is my being allowed to marry a woman forcing homosexuals to be heterosexual? Is having straight people in movies forcing the straight beliefs on others? you have it a little backwards.... all those things used to be just because they were. The movement has been to erase all things even remotely religious in public. I'm not religious, so save your judgment. I just have eyes, and can see what is happening. I'm not going to buy the lie of "attack on religion"... but there certainly is a movement. the liberal side of the spectrum has been trying to "force" their world view on the public for a while. Away from a religious/conservative history, to a liberal/everything is good no matter what you do for a while. PC, everyone wins, everyone is a beautiful special snow flake, nobody should make too much money, all the way to sexual norms. Promiscuity is fine... it's fun too I did plenty.... nobody needs a family.... and yes, sexual orientation gets wrapped up in all that. It has been a rebellion against the conservative history of this country. Now, I'm a heathen. Got laid, paid, and wasted. I'm not casting any moral judgments on anyone, and I would tell you what you could do with yours if you wanted to cast them on me. But the movement has been to REMOVE conservative values.... not force them. but when one side start a fight, then both sides throw punches. |
2015-01-26 12:30 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Veteran 869 Stevens Point, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X There is no proof yet, but I can tell you it is not a choice, I did not choose to be this way. To be blunt people who think it is a choice are wrong, it is not an opinion, they are just wrong. |
2015-01-26 12:41 PM in reply to: Justin86 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Justin86 Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X There is no proof yet, but I can tell you it is not a choice, I did not choose to be this way. To be blunt people who think it is a choice are wrong, it is not an opinion, they are just wrong. Of course they are.....but the kind of people who make that argument end up being wrong about a lot of things. |
2015-01-26 12:57 PM in reply to: 0 |
New user 1351 Austin, Texas | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate I don't understand why the choice thing makes a difference. Whether someone chooses to be gay or are born that way, they're still getting screwed by our legal system which still singles them out and says that they're not worthy of the same laws as everyone else. Can someone give me a clear and succinct reason why 2 gay people getting married is a bad thing? It's hard hearing it from someone like Michelle Bachmann because she has to appease voters too, so her reasoning gets all muddled up in political correctness. I get that religious groups see it as a sin, but why does their "sin" matter to anyone else?
ETA: I'm not trying to pick a fight, i just legitimately want to hear all sides of the argument Edited by trijamie 2015-01-26 1:03 PM |
|
2015-01-26 1:09 PM in reply to: trijamie |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by trijamie I don't understand why the choice thing makes a difference. Whether someone chooses to be gay or are born that way, they're still getting screwed by our legal system which still singles them out and says that they're not worthy of the same laws as everyone else. Can someone give me a clear and succinct reason why 2 gay people getting married is a bad thing? It's hard hearing it from someone like Michelle Bachmann because she has to appease voters too, so her reasoning gets all muddled up in political correctness. I get that religious groups see it as a sin, but why does their "sin" matter to anyone else?
ETA: I'm not trying to pick a fight, i just legitimately want to hear all sides of the argument I can't answer that. I don't understand the problem with polygamy. I can only handle one wife... but if someone want's to sign up for that... have at it. |
2015-01-26 1:54 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 Wow....You have some pretty strong assumption on my sexual history... Thinking back I remember the summer of 5th grade playing truth or dare with one of the neighborhood girls. I think that is when I decided kissing girls was way better that kissing boys. Before that I don't recall feeling differently between boys and girls. But honestly don't really know if the environment I grew up in led me to prefer girls or if I was born this way. So are you saying there is a conclusive study on "straight" gene? So for legislation, not one of those amendments in your link were pieces of legislation. All of them were ballot measures approved by the majority people of that State. None of those ballot measure are after 2006. Looking at it a different way, why should the States be in the business of licensing marriages? Why not work to eliminate the State's involvement in the institution of marriage? Would you be for that? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X Jackemy, when did you choose to be straight? How could you possibly make an informed decision without trying both? I propose you should take it for a test drive and go sleep with some men since its a choice. How does that sound to you? legislation: Because our tax laws involve marriage. If you want to change those and have no legal marriage for anyone that would be fine in terms of equality I guess.
