Cancer has been observed in alot of animals too, what is your point? And so has male pattern balding.Silver said:
I´ve been wondering about Gay-ness and choices and stuff
- Thread starter ALEXIS_DH
- Start date
well, duh, he's saying that it's natural. cancer is natural, and male pattern baldness is natural. thankfully, i'm afflicted by neither.
Yeah, both natural.BurlySurly said:
Being gay doesn't kill you like cancer does, unless you walk into a redneck bar perhaps...
Ridemonkey said:
not exactly... i dont question if gays should take pills...
my point is.. homosexuality, according to what i read, is a considition caused by an involuntary chemical inbalance, in which the individual can choose to stay within this state.
other chemical in balances that affect behaviour dont get to choose to stay. they are labeled patients, and they cannot make "free decitions" since they are within this state of chemical inbalance...
see any difference??
i mean, medicine is supposed to be there to make living easier. taking pills make the life of a bipolar easier?? yes...
would the life of a gay person be easier if he/she was hetero??? of course it will!!!!, would it just be easier to change some neurotoxins like with a bipolar, instead of changing the world around it, to accomodate for their cravings????
i dont want to get into the definition of "normal" since I´m quite a moral relativist, and this kinda makes me think, homosexual, among all the behaviours with origins in chemical inbalances, receives an un-equal social treatment and definition compared to others (lets not think for a minute in how it affects life, but just on the definition themselves)
Silver said:
Ok Silver and Narlus both. Slow ones. The point is that just because it happens naturally doesnt mean science doesnt have the obligation to explore it. Just like cancer and male pattern baldness (which you ignored as an example)
It's been looked at. Maybe that's why it got taken out of the DSM? It's also been dismissed by anyone who doesn't have an axe to grind (Gays are evil, icky, etc...)BurlySurly said:
Silver said:
but being 100% homo, kinda impairs your ability to breed, thus by a darwinism standard, and the definition of a biological success, is a failure.....
Silver said:
This is really a bad argument that a lot of people make......being that if it is observed in nature it is "natural" hence OK. Not directed towards you Silver.....people will often talk about the reeses monkeys which happen to practice A LOT of homosexual behaviors. They will make the argument that since this species is so sexually active across sexes that it proves that homosexuality is at the very root of animal insticts/behaviors. However what they fail to mention is that the reeses also molest their babies, make their babies ejactulate them, etc. So this too is natural behavior that occurs in the animal kingdom......it is NATURAL but that does not make it proper for mankind.
We are not animals.........
Well, slower one, I feel religion is a condition that negativley affects millions around the world and it would be great if that was treatable. Far more threatening than homosexuality. Don't want to discuss that? Its the same issue - just a different bunch of folks.BurlySurly said:
the DSM treatment of homosexuality if what made me wonder in the first place....
what is the reasoning behind deciding homosexuality is NOT an involuntary behaviour that impairs one´s ability to breed???
what is the reasoning behind deciding homosexuality is NOT an involuntary behaviour that impairs one´s ability to breed???
Darwinism, as you use it in this context, does not apply to modern society.ALEXIS_DH said:
Religion is a learned practice, it is not a chemical imbalance or anything biological. If you want to call homosexuality a 'choice' as religion is, then maybe we could say there is some relevance to your argument, but its obvious you're just trying to polarize the issue into one of hate, when Im just wondering about how's and why's.Ridemonkey said:
So? I'm not having kids. Ever. And I'm heterosexual.ALEXIS_DH said:
Where, exactly, did you read this garbage?ALEXIS_DH said:
Homosexuality, just like heterosexuality, is not a "condition". It's not going to be treated w/ pills like so many of you are hoping.
Give it a rest, macho man.
Granted. But that does throw out the whole "It's NOT natural!" screed, right?zod said:
I see your point. However, why is it conservatives obsess about things like homosexuality when it really has nothing to do with them? Why can't they just mind their own affairs?BurlySurly said:
bomberz1qr20 said:
I wasn't aware this has been proven one way or the other???
Because their religion and values tell them to. That is not my position here.Ridemonkey said:
Sure but what's that really matter........ a lot of things are natural. As I pointed out, homosexuality, child molestation, cannibalism, etc.Silver said:
That still doesn't make it correct behavior for mankind, that is the only wrench I am trying to throw in there. The argument that animals do it is stupid b/c there are a lot of things animals do that we do not or should not.
Wierdly I was with you for a while there, then drifted off in a different direction.zod said:
I agree it's natural and the arguments about reproduction are irrelevent, and fact work against the viewpoint that we should rise above certain behaviour because we're mankind. Because we are mankind we can choose our behaviour and what we choose is wrong is generally so because it harms other people. However sleeping with a member of the same sex is no more harmful than sleeping with a member of the ooposite sex.
