Is homosexuality a choice, a mental illness or something simply inherent?

[Quantum Windbag]

You are ignorantof scripture, particularly Matthew 24:36 where Jesus said that nobody knows the day. "not the anglesinheaven or the son but only the father."

I know all you can do is insult people that disagree with you.


Homosexuality isn't frowned upon by scripture, and I doubt you take the bible seriously.

God's word condemns Homosexuality AS AN ABOMINATION!!!

No it doesn't.

Actually, it does. You would appear more intelligent if you didn't make blanket statements about things you obviously are not familiar with. That doesn't make GISMYS right, but it definitely makes you wrong.

 

[westwall]

Homosexuality is genetic.

 

[Howey]

Homosexuality is genetic.

Well. There you have it!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is a strawman fallacy, I never once said any of the sortout even suggested it. Also: Do you have some reason to think the people that say they were born that way are lying? Delusional? Something else? Maybe you think it is a coordinated conspiracy.

I never said you said it, did I? I responded to your assertion that people are "born that way." You have to deal with the people who actually say they made a choice, the same way I have to deal with the people that claim they were born that way. Unlike you, I don't dodge the issue, I have repeatedly stated that the fact that an individual does not remember making a choice is not evidence they did not make one.

This begs the question. There is no fact that an individual made a choice and didn't remember. That is called an assumption. This isn't a dodge. Prove that somebody made a choice. I further don't have to deal with either of the groups because I haven't made a claim, that it is a choice, learned behaviors, or inborn phenomena.

I don't think you understand my position. Besides there are people that claim to receive radio transmissions in their teeth. What assertions? You haven't posted any facts.

Wow, you actually properly understand the begging the question fallacy.

I never said I wasn't assuming things, so pointing it out doesn't really change my argument. You asked for an explanation of why some people insist they are born that way if they actually made a choice, I provided the only one that makes sense to me.

I actually did post facts, you just didn't respond to the post where I did. Since I am under no obligation to repeat myself simply because you didn't see my post, feel free to peruse the thread and respond to the post where I posted actual facts.

I am using it properly. See above you are fabricating assertions, belief systems and positions I have not taken.

Actually, I owe you an apology, I misread one of your posts and responded according to that. That said, you are actually wrong in saying I set up a straw man. I never set up an argument you didn't make and used that to attack your position, I simply asked you a few questions based on the mistaken assumption that you had a position.

Bit feel free to keep misusing the term if it makes you feel better, most people do.

To save time I am going to delete the portion of your post where you kept replying to my mistake.

What isn't going to work? And good for you for not investing emotions into debate.

Accusing me of fallacies I am not using isn't going to work. it really isn't your fault, straw man is the most misused fallacy next to begging the question.

That is a rather odd projection. So it would be better if I met childish name calling with childish name calling?

Did I say that? What I said that your tactic of calling questions a straw man is childish.

Quite poorly. You said there is no known genetic marker. That would mean it's unknown. You said there was no known neurological marker, again that is unknown. So you saying that there isn't enough evidence to prove your position wrong is proof that it is right, is a logical fallacy.

No, what I said is that all of the markers that are cited as proof that people are born that way that are not also present aming the straight population. I actually posted articles that say that the science is inconclusive, and admitted that my position might be wrong.

Your problem here is you are assuming that I am am dogmatic in my position. You really should stop assuming you know what other people think.

Who taught you to think? Some things people learn without external aid, some things people need help to learn. Dexterity isn't one of the latter.[/QUOTE]Proof?[/quote]

Of what? That people can learn?

Do some research, you might learn something.

No, this isyour claim theburden of proof is on you. ['/quote]

I provided the evidence to back my position up. You claimed you didn't understand what I posted, and now you are demanding that I explain it. If you want to know, do the research. If you want to pretend that the fact that you understand something puts an obligation on me, feel free.

Just do not expect me to cooperate.

for some reason the board software didn't include your question about markers, I wouldn't want you to accuse me of dodging the question.

The only accurate study of living people showed a difference in the size of INAH3 between straight and gay men.

Is Homosexuality a Choice? | Guest Blog, Scientific American Blog Network

Why does there need to be physical markers?

Why do people insist that they exist when they don't?

In other words, ask the people who are looking for them.

The problem is that the difference does not prove that someone is homosexual, it is entirely possible for a straight man to have a relatively small INAH3, and there is no real evidence that links that area of the brain to anything.

Well this is evidence that it's unknown, not necessarily a choice.

Which is exactly my point, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that it is not a choice, so my position is totally valid. If someone ever comes up with conclusive evidence that I am wrong, I will change my position.

http://mith.umd.edu/WomensStudies/ReadingRoom/AcademicPapers/levay-critique

Since I never actually claimed that there isn't a difference in brain structure, I see no reason to respond to your challenge to prove that there is. What I claimed, and still do, is that there are no markers that exist solely in gay people. Feel free to prove otherwise.

I am not interested in proving otherwise because that isn't the caseI am advocating. What I want to know is the absence of what you call a marker, what ever that may be, allows you to jump to the conclusion that it is a choice.

The scientific fact that free will exists.

