Nature vs. Nurture

[Caip]

Erm, I guess I have some clearing up to do: I meant "shocked and awed" in the sense of being actually shocked and upset about some statement. In my defense Mari didn't know the military meaning of "shock and awe" either.

 

In case anyone else doesn't know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe

 

 

I don't really see how I could have possibly referred to the military term, since (in the context of my post) that would have made no sense whatsoever...

[Kitty!]

Well maybe i wasnt clear enough, gay ppl can be gay for many reasons, that was just one of the reasons. I dont know all of them, but i said i dont think theyre born gay, thats it. It can happen, cause my friend is gay, and his 1st experience happened while he was playing with a little friend of his. he liked the feeling, and is gay ever since. Hey it could happen. If ur not ok with it, sry, but its how it is.

[Nova™]

I dont think you can be born with it. I mean im sry but if im wrong, sry. but i do believe being gay happens after ur born.

 

/thumbsup

[FzyBunnySliprs]

Well maybe i wasnt clear enough, gay ppl can be gay for many reasons, that was just one of the reasons. I dont know all of them, but i said i dont think theyre born gay, thats it. It can happen, cause my friend is gay, and his 1st experience happened while he was playing with a little friend of his. he liked the feeling, and is gay ever since. Hey it could happen. If ur not ok with it, sry, but its how it is.

 

Did it occur to you or your friend that he/she liked the experimentation because he/she was in fact born gay? Then after he/she enjoyed it, they realised that they were predisposed to homosexuality? The experience doesn't make you turn gay. The experience makes you realise you either like it or don't.

 

As for sexual abuse turning you gay, that's is the farthest from the truth. I counseled sex offenders for several years, and although the incidence of abuse leading to future offending is quite common, it has nothing to do whatsoever with sexual orientation.

 

Lastly, stating that having straight parents, or one straight parent is better than having gay parents is absurd at best. Parenting skills have nothing to do with sexual orientation. Parenting skills often either model personal experience, or go to the opposite extreme. For example, if you were raised with an authoritarian father, and hated it, you might raise your children in a permissive style. The key here is that there are bad parents in all ethnic backgrounds, religions, sexual orientaions, and economic classes. There are also good ones. To imply that gay parents are inherantly bad, is descrimination plain & simple.

 

Just my opinion, but I think I'm still entitled to it...

Edited August 1, 2007 by FzyBunnySliprs

[FzyBunnySliprs]

Oh yeah, almost forgot...

Edited August 1, 2007 by FzyBunnySliprs

[RXS]

I most certainly will not lay off her just because she is a woman and/or agrees with your point of view. Her statement was ridiculous and I don't see any reason why I shouldn't speak my mind. I, however, did never say that she isn't entitled to her opinion.

 

I never said to lay off her because she is a woman and/or agrees with my point of view - maybe that's your guilty conscience talking. Kitty is trying to express her opinion (even apologetically) and offered a possible explanation for why someone might be gay. You can speak your mind, but I really don't see any value in humiliating her...that's why I told you to lay off. If we're not going to use some self-restraint on a sensitive subject like this, then by all means, lets get this flame war started and see where we end up.

 

 

Since you position yourself as an expert and have obviously heard of every reason why someone might be gay (except of course Kitty's), why don't you toss a couple of your ideas into the arena?

Edited August 1, 2007 by RXS

[[FF5]Knix]

Erm, I guess I have some clearing up to do: I meant "shocked and awed" in the sense of being actually shocked and upset about some statement. In my defense Mari didn't know the military meaning of "shock and awe" either.

 

In case anyone else doesn't know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe

I don't really see how I could have possibly referred to the military term, since (in the context of my post) that would have made no sense whatsoever...

 

Well since you did refer to yourself in an earlier post as...

 

"Considering myself a liberal (a European liberal, not what you Americans call liberal)"

 

And since I have never heard anyone use the term "shocked and awed" in a sentence in a benign way, I assumed it was a dig.

 

"I was shocked and awed that Baskin Robins ran out of Rocky Road Ice Cream!"

 

However if it was not, then my mistake, please forgive me.

 

To go back onto the subject briefly, I know that you and Mari are very close friends, and I have known you both virtually for a few years now. I would not want to offend Mari or your friendship of Mari by posting this topic. I posted the topic so I can better understand the subject matter, as I can't get my brain around it as I normally can on most topics so that I may have an view/opinion that I feel secure about.

