Nuc
Senior Member
Powerman said:
That's obvious, I don't know why these knuckleheads think anyone would choose to be gay. They must be insecure about their own sexuality if they think they could have gone either way but chose to be straight.
That's obvious, I don't know why these knuckleheads think anyone would choose to be gay. They must be insecure about their own sexuality if they think they could have gone either way but chose to be straight.
nucular said:
Well the one question that never gets answered is why people aren't tempted to be Gay if it is in fact a sin. Most things that are considered "sins" have some reward to them. I couldn't be gay if I wanted to, much less be tempted to be gay. It just couldn't happen. It's not a choice for me. I know that much. I suppose if you were confused about your sexuality it might be a choice but there is no confusion here. So if you think that it is a choice then you must be confused. That is the only logical conclusion that I can come to.
no1tovote4
Gold Member
You cannot choose your urges, but can choose your actions.
That people might be born with an urge toward the same sex can be argued or not, but to choose to live that lifestyle is still a choice...
That being stated.
The whole natural, unnatural argument is simply odd to me...
We often do things that are unnatural. It is unnatural to speed down a road paved unnaturally with dead dinosaurs pumped from the ground in cars run by the same at speeds exceeding 50 MPH in a vehicle made entirely from human hands manufactured by unnatural processes including smelting, which is also unnatural. It is unnatural to fly in an airplane, or a hot air balloon, to use machinery to go into space, to wear clothes, to manufacture sneakers, to play dodgeball with an artificially manufactured toy, to be able to buy processed food at a grocery store. It is unnatural to do most of the things we do, but that does not mean it should be illegal or that it is a sin. Saying it is unnatural simply isn't enough of an argument to convince me that it is wrong at its core because of the unnaturalness of the act.
Even showing the dangers still doesn't convince me of that, there are plenty of even more dangerous things that people do that are not, nor should they be, illegal. In my state, people regularly ride their motorcycles without a helmet, this is more dangerous than homosexuality to them, it is unnatural, should we make it illegal and label it wrong because of that? People jump out of airplanes, climb rocks, ski, more people die because of the unnatural act of driving every year than die from direct homosexual acts. Since it is more dangerous to drive should we make it illegal?
In other words, that it is unnatural, or intrinsically dangerous is not reason enough for the government to intervene. That it is against a person's religion is still not reason enough to intervene as the government shouldn't be displaying a proclivity towards nor regulating the lives of citizen's according to the dogma of any specific religion. So long as they are consenting adults, I can see no reason that they shouldn't be able to do what they wish with their bodies.
That people might be born with an urge toward the same sex can be argued or not, but to choose to live that lifestyle is still a choice...
That being stated.
The whole natural, unnatural argument is simply odd to me...
We often do things that are unnatural. It is unnatural to speed down a road paved unnaturally with dead dinosaurs pumped from the ground in cars run by the same at speeds exceeding 50 MPH in a vehicle made entirely from human hands manufactured by unnatural processes including smelting, which is also unnatural. It is unnatural to fly in an airplane, or a hot air balloon, to use machinery to go into space, to wear clothes, to manufacture sneakers, to play dodgeball with an artificially manufactured toy, to be able to buy processed food at a grocery store. It is unnatural to do most of the things we do, but that does not mean it should be illegal or that it is a sin. Saying it is unnatural simply isn't enough of an argument to convince me that it is wrong at its core because of the unnaturalness of the act.
Even showing the dangers still doesn't convince me of that, there are plenty of even more dangerous things that people do that are not, nor should they be, illegal. In my state, people regularly ride their motorcycles without a helmet, this is more dangerous than homosexuality to them, it is unnatural, should we make it illegal and label it wrong because of that? People jump out of airplanes, climb rocks, ski, more people die because of the unnatural act of driving every year than die from direct homosexual acts. Since it is more dangerous to drive should we make it illegal?
In other words, that it is unnatural, or intrinsically dangerous is not reason enough for the government to intervene. That it is against a person's religion is still not reason enough to intervene as the government shouldn't be displaying a proclivity towards nor regulating the lives of citizen's according to the dogma of any specific religion. So long as they are consenting adults, I can see no reason that they shouldn't be able to do what they wish with their bodies.
