"It raises the prospect that pregnant women could one day be offered a treatment to reduce or eliminate the chance that their offspring will be homosexual. Experts say that, in theory, the "straightening" procedure on humans could be as simple as a hormone supplement for mothers-to-be, worn on the skin like an anti-smoking nicotine patch."
http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fpageoneq.com%2Frssfeedstuff%2Findex.php%3Fid%3D10250
Oh God. Do people honestly have nothing better to do? Seriously.
parents should be given whatever options they want to make the kid they want. Kids aren't cheap, so why dictate what parents can and cannot do? I find it hilarious that the same people that argue for the right for a woman to choose would argue against choosing how to engineer her kid. You can't have it both ways.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
parents should be given whatever options they want to make the kid they want. Kids aren't cheap, so why dictate what parents can and cannot do? I find it hilarious that the same people that argue for the right for a woman to choose would argue against choosing how to engineer her kid. You can't have it both ways.
I don't think you would find a lot of opposition or support for this among the "Pro Choice" individuals...
However, I would think, such an unproven hypothesis would be found to be both offensive and repulsive to many in the "Gay Community"..
I know if they came out with an un-straight patch.... Many would say it was Satanic in nature.
Parents should be allowed to "make the kid they want"... I wonder how easy it would be to fund these tests, produce and sell this treatment for use, if the result were to purposely make a gay child? Perhaps gay parents would like to have gay children?
Scientists know what makes people gay. Hormones do. How "exactly" it happens in differnt people is not so simple to tease out. Hormones from the environment play a role, the genetics of the mother and how much male or female hormones she passes from her to the fetus, the foetus's succeptibility to fluctuations in hormones, the foetus's genetic predisposition to being gay, etc, etc. A hermaphrodite is more likely to be attracted to someone of the same genotype (xy or xx chromosomes is the genotype ) than the rest of the population and we know how hermaphroditism happens, hormones and the same variables as being gay. Basically a gay person is a hermaphrodite of the brain. Hermaphrodites, part of the body is more "mixed": gay, part of the brain is more " "mixed" having both male and female attributes. And then there are transgeotype people like the lady I know of who couldn't have children and during some tests discovered that she had xy chromosomes, this was before it was well known that such a thing could happen. They started discovering it more during some of those tests for the olympics back in the day, and these weren't people who had changed their sex. In other words not only were their bodies mostly female their brains were as well.
Chromosomes are supposed to determine what HORMONES make you male or female. But as we see in nature and life things vary from one extreme to another. Super short to super tall, skinny to fat, light to dark, and yes male to female, etc.
For the small percentage of people that are gay, have you ever noticed how many brilliant and talented people are gay? Especially artists and creative thinkers of that type from Aristotle to Hadrian to Leonardo Da Vinci to TE Lawrence to Franco Zeffirelli. Perhaps there is something beneficial to having a few brains that are a bit mixed, that have that unique combination of wiring, bit male, bit female. If you use hormones to negate this mixture ever again, will you also lessen the gifts to society that this mixture often brings? Can you imagine HGTV in such a world?[;)] It would be a much poorly decorated one thats for sure, and poorly dressed to boot. [:P] Your not just going to change what someone is attracted to if you change the balance of hormones in someones brain as that brain is developing.
There are more differences between male and female brains than just what they are attracted to. There are other "typically" masculine and feminine behaviors, traits, and qualities as well. Be careful of what you are getting rid of in the world.
We all know how hard it is to find love in this world someone to share your life, hopes, dreams, to be there by your side with you,,,and believe it or not gay people want that too. And believe it or not its much harder for them to find someone hidden in the crowd of so many who are not like you. How much more difficult will it be when those numbers are reduced. I would hate to be one of those last young gay people, searching... alone. For remember, if its real, if their brains really are wired differently to be attracted to the same sex, that feeling, that reality is just as real to them as your feelings are to you. They hurt and long for love with exactly the same reality that you have.
Its so very hard to see and feel from someone elses perspective. And, be aware that what you understand about the world and the things in it may not be as simple or obvious as they may seem at first glance. The thread you pull from the tapestry may not have been the color you preferred, but it may have been in the place one needed to be.
Well, put, Artist!