If it is just tax laws that are the issue, it would be easy enough to say that any two people can file a joint tax return. I've never understood why joint returns were only an option for those who are "married". Partners that share a business file a "joint" Partnership return. So why can't individuals who share a life file joint individual returns? |
2015-01-26 1:55 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 If it is just tax laws that are the issue, it would be easy enough to say that any two people can file a joint tax return. I've never understood why joint returns were only an option for those who are "married". Partners that share a business file a "joint" Partnership return. So why can't individuals who share a life file joint individual returns? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 Wow....You have some pretty strong assumption on my sexual history... Thinking back I remember the summer of 5th grade playing truth or dare with one of the neighborhood girls. I think that is when I decided kissing girls was way better that kissing boys. Before that I don't recall feeling differently between boys and girls. But honestly don't really know if the environment I grew up in led me to prefer girls or if I was born this way. So are you saying there is a conclusive study on "straight" gene? So for legislation, not one of those amendments in your link were pieces of legislation. All of them were ballot measures approved by the majority people of that State. None of those ballot measure are after 2006. Looking at it a different way, why should the States be in the business of licensing marriages? Why not work to eliminate the State's involvement in the institution of marriage? Would you be for that? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X Jackemy, when did you choose to be straight? How could you possibly make an informed decision without trying both? I propose you should take it for a test drive and go sleep with some men since its a choice. How does that sound to you? legislation: Because our tax laws involve marriage. If you want to change those and have no legal marriage for anyone that would be fine in terms of equality I guess.
also issues of hospital visitation and other similar civil liberties |
2015-01-26 2:16 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 If it is just tax laws that are the issue, it would be easy enough to say that any two people can file a joint tax return. I've never understood why joint returns were only an option for those who are "married". Partners that share a business file a "joint" Partnership return. So why can't individuals who share a life file joint individual returns? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 Wow....You have some pretty strong assumption on my sexual history... Thinking back I remember the summer of 5th grade playing truth or dare with one of the neighborhood girls. I think that is when I decided kissing girls was way better that kissing boys. Before that I don't recall feeling differently between boys and girls. But honestly don't really know if the environment I grew up in led me to prefer girls or if I was born this way. So are you saying there is a conclusive study on "straight" gene? So for legislation, not one of those amendments in your link were pieces of legislation. All of them were ballot measures approved by the majority people of that State. None of those ballot measure are after 2006. Looking at it a different way, why should the States be in the business of licensing marriages? Why not work to eliminate the State's involvement in the institution of marriage? Would you be for that? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X Jackemy, when did you choose to be straight? How could you possibly make an informed decision without trying both? I propose you should take it for a test drive and go sleep with some men since its a choice. How does that sound to you? legislation: Because our tax laws involve marriage. If you want to change those and have no legal marriage for anyone that would be fine in terms of equality I guess.
also issues of hospital visitation and other similar civil liberties What's wrong with a simple civil contracts to clear up the issue on hospital visitation or any other legal formality usually reserved for those with the legal status as "married"? I am sure a simple contract giving my life partner the same legal privileges as she has now would have cost way less than my wedding day (and perhaps I would have read the contract before I signed it). |
2015-01-26 2:19 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Veteran 869 Stevens Point, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 If it is just tax laws that are the issue, it would be easy enough to say that any two people can file a joint tax return. I've never understood why joint returns were only an option for those who are "married". Partners that share a business file a "joint" Partnership return. So why can't individuals who share a life file joint individual returns? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 Wow....You have some pretty strong assumption on my sexual history... Thinking back I remember the summer of 5th grade playing truth or dare with one of the neighborhood girls. I think that is when I decided kissing girls was way better that kissing boys. Before that I don't recall feeling differently between boys and girls. But honestly don't really know if the environment I grew up in led me to prefer girls or if I was born this way. So are you saying there is a conclusive study on "straight" gene? So for legislation, not one of those amendments in your link were pieces of legislation. All of them were ballot measures approved by the majority people of that State. None of those ballot measure are after 2006. Looking at it a different way, why should the States be in the business of licensing marriages? Why not work to eliminate the State's involvement in the institution of marriage? Would you be for that? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X Jackemy, when did you choose to be straight? How could you possibly make an informed decision without trying both? I propose you should take it for a test drive and go sleep with some men since its a choice. How does that sound to you? legislation: Because our tax laws involve marriage. If you want to change those and have no legal marriage for anyone that would be fine in terms of equality I guess.