LuvRPgrl
Senior Member
- Aug 11, 2005
- 3,163
- 206
- 48
All of that is actually pretty moot.
The main and sole purpose of marriage is to create stable families for kids. Homosexuals for the most part dont have kids by definition.
Marriage is and should continue to be for men and women to raise a healthy as possible family.
period, end of issue.
The main and sole purpose of marriage is to create stable families for kids. Homosexuals for the most part dont have kids by definition.
Marriage is and should continue to be for men and women to raise a healthy as possible family.
period, end of issue.
Nuc
Senior Member
LuvRPgrl said:All of that is actually pretty moot.
The main and sole purpose of marriage is to create stable families for kids. Homosexuals for the most part dont have kids by definition.
Marriage is and should continue to be for men and women to raise a healthy as possible family.
period, end of issue.
Sorry but there are a lot of people who get married because they love each other, yet have no intention, or perhaps lack the ability to have kids. For example every couple who marries late in life can't have kids. What you're saying is simply wrong from a factual viewpoint.
Powerman said:
This argument is flawed for this reason, how many times have heterosexual couples and even gay couples been tempted to cheat on their partners...That's right too many to count.. some make the choice to remain faithful, some don't. If you listen to biologists they will tell us that we as humans are genetically wired to spread our seed for the survival of the species, many could give in to that BUT they don't because they use their emotions and logic to make choices to remain faithful to one partner whom they have a love relationship with. I can think of no other desire that is stronger than a sexual desire but people make that decision every second of everyday all over the world.
People are very influenced by the world around them and it is very possible that young kids who are either sexually assualted by pedophiles will medicate with drugs or booze, some just happen to turn towards the sex of the person that violated them, some may be good friends with someone who is gay can be influenced into thinking they might be gay so they experiment and become convinced they are gay, they find it intriguing, taboo, exciting whatever still they are making a choice to act on those feelings. Right now there is this phenomenon occuring in high schools and middle schools in which it is considered cool to be gay or bisexual and kids are experimenting with that just because they are getting caught up in that mindset (addiction), still it's a choice they are making to be "cool, not a proclivity or genetics.
"This argument is flawed for this reason, how many times have heterosexual couples and even gay couples been tempted to cheat on their partners...That's right too many to count.."
That doesn't make my argument flawed. Most of the time people cheat on their partners it's with the same sex. Heterosexuals don't engage in consensual homosexual sex acts unless they are confused about their sexuality.
That doesn't make my argument flawed. Most of the time people cheat on their partners it's with the same sex. Heterosexuals don't engage in consensual homosexual sex acts unless they are confused about their sexuality.
Powerman said:
When my stepdaughters mother was married to my ex husband she was very heterosexual. They were married for about five years in which time he cheated on her numerous times. She loved him to the point of taking that kind of behavior just to stay with him. At that time she was a tiny pretty girl with long hair, very feminine. After her marriage to him ended she moved, cut her hair, gained weight and made a choice to start dating women. She has had several relationships with women and is a complete lesbian now. She wasn't born that way, she made a choice to be with women, most likely because she has been betrayed by men and feels she can trust women more. This is not the only case of this I have come across in my life, and don't tell me she was supressing her lesbianism when she was with her husband, that's crap, she was passionately in love with him as I have talked to her at great length about this subject. Many people who have been hurt by the opposite sex take solice with their own genders, and yes that is by choice.
Is there a small percentage of people that have their wiring a little off and think they are gay therfore succumb to that,? sure, and it is still a choice to act on those feelings. Our environment is what affects our choices in life, lifestyle, parents and upbringing, tragedies, mistakes, religion etc...
OK Bonnie this case makes sense. If over a long period of time someone learns to hate men then they can choose to date the same sex. Somehow I have a funny feeling this doesn't occur quite as often with men. But you do bring up an interesting example. How do you explain people that are gay when they are as young as 12 though. I don't think they've had enough bad experiences to be fed up with the opposite sex. Of course most people won't actually admit that they are gay at this age because they know it isn't normal but it certainly happens.