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Parents should be allowed to "make the kid they want"... I wonder how easy it would be to fund these tests, produce and sell this treatment for use, if the result were to purposely make a gay child? Perhaps gay parents would like to have gay children?
Scientists know what makes people gay. Hormones do. How "exactly" it happens in differnt people is not so simple to tease out. Hormones from the environment play a role, the genetics of the mother and how much male or female hormones she passes from her to the fetus, the foetus's succeptibility to fluctuations in hormones, the foetus's genetic predisposition to being gay, etc, etc. A hermaphrodite is more likely to be attracted to someone of the same genotype (xy or xx chromosomes is the genotype ) than the rest of the population and we know how hermaphroditism happens, hormones and the same variables as being gay. Basically a gay person is a hermaphrodite of the brain. Hermaphrodites, part of the body is more "mixed": gay, part of the brain is more " "mixed" having both male and female attributes. And then there are transgeotype people like the lady I know of who couldn't have children and during some tests discovered that she had xy chromosomes, this was before it was well known that such a thing could happen. They started discovering it more during some of those tests for the olympics back in the day, and these weren't people who had changed their sex. In other words not only were their bodies mostly female their brains were as well.
Chromosomes are supposed to determine what HORMONES make you male or female. But as we see in nature and life things vary from one extreme to another. Super short to super tall, skinny to fat, light to dark, and yes male to female, etc.
For the small percentage of people that are gay, have you ever noticed how many brilliant and talented people are gay? Especially artists and creative thinkers of that type from Aristotle to Hadrian to Leonardo Da Vinci to TE Lawrence to Franco Zeffirelli. Perhaps there is something beneficial to having a few brains that are a bit mixed, that have that unique combination of wiring, bit male, bit female. If you use hormones to negate this mixture ever again, will you also lessen the gifts to society that this mixture often brings? Can you imagine HGTV in such a world?[;)] It would be a much poorly decorated one thats for sure, and poorly dressed to boot. [:P] Your not just going to change what someone is attracted to if you change the balance of hormones in someones brain as that brain is developing.
There are more differences between male and female brains than just what they are attracted to. There are other "typically" masculine and feminine behaviors, traits, and qualities as well. Be careful of what you are getting rid of in the world.
We all know how hard it is to find love in this world someone to share your life, hopes, dreams, to be there by your side with you,,,and believe it or not gay people want that too. And believe it or not its much harder for them to find someone hidden in the crowd of so many who are not like you. How much more difficult will it be when those numbers are reduced. I would hate to be one of those last young gay people, searching... alone. For remember, if its real, if their brains really are wired differently to be attracted to the same sex, that feeling, that reality is just as real to them as your feelings are to you. They hurt and long for love with exactly the same reality that you have.
Its so very hard to see and feel from someone elses perspective. And, be aware that what you understand about the world and the things in it may not be as simple or obvious as they may seem at first glance. The thread you pull from the tapestry may not have been the color you preferred, but it may have been in the place one needed to be.
There is no homosexual gene, and therefore no way to genetically engineer a way to create or prevent it's presence in a human being. All the hype about being unable to deny the natural urges and ones God given homosexuality can be summed up quite clearly this column written by my favorite college professor Dr Mike S Adams...
quote:
Dear Christopher:I appreciate your recent email characterizing me as a "sick, twisted, homophobic, right-wing, piece of slime." Compared with most of the homosexual hate mail I receive on an almost daily basis, yours was really quite articulate and civil. As such, it deserves a lengthy response.
After your initial string of epithets, you outlined an argument against my attitude towards the homosexual lifestyle. Your argument enumerated several assumptions and positions I hear in many letters from gay readers.
First of all, you argue that homosexuality is genetic, not learned. Since these sexual urges are "natural," they are also "God-given" and, therefore, you say, should be acted upon. And, since I am critical of homosexuality, you assert that I am interfering with God's will. Finally, since Jesus never explicitly criticized homosexuality, you conclude that I am "un-Christian" to do so.
The bulk of your argument can be discredited by considering the following true story that was told to me just a few weeks ago:
A 43 year old businessman was tired of working seventy hours a week and enjoying virtually no social life – especially since he was still a bachelor. So he decided to invite a couple of his neighbors to put aside their yard work and spend a Saturday at the beach throwing back beers and taking in the sun. Somehow, the neighbors both convinced their wives to let them go for the day.