 

I work in the travel industry. I being a straight person am in the significant minority. Now I have no friends who are openly gay. I am friendly with many people who are openly gay. My lone bias that bothers me is those men and women who are to the extreme in the dress and behavior of those anotomicaly opposite of themselves. I have a guy at work who is more feminine then any women I have ever met. Why should this bother me? I am not forced to have anything socially to do with him. He is not handing out pamphlets on the advantages of exfoliation. That being said, every time he swishes by me in the hall I want to jab a syringe full of 100cc's of testosterone into his jugular to snap him out of it.

There was another guy used to work in my company back when I first started by the name of Pedro. Now Pedro behaved in the same manner as the person I just mentioned. Pedro periodically would come into work wearing big ole Jackie Onasis sun glasses to hide the bruises on his face from the pumeling he took when he hit on the wrong straight guy.

Now part of me felt true empathy for him. No one should suffer a beating for hitting on someone. If I was ever hit on, I would try to explain to that person in a manner not to embarras them, that I was not what they were looking for. However there was a part of me who thought that this keeps on happening to the guy, so it's not like a one shot bad deal. He's trying to go after the unobtainable, and he's playing with fire, thus he occasionally gets burned.

 

So throughout my above rambling I hope you can understand why I brought this topic up. Many people will write posts just to visually hear themselves talk, however hopefully one person will touch on an idea or point that give some me some insight.

Edited August 2, 2007 by [FF5]Knix

[FzyBunnySliprs]

Knix, in all seriousness, I don't think your problem is with homosexuals. I think it's with extreme personalities. And it is absolutely okay to find some people annoying. I'm sure there are people out there who find me annoying. That's human. I'll bet there are plenty of gay people who don't bother you at all, or that you don't even know are gay. So maybe you are thinking about this too hard. Is the problem really what someone chooses to do in the bedroom? Or is their personality that bothers you?

 

[Spacko]

Just for the record... Don't hold back any opinions on gayness on my account, you guys. I find it a little refreshing to hear some non-politically correct opinions on the topic.

 

Also, it is my belief that just as I'm sure you straight people will claim to have been born straight, I was born gay. Course, if we all had to choose or somehow adopt sexual orientations later on, I'd be fine with that as well, and perhaps it is like that for some people. What do I know.

 

As I've said before: I believe it must be up to each religion to choose whether they want to permit gay marriages or clergy. But if consenting adults of the same gender want to commit to each other in an equivalent to marriage, the state should provide them with that, so that their legal and economical rights are equal to straight couples'. Gay people who want kids and are able to raise them should certainly be allowed to do so, and in time that will become a non-issue.

 

Finally, the goatrapers and pedophiles argument is complete slippery slope. Consent is the key here... Which children and goats cannot give.

[Kitty!]

My friend is not completely gay. I have asked him myself. He told me that he has never had any experience at all with a woman, but he does say they are beautiful and would like to try, he sometimes feel attracted to some. That to me proves, that because of the experience he had, made him like guys, but he wasnt born withit. Other gay ppl try to be with opposite sex to see if they like, and they dont. It depends on what they really want. Other thing, im not saying by any means (just in case) that gay ppl are bad parents or bad influence, they can be better parents than straight ones, im just saying that I wouldnt like to have one of my parents to be gay. U can say oh sure i accept my parents as they are, thats bull, deep inside im sure u would mind, or at least feel uncomfortable at 1st. I know i would be, just because its not how its meant to be. But, were in the new century, so this stuff aint shocking like way back. Ppl can do whatever they want nowadays, and of course none of us is nobody to judge anyone. Im just being realistic, having gay parents isnt as easy as it sounds. No offence mari, im not a homophobic or anything, i like gay ppl, but i still feel the same way.

[Triggerhappy]

Ooooo, what a controversial topic KNIX. Are we doing abortions next? I meant that with no disrespect to the topics BTW.

 

Well not that my two cents matters, I think I'll put em in for laughs and chuckles anyhow.

 

Are you born this way? If so should science work on available options to offer a person the ability to become heterosexual?

Well since there hasn't been (as far as I know of) any proof of it being either way, I really don't like to guess at it. To be honest though, if people ARE born this way, it wouldn't surprise me at all. Look at obesity! It's a perfect example. While some obesity is known to be genetically hardwired to a person's body they can (to some extent) actually do things to try and keep their weight down. Although a lot of obesity in my opinion is just caused from pure lack of movement and exercise, and of course that precious appetite of theirs. US of A is one of the fattest countries in the world. I don't see that obesity is a big problem in third world countries where food isn't an issue, so maybe not everything is purely genetic. I think the same principles apply to homosexuality.

 

Should homosexuals be allowed to openly fight in the US Military?

Hell yes! If women and children can, so can homosexuals. I don't care if you're white, brown, black, yellow or blue, everyone in the USA should be qualified to participate.

 

Should they be allowed to enter Marriage, Unions, with the same legal benefits but no title, or neither?

 

Why not? Something else I'd like to add to this is...what about polygamists? Should they be allowed to marry?

 

Should they be allowed to adopt?

 

I can think of A LOT worse families to place children in. Rapist, murderers, molesters, etc. I know of several dysfunctional families that kids would be A LOT worse off in (for example my dad's family) while there are I'm sure perfectly stable homosexuals who would make great parents.

 

Good parenthood has to do with the parents ability to PARENT. If the sexuality factor is kept strictly in the bedroom where it belongs, then really it's a dumb argument (in my opinion) to say that it's unmoral and degrading as some might say.

 

Should they be allowed to user doner eggs, sperm, carriers to have children?

 

Yeah, same reasons as above.

 

 

I just want to point out that I personally do not like homosexuality and find it to be repulsive. That however, is the lifestyle I have chosen to take whether born with heterosexual genes or not. I do think however, that it would be extremely arrogant and ignorant of me to criticize people for being different than I. So long as the "difference" doesn't interfere with MY lifestyle, I don't give to rats about what a flaming homosexual wants to do in their spare time.

 

Also, in the defense of the homosexuals, I have to say it is a BIG double standard for most guys to be perfectly okay with LESBIAN homosexuality, yet turn around and despise males for liking each other sexually. I know this (as I like hot lesbian sex) to be extremely wrong and unfair to the guys in all fairness.

 

Final notes on the topic, I'd also like to add something that I've found to be true so far (for me any way) and I'm just throwing it out there on the table for you to consider regardless of whether or not you find it to be a reasonable conclusion. I find that the majority of women I know and have met in my life thusfar don't seem to have a problem with homosexuality at all. Yet, it's the guys who seem to have the biggest difficulty with homosexuality. Is it because (as I mentioned above) because it's guy sex and not so much female sex??? Like I said, that's my experience and maybe you don't agree but I find it to be true where I am at and thought it to be important enough to emphasize.

 

As far as I'm concerned, gay sexuality is THE LEAST of the problems that people should be thinking about right now. You can use the bible (if you take it's meaning literally) as a main reason to find homosexuality wrong, but that's another issue I'd be glad to discuss with someone who's got the time and energy to argue for a long time and get nowhere.

 

LOL I love controversial topics, it's so much fun to see people so indifferent!!!

Edited August 2, 2007 by Triggerhappy

[Caip]

However if it was not, then my mistake, please forgive me.

 

It was a language thing, but I do still apologize for causing any hard feelings.

 

Did it occur to you or your friend that he/she liked the experimentation because he/she was in fact born gay? Then after he/she enjoyed it, they realised that they were predisposed to homosexuality? The experience doesn't make you turn gay. The experience makes you realise you either like it or don't.

 

Yes, I agree with you there. I should have posted that in my reply to Kitty.

 

Since you position yourself as an expert and have obviously heard of every reason why someone might be gay (except of course Kitty's), why don't you toss a couple of your ideas into the arena?

 

I have never said or even implied that I was an expert on that field, I merely don't agree with Kitty's explanation. I believe, like Mari, that people are born gay. I do, however, also think that it is possible to chose to have relationships with persons of your own sex only.

 

(as I like hot lesbian sex)

 

Who doesn't?!

 

 

[RXS]

Finally, the goatrapers and pedophiles argument is complete slippery slope. Consent is the key here... Which children and goats cannot give.

