|
Post by demonofthewest on Nov 11, 2006 22:44:14 GMT -5
No offense, oln metga, but just because your mother happened to be a lesbian who despises the opposite sex, doesn't mean all gay people originate from that(I'm referring to your post from page 6). Maybe you didn't actually mean that, but it seems like a pretty harsh generalization to me.
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Nov 11, 2006 22:52:05 GMT -5
That's going along the lines of the argument that it's a choice. Why would you go against what nature had in mind for you, sex-wise, unless you preferred to be with your own gender over the other, deep-relationshipwise? You'd have to at least dislike the other gender more than the one you prefer spending time with; Or you could look at it as preferring one over the other. Either way, that's how it originates.
If you wish to argue genetics (Please don't anybody take this offensively, read it through), then you're arguing that people who are gay or lesbian or bisexual are genetically defective. You say "No, I'm not," but in effect, you are. Sexuality is around for the sole purpose of reproduction, and you can't reproduce with your own sex. Therefore, if it is genetic, it's a mutation that's not necesarrily bad, per se, but something that, for the sake of the species, shouldn't be in the gene pool (It would lead to possible endangerment or extinction if it became widespread).
I don't argue that it's genetic, though, I argue that it's choice.
|
|
Growly
DOBS Katara
The Jester of Multishipping
The Mod behind the Myth
Posts: 6,059
|
Post by Growly on Nov 12, 2006 0:53:48 GMT -5
Actually, I believe that homosexuality is a natural form of population control. I mean, look at how frequent it is among animals - and there's no denying that the human race is massively overpopulated. So I ask, whatever the reason for it, why is it a bad thing?
|
|
Grandi
Bato
Prince of All Cosmos
Posts: 603
|
Post by Grandi on Nov 12, 2006 3:00:26 GMT -5
That's going along the lines of the argument that it's a choice. Why would you go against what nature had in mind for you, sex-wise, unless you preferred to be with your own gender over the other, deep-relationshipwise? Except that there are proven pysiologcal and scientific differences between gay and straight people. It's not simply a whim for most of the gay community. Since you're male and you're straight. Does that mean you dislike other males? No, the sole purpose of every life form is to continue the existance of it's species, but genetics don't determine that. And as I've pointed out, a large portion of the animal community is homosexual. So if it is genetic, it would be more of a natural thing. You pointed it out yourself, gay people don't reproduce, but there seems to be a steady population of gays. Therefore, if you argue genetics, the gene is a common human one. Sounds like a natural occurence to me. Considering that being gay is incredibly difficult for most people. It stands to reason that people don't just choose to be gay. Especially such a large percentage of the populous (10%) So many people wouldn't just get up and decide to be gay with all the reprocussions against it. Heck, look at the Rev. Haggard.
|
|
Horyo
RP Admin
All your bending are belong to us.
Posts: 2,572
|
Post by Horyo on Nov 12, 2006 4:13:42 GMT -5
Being gay is actually more than just wanting to be it. There are hormones that activate only when you see some attraction in a person regardless of similarities or differences. Gay people have an affinity with others of their same gender, such as straight people like opposite gender. And when you get down to hormones, it's genetics and environment influenced, children could be brought up to be gay. There is a critical point in an offspring's life where it takes on its role, for humans to be gay it was because that moment--critical memeory moment--caused them to turn the other cheek. I find nothing wrong with gay people, they can be friends and such, it's not their fault that they're that way. This is like asking, why did your parents meet up?
|
|
gambitia
Fiery Ozai
millions have trembled before my pink armor!
Posts: 5,894
|
Post by gambitia on Nov 12, 2006 19:49:57 GMT -5
If you wish to argue genetics (Please don't anybody take this offensively, read it through), then you're arguing that people who are gay or lesbian or bisexual are genetically defective. You say "No, I'm not," but in effect, you are. Sexuality is around for the sole purpose of reproduction, and you can't reproduce with your own sex. Therefore, if it is genetic, it's a mutation that's not necesarrily bad, per se, but something that, for the sake of the species, shouldn't be in the gene pool (It would lead to possible endangerment or extinction if it became widespread). Consider, realistically, what the chances are that a species would honestly go extinct because the gene for homosexuality got so widespread. Just think about it. The chances are slim. And sexuality is not solely for reproduction--humans use it for fun too, and we are not the only animal who does so. Considering that humanity is in no way, shape, or form about to go extinct because there aren't enough babies, I think it's kind of a bogus argument. Besides, lots of things are genetic defects and they aren't stigmitized. My entire family--aunts, uncles, parents, grandparents, and cousins--suffers from clinical depression. Several have OCD or bipolar disorder too. Those are genetic defects. Heart disease is a genetic defect. So is (genetic) high cholestrol. You could make an argument that (genetic) obsesity is a genetic defect. You can call homosexuality a genetic defect, but that's not really a bad thing. Plenty of very common things are genetic defects.