By late morning, the beaches were filling up with girls in bikinis and the three musketeers were rating each one as she passed by. Just before noon, the bachelor saw a tanned blond in sunglasses who appeared to top them all. She was about 5'3", maybe 110 pounds, and must have worn a size "D" cup. Without hesitation, he tapped one of his friends on the shoulder and said "Perfect 10! Kind of makes me want to go back to college." Both of his friends soon lifted a thumb in concurrence with the judgment.
But then, something funny - funny "strange," not funny "ha ha" - happened. As the tanned young blond approached, the businessman recognized the girl. She lived just down the street in his neighborhood and attended a local middle school. In fact, she was only in the eighth grade. As soon as he did the math and realized she was around 13 years old, he felt a sickness deep inside his stomach.
A few moments later, one of his married friends also recognized the girl as his 13 year old neighbor. He felt a similar sickness in his stomach. But neither of the first two guys felt as nauseated as the third. Within a few moments, he recognized the girl as his 13 year old daughter.
The question I have for you, Christopher, is whether you consider the sexual urges of these three men to be "natural"? And, if so, would you also consider them to be "God-given." Should any of these three men act upon these urges simply because they came about naturally? And, if one or more were to act upon the urge, should I keep my objections to myself to avoid interference with the will of God?
Perhaps you are of the opinion that it would be wrong for the businessman to have sex with the 13 year old because she is not a consenting adult. But, remember, Christopher, Jesus never spoke out against statutory rape in the New Testament.
But, fortunately, we do have a basis for preventing the second man from having sex with the 13 year old. Since he is married, the act would constitute adultery, which Jesus specifically condemned in the New Testament.
Of course, that would also provide us with a reason to condemn the third man if he were to have sex with his 13 year old daughter. But, according to your twisted logic, he would be no more culpable, morally speaking, than the second man if both were to act upon the sexual attraction to the 13 year old. Incest was never mentioned by Jesus in the New Testament so it has no relevance in your theology.
Having sinful sexual urges is not the thing that separates homosexuals from the rest of the population, Christopher. It is the arrogant tendency to characterize the sinful urge as the will of God, to yield to it, and to make it the center of his being that makes the average homosexual too self-absorbed for me to tolerate. And you are simply not let off the hook by Christ's refusal to state the obvious.
Source http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=three_men_and_a_baby&ns=MikeSAdams&dt=07/24/2006&page=full&comments=true
Is there a gene for Homosexuality? First off one must consider that there is rarely one single gene that determines anything, its usually an interplay between many. And one must also see that there is a difference between ones actions and behaviors, and ones primary drives.
You can't deny there must be a genetic factor involved in what sex an animal is primarily attracted to or not. Or do we all choose? Does a red breasted robin "choose" to be attracted to a robin without a red breast and to fight one who does? Or is he genetically predisposed to do so? Either you choose to be attracted to the opposite sex or you don't.
Which is it?
Did the man and his buddies, as mentioned above, choose to be attracted to females? We often use the term, "sexual preference", this is not the most accurate or scientific word to use because it has several meanings, the word preference can mean choice, as in I prefer pepperoni over Canadian bacon. Ones food preferences are different than the basic drive to eat. The basic sexual drive and what one is attracted to underlies all preferences, fetishes, etc. Whether he is attracted to females is basic, what kind of females, older, younger, blondes, sheep, whatever those are added on top of that basic attraction or instict. Was it a choice for you to be attracted to the opposite sex or not?
Basically it can't be that there aren't any homosexuals if there are differences between the male and female brain, such that males are supposed to be attracted to females and vice versa. Are those differences a choice or genetic? Did the man choose to be attracted to females? If there are differences between male and female bodies, are those differences a choice or genetic and isn't the brain part of the body?
If you agree that there is a difference between a male and female brain to determine the sex one is attracted to it has to be that on occasion some xy brains may be more female just as some xy bodies are more female (they are called hermaphrodites or transphenotype).
