Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 24, 2024, 9:18 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
#41
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
Why is this even a debate. Sexuality is a range, not a script, people who fear the sexuality of others need to grow the fuck up and get over themselves.
Reply
#42
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
(February 28, 2013 at 11:58 am)Brian37 Wrote: Why is this even a debate. Sexuality is a range, not a script, people who fear the sexuality of others need to grow the fuck up and get over themselves.

Because not everyone shares your beliefs identically fuck nut.

And that a debate is often used to reach a consensus by facts, evidence, rhetoric and fair amount of criticism and cross examination.
Slave to the Patriarchy no more
Reply
#43
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
(February 28, 2013 at 2:18 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote:
(February 28, 2013 at 11:58 am)Brian37 Wrote: Why is this even a debate. Sexuality is a range, not a script, people who fear the sexuality of others need to grow the fuck up and get over themselves.

Because not everyone shares your beliefs identically fuck nut.

And that a debate is often used to reach a consensus by facts, evidence, rhetoric and fair amount of criticism and cross examination.

Aww, now we don't have to be mean about it. Smile

The fact of the matter is that homosexuality and most orientations have been scientifically prove to be natural and reasonably innocuous aspects of the human condition. There's no legitimate secular argument against it.

When coming from the religious quarter, there's only "because god says it's bad", which if you think about it, isn't actually a reason, it's just an arbitrary prohibition. There's no "and god says so, because this could happen, and it affects people this way, &c.".
It's really just an emotional appeal, and not grounded in facts or real consequences.
If you believe it, question it. If you question it, get an answer. If you have an answer, does that answer satisfy reality? Does it satisfy you? Probably not. For no one else will agree with you, not really.
Reply
#44
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
"The fact of the matter is that homosexuality and most orientations have been scientifically prove to be natural and reasonably innocuous aspects of the human condition."

So, you found the gay gene have ya?

Look folks, if you're not gay, you shouldn't be answering this question, PERIOD!
Reply
#45
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
(March 1, 2013 at 1:01 am)catfish Wrote: So, you found the gay gene have ya?

Look folks, if you're not gay, you shouldn't be answering this question, PERIOD!

That's an over simplification of the truth, but in effect, the modern scientific consensus is that several factors including genetics, development of the brain, and environmental factors during early development determine the sexual orientation of the individual. These things occur naturally, so in short, yes it's natural. Almost all respectable medical research institutions hold this view.

I'm bisexual, am I supposed to be answering this question?
If you believe it, question it. If you question it, get an answer. If you have an answer, does that answer satisfy reality? Does it satisfy you? Probably not. For no one else will agree with you, not really.
Reply
#46
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
No such thing as Bi*
If you are a guy and you suck dick, you're gay... lol
.
Reply
#47
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
(March 1, 2013 at 1:36 am)catfish Wrote: No such thing as Bi*
If you are a guy and you suck dick, you're gay... lol
.

So, you're applying the One Drop Rule to sexual orientation?
Reply
#48
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
(March 1, 2013 at 1:01 am)catfish Wrote: Look folks, if you're not gay, you shouldn't be answering this question, PERIOD!

Really? We shouldn't be speaking up in defence of people whom we feel are being targeted by small minded, bigoted bullies?

Tell us more.....

Badger
[Image: mybannerglitter06eee094.gif]
If you're not supposed to ride faster than your guardian angel can fly then mine had better get a bloody SR-71.
Reply
#49
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
(February 28, 2013 at 10:12 am)Question Mark Wrote: The salient difference between homosexuality and cannibalism in terms of the relationship between animals and humans, is that the concept of homosexuality on its own is entirely innocuous, whereas cannibalism as a way of life is intrinsically invasive on the lives of other people.
IE. those people getting eaten.
So? We could avoid those problems by eating our criminals, or our children when they die or our parents when they die? In many animals that is normal behaviour. In even more animals it is normal behaviour to fight for a mate, sometime even to the death, and in many cases even when the one you're fighting is already the mate's present mate! Should we do that too?

(February 28, 2013 at 2:18 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote:
(February 28, 2013 at 11:58 am)Brian37 Wrote: Why is this even a debate. Sexuality is a range, not a script, people who fear the sexuality of others need to grow the fuck up and get over themselves.
Because not everyone shares your beliefs identically fuck nut.

And that a debate is often used to reach a consensus by facts, evidence, rhetoric and fair amount of criticism and cross examination.
EXACTLY.

Sexuality is a range, yes, but there are acceptable ways of expressing it and unacceptable ways, helpful ways, unhelpful ways, dare I say, moral and immoral ways, there are beneficial ways and there are harmful ways. Just like violence. Violence can be expressed in a healthy way or an unhealthy way. For instance, going to the gym and laying into a boxing bag for half an hour - or - going home and beating your wife, can you tell which one is the better way to express violence Brian37?

