Political Crossfire Forums

[mek]

Just got the simple fact that its not natural, and should be defined as a mental disorder instead of normal.

Its just science, a man and a women are what go together. Anything else is either a result in something happening to this person as a child, or a chemical imbalance in the brain.

IMO I think anyone with feelings about the same sex should check themselves in somewhere and have their head examined, too bad the government won't stand up and state the facts.

[F_McClellan]

though Homosexual people do differ in brainwaves than those of straight people i wouldnt lcall it a disorder, and even if it were, it is not a dibilatating one where it would inhibate the there function in socity.

It is a fact that the natrual order of things are a man and a woman and that is what it should be , how ever if this minority of people wish marriage, let them ( for the religious people out there, i am christian, and god said dot judge) But the government wont allow this for the reason of monitary gain as we all know married people get bigger tax breaks the single well with all the new revenu going to gay married people and social security dwendling you can see how the government would not want this money going to the newly wed .

and for the final comment about the feelings of same sex it would be a grat idea to go get checked for that brain wave patteren so you wont have to kid yourself later in life.

[Todd D.]

Clothes are not natural. Automobiles are not natural. Concrete is not natural. Steel is not natural.

You really want to base your entire life on what "is natural"?

[F'losrix]

mek wrote: Just got the simple fact that its not natural
If you're relying on procreation as the only reason for sexuality there would be little argument to the contrary. But procreation is not the sole purpose of sexuality - not even in lower animals. Your point is open to debate then.

Quote: and should be defined as a mental disorder instead of normal.
The major professional organizations that deal with such matters disagree with you and stopped classifying it as such decades ago.

Quote: Its just science, a man and a women are what go together.
That's a gross oversimplification of the science involved.

Quote: Anything else is either a result in something happening to this person as a child, or a chemical imbalance in the brain.
There is no solid evidence that either one is the sole cause.

Quote: IMO I think anyone with feelings about the same sex should check themselves in somewhere and have their head examined,
I would tell you my opinion of your opinion, but I'd rather not get my account suspended.

Quote: too bad the government won't stand up and state the facts.
Don't confuse your opinion with fact.

[F'losrix]

F_McClellan wrote: though Homosexual people do differ in brainwaves than those of straight people i wouldnt lcall it a disorder, and even if it were, it is not a dibilatating one where it would inhibate the there function in socity.
Different brainwaves? That's a theory I don't think I've encountered before. Can you supply us with a link to more details?

Quote: It is a fact that the natrual order of things are a man and a woman and that is what it should be , how ever if this minority of people wish marriage, let them ( for the religious people out there, i am christian, and god said dot judge) But the government wont allow this for the reason of monitary gain as we all know married people get bigger tax breaks the single well with all the new revenu going to gay married people and social security dwendling you can see how the government would not want this money going to the newly wed .
While I won't deny that the monetary impact is certainly an issue of concern to some people, it's not the main reason the government has taken a stand against recognition of gay marriages - it's far more complex than that. There are Constitutional issues that may or not be of concern here. There is the desire not to move so quickly with changes in policy on an issue over which there are strong feelings among the general public (some of this is a fear over not getting re-elected, some is that it could lead to wider unrest).

Quote: and for the final comment about the feelings of same sex it would be a grat idea to go get checked for that brain wave patteren so you wont have to kid yourself later in life.
This is the first I've heard of there being any kind of 'test' available to determine if a person has homosexual tendencies. I really must insist on a link or that you post the relevant details.

[mek]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: mek wrote: Just got the simple fact that its not natural
If you're relying on procreation as the only reason for sexuality there would be little argument to the contrary. But procreation is not the sole purpose of sexuality - not even in lower animals. Your point is open to debate then.
----------

And what is other some other purposes of sexuality? Lower animals besides seeking out food , that is their only goal in life. And since you brought it up, what other low animals really only go with the same sex?

