to axeman, I don't hate the people, I hate the behavior. I see a difference between the two. As evidence, I offer the fact that I once shared a house with a gay guy for four months. In any case, you can't expect everyone to simply love everyone now, can you. It's the real world we live in. As long I'm not physically harming them I don't see any harm in discussing the acceptibility of homosexuality. ps -- I hope you don't take the failure of "the psychologists" to alter gay tendencies as the ultimate in proof that nothing can EVER be done.
1st .. these are not "givens" you are assuming that gay parents will all behave the same as you have pointed above which is just not true...Every parent would be different just as is the case with heterosexuals...will they get picked on at school?? perhaps, but that is not what a "healthy family enviroment" is about. 2nd.... you say they will teach their kids being gay is "A-OK"..who are you or anyone to say it is not OK...Would you dis-own your son because he comes flying out of the closet or would you accept him as your blood???? please answer 3rd.. you are assuming their kids would be "taught to experiment with sexuality, probably from a very early age"....Did your parents teach you at an early age?? why would gay parents do this differently.... peace
Alfonso, there's no point in my going back over all your posts and rebutting your assertions one by one. And there's no point in reiterating what's already been said since you have yet to offer anything but attitude, opinion, and belief. It's perfectly okay with me that you believe what you do. Many people agree with you. But that doesn't make what you believe fact. I'm still interested in seeing that data you have. Otherwise, perhaps everything will work out just the way you want it to.
DB - this is turning into a silly thread devoid of facts so I am not going to get "sucked" into it. I guess you are right there is no agenda to the gay marriage issue and marriage has alway been just a way to describe two committed people. Sorry for being so confused about he status quo.
The problem is, you are assuming this is 100% choice and nothing more than behavior. You have no evidence that shows this is 100% choice. I have at least provided some evidence that it is not choice based. Others have pointed out the "gay-ness" occurs in nature as well. The evidence is currently weighing against your position. I don't believe you when you say you "hate the behavior". This doesnt make sense. Typically if someone behaves in a way which you "hate", then you hate the person. You dont run around saying, I dont hate child molesters, I only hate their "behavior". You hate child molesters BECAUSE of their behavior. Your use of the term FAGGOT also shows us pretty clearly that you hate "them", and not just their "behavior". Did your roommate appreciate the use of that word, or were you "in the closet" with your hate of his "behavior"? Let's approach this another way. Lets ASSUME that this is 100% choice. It still is not a crime. A crime requires a victim. Why do you even CARE if two CONSENTING adults of the same sex what to be sexually active with one another? Who are they hurting? Makes you uncomfortable? So what..... stop being a baby. This kind of intolerance is the same old shit that has caused me grief from religious freaks because of my atheism. Leave em alone. Get over it. You have no right to impose any kinds of rules on other FREE people who are 100% consensual. Maybe your heterosexual sex makes the homosexuals sick to their stomach. Maybe they should push for laws against heterosexual marriages because it makes them uncomfortable? Your position is not defendable. peace axeman
I agree that it's devoid of facts. But all I was asking was how gays are attacking the concept of marriage? I'm not aware of any agenda other than the right to marry.
Cubes, 1st .. these are not "givens" you are assuming that gay parents will all behave the same as you have pointed above which is just not true...Every parent would be different just as is the case with heterosexuals...will they get picked on at school?? perhaps, but that is not what a "healthy family enviroment" is about. What's not a given? That they'll be taught that being gay is A-Ok? That they'll be taught being gay and raising a family as a gay couple is a viable lifestyle choice? That they'll be taught to experiment with sexuality? Why wouldn't we take these as givens? Do you think their opposite is more likely to be true? Please. 2nd.... you say they will teach their kids being gay is "A-OK"..who are you or anyone to say it is not OK...Would you dis-own your son because he comes flying out of the closet or would you accept him as your blood???? please answer Well, what I meant by A-Ok, is that any urge you might feel towards "experimenting" with the same sex is taught to be A-Ok. Well, given everything we know, or can reasonably assume, about human behavior, do you think this is a green light to fully develop any gay tendencies that might be there? Basically, it's as open an invitation to a gay lifestyle as you can get. And yes, I'm saying that I disagree with that. Geez, call me old fashioned, but I'd like to think that when I become a parent and have children of my own that I'd still be allowed some say in their sexual development timetable. Now, judging the vigor with which gays currently promote their cause -- turned on a tv anytime lately? -- it seems pretty sure to me that gay parents would be exposing their kids to ideas about sexuality from a far younger age than most other families. Well, it's really only a hop skip and a jump from there to having responsibility for sexual development snatched from parental control and handed over to some "experts" who, probably with great delight, can then pound my kid's head with the same pro gay views that I'm currently contesting. 