Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Homosexuality, the natural choice? (Gay Animals are Common)
Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 76 of 306 (375385)
01-08-2007 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Dan Carroll
01-08-2007 1:35 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
Dan, you said:
...Post an ad looking for NSA sex.
Daah, I duuno, Dan, there's just something about your request...
”Hoot Mon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-08-2007 1:35 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-08-2007 1:45 PM Fosdick has not replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 306 (375387)
01-08-2007 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Fosdick
01-08-2007 1:42 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
Daah, I duuno, Dan, there's just something about your request...
So you can't choose to enjoy sex with another man? (Or another woman, if you happen to be female.)
If homosexuality is a choice, it shouldn't matter whether or not you want to. You'll choose to want to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 1:42 PM Fosdick has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-08-2007 3:11 PM Dan Carroll has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 78 of 306 (375391)
01-08-2007 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Fosdick
01-08-2007 12:05 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
If I were a black person I might be insulted by your remark.
Perhaps, but many black leaders have expressed solidarity with gay persons precisely because they recognize that the struggle for equality is exactly the same.
Please, how should racial rights extend all the way to homosexual rights under the law?
Not racial rights, civil rights. There's no such thing as "racial rights." There's merely equal protection under the law, as guaranteed by our Constitution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 12:05 PM Fosdick has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 3:03 PM crashfrog has replied

Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 79 of 306 (375404)
01-08-2007 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by crashfrog
01-08-2007 2:07 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
crashfrog, re:
Not racial rights, civil rights. There's no such thing as "racial rights." There's merely equal protection under the law, as guaranteed by our Constitution.
Good point! Human rights”civil rights”rights of the human race.
My main issue is determining whether or not people make a CHOICE to be gay. If they are gay by way of genetic predisposition, that's one thing”it's not a matter of choice for them. But if they CHOOSE to be gay, that's quite another. Personally, I suspect they do not choose to be gay; I think it is probably genetically predisposed. So they should have all the rights they deserve. I even think they deserve to be civilly united if the choose, but I don't think they deserve to be married per se.
Question: Do I have to be a frickin' fundy to think that "marriage" is a heterosexual affair, and that "civil union" is a homosexual affair? What part of this is so oppressive to gays?
”Hoot Mon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by crashfrog, posted 01-08-2007 2:07 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by crashfrog, posted 01-08-2007 3:10 PM Fosdick has replied
 Message 82 by Taz, posted 01-08-2007 3:14 PM Fosdick has not replied
 Message 86 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-08-2007 3:23 PM Fosdick has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 80 of 306 (375407)
01-08-2007 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Fosdick
01-08-2007 3:03 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
Do I have to be a frickin' fundy to think that "marriage" is a heterosexual affair, and that "civil union" is a homosexual affair? What part of this is so oppressive to gays?
Asked and answered. When I replied to this and asked you why seperate "but equal" accomodations, public facilities, etc. represented a civil rights violation for black people - plus that there's more than 1000 Federal rights granted only to married couples - how didn't you understand that as the answer to your question?
I'm just curious what kind of mental block is going on here for you, since it appears that we're right back where we started.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 3:03 PM Fosdick has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 4:52 PM crashfrog has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 306 (375408)
01-08-2007 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Dan Carroll
01-08-2007 1:45 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
So you can't choose to enjoy sex with another man?
If I am unable to choose to be gay then that means that nobody is able to?
What about heteros that spend too much time in jail and then turn gay?
Or do you think that ones sexuality is unchangeable?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-08-2007 1:45 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Taz, posted 01-08-2007 3:15 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 84 by crashfrog, posted 01-08-2007 3:16 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 85 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-08-2007 3:18 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 82 of 306 (375409)
01-08-2007 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Fosdick
01-08-2007 3:03 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
You still haven't addressed my point. Why is it that you people always say you support civil union yet always legislate and vote for legislations that not only ban gay marriage but all so ALL forms of civil union for gay people? The latest state to ban gay marriage is wisconsin. Their ban also include ALL forms of union that remotely resemble marriage.
As the old saying goes, seperate but equal my ass.

AKA G.A.S.B.Y.
George Absolutely Stupid Bush the Younger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 3:03 PM Fosdick has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 83 of 306 (375410)
01-08-2007 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by New Cat's Eye
01-08-2007 3:11 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
Catholic writes:
What about heteros that spend too much time in jail and then turn gay?
I'm curious about this. Do tell us whatever experiences you've had or stories you've heard about straight people turning gay in jail.