Fruit flies display rudimentary free will - life - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist

Any other questions? Or do you want to keep pretending that I have no facts to back up my position?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Here's an interesting observation....

After reading that Scientific American guest blog (several times), I came away thinking "Wow, that was well written! ". Then I went back and read it a couple more times. And came to the conclusion that yes, it was well written, but it says absolutely nothing.

It's like one went to a learned person and asked; "Is being gay a learned behavior or is it genetic?" Like 99.99% of most questions, there is no definitive answer, and that's what the writer of this guest blog did so well. And left me feeling cheated. It's like I read all those words and all I got was a definitive "Maybe." in response to the original question.

So I researched the writer. Apparently, she's not a scientist. She is simply a "writer". Peddling her wares so others can learn how to convince their readers of, well, nothing. What a horrible and unsatisfying goal.

Here's her website if you want to see more:

Marcia Malory

The fact that she is a writer doesn't change the fact that no geneticist or biologist who have studied the issue have ever said anything but "We don't know." The only people that make that claim are psychologists who are looking for answers in fields that don't have the education to understand.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Homosexuality is genetic.

That is the one thing anyone who pays attention knows it isn't.

 

[westwall]

Homosexuality is genetic.

That is the one thing anyone who pays attention knows it isn't.

My sister is lesbian. We knew she was lesbian by the time she was 10 years old. She is a man in every respect save her genitalia and has ALWAYS been so. She was the toughest kid in her school and regularly took on the bullies who were tormenting her friends.

She has been in a committed relationship with her wife for over 15 years. There is no doubt that she is lesbian and has always been one.

Likewise my daughters godmother. She too has always been a lesbian. She tried real hard to be "normal". She comes from a devout Catholic family and dated guys up into college. It was never comfortable for her. Never. She then was introduced to a lesbian from another college student and instantaneously she knew that it was the right thing for her.

I am sorry but you and those who think like you are simply wrong. You allow your religious training and upbringing to bias your thinking.

 

[Inevitable]

LIVING IN THE SEXUAL PERVERSION OF homosexuality ""IS"" a choice!!!

Prove it.

Why are you allways insisting other people should have to proove their points - yet you refuse to proove yours ?

What point did I make?

What makes you think that your opinions are more valid than somebody elses simply because you uttered them ?

Not sure when I said that.

 

[Inevitable]

Wow, you actually properly understand the begging the question fallacy.

I am prettygood with logic.

I never said I wasn't assuming things, so pointing it out doesn't really change my argument. You asked for an explanation of why some people insist they are born that way if they actually made a choice, I provided the only one that makes sense to me.

You don't seem able to support it with facts, but if this isjust your opinionI don't believe it is necessary.

I actually did post facts, you just didn't respond to the post where I did. Since I am under no obligation to repeat myself simply because you didn't see my post, feel free to peruse the thread and respond to the post where I posted actual facts.

Factsthat prove it's a choice? Whatis the post number?

Actually, I owe you an apology, I misread one of your posts and responded according to that. That said, you are actually wrong in saying I set up a straw man. I never set up an argument you didn't make and used that to attack your position, I simply asked you a few questions based on the mistaken assumption that you had a position.

no need to apologize, I tend to take a very different position on thisthanmost people. And often times people automatically assume that I hold the position that is the opposite of theirs.

Bit feel free to keep misusing the term if it makes you feel better, most people do.

I didn't misuse the term, you admit that you were mistaken.

Accusing me of fallacies I am not using isn't going to work.

I didn't.

it really isn't your fault, straw man is the most misused fallacy next to begging the question.

I didn't misuse it. Youmisrepresented my position and thus my argument whether you were mistaken or not isn't really relevant.

Did I say that? What I said that your tactic of calling questions a straw man is childish.

It isn't a tactic, I used the term properly. You misunderstood my position then made one up, and than argued against it. I understand why you made the error, and it isn't your fault (completely) but it is apt.

No, what I said is that all of the markers that are cited as proof that people are born that way that are not also present aming the straight population. I actually posted articles that say that the science is inconclusive, and admitted that my position might be wrong.

The fact that they are inconclusive supports my position completely.

Your problem here is you are assuming that I am am dogmatic in my position. You really should stop assuming you know what other people think.

You arecorrect I did assume that and I apologize for that assumption. I do have to tip my hat to you for being open minded.

Of what? That people can learn?

That dexterity, barring loss of function of limbs, is learned.

I provided the evidence to back my position up. You claimed you didn't understand what I posted, and now you are demanding that I explain it. If you want to know, do the research.

Have you done the research? And your evidence is inconclusive.

Why do people insist that they exist when they don't?

In other words, ask the people who are looking for them.

They aren't the ones here making claims.

Which is exactly my point, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that it is not a choice, so my position is totally valid. If someone ever comes up with conclusive evidence that I am wrong, I will change my position.

My position is completely validated by this. Claiming that no proof contrary to your position thus your position must be correct is logical fallacy.

The scientific fact that free will exists.

Fruit flies display rudimentary free will - life - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist

Any other questions? Or do you want to keep pretending that I have no facts to back up my position?

None of your facts prove your position they all prove mine.

 

[Inevitable]

Homosexuality is genetic.

Homosexuality is genetic.

Well. There you have it!

I simply must say this, there could be a million other factors that contribute to homosexuality, and I simply won't rule out genetics or a genetic predisposition, but it's hard to say with any certaintythat it either is or is not genetic.

 

[Inevitable]

Actually, it does.

No it doesn't.

You would appear more intelligent if you didn't make blanket statements about things you obviously are not familiar with.

You fussed at me for making assumptions about your position, but I did so without libelous comments. I know it never mentioned that homosexuality was an abomination.

That doesn't make GISMYS right, but it definitely makes you wrong.

Prove it.

 

[G.T.]

I don't know how any straight person gets around the paradox unless they're either gay or bisexual.

There is no way I can "choose" who my "sex organ" rises up for. It's a natural occurrence. I cannot change it merely by choice.

 

[yidnar]

The APA lists no known causes for homosexual, thoughthere are some hypotheses. What do you think and why?

homosexuality is when one liberal has sex with another liberal.

 

[Inevitable]

The APA lists no known causes for homosexual, thoughthere are some hypotheses. What do you think and why?

homosexuality is when one liberal has sex with another liberal.

Not quite.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The APA lists no known causes for homosexual, thoughthere are some hypotheses. What do you think and why?

As a 42yo who's enjoyed sex with both males and females I don't believe x-sexuality as an orientation even exists. I think instead, we're just animals and are capable of having sex with whomever we desire at that moment. x-sexuality orientation is a relatively new concept. Until they were coined, people just had sex with no special delineation between gay or straight. It was such a non-issue in fact that most everyone we read about now in history books was by today's definitions bisexual. They married opposite sexed people, but for recreative or social bonding sex had such experiences with their own sex as well. No where is this more pronounced than in ancient Greek and Roman circles.

For ease of reference, I'm bisexual. Though I prefer to think of it as simply 'sexual.' I'm not automatically attracted to every man or every woman, and sexual attraction for me requires actually knowing someone personally. If I'm simply horny I masturbate. But before I involve another person's feelings and emotions I wanna make sure we're into each other beyond simply mutual desire to have a bit of fun. But the last thing on my mind is what sex they happen to be. Both are fun for different reasons, and in point of fact a lot of cross-over fun as well.

But we are unfortunately a label-obsessed society. I'm not sure why, but we distance ourselves throughout our experience into this or that labels. Liberal/conservative, black/white, gay/straight, rich/poor are some of the big ones. But as animals, I think in objective reality we're just human beings and what to most is a label difference between two people, is to me simply natural variation seen throughout nature. If people wanna break other people down into camps with labels that's their problem.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If you're an example of 'blessed' no thanks.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Seems logical to me that anyone who thinks homosexuality is a choice is someone who has to consciously choose heterosexuality (in other words, an in the closet homosexual).

I duno bout the rest of you - I don't choose to be heterosexual. I was born that way.

 

[Inevitable]

If you're an example of 'blessed' no thanks.

My thoughts exactly.

I find bible beaters aren't really even worth having discussion with. They seem incapable of it. Almost to the point they suffer from Tourette's syndrome.

 

[Inevitable]

The APA lists no known causes for homosexual, thoughthere are some hypotheses. What do you think and why?

As a 42yo who's enjoyed sex with both males and females I don't believe x-sexuality as an orientation even exists. I think instead, we're just animals and are capable of having sex with whomever we desire at that moment. x-sexuality orientation is a relatively new concept. Until they were coined, people just had sex with no special delineation between gay or straight. It was such a non-issue in fact that most everyone we read about now in history books was by today's definitions bisexual. They married opposite sexed people, but for recreative or social bonding sex had such experiences with their own sex as well. No where is this more pronounced than in ancient Greek and Roman circles.

For ease of reference, I'm bisexual. Though I prefer to think of it as simply 'sexual.' I'm not automatically attracted to every man or every woman, and sexual attraction for me requires actually knowing someone personally. If I'm simply horny I masturbate. But before I involve another person's feelings and emotions I wanna make sure we're into each other beyond simply mutual desire to have a bit of fun. But the last thing on my mind is what sex they happen to be. Both are fun for different reasons, and in point of fact a lot of cross-over fun as well.

But we are unfortunately a label-obsessed society. I'm not sure why, but we distance ourselves throughout our experience into this or that labels. Liberal/conservative, black/white, gay/straight, rich/poor are some of the big ones. But as animals, I think in objective reality we're just human beings and what to most is a label difference between two people, is to me simply natural variation seen throughout nature. If people wanna break other people down into camps with labels that's their problem.

I mostly agree with you on your understanding of sexuality, though I tend to think of it as more of a spectrum. Some people keep to one side or the other and naturally do so. Few peopleexist in the middle.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I don't know how any straight person gets around the paradox unless they're either gay or bisexual.

There is no way I can "choose" who my "sex organ" rises up for. It's a natural occurrence. I cannot change it merely by choice.

Yep.

If its true that homosexuality is a choice, then so is heterosexuality.