Quote: and should be defined as a mental disorder instead of normal.
The major professional organizations that deal with such matters disagree with you and stopped classifying it as such decades ago.
--------
Major Professional organizations would be dragged into court if they came out with that. The gay community does work together well I will have to admit. Little by little bringing companies to their knees, along with any common sense.

Quote: Its just science, a man and a women are what go together.
That's a gross oversimplification of the science involved.
--------
Why bother making it complex? I mean really , everyone knows male and female are the ones that are needs to reproduce in the world.

Quote: Anything else is either a result in something happening to this person as a child, or a chemical imbalance in the brain.
There is no solid evidence that either one is the sole cause.
-------
the psychological effects of trama when a child is young, like being molested, or even having a overbearing mother/father of some sort can effect your sexuallity. There are some who grew up normal (at least this is what most claim, but people do tend to block memories or just lie about such things) , these people are what do need to be studied more. No there hasnt been a DNA test made that will say wether someone will/will not be gay, but that doesn't mean there won't be one. Of course, politics will play out in this. Will the government stand up and fund these tests? probly not, mainly because they want votes, and until a major uprising about this subject comes up. I doubt they will.

Quote: IMO I think anyone with feelings about the same sex should check themselves in somewhere and have their head examined,
I would tell you my opinion of your opinion, but I'd rather not get my account suspended.
--------
I understand, people tend to get mad and unreasonable when you tell them they are wrong about things they hold dear.

Quote: too bad the government won't stand up and state the facts.
Don't confuse your opinion with fact.
-------
Facts can be twisted , which is something the gay community knows a lot about. Government (at least the one in the U.S.) won't stand up and say it is wrong, but they will not say it is right. They will go on trying to ignore this issue as long as they can.

Mainly you have to ask yourself, what will come of the world if this happens? nothing of course at first, but little by little things will begin to shift, childern will be taught in school about how being gay is a normal thing. Less and less will be straight, now i'm not saying EVERYONE will turn gay. But those who would have been living a normal life with kids would have picked a different road.

This subject goes along with other moral issues, that today are still wrong but tomorrow maybe on the edge like this is today. Like sex with young childern. You see more and more of this JUST like a few years ago, when being a homosexual wasn't acceptable. Little by little it worked itself into being almost acceptable, until today when men and men, women and women are almost allowed to marry. Where does a person draw the line?


Sorry about the quote issue above, am still figuring out how to quote properly.

[mek]

Todd D. wrote: Clothes are not natural. Automobiles are not natural. Concrete is not natural. Steel is not natural.

You really want to base your entire life on what "is natural"?

first off, these are all inventions of man. Nothing to do with nature or what is or isn't natural. Humans are a natural creature to this world, we have grown through the years to produce some wonderful and horrible things. I don't really see how clothes, automobiles, concrete or steel have ANYTHING to do with this current issue.

[Geneviève]

Quote: Just got the simple fact that its not natural, and should be defined as a mental disorder instead of normal.

Its just science, a man and a women are what go together. Anything else is either a result in something happening to this person as a child, or a chemical imbalance in the brain.

IMO I think anyone with feelings about the same sex should check themselves in somewhere and have their head examined, too bad the government won't stand up and state the facts.

-------
Facts can be twisted , which is something the gay community knows a lot about. Government (at least the one in the U.S.) won't stand up and say it is wrong, but they will not say it is right. They will go on trying to ignore this issue as long as they can.

Mainly you have to ask yourself, what will come of the world if this happens? nothing of course at first, but little by little things will begin to shift, childern will be taught in school about how being gay is a normal thing. Less and less will be straight, now i'm not saying EVERYONE will turn gay. But those who would have been living a normal life with kids would have picked a different road.

This subject goes along with other moral issues, that today are still wrong but tomorrow maybe on the edge like this is today. Like sex with young childern. You see more and more of this JUST like a few years ago, when being a homosexual wasn't acceptable. Little by little it worked itself into being almost acceptable, until today when men and men, women and women are almost allowed to marry. Where does a person draw the line?