Powerman said:
I think truly kids sat that age are very confused about sexuality in general, their hormones are going flooey and they are curious about everything and everyone around them. Kids are thrown into lockeroom showers with other boys in this case and it can send mixed signals. Look at prisons, (we have discussed this before) but men will engage in homosexual activity either by choice or by force simply because their need for sex is greater than their disdain for homosexuals. But still it's a choice for many of them. And for others as I mentioned earlier they think it's chic to be gay even if they don't really feel like they are, all their friends are "experimenting", they want to be cool, then they get caught up in it, especially if they are not secure with themselves as are the kids who don't go along with are more sure of themsleves and their own identities. How many times have kids smoked Pot only to move on to Speed or Cocaine or alcohol? Sex no matter what kind can be very seductive. Maybe this makes no sense to you but I honestly believe that any kind of sexual behavior can be addictive, especially when kids are empty inside and are looking for comfort or guidance, or love that their not getting at home. I don't have lesbian tendencies, however, who knows what I would have become if I grew up in a different environment than the one I did which was a typical middleclass, Catholic, happy loving home with two happily married parents. Suppose I was growing up now and I was subjected to some of my friends experimenting at parties and I found it pleasurable, doing drugs, having parents that were lax in their paying attention to me, things might well be very different for me, maybe I would actually think I was a lesbian and being addicted to that? Im saying it's very possible and even likely.
What Im saying is that Im sure there are a very small number of people that may be wired to lean more towards the same sex, which they still make a choice to act on, the rest simply think they are due to all those other factors going on in society now. I have a few gay friends that I have known for years now and they all started out being attracted to the opposite sex, but other factors played into things and they became gay or gravitated that way. And the thing is they still really think women are beautiful and wouldn't mind having sex with one.
no1tovote4
Gold Member
Powerman said:
Age has nothing to do with bad experiences. How many of them were previously molested by a sexual predator? How many of them have a strong parental experience with their same-sex parent?
There can be many environmental factors that could push one toward such action.
Personally I would think homosexuality would be more of a fetish-like thing. Some people have weird fetishes, others have one like this. That you are drawn to something doesn't change the fact that you choose to participate in the action.
In other words, just because I am sexually attracted to women does not mean I have to have sex with them.
Bonnie you make some good points but I'm going to have to just agree to disagree with you on the fact that most homosexuals are that way because of their environment. But that point aside, what harm would it be to let homosexuals marry eachother? Marriage is not exclusive to religious institutions. If 2 people truly love eachother and want to get married then I don't see why they can't.
no1tovote4 said:
How many weren't put in the situations you've suggested? There are plenty of gagy people who lived in perfectly normal homes and have not been molested. It's genetic for the most part.
Correct but covneniently enough for you if you want to marry a woman that you fall in love with you can. If you were attracted to men you couldn't do so. Do you think that is fair? It would take some twisted logic to justify that as being fair.
no1tovote4
Gold Member
My point was that you cannot know what bad experiences they may have had or what environmental forces may have worked on them.Powerman said:
They can marry them, many churches would do the ceremony. The problem is the government is messing in a Religious Institution and therefore attempting to define and regulate it. As I stated previously in the thread I believe the government has no place in this particular institution and that all unions outside of marriage should be Civil Unions and contractual in nature. You can go back if you like and actually read the statements of people before you simply assume an opinion from somebody. There is nothing that makes one look foolish than forgetting what somebody has stated and attributing an opinion to them that they do not have.
no1tovote4
Gold Member
Powerman said:
Had you read earlier posts you would know my opinion. Asking leading questions and ending with a statement such as "It would take some twisted logic to justify it as being fair." Is simply an attempt to answer the argument that you think I will make to your statement based on an assumption of my opinion.
Powerman said:
I have no problem with legal civil unions for gay couples, I do have a problem with marriage in the church or by clergy of gay couples for many reasons. And if Gay people are really only concerned with being legally married for tax reasons, fidelity and committment issues so be it.
There are many Gay activists that are pushing for a church type marriage in an attmept to legitamize their behavior in religion as well, that I have a major problem with as do many others.
dmp
Senior Member
I see no problems with brothers and sisters forming 'civil unions'...or even 'groups of people' for that matter. I think I'd support a 'civil union' between pets and their owners as well. I mean, really...why 'discriminate'?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Say now what happened to the$200 per barrel oil thread ??- Started by WEATHER53
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
2 people beaten up in California for speaking Hebrew ??- Started by Quasar44
- Replies: 1
-
