What difference does it make if being gay is genetic or if it's a choice?

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,417
Reaction score
13,695
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
That's just an opinion. You have no idea why she was fired. You're a co-worker, not her management. Amazing how you know what her career has been. This is still the completely uninformed opinion of an uninformed coworker
Actually, I know exactly what her career has been because I've updated her resume several times... It's kind of my thing.

We know exactly why she was fired, because the managers were a bunch of religious nuts...

Amazing life you've lived. Most people know no one who'd been fired or beaten up for being gay, black, foreign or anything else. But you know them ALL!
Well, yes, I get around, unlike you...

Sure, Joe, sure. You personally know a black who was shot by the cops too, don't you?
No, but my brother is friends with a cop who shot a black kid... He and I haven't talked in four years because I had some funny idea that his friend should go to jail. (which is where he is now.)

I also got to know a young man who spent 10 years in prison because the CPD Framed him. He was eventually released when the Northwestern Justice Project did their job for them and caught the real guy.

And a Chinese immigrant who was told to go home by a gang wearing MAGA hats? Oh, and of course you know someone who shot a family member thinking someone broke in their home.
Nope, can't say I know any of those folks... I'm sure it's happened.

Funny thing, I have no doubt your experiences have made you the asshole you are today... but it doesn't excuse you being an asshole.
 
OP
kaz

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
62,707
Reaction score
12,038
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
That's just an opinion. You have no idea why she was fired. You're a co-worker, not her management. Amazing how you know what her career has been. This is still the completely uninformed opinion of an uninformed coworker
Actually, I know exactly what her career has been because I've updated her resume several times... It's kind of my thing.

We know exactly why she was fired, because the managers were a bunch of religious nuts...

Amazing life you've lived. Most people know no one who'd been fired or beaten up for being gay, black, foreign or anything else. But you know them ALL!
Well, yes, I get around, unlike you...

Sure, Joe, sure. You personally know a black who was shot by the cops too, don't you?
No, but my brother is friends with a cop who shot a black kid... He and I haven't talked in four years because I had some funny idea that his friend should go to jail. (which is where he is now.)

I also got to know a young man who spent 10 years in prison because the CPD Framed him. He was eventually released when the Northwestern Justice Project did their job for them and caught the real guy.

And a Chinese immigrant who was told to go home by a gang wearing MAGA hats? Oh, and of course you know someone who shot a family member thinking someone broke in their home.
Nope, can't say I know any of those folks... I'm sure it's happened.

Funny thing, I have no doubt your experiences have made you the asshole you are today... but it doesn't excuse you being an asshole.
So that's four stories now. You know a gay beaten up for being gay, a gay fired for being gay, a cop who shot a black kid and a guy who was framed by the cops.

All self serving stories. And most of us know no one those things happened too. A few know one.

I like how again you're saying all the people cops murder while you only want the cops to have guns.

Keep going, Joe. No one discredits you like you do.

Do you know someone who drowned because of global warming? LOL
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,417
Reaction score
13,695
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
So that's four stories now. You know a gay beaten up for being gay, a gay fired for being gay, a cop who shot a black kid and a guy who was framed by the cops.

All self serving stories. And most of us know no one those things happened too. A few know one.
Actually, one of those stories is well documented... but never mind.

I like how again you're saying all the people cops murder while you only want the cops to have guns.
Which isn't what I've said at all... but never mind. Clearly, you can't have a serious argument on this subject.

Let's try again.

Most cops are great guys. 99% of them, in fact. The cops who aren't great guys are the problem, and we need to get them off our police forces... This means the unions and the politicians (both parties) need to stop protecting the bad apples.

That said, part of the reason cops are so trigger happy to start with is because thanks to the Gun Industry, our cities are awash with guns. Cops in the UK almost never shoot people. Why? they know it's unlikely that someone who panics and makes a sudden move is going for a gun.

There are other problems we need to solve as well- addiction, poverty, mental illness... that we make the cops deal with and they don't have the training.

All that said, the fact is, there is no good reason for your average citizen to own a gun. Guns are far more likely to kill household members than bad guys, and it's not like you guys are going to ever overthrow the government with handguns.
 

badger2

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2016
Messages
7,398
Reaction score
598
Points
140
Genetics has not yet been linked, and the will can come through a drug, bypass a drug, to express itself.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
9,243
Reaction score
2,170
Points
195
Objection your honor, assumes facts not in evidence.