Also remember that sex is pleasurable and many of us partake if it for pleasure rather than reproduction. So if sex is pleasurable with a member of the same sex why should be unnatural, it is only activity, like riding a bike.
Silver said:
so, am hetero as well, and only want to have one kid.this is a choice we are makign within our right minds, in a state of chemical balance, right???
so by legal definition, you can call it a choice made by people on their right minds...
but... if this "choice" was not a choice but rather a thing caused by an un-voluntary chemical inbalance.....
do you think it still weights as much as your decision, made without any chemical inbalance compromising it??
and if you think they both weight the same... then why is a bipolar person called a patient, if he/she decides "freely" to stay hypo-maniac (regardless it impairs a person, because hypòmania is not dangerous), and they say this person is not making a "free choice" because his decision is compromised by the chemical inbalance in the 1st place?????.....
Let's review:zod said:
Consensual Activity:
Homosexual sex
Non-Consensual Activity
Child Molestation
Cannibalism (I'm assuming the person died at your hand.)
That's the big difference.
Because their handbook (the bible) tells them it's wrong.Ridemonkey said:
Christians are a forgiving lot. If they can relate to homosexuals as having a "condition" or an "imbalance", then it makes it more forgivable in their eyes. Then one can look for a "cure", and homosexuals can "choose" to be "cured".
People are the way that they are. I'm a heterosexual man, I have a kid, I like women, I wanted to breed - simple. Pills can't and won't make me gay, and pills won't make a gay man straight.
What about that is hard to understand?
Is it unnatural to want to ride a road-bike occasionally?
Says who?bomberz1qr20 said:
Alexis_DH knows about as much about road biking as he does about homosexuality. This should make for some interesting discussion.fluff said:
Ridemonkey said:
its not about conservatives. am quite a liberal pinko. and i´m pro gay-marriage.
But I wonder in a psedo-phylosophical way what makes them get a different
social treament from other behaviours caused by chemical-inbalances????
am not trying to satanize nobody, in fact its you who tries to satanize me for making such questions, which in the first place, hace no prejudice towards gays.
ALEXIS_DH said:
Just because you started the thread doesn't mean all my posts are directed at you.
Your silly comments in the road forum are another issue..
Consensual Activity: Incest with birth controlSilver said:
Consensual Activity: Assisted Suicide
Consensual Activity: Sex with dolphins (dolphins actually like this)
Consensual Activity: Pissing in the sink
Im not trying to say homosexuality is exactly the same as these things, but just because they are consensual, doesnt make them right
So the hetero is hetero, the homo is home, the pedo is pedo, and the necro is necro.............forgot the beastiobomberz1qr20 said:
Ridemonkey said:
lol. like I say, i know very little about homosexuality so i´ve been wondering abuot that lately and figuring out things myself....
so i´ll ask you directly, who knows a lot about gays...
what is the reasoning behind deciding homosexuality is NOT an involuntary
behaviour that impairs one´s ability to breed???
and what makes the "choice" of staying gay, a "free choice" (which means is made by people in their right minds), in oppposition as say, other conditions like bipolar disorder, in which doctors agree this people CANNOT make "free choices" (since their chemical inbalances compromise their choice).
When according to what i read here, people say people dont choose to be gay(which would mean is based on an involuntary chemical inbalance), in the very same way bipolar get their mood swings???
I always thought homosexuality was more like drinking out of the laundry tap. It's not what most people do but it's not actually wrong.BurlySurly said:
i think burly needs a new title.
i suggest SINK PISSER
i suggest SINK PISSER
What ever happened to "you're f*ckin crazy"?ALEXIS_DH said:
Is there an effective anti-gay pill?BurlySurly said:
Take two and call AlexisDH in the morning.
bomberz1qr20 said:
hahaha, hey in my first post i said "for the sake of the argument say they exists"...
after all, if they have pills for depression and mania, its not far they day they will have them, if they dont already.
arent there hormonal treatment for those who go sex reassignment surgery?? arent those pills or shots to make a person more of a certain sex????
It doesn't impair the ability, it might lessen the likelyhood though...ALEXIS_DH said:
Like I said of all the gay people I know or have known, not one of them were making a choice.
To quote my step cousin:
"I wake up gay and I go to bed gay. Im gay when I sleep too."
talk about dodging the issue...bomberz1qr20 said:
ALEXIS_DH said:
I've heard similar arguments about homosexuality when it is compared to alcoholism. Alcoholism is a behavior pattern with a genetic predisposition. It is found in nature (monkey populations). Homosexuality is also found in nature, and many believe it is genetic and gay individuals are "born that way".
One lifestyle is perceived as being a problem by society, the other isn't as much. Since being gay is not harmful to people surrounding the individual like alcoholism (drunk driving, violence, etc) why is it such a concern?
For the howevermanyteenth time "why is it such a concern?" does not answer the question. Science exists to answer these very questions and should do so.HedgeHog said: