Homosexuality and Natural Selection.

I have never heard such a load of crap in my life. Are there any gays on this forum? Does anyone know a gay personally? These so labelled people are remarkably human. This discussion is highly offensive in debating human beings as though they are some mutation. Have a look at yourselves!

The whole tone of the discussion is demeaning by implying there is something wrong or there is a defect. Bullshit! There is no more need of a scientific discussion on homosexuality than there is for people with red hair.
What determines who any of us are? Not our sexual desires or choice of partner that's for sure. Do any of us choose to be who we are? I didn't choose my gendre or orientation. I just am and so is everyone else. As a 'gay' woman maybe you have a need to be accepted, allowing this kind of scrutiny. If I was a person in a same sex relationship (which is all it amounts to)I would say, "UP YOURS"Edited by dameeva, : No reason given.

The whole tone of examining homosexuality as though it is NOT NORMAL is my point. You are normal. I am normal. We are human beings! There is no need for a scientific analysis of normal.
What is the reason for this line of enquiry?

I did spit the dummy a little and I apologise if I have offended anyone. I tend to get a bee in my bonnet when my children are concerned. A lioness protecting her cubs interests. Maybe this is why you assume I am an evolutionist?

I understand perfectly this dangerous view point of homosexuality being a sin, but trying to prove them wrong won't work. Look what happened when I just tried it on this forum? No one really heard my view point.

ha ha ha, no my friend, children are children. One of my own adult children just happens to be in a same sex relationship.That Theodore Roosevelt talks a load of shit, doesn't he?

I'm still reading the posts and I still don't get why this line of enquiry? I just don't get it. Is it just a topic of conversation?

I guess I know how your mum feels. Anything bordering on de-humanizing my child drives me insane. I'm not too keen on labelling of any kind and I do feel this forum discussion is trying to categorize a group of people.
I see homosexuality as another form of hetrosexuality. A relationship between two people. I don't need to be examined to discover why I choose one relationship and not another. I am drawn to some and not to others. It's simple and normal.
Why is deemed un-natural for same sex relationships? I just don't get it.

What is with the strong arm tactics? Does being sensitive exclude me from discussing a topic on which I have something to say? Or do I have to say what you wish to hear?Edited by dameeva, : No reason given.

yes I do feel the whole subject is demeaning but I am honest in my enquiry. I am in no way putting anyone down or intending to cause any disruption. I am utterly confused as to why this line of enquiry is taking place.
No way do I believe it is intented to be demeaning and I see no evidence of malice and haven't made any such accusations. Surely you have a valid reason for this discussion and it is not just idle chatter on something so serious? Edited by dameeva, : No reason given.

I think if you read my post 162 you would find I am being civil but human too. This discussion is about human beings and therefore is open to different view points of humanity. If my views offend you then you will know how I feel.
It isn't what is being said as much as the insensitivity that is de-humanising the subject. Emotion cannot be excluded when the subject is human. Even when the form of de-humanising comes without judgement or blame, it has the same effect.
The only motive that has been offered for this line of enquiry was to prove to dangerous fundamentalists that homosexuality is normal. If this is the case I would ask, why aren't the dangerous fundamentalists being scrutinized and examined to discover if they were born that way and have no choice? What is 'wrong' with them?
The gay population are not responsible for others behaviour and are not a threat of any kind. Those who see them as such need their heads examined. However, I will probably defend them also if de-humanisation is present.
I truly cannot get my head around this subject matter and my queries are not coming from emotion (well maybe a little frustration at not understanding). Can anyone tell me the nature of this discussion?Edited by dameeva, : No reason given.

I think being a religious person and a person in a homosexual relationship are two different things not to be compared. I don't see the points made in the discussion as in error, as most are assumptions and opinions anyway. It is the implications of such a discussion that I refer to. The actual content is neither here nor there but the impersonal implications have an effect of de-humanisation.
I have a strong inbuilt sense of it because I have experienced inequality through de-humanising concepts. I wasn't born here. I am English and have been around since the industrial revolution. I have experienced many great changes and now it's time for the mentality to catch up.
By all means entertain yourself but use your intellect to look also at the possible consequences of the thought energy you are putting out there. We have a responsibilty to clear our minds of separatists views. The scenerio over gay marriage bans is the extreme of non acceptance and I find it most upsetting, yes.
I felt the same with the anti-abortionist killings. Dreadful.
I see it this way, the guilty (gay bashers) point the finger at the innocent (gays) and the jury (this forum) goes along with the pointy fingers trying to prove the innocent innocent, and the judge (admin) throws out any evidence (me) to the contrary. It is back to front.

It is my experience that we are all, without exception, a product of our whole life experiences to this moment. We are an evolving species and there are no rules in which we evolve into the human roles we play.
I used to believe homosexuality was inbred because a cousin of mine was very effeminate and gay. This was a long time ago. His father dis-owned him as defective. Very sad. However, many male hetrosexuals are effeminate and also many female hetros are masculine. It really has nothing to do with it so I changed my mind. I have many more experiences to draw on in my life and there is nothing as yet to discredit the 1st statement I made. It really is a case of, 'there but for the grace of god go I'.

well I guess my statement and views from life experiences was meant to challenge yours. I'm sorry that some feel threatened by a challenge. That is certainly not my intention. I am simply offering a different view to that of the forum. I am not trying to be right. I am not trying to make anyone wrong either. I am different.
The ideas put forward could all possibly be correct. I am saying there is more than one way to skin a cat and if someone could articulate the objective of this discussion then maybe it would benefit us all.
Whilst dispassionate discourse is taking place, it may be causing harm without intention. The responsible adult would at least take this into consideration. It is only my intention to show the possible effects of the discussion from a different perspective.
I know a different view is very difficult to percieve, as it is not recieved objectively. This applies to all of us, but we can try.

Refpunk, is lust a sin?