And how do you know she was fired for being "gay?"
Because she had an excellent work record for 14 years, was well liked by all her coworkers, and had even recently received a promotion. She has gone on to have an excellent career with other companies
That's just an opinion. You have no idea why she was fired. You're a co-worker, not her management. Amazing how you know what her career has been. This is still the completely uninformed opinion of an uninformed coworker

And after they fired her they beat her up? Note leftists aren't smart enough to process two points in one post. You're just not
I didn't really have to prove you a liar twice, did I?

Yes, I had another coworker at another company who was the victim of a fag-bashing, when three guys beat him up. When I was in the service, there was a soldier in my squad who was beaten up at the enlisted club. (Of course, he couldn't file a formal complaint, without outing himself.)

I remember it because an MP woke me up in the middle of the night to tell me he was at the infirmary.

Yes, people really do suffer discrimination for being gay... and until we pass laws to protect them and go after the people who violate them, HARD, it will keep going.
Amazing life you've lived. Most people know no one who'd been fired or beaten up for being gay, black, foreign or anything else. But you know them ALL!

And it matches your warped political ideology!

Sure, Joe, sure. You personally know a black who was shot by the cops too, don't you? And a Chinese immigrant who was told to go home by a gang wearing MAGA hats? Oh, and of course you know someone who shot a family member thinking someone broke in their home.

You're a fountain of platitudes and self serving stories
So if you don't know a person who has been fired or beat up for being gay no one has?

I don't know anyone who has been murdered so I guess , if I used your "logic" I should say that murders don't happen
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
7,393
Reaction score
1,019
Points
265
I just can't figure out why you people care who another person is attracted to.

Life is short so if a same sex partner makes people happy who are any of you to stop them?
I don't care who they love. I do care that it is the law. Our society is dying the "death of 1000 cuts", and watering down marriage is simply one more cut.

Mark
I disagree.

Any and all citizens are entitles to all the legal protections as anyone else.

What do you care if two same sex people marry so that the partners can receive all the protections we as a society have agreed upon?

What does it matter when it comes decisions like medical care, or health insurance if a married couple is same sex or not?
On your last question, I agree as long as you mean it's between you, your employer, your insurance company, whoever, but it's not government regulation. Government should stay out of it
So you want to get rid of all anti-discrimination laws?
Yes. Government should not be allowed to discriminate. But government has no legitimate power to control the relationship between private citizens. Talk about being a slave to government
So then you want to go back to White only drinking fountains etc?

We benefit more as an inclusive society.

The more people that are included the happier and more productive they are.
Well, that's a totally vacuous statement since you were completely vague about what you meant. So let's go back to what I said.

Government drinking fountains could not be white only. Parks, government buildings, government schools, none cold do that. I said that. Sure, privately owned drinking fountains could be. Not that anyone would do that other than maybe some redneck bar on Boonieville where blacks wouldn't really want to go anyway.

Even the Montgomery Bus Company opposed the laws that forced their most loyal customers to the back of the bus and to stand, it was terrible for business. Pick up a history book. And that was 50s Alabama.

Public accommodation laws are a sledge hammer solution to a non-existent problem. Only a true government loving leftist would ever look at the reality of those laws and support them
you assume no one would do that again but I don't.

I have a feeling they would.

I don't find public accommodation laws to be a burden at all. And you might want to realize that the nonexistent problem you speak of is nonexistent because of public accommodation laws.
I just gave you the specific example that even in deep South Alabama the Montgomery Bus Company OPPOSED Jim Crow laws.

Note Jim Crow ... LAWS ... It was government that did that. And government is your solution to prevent it. See anything wrong with that at all?
One bus company in Alabama

Really?

How many other states had Jim Crow-esque laws on the books at the time?

And we have laws for all kinds of things I just don't see how anti-discrimination or public accommodation laws are so egregious compared to many others.
You don't know the significance of the Montgomery Bus Company? Seriously?

I want to the heart of the beast, Alabama in the 50s to make the point that businesses care only about serving one color, green. That we are looking for a reason to not do business with people is moronic. Customers are our target. Think about it.

So you have not demonstrated any significant discrimination from private businesses ever. I pointed out that the most prolific case ever of discrimination, which was even a quasi government company and not free market, needed the riders and opposed driving them away.

So make the case what good the sledge hammer of power you give government does
you haven't demonstrated any significant lack of discrimination.

One example is hardly proof.

And tell me how is it a sledge hammer?