also issues of hospital visitation and other similar civil liberties This. See a documentary called Bridegroom, it details this very, very well. About how if one side of the family is so anti your relationship and something bad happens they can completely shut you out, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. Ok, he should have had a living will, and whatnot, but how many of you at a young age had such things?
|
|
2015-01-26 2:22 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 What's wrong with a simple civil contracts to clear up the issue on hospital visitation or any other legal formality usually reserved for those with the legal status as "married"? I am sure a simple contract giving my life partner the same legal privileges as she has now would have cost way less than my wedding day (and perhaps I would have read the contract before I signed it). Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 If it is just tax laws that are the issue, it would be easy enough to say that any two people can file a joint tax return. I've never understood why joint returns were only an option for those who are "married". Partners that share a business file a "joint" Partnership return. So why can't individuals who share a life file joint individual returns? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 Wow....You have some pretty strong assumption on my sexual history... Thinking back I remember the summer of 5th grade playing truth or dare with one of the neighborhood girls. I think that is when I decided kissing girls was way better that kissing boys. Before that I don't recall feeling differently between boys and girls. But honestly don't really know if the environment I grew up in led me to prefer girls or if I was born this way. So are you saying there is a conclusive study on "straight" gene? So for legislation, not one of those amendments in your link were pieces of legislation. All of them were ballot measures approved by the majority people of that State. None of those ballot measure are after 2006. Looking at it a different way, why should the States be in the business of licensing marriages? Why not work to eliminate the State's involvement in the institution of marriage? Would you be for that? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by dmiller5 >Why is the whole "being Homosexual is a choice" thing a debate. Even if it was a choice, what right would anyone have to discriminate against it or call it wrong?. Is there conclusive scientific evidence that sexual preference is hereditary? Has the elusive "gay" gene been found? I think unless that question is solved, which is may well be, there will still be a debate surrounding sexual preference as a choice. Out of curiosity, what discriminatory legislation was passed against the gay community?
X Jackemy, when did you choose to be straight? How could you possibly make an informed decision without trying both? I propose you should take it for a test drive and go sleep with some men since its a choice. How does that sound to you? legislation: Because our tax laws involve marriage. If you want to change those and have no legal marriage for anyone that would be fine in terms of equality I guess.
also issues of hospital visitation and other similar civil liberties Well according to the State, the marriage is a simple civil contract, and that is what some states will not allow a homosexual couple to obtain. Your wedding (I'm assuming) was a religious ceremony and separate from a state recognized marriage. You could have just gone to the courthouse and gotten a license. I also don't think we should tell a church that it has to marry homosexual couples. That is religion and the state should not tell a religion what it can and cannot do. The state however, should not refuse to give the civil contract of marriage to any couple based on the religious beliefs of those in power. |
2015-01-27 12:13 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Maybe they need to do what they did in the former Yugoslavia. Everyone would have to go to the court house to be legally married. You could still go to the Catholic church for example and have a ceremony you just would not be legally bound to that person. Kinda like how gays had there commitment ceremonies in the past. Nothing legally binding about it. Let God has his weddings and man has own. |
2015-01-27 12:22 PM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. |
2015-01-27 12:41 PM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by chirunner134 As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. So......my brother liked to wrestle, and I got tired of having my arse kicked by him so I did not....I made my sister wrestle him instead. I don't know what that says about us. The person who wrote that paper is probably walking around in circles with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure it out. |
2015-01-27 1:34 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by chirunner134 As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. So......my brother liked to wrestle, and I got tired of having my arse kicked by him so I did not....I made my sister wrestle him instead. I don't know what that says about us. The person who wrote that paper is probably walking around in circles with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure it out. or his head up his arse |
|
2015-01-27 1:58 PM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by chirunner134 Maybe they need to do what they did in the former Yugoslavia. Everyone would have to go to the court house to be legally married. You could still go to the Catholic church for example and have a ceremony you just would not be legally bound to that person. Kinda like how gays had there commitment ceremonies in the past. Nothing legally binding about it. Let God has his weddings and man has own. you realize that is what we do in america right? and there are states that won't let gay couples go to the courthouse. |
2015-01-27 2:01 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by chirunner134 Maybe they need to do what they did in the former Yugoslavia. Everyone would have to go to the court house to be legally married. You could still go to the Catholic church for example and have a ceremony you just would not be legally bound to that person. Kinda like how gays had there commitment ceremonies in the past. Nothing legally binding about it. Let God has his weddings and man has own. you realize that is what we do in america right? and there are states that won't let gay couples go to the courthouse. That's only during the wrestling championships.