___

first off, these are all inventions of man. Nothing to do with nature or what is or isn't natural. Humans are a natural creature to this world, we have grown through the years to produce some wonderful and horrible things. I don't really see how clothes, automobiles, concrete or steel have ANYTHING to do with this current issue.







This is like... wow. Really, really offensive.
It really saddens me to read this thread.
It also pisses me off, and I'm not even gay.
Stuff like this makes straight people come off as morons, for one thing... do you really think rational people are going to cry over the tragedy of "those who would have been living a normal life with kids would have picked a different road", when you offer yourself up as a paragon of normalcy?
You just said, in effect: "I think gay people are unnatural and gross. If they continue to demand civil rights and freedom from discrimination and abuse at the hands of "normal" people like me, it might turn "normal" people like me gay, and then they won't breed, and eventually there won't be any more "normal" people like me. So gay people really ought to back off on this "demanding rights" business."

I'd be more confident in the fate of humanity if "more and more people" cracked a book every once in awhile, or actually used their brains for a change, or possibly even showed some compassion for their fellow man, than if they simply continued to breed like rats, cranking out countless replicas of... you.
Everyone can turn gay and the freaking human race can die out, for all I care.
Seriously. What concern is it of mine whether or not the human race continues to exist five hundred years from now, because everybody "turned gay" and ceased to reproduce?
Big loss, and so outrageously implausible anyway that it doesn't even bear thinking about. It's absurd.
I just find it appalling that you would take the time to post in a gay and lesbian forum, identify yourself as a straight person, and proceed to earnestly explain that homosexuality is "unnatural" because "men and women were meant to go together" and that the government should stand up and announce this as "fact".
And then to see gay people responding to this assault in a patient and reasonable tone makes me even angrier, because it makes me realize that they probably deal with this constantly, with people like you attempting to invalidate their very existence.
I'm just.... GRRRR!!!!! :x
This really upsets me.
I may be straight, but posts like your almost make me wish I wasn't, because I don't want to be in the same category with you.
If anything "turns people gay", it will probably be the fact that they can't stand to be lumped together with ignorant and intolerant bigots like you.


:evil:

[F'losrix]

Geneviève wrote: And then to see gay people responding to this assault in a patient and reasonable tone makes me even angrier, because it makes me realize that they probably deal with this constantly, with people like you attempting to invalidate their very existence.

Yep. I won't lie - it does make me angry on occasion, but for the most part I've simply become numb to it. I think the best revenge is to live as long and as happily as possible, which for a gay person generally requires developing a pretty thick skin and learning not to feel stressed every time some (expletive deleted) advocates for our oppression or extermination.

[F'losrix]

mek wrote: And what is other some other purposes of sexuality? Lower animals besides seeking out food , that is their only goal in life. And since you brought it up, what other low animals really only go with the same sex?
Animals don't use sex only for procreation.

"Whereas in most other species sexual behavior is a fairly distinct category, in the bonobo it is part and parcel of social relations--and not just between males and females. Bonobos engage in sex in virtually every partner combination (although such contact among close family members may be suppressed). And sexual interactions occur more often among bonobos than among other primates. Despite the frequency of sex, the bonobo's rate of reproduction in the wild is about the same as that of the chimpanzee."

from Bonobo Sex & Society

See also: Queer Creatures

Ultimately it is not very useful to compare humans with other species, though - we expect civilized human beings to use their intellect as a curb to the brutality one often sees amongst other animals. It would be a mistake however to assume this extends to being able to use the power of one's intellect to choose one's sexual orientation. As smart as humans are, they can't control their every subconscious feeling.

Quote: Major Professional organizations would be dragged into court if they came out with that.
Baloney - what would be the basis for such a lawsuit?