You really think anti-discrimination laws and public access laws are tantamount to taking a sledgehammer to your freedoms?

I'd be far more worried about laws that actually restrict my rights than those.

And don't forget there are still instances where a business owner can refuse service.
So you think laws should be enacted unless we can prove they aren't needed? Seriously? The burden is not on you to support a law you agree with, it's my job to prove you wrong? Pass, but wow ...
I think anti-discrimination laws ARE needed.

And as laws go they are some of the least restrictive.
Why would you need an anti discrimination law which discriminates?
You
Or why should a law forbid persons from doing what the state does with the law.

Whhen we say equality under the law it means government must not be allowed to discriminate.

People however have the right to discriminate however they choose. Discrimination is nothing more than a choice based on preference.
Tell me how anti discrimination laws discriminate and who do they discriminate against?
I have both commercial and residential rental properties
I have to deal with fair housing laws all the time.

But since i would not refuse anyone with the ability to pay rent the laws are not a burden on me at all.
They discriminate against business and property owners. Customers and tenants may discriminate all they wish.

Yes and I would never harm someone so murder laws are not a burden to me, but I would object of some people were exempt from murder laws
Wow, Blues Man's view that life would be fair if we only empower government to use guns to force us to be fair is totally and absurdly naive.

Government makes us be fair, and then life is fair. Just wow.

As a long time business owner and taxpayer and American citizen and driver's license holder in this country, I've experienced a hell of a lot from government. "Fair" isn't one of them
I never once used the word "fair".

In fact I never use that word because I know it's bullshit.

If you want to run a business that is open to the public then you have to allow the public entry.

And you say you do anyway so there is no burden on you but only on those that want to hang signs that say Ni##ers, Queers, Jews and Gooks not allowed
The public is not a real entity and no business is ever open to the public . All businesses are open only to customers who by definition are select individuals . Therefore all business owners discriminate are just as everyone else does.
Semantics.

Just because you sell an item that only a portion of the population will buy does not mean you are not open to the public.
yes it does mean that

No business provides goods and services they sell goods and services

Customers may discriminate all they wish it is abuse of government power to selectively discriminate against business owners
So if you sell a product that only 7.2% of the people in your town buy from your retail store you are telling me that you are not a business that is open to the public?
And ALL business owners that are open to the public must follow the same rules so there is no discrimination against business owners
Wrong they are not open to the public.
They are in fact all being discriminated against . No such law applies to customers. The fact that business owners are a minority and the law only applies to them proves that they are being discriminated against.
Of course they are open to the public.

Anyone can walk into any retail establishment and buy anything they want.

If you want to make your business a private for fee membership club you have an argument.

By your "logic" Walmart is not open to the public if 1 person in the country does not shop there.
Wrong.

They are only.open to select individuals.

some people have no money or enough money to buy what is for sale. By definition every business is a private entity not just clubs
Wrong.

People with no money can enter your store and look around.

You cannot require that a person shows you their bank statement and their available credit before they walk into a store.
Wrong
Many business can and they routinely do throw out those who like around without buying anything

You can tell them to buy something or.leave
yes but only AFTER they have entered the store.

You can't turn them away at the door
sure can

" We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone "

that sign hangs on many businesses nationwide
Yeah but how many actually do turn people away at the door for any reason?

And if they do because those people are Black or gay or whatever they'll not only end up in court but the current public attitude to such discrimination will also bring another whole world of shit down on them.
A few do like.for example. If someone tried to come in who is too filthy

They should not be taken to court they should be left alone to fail.The law is wrong and discriminates . People have the right to discriminate the government should never be permitted to do so .

these laws discriminate
Now you're cherry picking.

Yeah some guy that stinks of shit and urine can be denied entry for health and safety reasons just like the no shirt no shoes no service policy which is legal.

So tell me who are you being "forced " to deal with in your business that you want to deny service to?
It may be cherry picking but still proves the point businesses are open to select persons not the public.

I am. It being forced to do so. I am not a business owner and therefore the law does not apply to me because it discriminates against a minority.

any law which practices what it forbids should be repealed
Cherry picking never proves anything but that outliers exist.

So tell me who exactly are you being "forced" to do business with that you want to deny service to?
Wrong

In this argument it proves my point

Asked and answered
All cherry picking ever proves is that there are always exceptions to every rule.

That's called the real world not the world of absolutes which is the world you live in
in this case the rule is contradictory and proved my point.