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Nov 12, 2006 20:12:10 GMT -5
If you wish to argue genetics (Please don't anybody take this offensively, read it through), then you're arguing that people who are gay or lesbian or bisexual are genetically defective. You say "No, I'm not," but in effect, you are. Sexuality is around for the sole purpose of reproduction, and you can't reproduce with your own sex. Therefore, if it is genetic, it's a mutation that's not necesarrily bad, per se, but something that, for the sake of the species, shouldn't be in the gene pool (It would lead to possible endangerment or extinction if it became widespread). Consider, realistically, what the chances are that a species would honestly go extinct because the gene for homosexuality got so widespread. Just think about it. The chances are slim. And sexuality is not solely for reproduction--humans use it for fun too, and we are not the only animal who does so. Considering that humanity is in no way, shape, or form about to go extinct because there aren't enough babies, I think it's kind of a bogus argument. Besides, lots of things are genetic defects and they aren't stigmitized. My entire family--aunts, uncles, parents, grandparents, and cousins--suffers from clinical depression. Several have OCD or bipolar disorder too. Those are genetic defects. Heart disease is a genetic defect. So is (genetic) high cholestrol. You could make an argument that (genetic) obsesity is a genetic defect. You can call homosexuality a genetic defect, but that's not really a bad thing. Plenty of very common things are genetic defects. What I meant was, at BASE, was that sexuality is for reproduction. Otherwise we wouldn't have it, because we wouldn't be reproducing sexually. And I didn't say that it being a defect was bad. I just said it was a defect.
|
|
|
Post by gacho on Nov 12, 2006 21:13:57 GMT -5
Hmmmmm... Well for me I have nothing against homosexuals. I actually find that homosexuals are usually much nicer than usual people. I think it's sad that people don't like homosexuals because they just like loving the same sex.
|
|
attonbitus
Blue Spirit
I'm in ur clouds, steel'n ur thundar
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by attonbitus on Nov 13, 2006 9:54:24 GMT -5
Besides, lots of things are genetic defects and they aren't stigmitized. My entire family--aunts, uncles, parents, grandparents, and cousins--suffers from clinical depression. Several have OCD or bipolar disorder too. Those are genetic defects. Heart disease is a genetic defect. So is (genetic) high cholestrol. You could make an argument that (genetic) obsesity is a genetic defect. You can call homosexuality a genetic defect, but that's not really a bad thing. Plenty of very common things are genetic defects. Oooo... Ok i'll make the statement that i posted originally cause I figured we circle back around to this. IF it is a genetic defect then why don't we treat it as such? With your examples (high cholesterol, obesity) you can see commercials and research studies about treatments to 'over come' those genetic defects. So why not treat homosexuality any differently? (i'm playing devils advocate here, i know a how to blow open in my questions )
|
|
|
Post by writer on Nov 13, 2006 15:23:55 GMT -5
Because I found that funny :3
|
|
gambitia
Fiery Ozai
millions have trembled before my pink armor!
Posts: 5,894
|
Post by gambitia on Nov 13, 2006 18:59:59 GMT -5
Oooo... Ok i'll make the statement that i posted originally cause I figured we circle back around to this. IF it is a genetic defect then why don't we treat it as such? With your examples (high cholesterol, obesity) you can see commercials and research studies about treatments to 'over come' those genetic defects. So why not treat homosexuality any differently? (i'm playing devils advocate here, i know a how to blow open in my questions ) Obesity and high cholesterol will kill you. Homosexuality will not. And people can refuse to be treated for things like high cholesterol and heart disease. There are people who choose to have their homosexuality treated like a disease; sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Nov 13, 2006 20:42:38 GMT -5
Yes, but heart disease and obesity don't result in you not having children (Some gays aside; However, the majority don't).
|
|
gambitia
Fiery Ozai
millions have trembled before my pink armor!
Posts: 5,894
|
Post by gambitia on Nov 13, 2006 21:58:37 GMT -5
Yes, but heart disease and obesity don't result in you not having children (Some gays aside; However, the majority don't). How is not having children comparable to dying? And gay couples could have children, thanks to the wonders of science.
|
|
|
Post by writer on Nov 13, 2006 22:07:35 GMT -5
.......
Why does male pregancey thwack me over the head?
|
|
gambitia
Fiery Ozai
millions have trembled before my pink armor!
Posts: 5,894
|
Post by gambitia on Nov 13, 2006 22:18:11 GMT -5
....... Why does male pregancey thwack me over the head? They'd use surrogate mothers! Do I have to explain this play-by-play?
|
|