Quote: The gay community does work together well I will have to admit. Little by little bringing companies to their knees, along with any common sense.
Rhetoric - you've give nothing to support this assertion.

Quote: Why bother making it complex? I mean really , everyone knows male and female are the ones that are needs to reproduce in the world.
Reproduction and sexuality are not the same thing. It would appear you want the world to be a very simple place. Welcome to reality - things aren't that easy.

Quote: the psychological effects of trama when a child is young, like being molested, or even having a overbearing mother/father of some sort can effect your sexuallity.
No proof that this causes anyone to become homosexual or that these are conditions common to all of them.

Quote: There are some who grew up normal (at least this is what most claim, but people do tend to block memories or just lie about such things),
Or they could simply be telling the truth and you're just dead wrong about it.

Quote: these people are what do need to be studied more.
Gay people aren't lab rats.

Quote: No there hasnt been a DNA test made that will say wether someone will/will not be gay, but that doesn't mean there won't be one. Of course, politics will play out in this. Will the government stand up and fund these tests? probly not, mainly because they want votes, and until a major uprising about this subject comes up. I doubt they will.
Major uprising? What exactly are you advocating here? A test to find all the gay people? Do you have any notion of just how costly such an effort would be? And then what do you want to do with them once you ferret them out?

Quote: I understand, people tend to get mad and unreasonable when you tell them they are wrong about things they hold dear.
I'll admit that I find you very irritating, but I'm not being unreasonable. Who made you God that you think it's your place to tell me I'm wrong about my own sexuality?

Quote: Facts can be twisted , which is something the gay community knows a lot about.
Blanket denigration of an entire demographic with no offer of proof. You are skating dangerously close to the edge now.

Quote: Government (at least the one in the U.S.) won't stand up and say it is wrong, but they will not say it is right. They will go on trying to ignore this issue as long as they can.
Probably because it's not the government's place to take stands on issues that are morally subjective. Can you imagine the strife & division it would cause in this country if they did?

Quote: Mainly you have to ask yourself, what will come of the world if this happens? nothing of course at first, but little by little things will begin to shift, childern will be taught in school about how being gay is a normal thing. Less and less will be straight, now i'm not saying EVERYONE will turn gay. But those who would have been living a normal life with kids would have picked a different road.
So what? It sounds to me like you want to make us buy a slippery slope argument that can't be reasonably supported.

Quote: This subject goes along with other moral issues, that today are still wrong but tomorrow maybe on the edge like this is today. Like sex with young childern. You see more and more of this JUST like a few years ago, when being a homosexual wasn't acceptable. Little by little it worked itself into being almost acceptable, until today when men and men, women and women are almost allowed to marry. Where does a person draw the line?
More rhetoric, no substance.

[Malencontreux]

Yeah I feel like cracking his head on concrete but luckily this is an internet forum and he isn't saying it to my face.

1. If marriage were about procreation, we wouldn't let old people marry or infertile couples would we smart one?

2. I guess everyone chooses their sexuality, like if you concentrate hard enough you can turn your hair blond. Note the sarcasm.

3. If we allow gay marriage, there will be more gay people because gay people raise gay kids and straight people raise straight kids. Note the sarcasm again.

Don't worry about trying to figure out how to quote things, because if you keep posting with this ignorant bull or keep insulting people who are gay or lesbian, you won't be around here for long.

[Chris29]

OMG the gay people are coming what are we going to do :gmo:






seriously the mental disorder thing may have warranted a response a couple centuries ago along with fear of witches and such.

[Valdimar]

mek wrote: This subject goes along with other moral issues, that today are still wrong but tomorrow maybe on the edge like this is today. Like sex with young childern. You see more and more of this JUST like a few years ago, when being a homosexual wasn't acceptable. Little by little it worked itself into being almost acceptable, until today when men and men, women and women are almost allowed to marry. Where does a person draw the line?
Where does a person draw the line? Well, the government, who you want so badly to do something about the issue of homosexuality, says that pedophilia is illegal. Homosexuality is NOT illegal. Two consenting adults can do whatever they please.

