Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
106 online now:
DrJones*, nwr (2 members, 104 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,180 Year: 6,292/6,534 Month: 485/650 Week: 23/232 Day: 0/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Homosexuality and Evo, Creo, and ID
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3851
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(4)
Message 76 of 1309 (722923)
03-25-2014 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:24 PM


Re: Why are choices fair game?
lokiare writes:

The key thing to take away is that not liking something is not persecution or bigotry.

You're half right: bigotry is indeed an inner state, not a behavior; persecution and other discriminatory acts are behavior.

I am astonished that you will not defend your premise that only biologically determined characteristics should be protected by law, preferring to claim the question is an attempt to "box you in".

But you have boxed yourself. Without that premise, your argument is nonsense.

I find some religious tenets abhorrent: may I refuse service to anyone I suspect of embracing them?

lokiare writes:

So the equivalency would be for every restaurant to be required to have a vegetarian option or be considered to be persecuting vegetarians.

No, the equivalent would be refusing to serve salads to vegetarians because they won't eat the meat.

It also has to do with what people consider persecution and bigotry. I once went to a forum and expressed my dislike of all of the homosexual lobbying that was putting homosexual scenes in every show. I said something along the lines that I was not entertained by it anymore than someone who doesn't like scenes of romantic comedy in their serious political thrillers. Shortly after I was severely 'persecuted' for having an opinion.

One frequently hears that a chorus of condemnation is an affront to free speech rights. That's as ridiculous as your attempt to allocate equal treatment under the law on biologic grounds.

It is also typically the complaint of bigots.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:24 PM lokiare has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 8:37 PM Omnivorous has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 723 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 77 of 1309 (722924)
03-25-2014 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:27 PM


... A christian bakery is now being sued and threatened with criminal conduct for choosing not to serve a homosexual couple for example. ...

Nope. A PUBLIC bakery discriminated against a couple based on the bigoted beliefs of the owner.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:27 PM lokiare has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 8:38 PM RAZD has replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2216
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004


(3)
Message 78 of 1309 (722925)
03-25-2014 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:57 PM


quote:
Which is odd, since its purely a mental state brought on by environment and chemical reinforcement, which can be reversed.

Like religion. I'm glad you can see how it is now time to sweep away all the false religions protected by law and force everyone to convert to the true faith and worship the king of kings, lord of lords, Odin the Allfather.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:57 PM lokiare has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 8:42 PM DrJones* has replied

AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6835
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 79 of 1309 (722927)
03-25-2014 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by New Cat's Eye
03-25-2014 5:44 PM


There have been enough misunderstandings all the way around. Faith spoke in general at first then became more specific as the misunderstanding came forth.

We all know Faith. We should know she did not mean that a homosexual is incapable of reproducing by heterosexual means. Some chose to ignore this for reasons of their own.

Do you really think that Pressie was trying to imply that homosexual intercourse can lead to pregnancy?

No, and I don't believe Faith thought so either. I think she misunderstood what Pressie was saying in response to lokiare.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-25-2014 5:44 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

lokiare
Member (Idle past 2968 days)
Posts: 69
Joined: 03-18-2014


Message 80 of 1309 (722928)
03-25-2014 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Dr Adequate
03-24-2014 3:40 PM


So if homosexuality doesn't fit into evolution why is it here at all? Wouldn't it have been evolved out by now?

Is homosexuality a choice or is it some biological process. If it is a biological process it should have been eradicated by evolution right?

It's not a dominant genetic trait, is it? By your naive reasoning, we'd also be rid of sickle-cell anemia.

People who have sickle cell anemia are immune or resistant to malaria a wide spread disease in some areas. There is a reason it persisted. There is no reason for homosexuality (if it were genetic) to persist.

If it is not a biological process and a result of choice and environment then it shouldn't be protected under the law any more than any other choice/environment option (like say vegetarianism).

One could say the same of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to bear arms ...

I already addressed this in a post above.

And your right to be vegetarian is protected under the law. If you're a vegetarian, and someone tries to force a beefsteak down your throat, that's assault.

My example is that every restaurant is forced to serve vegetarian options on their menus. Is that protected under the law? Because that's what homosexuals are pushing for.

I put forward several studies that have been done that show homosexuality is more by choice and environment and falls under a mindset rather than a biological imperative or being of genetic origin:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1300464/posts

Ah, freerepublic, the source of all knowledge ...

Ah the Ad hominem fallacy, where a source of information is defamed rather than the information provided.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-24-2014 3:40 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Taq, posted 03-25-2014 6:15 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 103 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2014 7:30 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 105 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-25-2014 7:39 PM lokiare has not replied

AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6835
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 81 of 1309 (722929)
03-25-2014 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Theodoric
03-25-2014 5:54 PM


They would have evolved out of existence, because homosexuals cannot reproduce. That is inaccurate and a strawman.