OK, if consent is the sticking point with this argument, then how about allowing brother/sister, brother/brother, sister/sister, father/daughter (I think you get the picture) marriages? Consent could obviously be given....does that make it right?

[RXS]

I have an Aunt who says she became gay after two bad marriages with males. I also work with a guy who claims he was born gay.......maybe both are possible. My personal position is that one is not born gay. I do think that some may be "a little more in touch with their fem/male side" and may choose to nurture it into something more along the lines of being outright gay.

[[FF5]Knix]

What about prison?

 

This is based more so on perceived neccesity rather then biological/genetic predisposition.

[FzyBunnySliprs]

What about prison?

 

This is based more so on perceived neccesity rather then biological/genetic predisposition.

 

Interesting point Knix. I wonder if incarcerated individuals show any evidence of continuing the same sex preference after leaving prison. Or if they revert back to their previous orientation when they are free.

[[TNT] Sonic Goo]

I would still like to keep the nature/nurture thing out of the discussion, like I've said before, since that shouldn't be a matter of opinion but a matter of fact.

 

What I'm still missing is what's so objectionable about gay people? About gay people marrying, about them adopting children, etc. What exactly do they do what's so bad about it? What influence does a gay marriage have on other people? What exactly is the effect gay parents have on children that's so bad? I still haven't seen any of those mechanisms explained.

[[FF5]Knix]

my above rambling I hope you can understand why I brought this topic up. Many people will write posts just to visually hear themselves talk, however hopefully one person will touch on an idea or point that give some me some insight.

 

 

 

[[TNT] Sonic Goo]

That's exactly what I'm asking for. Explain yourselves and provide the insight for us poor people unable to see what's so wrong about it.

[{GD}Independent]

"If you lower the tone of the discussion with talk of goatrapers and such, there will be people who take the low road with you"

 

"Are you saying that things like women being allowed to vote or black people getting equal right constitute a downward spiral?

 

Hmm, you saying RXS is a racist and a sexist is not lowering "the tone of the discussion"? Again, liberals can get away with anything, but conservatives must be attacked as bigots. Thanks for proving my point, goo.

[{GD}Independent]

 

I am sorry, but this is one of the most ridiculous theories I have EVER heard...

 

I do believe that circumstance can cause one to choose (subconsciously, of course) a gay lifestyle. How many of your gay friends had "normal" childhoods? Be honest, please.

[{GD}Independent]

The leadership of the Episcopal church a couple of years back decided it would be a good idea to allow openly gay folks to be bishops in the church. Would they allow openly adulterous people to be bishops, too?

 

I believe that we all have certain things we enjoy that we know are wrong. Let's say that my "wrong" thing is, oh, let's see -- having sex with my wife's grandmother. We all know that's wrong, and as such, I'd be ashamed of it, and I wouldn't talk about it. What if, one day, I decided I was sick of being ashamed of it, and decided that I wanted society to stop thinking it was wrong? I might (surreptitiously, at first) try to find others who shared my particular lifestyle, and seek solidarity with them. Later, I might lobby sympathetic members of congress to enact laws so that my wife's grandmother must be covered by my employer under my health plan. I'd find someone in Hollywood to make a TV show about a lovable guy who just happened to like to have sex with his wife's grandmother. We could call it "Indy and Grace." It would be very well-written, with attractive actors. My person-who-likes-to-have-sex-with-their-spouse's-grandparent sympathetic cohorts would make sure that my TV show won all sorts of awards. Maybe there'd be a "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"-type show on cable with a person-who-likes-to-have-sex-with-their-spouse's-grandparent. I'd make sure that Hollywood and the media got as many person-who-likes-to-have-sex-with-their-spouse's-grandparent shows as possible on the air and in the theaters, so that regular joes would begin to feel that this behavior was normal, and that maybe it was just "the way God made" someone. Eventually, my "wrong" thing could be just another lifestyle. Ok, hate to leave this diatribe half-finished, but it's time for bed. More later.

Edited August 3, 2007 by {SFI}Independent

[Caip]

Goatrapers. Incest. Pedophelia. Grandmother-in-law-doing. This slope is getting more slippery with every post. Could we ask you people to please stay on topic which is gayness and gay rigths?! Saying "today we accept gayness, tomorrow we accept pedophilia" is no real argument, since society might or might not accept pedophilia some day. Without proof that accepting gayness will automatically lead to the acceptance of child molestation or bestiality, etc. you are simply speculating without being able to back up anything you say.