Just because you can't see hermaphroditism in the brain doesn't mean it is any less real than what you can see when it is on the outside. Many times it used to be that a baby whose genitalia were ambiguous, would have its sex "assigned" to it with surgery. And many times this would result in the person growing up to discover they were attracted to the same sex. The xy baby was "assigned" to be a girl, but this xy baby grew up and was not attracted to boys. Is it normal or genetic for an xy baby to grow up and be attracted to females? If we cut off your male genitalia and gave you female hormones would you now suddenly as a girl become attracted to men? Or would your brain still be wired to be attracted to females? Would that attraction be considered genetic or a choice? At what age can this genetic attraction be changed or at what age should you choose? Its now more common to allow the person to choose his sex when they are older if the genitalia are ambiguous, because it is recognized that just because you can guess or change the outside sex, you can't yet change and determine the sex of the brain on the inside. And just as the outside of the body may be "mixed" it is realized that in these cases that it is more likely that the inside in the brain the sex is "mixed" as well.
There is a difference between the basic sexual attraction someone has, the sex, they are attracted to, and all the "preferences", behaviors, social mores, fetishes etc. that are added on top of that basic attraction.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
You can't deny there must be a genetic factor involved in what sex an animal is primarily attracted to or not.
Yes I can, and do. There has not been a gene ever found to control sexual choice, being choosing between homosexuality and heterosexuality. Furthermore, I don't consider myself an animal, nor descended from one, so an animals behavior does not apply to this topic, especially when considering moral choices.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist Or do we all choose? Does a red breasted robin "choose" to be attracted to a robin without a red breast and to fight one who does? Or is he genetically predisposed to do so? Either you choose to be attracted to the opposite sex or you don't.
Which is it?
Choice is the defining characteristic here. In the case of an animal, they have no spirit and act entirely on genetic predisposition, in essence they have no choice.
Humans by contrast have a spirit and make choices using that spirit, and knowing right from wrong in their spirit as set forth by God our Creator.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Did the man and his buddies, as mentioned above, choose to be attracted to females? We often use the term, "sexual preference", this is not the most accurate or scientific word to use because it has several meanings, the word preference can mean choice, as in I prefer pepperoni over Canadian bacon. Ones food preferences are different than the basic drive to eat. The basic sexual drive and what one is attracted to underlies all preferences, fetishes, etc. Whether he is attracted to females is basic, what kind of females, older, younger, blondes, sheep, whatever those are added on top of that basic attraction or instict. Was it a choice for you to be attracted to the opposite sex or not?
Of course it's a choice.
What differentiates a 'basic drive' from a choice, scientifically speaking of course?
What determines your imaginary 'basic drive', scientifically speaking of course?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Basically it can't be that there aren't any homosexuals if there are differences between the male and female brain, such that males are supposed to be attracted to females and vice versa. Are those differences a choice or genetic? Did the man choose to be attracted to females?
Ye, choice is occurring. You discount the human spirit and subject man and women to nothing more than genetic robots. You can't just throw choice out like that. Then you could start advocating that murderers are genetically disposed to murder and therefore not responsible for their actions.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
If there are differences between male and female bodies, are those differences a choice or genetic and isn't the brain part of the body?
Genetic, however you are making an outlandish assumption that all of our actions are based on genetics. They are not. What separates a sexual choice vs. which kind of milk to buy at the store? According to you, nothing, it's all genetically predisposed.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
If you agree that there is a difference between a male and female brain to determine the sex one is attracted to it has to be that on occasion some xy brains may be more female just as some xy bodies are more female (they are called hermaphrodites or transphenotype).
No, I don't. And what gene causes this?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Just because you can't see hermaphroditism in the brain doesn't mean it is any less real than what you can see when it is on the outside.
Gene that causes this?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Many times it used to be that a baby whose genitalia were ambiguous, would have its sex "assigned" to it with surgery. And many times this would result in the person growing up to discover they were attracted to the same sex. The xy baby was "assigned" to be a girl, but this xy baby grew up and was not attracted to boys.
That's called a really bad mistake!
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Is it normal or genetic for an xy baby to grow up and be attracted to females? If we cut off your male genitalia and gave you female hormones would you now suddenly as a girl become attracted to men? Or would your brain still be wired to be attracted to females?
I make choices using my spirit, as every other human does. I'm not a robot. I'm not an accident of nature. I'm not a pointless evolution of a puddle.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Would that attraction be considered genetic or a choice?