3rd.. you are assuming their kids would be "taught to experiment with sexuality, probably from a very early age"....Did your parents teach you at an early age?? why would gay parents do this differently.... Well, it's not the "from a very young age" that I took as a given. Notice I used the word "probably" there, and I do consider it probable, but that's more of an open question. I don't have any doubt that they'd be taught -- at some stage -- that experimenting with sexuality, especially in terms of exploring any feelings related to the same sex. As I said, promotion of gay lifestyle pure and simple. As I've said, and I'll repeat again, there are clearly cases of homosexual tendencies that develop later in life, often after periods of heterosexuality. And vice versa. So, EVEN THOUGH homosexuality MIGHT -- and, as I've said, I'm still waiting for scientific data that proves it IS -- be a birth condition, there can be no doubt that in some cases it *is* suppressable and that it can surface under certain conditions. (Something db obviously seems content to ignore -- or at least pretend he is still "waiting for data" on). Therefore, I say wait, let's wait, before we get all excited about gay marriages and consider the impact they'd have on our society. Let's remember, significant numbers of people, I'd estimate a great majority, are at least mildly turned off by gay behavior -- I mean, afterall, gays themselves are only a tiny portion of the overall population -- and I would imagine that, if pressed, most people, no matter how "tolerant" they claim to be, would admit to being turned off and repulsed by the idea of engaging in gay sex. Well, for all the "naturalists" out there -- how much more "natura" does it get than guys being turned off and repulsed by the thought of engaging in homosexual sex? Hmm? What about you Cubano? Would you let a guy rub his cock on you? I doubt it. Well, that, folks, is a perfectly damn natural reaction! So I repeat, before we want to, inadvertantly, -- because I'm sure that most people whose only exposure to the issue is the gay propaganda raging over the air waves aren't aware of the opposing arguments -- help promote gay lifestyles, and increase the number of gays in society, let's take a minute to remember that most of us AREN'T gay, and would prefer if it people were heterosexual. I mean, essentially, it doesn't get much simpler than that.
As to data, I'm only interested in the data you say you have that supports your assertions. Beyond that, I really couldn't care less about any of this. What difference does it make after all whether gays marry or not? Doesn't do me any damage. So why not?
The problem is, you are assuming this is 100% choice and nothing more than behavior. You have no evidence that shows this is 100% choice. I have at least provided some evidence that it is not choice based. Others have pointed out the "gay-ness" occurs in nature as well. Care to show me exactly where I claimed 100% choice? I claim development, and I don't rule out "day one" determinism, in *some* cases. The evidence is currently weighing against your position. Ahh, yes. The famous "evidence". Care to provide me with it? Not evidence against 100% choice, mind you, evidence against DEVELOPMENT. I don't believe you when you say you "hate the behavior". This doesnt make sense. Typically if someone behaves in a way which you "hate", then you hate the person. Whoa, axe doesn't believe me. My my, whatever shall I do? Okay, I can accept that the best explanation is that you're simply ignorant about this stuff. It certainly DOES make sense. I, and mainstream, cutting psychology -- nor much of classical philosophy, for that matter -- don't consider a person's behavior to be the ultimate definition of who that person is. My hating hockey does not imply that I hate hockey players. Pretty simple really. Maybe life to you is so cruelly simple. I wish you luck with it. You'll need it. Your use of the term FAGGOT also shows us pretty clearly that you hate "them", and not just their "behavior". Did your roommate appreciate the use of that word, or were you "in the closet" with your hate of his "behavior"? I use it to let off steam. Sorry, I'm human. Plus I know it riles up the gays, so I have a bit of fun with it. Naturally we don't always let our feelings towards certain things poison our relationships with people, so there's no need to think I was in any way offensive to my housemate. Let's approach this another way. Lets ASSUME that this is 100% choice. It still is not a crime. A crime requires a victim. Why do you even CARE if two CONSENTING adults of the same sex what to be sexually active with one another? Who are they hurting? Where have I ever stated that gays should be prevented from having sex? I am repulsed by male gay sex. Unless you're gay, I'd bet you are too. Disagree? Have you had gay sex before? Would you let a gay guy fuck you? Makes you uncomfortable? So what..... stop being a baby. This kind of intolerance is the same old shit that has caused me grief from religious freaks because of my atheism. It's only intolerance if I don't tolerate it. Yet I've repeatedly stated that I do. Leave em alone. Get over it. You have no right to impose any kinds of rules on other FREE people who are 100% consensual. Maybe your heterosexual sex makes the homosexuals sick to their stomach. Maybe they should push for laws against heterosexual marriages because it makes them uncomfortable? I'm starting to think you have no idea of what this thread is about. How much of it have you actually read? Although you bring up a point: hetero sex repulses gays far less than gay sex repulses heteros. Your position is not defendable. Lol. It is, you just don't have any idea of what my position actually is. It's certainly not the straw man you've erected.