We have no equality under the law when the law discriminate s against minorities as anti discrimination laws do
If the law treats all members of a group exactly the same there is no discrimination.

And you still haven't told me who you are being forced to do business with that you would otherwise refuse service to.
Wrong

If the law fails to treat EVERYONE the same then it is by definition discriminatory

I have indeed answered you
No you haven't told who you want to refuse service to that the big bad government is forcing you to do business with.

And all business owners are treated the same under the law.
That is a lie.

I answered you

Business owners are a minority who are discriminated against under the law.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
7,393
Reaction score
1,019
Points
265
That is a lie.

I answered you

Business owners are a minority who are discriminated against under the law.
You mean the law is designed to protect workers and consumers? That's terrible!!!
It is not designed for that nor does it succeed.

Equality under the law is a higher moral standard than protecting consumers who need no protection.

This law discriminates against a minority.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,417
Reaction score
13,695
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
It is not designed for that nor does it succeed.

Equality under the law is a higher moral standard than protecting consumers who need no protection.

This law discriminates against a minority.
Not at all. Owning a business is a choice.

You have to treat your employees and customers right.
You can't poison the environment.
you can't endanger the public...

If you can't meet the basic standards of running a business, you shouldn't have a business.
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
7,393
Reaction score
1,019
Points
265
It is not designed for that nor does it succeed.

Equality under the law is a higher moral standard than protecting consumers who need no protection.

This law discriminates against a minority.
Not at all. Owning a business is a choice.

You have to treat your employees and customers right.
You can't poison the environment.
you can't endanger the public...

If you can't meet the basic standards of running a business, you shouldn't have a business.
Yes owning a business is an choice as is patronizing a business.

You do not define the standards of running a business and neither do I nor does the government.

Discrimination endangers or poisons NO ONE. You do not have to treat anyone right because they have every right to leave, quit or simply bankrupt you by never buying anything.

Consumers have every right to discriminate aghhainst any business or business owner for ajy reason. The law however is discriminatory because it violates the rights of business owners who are not permitted to make the same choices.

A law which discrimnates in such a manner is a contradiction. It discriminates against minorities who it bans from doing the same thing. This is precisely the opposite of equality under the law.
 

sartre play

Gold Member
Joined
May 4, 2015
Messages
4,945
Reaction score
774
Points
140
Many posters here must be very young or very isolated. I say that because being in the closet or coming out of the closet was a Very BIG DEAL not so long ago. So why would you need to hide your sexual preference if their had been no discrimination against you? before laws were made against discrimination it was legal to fire or refuse employment just for being gay. also gays were treated badly even physical abuse. you can choice in your private life to not personally associate with gay people, anything beyond that is wrong.
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
7,393
Reaction score
1,019
Points
265
Many posters here must be very young or very isolated. I say that because being in the closet or coming out of the closet was a Very BIG DEAL not so long ago. So why would you need to hide your sexual preference if their had been no discrimination against you? before laws were made against discrimination it was legal to fire or refuse employment just for being gay. also gays were treated badly even physical abuse. you can choice in your private life to not personally associate with gay people, anything beyond that is wrong.
Business IS private life.
 

Polishprince

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
25,656
Reaction score
11,479
Points
950
Many posters here must be very young or very isolated. I say that because being in the closet or coming out of the closet was a Very BIG DEAL not so long ago. So why would you need to hide your sexual preference if their had been no discrimination against you? before laws were made against discrimination it was legal to fire or refuse employment just for being gay. also gays were treated badly even physical abuse. you can choice in your private life to not personally associate with gay people, anything beyond that is wrong.

Not that many years ago, people kept it to themselves and only spread the news about their sexual preferences on a "need to know" basis.

The fact that the PA Secretary of Health is a cross dressing tranny isn't really a problem to me at all. The thing I don't understand is why Gov. Wolf doesn't insist "Rachel" wear a suit and tie, maybe a lab coat during official appearances and while working in the office? If the doctor wants to get in full homo regalia at night and weekends, that's his own affair. But at their regular jobs, and in regular company, is it too much to ask for him to behave normatively?
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
70,410
Reaction score
12,348
Points
2,210
Neither.

It's a developmental disorder.
I'd say it's multi-factor. I doubt there's a "gay gene." But there are genes that make some people more disposed to be gay. That disposition is clearly a range. I think there are people who are clearly gay, clearly not gay and then a curve (normal distribution?) for others where their environment and choices are going to make the difference.