And you continue the misunderstanding. So be it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Theodoric, posted 03-25-2014 5:54 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Theodoric, posted 03-25-2014 6:20 PM AZPaul3 has replied

frako
Member
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 82 of 1309 (722930)
03-25-2014 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:27 PM


Because it is getting to the point where it is coming into direct conflict with the laws that protect the free exorcise of religion. A christian bakery is now being sued and threatened with criminal conduct for choosing not to serve a homosexual couple for example. So it actually is our business. You'll notice that we didn't really care until that point. We tried to convert them, but that was it.

Well my religion says that i cannot do business with black people, and now i can be sued, Nazis tried to make them white with blue eyes and the world condemned such experiments and prosecuted the scientists.


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:27 PM lokiare has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 8:46 PM frako has not replied

Taq
Member
Posts: 8525
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.0


(4)
Message 83 of 1309 (722931)
03-25-2014 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:24 PM


Re: Why are choices fair game?
So the equivalency would be for every restaurant to be required to have a vegetarian option or be considered to be persecuting vegetarians.

No. The equivalent would be to put up a sign that says "Will Not Serve Christians" since your religion is a choice.

Why should everyone be forced to cater to something that is a choice.

That is the agreement you make with our democratic society when you open a business that is open to the public. If you don't want to cater to homosexuals, then don't run a business that would require you to cater to homosexuals. It's not as if government agents are showing up to your home and forcing you serve homosexuals in your home.

It also has to do with what people consider persecution and bigotry. I once went to a forum and expressed my dislike of all of the homosexual lobbying that was putting homosexual scenes in every show. I said something along the lines that I was not entertained by it anymore than someone who doesn't like scenes of romantic comedy in their serious political thrillers. Shortly after I was severely 'persecuted' for having an opinion.

Tell you what. Go find Jesse Jackson who worked with Martin Luther King, Jr. Tell him your story, and then ask him how your story compares to the persecution that blacks suffered in the South during the Civil Rights movement. Don't be surprised if he laughs at you . . . for a long time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:24 PM lokiare has not replied

Taq
Member
Posts: 8525
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.0


(2)
Message 84 of 1309 (722932)
03-25-2014 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by lokiare
03-25-2014 6:07 PM


People who have sickle cell anemia are immune or resistant to malaria a wide spread disease in some areas. There is a reason it persisted. There is no reason for homosexuality (if it were genetic) to persist.

Perhaps you could produce the evidence for this claim?

My example is that every restaurant is forced to serve vegetarian options on their menus.

False. Vegetarians can order anything off the menu, just like anyone else. There is no discrimination. If it were comparable, you would not let vegetarians enter your restaurant.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 6:07 PM lokiare has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 8:51 PM Taq has not replied

lokiare
Member (Idle past 2968 days)
Posts: 69
Joined: 03-18-2014


Message 85 of 1309 (722933)
03-25-2014 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Diomedes
03-24-2014 4:23 PM


Re: Research Studies
So if homosexuality doesn't fit into evolution why is it here at all? Wouldn't it have been evolved out by now?

There have actually been several studies on this topic. I provided a few links below, but to summarize:

There is a selection component for homosexuality when you factor in social constructs of species. So far as I understand, homosexuality exists in species that have a social component to their organizational makeup; i.e. they live and work in groups.

The selective advantage of homosexuality can often be summed up by the 'Gay Uncle' notion. In a situation where a specific family has a gene or specific disposition to produce gay offspring, the likelihood of that offspring surviving increases because of the added benefit of having an additional male member of the group protecting a sibling's offspring. This can be expanded on to include the 'Lesbian Aunt' notion where a gay female member can assist in child rearing.

Actually relatives helping others in their families in social animals is seen whether the animals in question are gay or not. So this proposition doesn't even stand up to basic logic (are there other equally likely reasons that this could happen?). There is no genetic advantage to this that wouldn't be eclipsed by a heterosexual creature that helps take care of relatives young as well as its own. Thus being more likely to spread their genetic code to the next generation.

Also even if that were true, it doesn't follow unless the creature in question passes its genes on to another generation. If it doesn't, then it would still get weeded out.

In order for natural selection to work, the gene has to be passed on, homosexual animals don't pass on genes.

An important notion to remember: homosexuality has been observed in species outside of the human race. Macaque monkeys are a good example. Which means it is both natural and must have some specific evolutionary advantage.

Uh no. There could just be similar unnatural reasons why both animal and humans have homosexuals within their ranks. Has anyone done studies on serotonin imbalances in animals that show that homosexuality in animals is driven by an imbalance? Why yes they have. So there is one similarity right there.

Unless of course evolution is false, then there is no need to have an advantage, but assuming for the moment that evolution is fact (instead of a loosely put together theory that has been proven false over and over) what advantage would there be that wouldn't be eclipsed by other advantages that a heterosexual social animal brings to the table? I have yet to see a valid answer to this.

Links:

http://www.newscientist.com/...mosexuality.html#.UzCTFahdV8E

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...s/PMC1691850/pdf/15539346.pdf

http://www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/.../evo%20homosexual%20review.pdf

I haven't reviewed your links. I will do so after I get done responding to what you've posted, if you properly summarized them, though it doesn't do much for the homosexual cause.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Diomedes, posted 03-24-2014 4:23 PM Diomedes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2014 7:45 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 109 by Taq, posted 03-25-2014 7:51 PM lokiare has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 723 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(4)
Message 86 of 1309 (722934)
03-25-2014 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:36 PM


Nice try but you fail at a few points. One this would not work unless you had a large enough sample size to weed out randomness. Second it wouldn't prove anything one way or the other.