(February 28, 2013 at 2:34 pm)Question Mark Wrote: There's no legitimate secular argument against it.
Um, yes there is.

Adoption. Children need both a mother and father, this has been proven again and again. Children can be raised without a mother or without a father, but the best possible environment is with both a male father and a female mother. Just like you can cut off their right arm from birth and they'll still live and develop "normally", a child is supposed to have both their arms.

Speaking as someone who grew up without a father from the age of 10 I can personally attest to the truth of this.

Allowing children to be adopted by single people or by homosexual couples denies them the best possible start in life, and intentionally denies them either a mother or a father. Adoption is, after all, concerned with the best interests of the child first and foremost and not the "rights" or "interests" of adults.

There's your secular argument. Go nuts.

When coming from the religious quarter, there's only "because god says it's bad", which if you think about it, isn't actually a reason, it's just an arbitrary prohibition. There's no "and god says so, because this could happen, and it affects people this way, &c.".
It's really just an emotional appeal, and not grounded in facts or real consequences.
[/quote]
For Religion & Health see:[/b][/size] Williams & Sternthal. (2007). Spirituality, religion and health: Evidence and research directions. Med. J. Aust., 186(10), S47-S50. -LINK

The WIN/Gallup End of Year Survey 2013 found the US was perceived to be the greatest threat to world peace by a huge margin, with 24% of respondents fearful of the US followed by: 8% for Pakistan, and 6% for China. This was followed by 5% each for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea. -LINK


"That's disgusting. There were clean athletes out there that have had their whole careers ruined by people like Lance Armstrong who just bended thoughts to fit their circumstances. He didn't look up cheating because he wanted to stop, he wanted to justify what he was doing and to keep that continuing on." - Nicole Cooke
Reply
#50
RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
(March 1, 2013 at 4:05 am)Aractus Wrote: Adoption. Children need both a mother and father, this has been proven again and again. Children can be raised without a mother or without a father, but the best possible environment is with both a male father and a female mother. Just like you can cut off their right arm from birth and they'll still live and develop "normally", a child is supposed to have both their arms.

You have very deceitfully cited single parenthood as an argument against homosexual parents.

Quote:Allowing children to be adopted by single people or by homosexual couples denies them the best possible start in life, and intentionally denies them either a mother or a father. Adoption is, after all, concerned with the best interests of the child first and foremost and not the "rights" or "interests" of adults.

There are no independent studies which show, conclusively, a significant benefit to children who have a mother and a father compared to those who have same-sex parents. Because, of course, that's total bullshit. Children need loving parents, and two loving, devoted homosexual parents are undeniably better for any child than heterosexual parents who are neglectful and/or abusive, as many are.

Children of caring homosexual parents are undoubtedly more suited to the task than a great many devoutly religious heterosexual parents.
When I see young people denying evolution, expressing homophobia, or being forced to attend many kinds of sinister religious services (especially Catholic and evangelical Christian), I see child abuse, because these are kids who are being intentionally denied their best interests and must succeed at life in spite of this.

As I said in my first response to you, there is not a single secular argument against homosexuals marrying and adopting which does not apply (and much more strongly, arguably) to religious heterosexuals.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Happy Birthday to all the members who were "born" today! Jehanne 7 1113 January 4, 2023 at 1:08 pm
Last Post: HappySkeptic
  What Were You Dreaming About Last Night? Disagreeable 17 2256 February 2, 2022 at 11:51 am
Last Post: no one
  Who were your heros? Brian37 10 1026 July 28, 2020 at 12:17 am
Last Post: Silver
  How were past times so violent? Macoleco 17 1685 April 19, 2020 at 11:45 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Any of you attend a Christian University/high school. What were your thoughts? Atomic Lava 19 3142 November 20, 2019 at 3:32 pm
Last Post: Atomic Lava
  What candy came out the year you were born? Silver 23 2599 October 21, 2018 at 11:25 pm
Last Post: Fireball
  A thought on Homosexuality Amarok 44 4036 September 19, 2018 at 1:47 am
Last Post: robvalue
  If you were to perform in drag.... Silver 39 6643 May 29, 2018 at 5:24 am
Last Post: Whitewolf
  What would you do if you woke up one day to find you were the last person alive? Edwardo Piet 64 18989 October 16, 2017 at 7:25 pm
Last Post: c172
  I think Homosexuality leads to AIDS and obesity Renug 13 3956 May 29, 2017 at 12:55 pm
Last Post: Alex K



Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)