AKA G.A.S.B.Y.
George Absolutely Stupid Bush the Younger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-08-2007 3:11 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 84 of 306 (375411)
01-08-2007 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by New Cat's Eye
01-08-2007 3:11 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
What about heteros that spend too much time in jail and then turn gay?
They turn straight when they get out.
Look, think of it like this. If you jack off, are you gay? Cuz technically it was a dude's hand on your junk?
No, right? Because it's more about what's going on in your head than what's going on below the belt. Plenty of gay men have had sex with women; they were thinking of guys, usually, while they were doing it, which is how they came to understand that they were gay. And sometimes straight people have gay sex because it's all they can get, like kids in boarding school or prison inmates. Artifical restrictions on sexual access aren't fruitful in regards to determining orientation. It's people's free behavior that is indicative.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-08-2007 3:11 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 306 (375413)
01-08-2007 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by New Cat's Eye
01-08-2007 3:11 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
If I am unable to choose to be gay then that means that nobody is able to?
I can't say what everyone on the planet is capable of doing. But if a person such as you or Hoot Mon is incapable of choosing your sexuality, then it seems a bit silly for either of you to insist that it's what others are doing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-08-2007 3:11 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-08-2007 5:39 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 86 of 306 (375414)
01-08-2007 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Fosdick
01-08-2007 3:03 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
My main issue is determining whether or not people make a CHOICE to be gay.
You have been given a very simple way of answering this. Repeating the question doesn't mean the answer isn't staring you in the face.
Heck, because I'm such a nice guy, I'll go ahead and give you another possible test, that won't even involve touching another guy.
1) Rent a gay porn movie.
2) Watch it.
3) Choose to get an erection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 3:03 PM Fosdick has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Taz, posted 01-08-2007 4:12 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 87 of 306 (375425)
01-08-2007 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Dan Carroll
01-08-2007 3:23 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
Dan, it doesn't work if Hoot is a teen. A teen gets an erection while looking at jello.

AKA G.A.S.B.Y.
George Absolutely Stupid Bush the Younger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-08-2007 3:23 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 4:33 PM Taz has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 88 of 306 (375428)
01-08-2007 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Fosdick
01-08-2007 1:31 PM


Re: a benefit or not ...
quote:
...and you think we are UNNATURAL, at least in part.
No, I don't think that at all. Human behavior is neither natural or unnatural. Termites, for example, have natural behavior. Termites don't have to be taught to build nests or feed the queen or rear young or guard the entrance. They just do these things automatically, as part of their programming. Termites are simply organic machines acting according to preset programming. Termites do have behavior that is entirely natural.
Humans, on the other hand, have very few, if any, behaviors that are the result of prewired programming. It seems possible, in light of some scientific studies, that some individuals have a biology based predisposition that, when exposed to some sort of environmental stimulus, will more likely result in an individual that is sexually attracted to individuals of the same sex. Just as there are some individuals that, without any biological predisposition whatsoever, will, when exposed to some sort of environmental stimulus, result in an individual that is sexually attracted to individuals of the same sex. And/or there are individuals who have this biological predisposition but, presumably due to the environment that they were exposed to (either prenatally or post-natal socially), did not develop into an individual that is sexually attracted to members of the same sex.
If there is one thing that seems clear, especially when observing different cultures and how real individuals actually behave in a given culture, is that humans are not "naturally" anything. If they are naturally anything, then they are natural bisexual polygamists, and the predominance of obligate heterosexual behavior among American males is probably due to cultural conditioning, not because heterosexuality is somehow more "natural" than homosexual behavior.

I have always preferred, as guides to human action, messy hypothetical imperatives like the Golden Rule, based on negotiation, compromise and general respect, to the Kantian categorical imperatives of absolute righteousness, in whose name we so often murder and maim until we decide that we had followed the wrong instantiation of the right generality. -- Stephen Jay Gould

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 1:31 PM Fosdick has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Fosdick, posted 01-08-2007 5:16 PM Chiroptera has replied

Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 89 of 306 (375431)
01-08-2007 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Taz
01-08-2007 4:12 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
TD wrote:
Dan, it doesn't work if Hoot is a teen. A teen gets an erection while looking at jello.
The last time I got sexually aroused over Jello was when my high school girl friend dropped it down her blouse and I went fishing for it. That was over 50 years ago.
”Hoot Mon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Taz, posted 01-08-2007 4:12 PM Taz has not replied

Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 90 of 306 (375435)
01-08-2007 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by crashfrog
01-08-2007 3:10 PM


Re: Gay "marriage" & gay genes
crashfrog wrote:
Asked and answered. When I replied to this and asked you why seperate "but equal" accomodations, public facilities, etc. represented a civil rights violation for black people - plus that there's more than 1000 Federal rights granted only to married couples - how didn't you understand that as the answer to your question?
If I'm a black person and you say I can't drink water from a public fountain, is that the same thing as if I'm gay person and you say I can't get "married" at a public courthouse? Is it? That's really what I'm questioning here. Let me ask you why gays suffer when they can't get "married" under the law but still gain, via civil union, all of the technical rights that heterosexual married people enjoy. I say let them have everthing but the title of being "married." What's so bad about that?
I'm just curious what kind of mental block is going on here for you, since it appears that we're right back where we started.
I must have the obnoxious gene for questioning half-baked opinions.
”Hoot Mon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by crashfrog, posted 01-08-2007 3:10 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-08-2007 5:15 PM Fosdick has replied
 Message 98 by crashfrog, posted 01-08-2007 6:26 PM Fosdick has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024