"Gay weddings"

It would appear I'm a master of bigotted deception :)
 
I'm just waiting for Steve to come on this thread with his "Fag!" comment.
 
Absinthe said:
Then why has it been found that homosexuals have differently structured brains than heterosexuals?
Click to expand...

I'm not claiming to be an expert but I have studied biology throughout my undergraduate career and am continuing to do so now in Dental School. It's kinda stupid having to know about the whole body but apparantly our boards have a lot of the same stuff that is on the boards for med students.

That being said I just got done taking Neuroanatomy. There are several professors but the main one Dr. O'Donahugh (I think that's how his name is spelled I can't remember) is considered an expert in this field. He has lots of published works and has mapped out certain things of the brain that I can't fully comprehend. He has done years of research in this field. He stresses that contrary to popular belief that there is no clear support for a biological link for homosexuality. He said there have been studies that give support for both sides of the argument, but that it remains ambiguous as to what the answer is.

Now let me apologize in advance for my grammer and spelling. I often make simple errors as it is not one of my strong points. It was not stressed very much in my area of study. Had I gotten a masters and written a thesis it would have greatly hindered me.
 
SIGbastard said:
He stresses that contrary to popular belief that there is no clear support for a biological link for homosexuality.
Click to expand...
Then why is it observable in some animals?
 
el Chi said:
Then why is it observable in some animals?
Click to expand...
A truck loaded with gay-fuel had an accident and polluted waterways and eco-systems causing gay behavoir in animals......
 
el Chi said:
<Sighs>
Whilst it is true that a lot of paedophiles are notorious for assaulting young boys, that does not equate paedophiles with homosexuals. There have been a lot of convicted paedophiles who have wives and would otherwise consider themselves heterosexual.
I concede that some married men do, eventually come out as gay, but this really is not the same thing.

The disproportionate level of paedophilia in the Catholic Church is almost certainly a biproduct of sexual restriction and repression. Consider that in the Church of England (for other sections of Christianity, let alone other religions I couldn't say) the level of convictions of paedophilia is far lower. C of E priests/vicars/whatever are allowed to marry, and many of them do have wives and do not interfere - as the gross understatement of a euphemism runs - with young boys.

From this are we to infer that Catholicism is the closet homosexuals' religion of choice? Or are we to infer that perhaps there isn't as much of a link between paedophilia and homosexuality after all?

And what do we say to the paedophiles who assault small girls? Are we to look on them as the strange exceptions to the rule?

Let's face it, paedophilia is a sexual preference unto itself - it is neither truly homosexual nor heterosexual. It involves the same level of power issues that rape does whilst encompassing a sexual motivation outside of normal heterosexual or homosexual relations.
Click to expand...


I only mentioned it because the topic came up. I know there was a study that supports what I said. Sorry I don't have the source at hand.

Even if it is true it could be a product of how homosexuals are treated and viewed in todays society.

It's the same as saying African Americans are more prone to violence than white Americans. The numbers back the claim up and it upsets ALOT of people if you bring this fact up. It is a very unfortunate fact. It has to do with History and not so much gene's IMHO. Please don't call me a racist now I was just trying to think of a good example that stirs up the same feelings that the current topic does.
 
el Chi said:
Then why is it observable in some animals?
Click to expand...

Most animals just have an instinctual urge to spread their seed. I studded my boxer out recently. My beagle would not stop humping him after this. He humped him while he was on the couch trying to sleep for like 45min. I guess he had the residual smell. I had another dog that loved stuffed animals. I don't think animals have a preference just a desire. I just don't think they have the same social complexity to care.
 
short recoil said:
It's about control rather than lack of natural sexual attraction.

With my working out i have hormone levels of a male elephant, sometimes i find myself almost unstoppably attracted to women but i like to exercise full logical control over most things i do, otherwise i'm closer to being an animal.

And btw sigbastard, you didn't choose to be straight, it's hormones mate.
Click to expand...

Homosexuals have the same hormones in the same proportions mate.
 