|
2015-01-27 11:25 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by chirunner134 As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. So......my brother liked to wrestle, and I got tired of having my arse kicked by him so I did not....I made my sister wrestle him instead. I don't know what that says about us. The person who wrote that paper is probably walking around in circles with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure it out. Well you can ask him. Simon Levay wrote the book "the science of sexual orientation" . He was a lecturer and the Director of Human Sexuality Studies at Stanford University. |
2015-01-28 8:37 AM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by Left Brain Well you can ask him. Simon Levay wrote the book "the science of sexual orientation" . He was a lecturer and the Director of Human Sexuality Studies at Stanford University. Originally posted by chirunner134 As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. So......my brother liked to wrestle, and I got tired of having my arse kicked by him so I did not....I made my sister wrestle him instead. I don't know what that says about us. The person who wrote that paper is probably walking around in circles with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure it out. I gptta be honest here.....I'm a Midwest kid. The day will never come when I read a book by the Director of Human Sexuality Studies at Stanford University. I'd be happy if that guy just went and got a job. LMAO |
2015-01-28 8:37 AM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Veteran 869 Stevens Point, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by Left Brain Well you can ask him. Simon Levay wrote the book "the science of sexual orientation" . He was a lecturer and the Director of Human Sexuality Studies at Stanford University. Originally posted by chirunner134 As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. So......my brother liked to wrestle, and I got tired of having my arse kicked by him so I did not....I made my sister wrestle him instead. I don't know what that says about us. The person who wrote that paper is probably walking around in circles with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure it out. I have a hard time believing most of these so called stereotypes, even if they come from so called experts. Most of the gay people that I know, including my self to not adhere to them. I was your typical boy, I played in the mud, burned ants with a magnifying glass and got into more then my fair share of trouble. I also liked to wrestle when i was young. I was always a stronger kid so it was fun because I would usually win. |
|
2015-01-28 10:03 AM in reply to: Justin86 |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Justin86 Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by Left Brain Well you can ask him. Simon Levay wrote the book "the science of sexual orientation" . He was a lecturer and the Director of Human Sexuality Studies at Stanford University. Originally posted by chirunner134 As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. So......my brother liked to wrestle, and I got tired of having my arse kicked by him so I did not....I made my sister wrestle him instead. I don't know what that says about us. The person who wrote that paper is probably walking around in circles with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure it out. I have a hard time believing most of these so called stereotypes, even if they come from so called experts. Most of the gay people that I know, including my self to not adhere to them. I was your typical boy, I played in the mud, burned ants with a magnifying glass and got into more then my fair share of trouble. I also liked to wrestle when i was young. I was always a stronger kid so it was fun because I would usually win. I did not read the book either I read the synopsis of each chapter. I never learned to read books. The point I was trying to make is not there are stereotypes that hold true in all cases. Though it very could be in 70% or 80%. Always exceptions to every rule. The point is that before boys and girls reach the point they are interested in sex they do have behaviors that would indicate future sexual preferences which would show there is a biological component you are born with. To say well there is no gay gene so we should be able to harass and discriminate against people is not true. Human sexuality is very complicated and complex thing. There is nothing cookie cutter about it. We are all ruled by our hormones, experiences, and personalities. |