 

Many gay people, including Mari, claim that they were in fact born gay. Several people have argued in this and past topics that you cannot be born gay. What sort of proof do you have to back that claim up? If you don't then how can you be so sure? The burden of proof is clearly on your side of the field.

 

So far we haven't seen any hard proof that screams "being gay is wrong". All we have seen up to this point is argumentation based on personal moral values. Everyone has different moral standards, hence, we can actually never agree on anything without changing our personal beliefs. So the actual problem we face is not scientific but ethical, therefore, the question is "whose moral standards should be accepted?" or more plainly "who is right?"

 

Some people claim accepting gayness is going down a road that will eventually lead to moral decay. Proof? None. The only argument against that opinion is that we believe in a rationality that tells us where to draw the line, which is before goatrape, incest and pedophilia. If someone cannot accept this believe then our only reply can be that some people have a broader set of ethics than others do and in the end the majority will win. It has always been that way and will very likely remain so in the future.

 

- Mari and Sascha

[{GD}Independent]

Goatrapers. Incest. Pedophelia. Grandmother-in-law-doing. This slope is getting more slippery with every post. Could we ask you people to please stay on topic which is gayness and gay rigths?! Saying "today we accept gayness, tomorrow we accept pedophilia" is no real argument, since society might or might not accept pedophilia some day. Without proof that accepting gayness will automatically lead to the acceptance of child molestation or bestiality, etc. you are simply speculating without being able to back up anything you say.

 

Many gay people, including Mari, claim that they were in fact born gay. Several people have argued in this and past topics that you cannot be born gay. What sort of proof do you have to back that claim up? If you don't then how can you be so sure? The burden of proof is clearly on your side of the field.

 

So far we haven't seen any hard proof that screams "being gay is wrong". All we have seen up to this point is argumentation based on personal moral values. Everyone has different moral standards, hence, we can actually never agree on anything without changing our personal beliefs. So the actual problem we face is not scientific but ethical, therefore, the question is "whose moral standards should be accepted?" or more plainly "who is right?"

 

Some people claim accepting gayness is going down a road that will eventually lead to moral decay. Proof? None. The only argument against that opinion is that we believe in a rationality that tells us where to draw the line, which is before goatrape, incest and pedophilia. If someone cannot accept this believe then our only reply can be that some people have a broader set of ethics than others do and in the end the majority will win. It has always been that way and will very likely remain so in the future.

 

- Mari and Sascha

 

Of course being gay is not equivalent to being a goat raper. It's called

*hyperbole*.

 

Are you saying there's a line we should not cross, and it's somewhere between gay behavior and goatrape, incest, and pedophilia? You're proving my point for me. Because 50 years ago, you would have said that gayness was on the same side of the line as the others. Liberals keep moving the line that divides acceptable behavior from unacceptable behavior. Oh, and the notion that we can "prove" that homosexuality is wrong is absurd. Can you "prove" that having sex with your grandmother is wrong?

[Caip]

Are you saying there's a line we should not cross, and it's somewhere between gay behavior and goatrape, incest, and pedophilia? You're proving my point for me. Because 50 years ago, you would have said that gayness was on the same side of the line as the others. Liberals keep moving the line that divides acceptable behavior from unacceptable behavior.

 

You are so caught up in your conservative/liberal thinking that you seem to be unable to really get what we meant. We said that we believe there is a common rationality that tells us what is right and wrong or rather where to draw the line. It is hard to dictate where that line exactly goes...for this we have debates. Challenging the status quo keeps us sharp and hopefully helps us to grow both as individuals and as a society.

 

Just in case you haven't read Goo's posts I quote him: "Indy: times change and society's values with them. There was a time when it was ok to call black people animals, to publicly humiliate them."

 

Oh, and the notion that we can "prove" that homosexuality is wrong is absurd. Can you "prove" that having sex with your grandmother is wrong?

 

So the actual problem we face is not scientific but ethical, therefore, the question is "whose moral standards should be accepted?" or more plainly "who is right?" How can anyone not get our point here? We said it is an ethical and NOT a scientific question...at least up to this day.