One last thing for now. When I said that my professor said "contrary to popular belief" I was not referring to the scientific community. I was referring to your average person that hear's a tidbit of something and then thinks it is fact. Yes there have been studies that very MILDLY support the biological link theory, but there are to many problems with those studies. There is just as much if not more support currently for the opposite opinion. Ask any Biology, Anatomy, Zoology, etc PROFESSOR (not your high school teacher) and they will tell you the same thing. It doesn't mean there isn't a biological link there just isn't enough support yet.

Furthermore even if there is it doesn't make it undoubtedly morally acceptable because of the link. There are supposed links in career criminals but it doesn't make the behavior any more or less acceptable.
 
SIGbastard said:
Homosexuals have the same hormones in the same proportions mate.
Click to expand...
I wasn't talking about the difference between homo and heterosexuals.

I was talking about your "choice" to be straight.
you didn't choose to be attracted to women, you find your body instinctively attracted due to hormones.

I can choose not to have sex but i can't choose not to be attracted to women, in essense i am straight but i don't act on my instincts.
 
Holy shit, quadruple post.

Also, Short Recoil is quite right. If sexuality were a choice that everyone makes, then everyone would be able to choose "off".
 
Mechagodzilla said:
Holy shit, quadruple post.

Also, Short Recoil is quite right. If sexuality were a choice that everyone makes, then everyone would be able to choose "off".
Click to expand...

It was a quadruple post because I kept going further back reading posts and wanted to respond.

My mother in law had a 4 year period that she only dated women. She no longer has any interest in dating other women and has only dated men. I was not around when she had her temporary decision change but I can tell you now that it was fully her choice.
 
SIGbastard said:
Most animals just have an instinctual urge to spread their seed.
Click to expand...
As do most humans. But there are proven, observable instances of homosexuality in other species besides our own.
The theory has been put forward that this is advantageous in an evolutionary capacity. A homosexual member of an over-crowded pack/group/whatever can aid hunting, caring for other members, etc. without contributing to an over-crowded population.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/animalrights/story/0,,1414805,00.html

SIGbastard said:
I only mentioned it because the topic came up. I know there was a study that supports what I said. Sorry I don't have the source at hand.

Even if it is true it could be a product of how homosexuals are treated and viewed in todays society.

It's the same as saying African Americans are more prone to violence than white Americans. The numbers back the claim up and it upsets ALOT of people if you bring this fact up. It is a very unfortunate fact. It has to do with History and not so much gene's IMHO.
Click to expand...
No, I know that's not a racist statement - it is down to history, as you say, and socio-economic factors (a lot of black people are working class, crime is most prevalent in working class - if you haven't got enough to get by on, you're going to be more likely to try and take it).
But that's a WHOLE other topic, and I don't quite see what it's got to do with paedophiles?

Oh, and if paedophilia WAS something to do with homosexuality, why do we hear of no (as far as I am aware) female paedophiles?
Lesbians do exist outside the films I download from time to time. Or so I'm told.
 
SIGbastard said:
My mother in law had a 4 year period that she only dated women. She no longer has any interest in dating other women and has only dated men. I was not around when she had her temporary decision change but I can tell you now that it was fully her choice.
Click to expand...

She chose to try giving up heterosexuality and didn't succeed. That kind of re-enforces my point, doesn't it?

If she could choose her sexuality, there would be no loss of interest.
 
Global warming is caused by pirates. If you plot the number of pirates against global temperatures, you'd notice that as the number of pirates decreased, temperatures went up.

-Angry Lawyer
 
Mechagodzilla said:
She chose to try giving up heterosexuality and didn't succeed. That kind of re-enforces my point, doesn't it?

If she could choose her sexuality, there would be no loss of interest.
Click to expand...

She was quite happy with her choice at the time from what my wife tells me. I wouldn't call it a failed attempt at giving up heterosexuality. I guess you can twist it whatever way you want though.