You need to accept that what other people do in their lives is none of your concern.

[Melchior]

Valdimar wrote: mek wrote: This subject goes along with other moral issues, that today are still wrong but tomorrow maybe on the edge like this is today. Like sex with young childern. You see more and more of this JUST like a few years ago, when being a homosexual wasn't acceptable. Little by little it worked itself into being almost acceptable, until today when men and men, women and women are almost allowed to marry. Where does a person draw the line?
Where does a person draw the line? Well, the government, who you want so badly to do something about the issue of homosexuality, says that pedophilia is illegal. Homosexuality is NOT illegal. Two consenting adults can do whatever they please.

You need to accept that what other people do in their lives is none of your concern.

Well in some states sodomy is illegal, and gay marriage is not recognized.

Anyone who coins the phrase where do we draw the line is ignorant to what American principles are, in my honest opinion. We have a document called the BILL OF RIGHTS, start from there. It's not hard to figure out; does homosexuality involve victims? No, it involves consenting adults. ~ TA-DA! ~

[Valdimar]

Marriage is more subjective than anything now a days. My neighbors are a gay couple that have been together for almost 30 years. They have a joint checking account, promise of commitment and life partnership contract, etc, and believe me, they argue like a typical 'married' couple. They have two young girls ages 7 and 9. They are the most *brilliant* and well rounded children I have ever met in my life. And, they don't cut their hair short or into mullets, wear flannel, and have tool belts. Anyway...

Looks a lot like a marriage to me whether the government recognizes it or not. They only thing they can't do, is file their taxes jointly.

[Melchior]

What about that issue of visiting your partner in the hospital?

[Jay2014]

Melchior wrote: Valdimar wrote: mek wrote: This subject goes along with other moral issues, that today are still wrong but tomorrow maybe on the edge like this is today. Like sex with young childern. You see more and more of this JUST like a few years ago, when being a homosexual wasn't acceptable. Little by little it worked itself into being almost acceptable, until today when men and men, women and women are almost allowed to marry. Where does a person draw the line?
Where does a person draw the line? Well, the government, who you want so badly to do something about the issue of homosexuality, says that pedophilia is illegal. Homosexuality is NOT illegal. Two consenting adults can do whatever they please.

You need to accept that what other people do in their lives is none of your concern.

Well in some states sodomy is illegal

i think lawrence v. texas ended that.

[Valdimar]

Melchior wrote: What about that issue of visiting your partner in the hospital?
Everything that isn't granted to them under an otherwise typical marriage is privately contracted between the two of them. It's a lot of paperwork, but it just goes to show how determined they are to not be denied what they are and should be entitled to with one another. I say good for them.

By the way, Lawrence v. Texas did reverse all anti-sodomy laws.

[F'losrix]

Valdimar wrote: Melchior wrote: What about that issue of visiting your partner in the hospital?
Everything that isn't granted to them under an otherwise typical marriage is privately contracted between the two of them. It's a lot of paperwork, but it just goes to show how determined they are to not be denied what they are and should be entitled to with one another. I say good for them.

By the way, Lawrence v. Texas did reverse all anti-sodomy laws.

No, it didn't. This is a common misconception. As long as those laws remain on the books, they remain a danger to liberty. Here's a link to a story about a man being prosecuted under Virginia's anti-sodomy law, post-Lawrence.

http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/virginia/vanews138.htm

The Lawrence decision only ended the prohibition against consensual sodomy between adults acting in private. While I'm not an advocate of sex in public places, there is another danger - if Lawrence is overturned by a future court that does not recognize a right to privacy, it's entirely possible that there would be no impediment to the reactivation of those now unenforceable laws.

[Valdimar]

Yeah, that's what I meant. And of course a state like Virginia will do anything to enforce anything remotely anti-gay.