RE: Gay rights within the template of religion proves flaws in "religion"
October 14, 2014 at 12:39 pm
(October 14, 2014 at 3:05 am)One Above All Wrote:(October 14, 2014 at 1:46 am)Alex K Wrote: Erm What? Do you have an argument why this is justified? And what do you mean by a decision being made through an act?
CristW, if sexuality is a choice, when did you choose to (presumably) be heterosexual? Better yet, why don't you "choose" to be homosexual? Seriously; choose to be sexually attracted people of the same gender. Change what you like by sheer force of will. I dare you.
Fucking idiot.
Yes, I was referring to Kant's argument. No, if you were born with a biological mechanism to be a particular category, concerning sexual orientation, I doubt that genetics plays a role. This is why I say, you "decide" to be gay. Nevertheless, if you skip the previous argument and determine sexuality by an "act". The "act" would be the only way someone could determine if they are gay or not.
It really does not bother me if scientists find out if someone is born gay or not. I was by-passing the argument, even though, I mentioned it by mentioning last the final "act".
There are two arguments to the conclusion - (Gay).
One argument - genetics or social environment.
One argument - flaws in religion through social legislation.
I by-passed the first argument and concentrated on the second one.