As far as the pedophile thing. Men are far more likely to be pedophiles than women regardless if they are gay or straight. I guess I should clarify as to say male homosexuals have been shown to be pedophiles in proportionally higher numbers than heterosexual males. The example I mentioned earlier has everything to do with this. If you agree that it was socio-economic factors in that example of African Americans it is easy to see it could be some other social factor for gays. I mean they are shunned to a large degree by their own families as well as by others.
 
short recoil said:
A truck loaded with gay-fuel had an accident and polluted waterways and eco-systems causing gay behavoir in animals......
Click to expand...
God damn satanists are trying to turn the whole world gay! HOW WILL WE REPRODUCE NOW?!?!
 
SIGbastard said:
She was quite happy with her choice at the time from what my wife tells me. I wouldn't call it a failed attempt at giving up heterosexuality. I guess you can twist it whatever way you want though.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to twist anything here. Certainly no more than you are using a select case as indicative of a whole.
My point is quite simple.

Out of (my estimate) 50 years of life, your mother in law tried being a lesbian for just four and then never again.
Obviously, there is a bias towards one sexual preference there.
Obviously, the "choice" to be homosexual did not work, as she did not remain homosexual.
And, Just as obviously, this isn't a case that can be applied to everyone. Just think about this rationally.
If stepmom did it, how come you can't?

But you're not even arguing that sexuality "choice" is a binary switch to be flicked at will, but rather that it is a conscious and usually permanent decision made at puberty.

So in all honesty, your stepmom's adventures in bi-curiousness in no way re-enforce your point and, in fact, detract from it.

When your point is that sexuality is entirely mandated by societal forces, you need much better argumentation than literally anecdotal evidence about your stepmom and the family pet.

And even if sexuality were a choice, what does that have to do with marriage rights? We have people choosing their religions all the time, yet we don't prevent their marriages.

As far as the pedophile thing. Men are far more likely to be pedophiles than women regardless if they are gay or straight. I guess I should clarify as to say male homosexuals have been shown to be pedophiles in proportionally higher numbers than heterosexual males. The example I mentioned earlier has everything to do with this. If you agree that it was socio-economic factors in that example of African Americans it is easy to see it could be some other social factor for gays. I mean they are shunned to a large degree by their own families as well as by others.
Click to expand...

So your point is what, exactly?
That your statistics justify homophobia, or that people who are shunned deserve less rights?

Statistics are a very simple way to fake a scientific point. They need solid interpretation backing them up, or else it's just facile. Here, I am not seeing any solid interpretation.
 
Mechagodzilla said:
I'm not trying to twist anything here. Certainly no more than you are using a select case as indicative of a whole.
My point is quite simple.

Out of (my estimate) 50 years of life, your mother in law tried being a lesbian for just four and then never again.
Obviously, there is a bias towards one sexual preference there.
Obviously, the "choice" to be homosexual did not work, as she did not remain homosexual.
And, Just as obviously, this isn't a case that can be applied to everyone. Just think about this rationally.
If stepmom did it, how come you can't?

But you're not even arguing that sexuality "choice" is a binary switch to be flicked at will, but rather that it is a conscious and usually permanent decision made at puberty.

So in all honesty, your stepmom's adventures in bi-curiousness in no way re-enforce your point and, in fact, detract from it.

When your point is that sexuality is entirely mandated by societal forces, you need much better argumentation than literally anecdotal evidence about your stepmom and the family pet.

And even if sexuality were a choice, what does that have to do with marriage rights? We have people choosing their religions all the time, yet we don't prevent their marriages.



So your point is what, exactly?
That your statistics justify homophobia, or that people who are shunned deserve less rights?

Statistics are a very simple way to fake a scientific point. They need solid interpretation backing them up, or else it's just facile. Here, I am not seeing any solid interpretation.
Click to expand...


I'm not trying to prove a point or promote homophobia. I just mentioned it because the pedophile thing came up. The only reason I keep talking about it is you keep trying to rationalize around it.

As far as my mother in law. She chose to try something different as she found herself attracted to the same sex at the time. She had at least one relationship that lasted a couple of years. She didn't go back to men because of failure. She isn't a desperate woman she just changes her mind about what she wants alot.

I am sorry if it offends everyone but I firmly believe it is a choice. I am respect homosexuals in daily life so I don't see what the problem is. If you think I am a moron because I have a different opinion so be it.
 