Nope, the question applied just to you. So is this:

Do you remember when you chose to be heterosexual? Or did you always know?

The one thing that most people don't understand is that it is reversible and treatable. ...

This is one of the most pernicious lies going around.

You can make people hide their homosexuality by persecuting them, that is not a cure, it is going back to the dark ages.

There is also no social reason for homosexuality to be "cured" when the alternative is to just recognize the various orientations within the human population. They are natural, they occur in other animals as well, there is no rational reason for discrimination.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:36 PM lokiare has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7416
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 87 of 1309 (722935)
03-25-2014 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by AZPaul3
03-25-2014 6:08 PM


OK show me where i misunderstand. Look at the OP, look at Faiths statements. Show me what I am misunderstanding.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2014 6:08 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2014 8:29 PM Theodoric has not replied

lokiare
Member (Idle past 2968 days)
Posts: 69
Joined: 03-18-2014


Message 88 of 1309 (722936)
03-25-2014 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by frako
03-24-2014 5:58 PM


So if homosexuality doesn't fit into evolution why is it here at all? Wouldn't it have been evolved out by now?

well if you take a the human species as an example for the past 1000 or more years just about everywhere on the planet gays where killed, tortured and or imprisoned. So naturaly people hid their sexuality, got married and had kids to show see im not gay im just in touch with my feminine side LOL. So all that fighting against gays probably increased the gay population in humans.

Do you have some references to back up the 1000 year claim? Short of the few years in medieval times and the Muslim people's practices, I was under the impression from early times that homosexuality was accepted along side everything else as just an oddity.

As fare as gay animals go, take a look at bees or ants most of their population cannot breed yet they still exist as they serve a purpose in their social structure, gays in a wolfpack for instance increase the odds of their siblings surviving, as they have a strong male member that will not weaken the pack with fights over females. and even though they do not pass their genes on directly their closest relatives do more often and a proportion of them will be gay, as we know its not a gene itself that determines "gayness" it also has to do with the environment the genes just increase the chance.

Can you show me any studies at all that have been done that haven't been later disproven that show some genes that have anything to do with homosexuality? From my own research I haven't been able to find a single source that proves homosexuality is genetic in any way. Merely environmental and reversible at that.

If it is not a biological process and a result of choice and environment then it shouldn't be protected under the law any more than any other choice/environment option (like say vegetarianism). So which side does it fall under and what are the scientific and lawful implications?

It is a biological process in short during development, a lack of some hormones and possibly other environmental factors influence the development of the part of the brain that determines who you are attracted to. Think you'r brain was wired to find girls/boys attractive its not really a choice if you think it is watch a gay porno and see if you can get a hadron.

I put forward several studies that have been done that show homosexuality is more by choice and environment and falls under a mindset rather than a biological imperative or being of genetic origin:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1300464/posts

And i challenge you to watch a gay porno with a couple of your sex, and get aroused by choice. And no cheating by thinking of girls think of men. If you can manage that you are either gay/bisexual or you have a point.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by frako, posted 03-24-2014 5:58 PM frako has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 16087
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 89 of 1309 (722937)
03-25-2014 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by lokiare
03-25-2014 5:14 PM


Re: Rights versus Responsibilities
I can speak from personal experience.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 5:14 PM lokiare has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by lokiare, posted 03-25-2014 8:54 PM Phat has replied

lokiare
Member (Idle past 2968 days)
Posts: 69
Joined: 03-18-2014


Message 90 of 1309 (722938)
03-25-2014 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by roxrkool
03-24-2014 10:12 PM


Re: choice??
I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone can possibly conclude that sexual attraction is a choice. Unless YOU personally feel attraction for both sexes. Do you? If so, then you are bi-sexual. Whether you acknowledge the fact or not.

I do not recall one time in my entire life where I made the deliberate choice not to feel attracted to a person of the same sex. That makes me a heterosexual. I have found many of my sex attractive, but have never felt any desire to take it further than pure appreciation for a beautiful human. Hell, I can't even control the attractions I feel for the opposite sex.

It is a choice, not an easy choice. Many homosexuals are caused by sexual abuse as children (as the studies I linked show). The choice may not have been the individuals, but it was a choice. Many homosexuals voluntarily rid themselves of homosexuality through various therapies which indicates anyone can choose to change from homosexual to heterosexual.

When I say its a choice, I don't mean its 'vanilla vs. chocolate' choice, I mean its a 'heroin addiction vs. being clean' choice. Being brought on by environmental factors (such as sexual abuse, parenting, or chemical imbalanced in the brain) and reinforced by brain chemistry means unless its caught early, it might be a difficult choice to change.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by roxrkool, posted 03-24-2014 10:12 PM roxrkool has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Taq, posted 03-25-2014 6:41 PM lokiare has replied
 Message 95 by Omnivorous, posted 03-25-2014 6:50 PM lokiare has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022