But that's really just a guess. I don't know and I don't really care that much. I only object to gays running to government and demanding handouts, but I also object to anyone else doing that
Oh? What "handouts" are they demanding?
 

Polishprince

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
25,656
Reaction score
11,479
Points
950
Neither.

It's a developmental disorder.
I'd say it's multi-factor. I doubt there's a "gay gene." But there are genes that make some people more disposed to be gay. That disposition is clearly a range. I think there are people who are clearly gay, clearly not gay and then a curve (normal distribution?) for others where their environment and choices are going to make the difference.

But that's really just a guess. I don't know and I don't really care that much. I only object to gays running to government and demanding handouts, but I also object to anyone else doing that
Oh? What "handouts" are they demanding?

I guess you've never heard of the demands to legalize Gay Marriage, demands for LGBTQ Reparations to make Normative people pay them for thousands of years of allegedly making fun of them
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
70,410
Reaction score
12,348
Points
2,210
Neither.

It's a developmental disorder.
I'd say it's multi-factor. I doubt there's a "gay gene." But there are genes that make some people more disposed to be gay. That disposition is clearly a range. I think there are people who are clearly gay, clearly not gay and then a curve (normal distribution?) for others where their environment and choices are going to make the difference.

But that's really just a guess. I don't know and I don't really care that much. I only object to gays running to government and demanding handouts, but I also object to anyone else doing that
Oh? What "handouts" are they demanding?

I guess you've never heard of the demands to legalize Gay Marriage, demands for LGBTQ Reparations to make Normative people pay them for thousands of years of allegedly making fun of them
You're right, I never heard of that. Sounds like more rightatded dementia than anything else.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,417
Reaction score
13,695
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Yes owning a business is an choice as is patronizing a business.

You do not define the standards of running a business and neither do I nor does the government.
Sure we do... we pass laws saying what they can and can't do to their customers and employees.

Consumers have every right to discriminate aghhainst any business or business owner for ajy reason. The law however is discriminatory because it violates the rights of business owners who are not permitted to make the same choices.
Yup. Isn't it awesome? I'm kind of a fuck business, because they keep inflicting the GOP on us.
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
7,393
Reaction score
1,019
Points
265
Yes owning a business is an choice as is patronizing a business.

You do not define the standards of running a business and neither do I nor does the government.
Sure we do... we pass laws saying what they can and can't do to their customers and employees.

Consumers have every right to discriminate aghhainst any business or business owner for ajy reason. The law however is discriminatory because it violates the rights of business owners who are not permitted to make the same choices.
Yup. Isn't it awesome? I'm kind of a fuck business, because they keep inflicting the GOP on us.
Once again we do not define what the proper standards are for running a business. A law imposed on people defines no such standard it merely empowers the government to use force.

Not the same thing.

No they do not actually. The voters do so deal with it.
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
7,393
Reaction score
1,019
Points
265
So that's four stories now. You know a gay beaten up for being gay, a gay fired for being gay, a cop who shot a black kid and a guy who was framed by the cops.

All self serving stories. And most of us know no one those things happened too. A few know one.
Actually, one of those stories is well documented... but never mind.

I like how again you're saying all the people cops murder while you only want the cops to have guns.
Which isn't what I've said at all... but never mind. Clearly, you can't have a serious argument on this subject.

Let's try again.

Most cops are great guys. 99% of them, in fact. The cops who aren't great guys are the problem, and we need to get them off our police forces... This means the unions and the politicians (both parties) need to stop protecting the bad apples.

That said, part of the reason cops are so trigger happy to start with is because thanks to the Gun Industry, our cities are awash with guns. Cops in the UK almost never shoot people. Why? they know it's unlikely that someone who panics and makes a sudden move is going for a gun.

There are other problems we need to solve as well- addiction, poverty, mental illness... that we make the cops deal with and they don't have the training.

All that said, the fact is, there is no good reason for your average citizen to own a gun. Guns are far more likely to kill household members than bad guys, and it's not like you guys are going to ever overthrow the government with handguns.
The gun industry has not made the USA awash in hand guns. It always has been awash in gunhs. We have always had a vheavily armed populace and yes in case the government needs to be resisted. And yes that is feasible.


There are manyt good reasons to own a gun. Not that it matters since rights are not based on a need or reason. The claim that they are more likely to kill house hold members is a myth. It is amazing how you willfully ignore outdated claims like that.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top