SIGbastard said:
I'm not trying to prove a point or promote homophobia. I just mentioned it because the pedophile thing came up. The only reason I keep talking about it is you keep trying to rationalize around it.

As far as my mother in law. She chose to try something different as she found herself attracted to the same sex at the time. She had at least one relationship that lasted a couple of years. She didn't go back to men because of failure. She isn't a desperate woman she just changes her mind about what she wants alot.
Click to expand...

And to think you're accusing others of rationalizing around things.
 
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/bioresearch.html

This is a fairly good read. I reccomend it and several others if you think there is a proven genetic link. I am ceretainly not saying there is no link but that we do not have any solid evidence to point to either side at the moment.

It is ridiculous to think that there is a single gene that makes a person gay or straight. Anyone who has taken genetics would know that it is much more complicated than that. Sure there are some traits that are majorly impacted by specific genes. Behaviors are to complex to follow this model though. A gene simply encodes various RNA's from mRNA (protein transcripts), tRNA, rRNA, snRNA and so on. A single protein is not going to make you gay.

Also the cerebal cortex will reorganize from a variety of factors as. If you cut off your hand your pinky more your cortex will compensate by expanding the area used for the rest of your fingeres. Similarly if you go blind your cortex will reorganize. The visual association areas in your occipital cortex can be shown to be active from completely different stimuli than in a normal person. It will also have large differences between people for a variety of reasons ranging from side dominance to a variety of other factors. I don't remember all the details otherwide I'd be more specific. It's very interesting stuff. God I hated that class. It was interesting at times but there was so much information in such little time that I harldy retained any of it.
 
Great, so you have no point. Thanks for spending so much time sharing that insight with us.

It's a nice mom story and all, but it's pseudoscientific in this context, and it isn't even very relevant to your own argument. As Lawyer pointed out, you are using a broad effect as proof of cause. That same effect is reported based on anecdotal third-hand information. Whee.

Then, for some reason, you are taking offense when I say that she failed to become homosexual. Even though this is clearly the case, based on the fact that SHE IS STRAIGHT RIGHT NOW.

You're entitled to your beliefs, but spending this unrelated thread trying to quasi-rationalize them to yourself is just pointlessly derailing the thread topic. Whatever that was.

And great, now you've got a link (that has nothing to do with gay MARRIAGE) that outright proves that your argument has no point. "It could go either way! Scientists say I may be right or wrong!"
 
SIGbastard said:
I fixed that for you.
Click to expand...

Spare me. You accuse others of dancing around a supposed unpleasant truth when you yourself are doing the same.

"My mom completely chose it, dude! She totally felt like it, even though it was only temporary, and she later stopped... and she hasn't done it since... because she didn't like it as much... which may or may not have gone against her nature... but it was totally her choice!"

If she didn't maintain her homosexuality, then she very much did, as Mecha has pointed out, fail at her transition.
 
Question. SIGbastard, are you supporting gay weddings or not?
 
Absinthe said:
Spare me. You accuse others of dancing around a supposed unpleasant truth when you yourself are doing the same.

"My mom completely chose it, dude! She totally felt like it, even though it was only temporary, and she later stopped... and she hasn't done it since... because she didn't like it as much... which may or may not have gone against her nature... but it was totally her choice!"

If she didn't maintain her homosexuality, then she very much did, as Mecha has pointed out, fail at her transition.
Click to expand...

I don't care what Mecha pointed out. If it is a choice like some believe you can change your mind.:thumbs:
 
Mechagodzilla said:
Great, so you have no point. Thanks for spending so much time sharing that insight with us.

It's a nice mom story and all, but it's pseudoscientific in this context, and it isn't even very relevant to your own argument. As Lawyer pointed out, you are using a broad effect as proof of cause. That same effect is reported based on anecdotal third-hand information. Whee.

Then, for some reason, you are taking offense when I say that she failed to become homosexual. Even though this is clearly the case, based on the fact that SHE IS STRAIGHT RIGHT NOW.

You're entitled to your beliefs, but spending this unrelated thread trying to quasi-rationalize them to yourself is just pointlessly derailing the thread topic. Whatever that was.