2015-01-28 11:23 AM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Pro 6767 the Alabama part of Pennsylvania | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by chirunner134 As for religious freedom we already have limits on religious freedoms. my religion might demand that people get stoned for crimes or have human sacrifice. Even if the person who is suppose to die not only a member of the faith but completely willing to die for there religion does not mean we allow them to do it legally. Just like you can use a religious argument that smoking marijuana is apart of your religion to legally do it. As for homosexuality by birth. I read an interesting paper online. One the interesting tell tale signs if your young child is gay is if he/she likes to wrestle. Gay girls and straight boys like to wrestle where gay boys and straight girls do not. I did a small poll of my female friends and only the openly bisexual girl liked to wrestle as a kid. So......my brother liked to wrestle, and I got tired of having my arse kicked by him so I did not....I made my sister wrestle him instead. I don't know what that says about us. The person who wrote that paper is probably walking around in circles with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure it out. Well you can ask him. Simon Levay wrote the book "the science of sexual orientation" . He was a lecturer and the Director of Human Sexuality Studies at Stanford University. I didn't like to wrestle (still don't), and I'm straight. Neither of my girls liked to wrestle. And only one of them is gay. Just because he wrote a book and has a title doesn't mean he got anything right. In the 90's, there was a lot of debate about recovered memory. One of the "experts" in the field, Lenore Terr, was instrumental in a case where the recovered memory led to a murder conviction (People vs Franklin). She was a well known and well regarded expert in the area of trauma. She wrote a book about recovered memory ("Unchained Memories"). And in the end, she was completely wrong about all of it. |
2015-01-28 9:01 PM in reply to: trijamie |
Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by trijamie I don't understand why the choice thing makes a difference. Whether someone chooses to be gay or are born that way, they're still getting screwed by our legal system which still singles them out and says that they're not worthy of the same laws as everyone else. Can someone give me a clear and succinct reason why 2 gay people getting married is a bad thing? It's hard hearing it from someone like Michelle Bachmann because she has to appease voters too, so her reasoning gets all muddled up in political correctness. I get that religious groups see it as a sin, but why does their "sin" matter to anyone else?
ETA: I'm not trying to pick a fight, i just legitimately want to hear all sides of the argument "our legal system which still singles them out and says that they're not worthy of the same laws as everyone else" I believe in the states there are laws that are for protecting gay people. I think its called hate crimes or Matt Sheprad or something like that. I believe there are laws written to protect everyone that are not white hetro sexual males. Is that what you mean by not worthy of laws as everyone else? |
2015-01-28 9:13 PM in reply to: Puppetmaster |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: The whole homosexuality debate Originally posted by Puppetmaster Originally posted by trijamie I don't understand why the choice thing makes a difference. Whether someone chooses to be gay or are born that way, they're still getting screwed by our legal system which still singles them out and says that they're not worthy of the same laws as everyone else. Can someone give me a clear and succinct reason why 2 gay people getting married is a bad thing? It's hard hearing it from someone like Michelle Bachmann because she has to appease voters too, so her reasoning gets all muddled up in political correctness. I get that religious groups see it as a sin, but why does their "sin" matter to anyone else?
ETA: I'm not trying to pick a fight, i just legitimately want to hear all sides of the argument "our legal system which still singles them out and says that they're not worthy of the same laws as everyone else" I believe in the states there are laws that are for protecting gay people. I think its called hate crimes or Matt Sheprad or something like that. I believe there are laws written to protect everyone that are not white hetro sexual males. Is that what you mean by not worthy of laws as everyone else? A person can be charged with a hate crime even if the victim is a white heterosexual male. |
|
|