And great, now you've got a link (that has nothing to do with gay MARRIAGE) that outright proves that your argument has no point. "It could go either way! Scientists say I may be right or wrong!"
Click to expand...

Man I pointed it out with every single post about the pedophile thing that I only mentioned it because it was brought up.
 
SIGbastard said:
I have no problem with homosexuals but I think giving civil unions equal status would do a great deal to appease both sides rather than changing our countries definition of marriage to satisfy a small minority.
Click to expand...

Jintor I already posted this. Here it is again. This is what I support.
 
It's not changing the definition, it's broadening the prospects for others to become involved. Giving the vote to women didn't change the definition of voting, it just made things more fair.
 
I think what he is trying to say is:

"Ok, you can be gay, just stay away from my anus."

That's how I see it anyway :p
 
SIGbastard said:
Jintor I already posted this. Here it is again. This is what I support.
Click to expand...


seperate but equal is still discrimination
 
Beerdude26 said:
I think what he is trying to say is:

"Ok, you can be gay, just stay away from my anus."

That's how I see it anyway :p
Click to expand...
Sounds to me like hes a bi in denial.
 
CptStern said:
seperate but equal is still discrimination
Click to expand...

Like I said before if you think homosexuality is a life choice it isn't as clear cut as that. Besides there lots of things that could be considered discrimination. NAMBLA members believe they are victims of discrimination. It's hard to not discriminate against some group of people when making rules. To try and achieve this would basically make our society largely lawless.

Oh and I am not Bi. One thing I learned growing up was that wimmins have vaginas and they are fascinating!!

I'm done in here it's getting boring.
 
SIGbastard said:
I don't care what Mecha pointed out. If it is a choice like some believe you can change your mind.:thumbs:
Click to expand...

Which is a completely fallacious statement that flies in the face of reality. Congratulations, you're a winner.

SIGbastard said:
Like I said before if you think homosexuality is a life choice it isn't as clear cut as that.
Click to expand...

The first logical step would then be to evaluate wether or not such a belief is at all founded in reality. You have seemingly skipped this.
 
Absinthe said:
Which is a completely fallacious statement that flies in the face of reality. Congratulations, you're a winner.



The first logical step would then be to evaluate wether or not such a belief is at all founded in reality. You have seemingly skipped this.
Click to expand...

What because absinthe says so? Maybe you have been drinking to much of your precious juice.

Ok done for real this time.
 
SIGbastard said:
Like I said before if you think homosexuality is a life choice it isn't as clear cut as that. Besides there lots of things that could be considered discrimination. NAMBLA members believe they are victims of discrimination. It's hard to not discriminate against some group of people when making rules. To try and achieve this would basically make our society largely lawless.

I'm done in here it's getting boring.
Click to expand...

dance around the issue if you must but there is one fact you cannot circumvent:

seperate but equal is still discrimination


it's no different than segregation

this is no different than this


oh and if you're so sure it's a choice you should have no problem finding documented cases of gays saying they freely chose homosexuality ...or conversely you should be able to find ample examples of people who were gay but chose to revert back to straight ..if it's a choice then it must be the case for the majority of gay people worldwide ..that's gotta be in the millions ...surely you can find testimonials of people who willfully chose their lifestyle ..a second hand account of your mother-in-laws experience isnt exactly a good measuring stick
 
CptStern said:
dance around the issue if you must but there is one fact you cannot circumvent:

seperate but equal is still discrimination


it's no different than segregation

this is no different than this


oh and if you're so sure it's a choice you should have no problem finding documented cases of gays saying they freely chose homosexuality ...or conversely you should be able to find ample examples of people who were gay but chose to revert back to straight ..if it's a choice then it must be the case for the majority of gay people worldwide ..that's gotta be in the millions ...surely you can find testimonials of people who willfully chose their lifestyle ..a second hand account of your mother-in-laws experience isnt exactly a good measuring stick
Click to expand...

It was an example and was never meant as undeniable proof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lizardizzle
2019: The year of Half-Life SFX videos
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ennui
Ennui
bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Community Interviews: Final Exchange development team
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Back
Top