A choice. I know who I was created to be by my Creator. You're still trying to avoid that recognition.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
At what age can this genetic attraction be changed or at what age should you choose?
It cannot be both genetic and a choice. You're quite good at attempting to blur lines!
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Its now more common to allow the person to choose his sex when they are older if the genitalia are ambiguous, because it is recognized that just because you can guess or change the outside sex, you can't yet change and determine the sex of the brain on the inside. And just as the outside of the body may be "mixed" it is realized that in these cases that it is more likely that the inside in the brain the sex is "mixed" as well.
All you need is this elusive gene to figure it out!
It's a choice of a much larger consequence than most ever have to make, but a choice still. Few of these hermaphrodites ever are so closely middle of the road that they have a hard time with this. The hard time comes when they make a choice based on their emotions and not their spirit.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
There is a difference between the basic sexual attraction someone has, the sex, they are attracted to, and all the "preferences", behaviors, social mores, fetishes etc. that are added on top of that basic attraction.
Nonsense. You failed to prove this genetically which is your thrust. That one cannot help who they are in their mind by genetic predisposition.
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Furthermore, I don't consider myself an animal, nor descended from one, so an animals behavior does not apply to this topic, especially when considering moral choices.
Not a very good way to start out an argument.
The epitome of Truthiness (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness%22)
You lose.
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Ye, choice is occurring. You discount the human spirit and subject man and women to nothing more than genetic robots. You can't just throw choice out like that. Then you could start advocating that murderers are genetically disposed to murder and therefore not responsible for their actions.
Well, actually the study done by Yoon-Mi Hur and Thomas Bouchard in 1997 on the Twins spilt apart has shown a strong link between impulsivity and sensation-seeking behavior... which are attirbuted to geneitc makeup/factors and are found to be higher in drug abusers, delinquents, and psychopaths.
you are right though, there are no, "killing genes", but some genes due lead to violent behavior... mixed in with a bad enviroemnt or with an extra y or x chrosome... you might have the next serial killer.
Yes, you are a genetic robot... you are who you are... even if your creator created you a few genes short[}:)] Who knows maybe your creator is transgenderd??? that might expalin why such things happen.
Same can be said for homosexuals, the genetic makeup of a person along with the enviroment they are brought up in... might just be the cause for their lifestyle.
You talk a lot about Choice... do you think Homosexuals actually choose to be looked down upon by people like yourself and choose to be an outcast to society? why would anyone in their right mind make that choice?
quote:
Originally posted by unknown
QuoteOriginally posted by truth4freedom
You talk a lot about Choice... do you think Homosexuals actually choose to be looked down upon by people like yourself and choose to be an outcast to society? why would anyone in their right mind make that choice?
Thank you! That is the best argument against it being "choice". And comparing the homosexual to someone who murders (a choice one shouldn't choose) or one who fights the urge to sleep with a 13 year old? A man sleeps with a 13 year old - that hurts the 13 year old. A man murders another man, that hurts the murdered man. What does a man sleeping with another man hurt? What happens behind closed doors between two consenting adults has nothing to do with you.
Truth4freedumb....you seem new to this game.
"what church do you attend?"
Someone help me. I fail to see any relevance to homosexuality, whether it be caused by genes or environment, and the insipid story of three men ogling a 13yr old girl. Have you no children or proximity to them? Are you just totally unaware of humanity and human nature?
I could see embarrassment as a natural reaction to seeing my neighbor's daughter and mistakenly lusting after her, but anything else is ludicrous. The real moral of the story is that if men behave as pigs, swilling beer on the beach and judging women like cuts of beef, the result is not good. But then to jump to the conclusion that sex would be the inevitable response to admiring that beauty is crude thinking. If you intend to hide your hate under such flimsy arguments as you have proposed here, expect to be taken as a lightweight and laughed off. That's my response anyway.
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Furthermore, I don't consider myself an animal, nor descended from one, so an animals behavior does not apply to this topic, especially when considering moral choices.
Not a very good way to start out an argument.
The epitome of Truthiness (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness%22)
You lose.
I'm not the one relying on an imaginary gene and a primal urge that can't be resisted.
Another Wiki fan. What is it with your arguments being based on an entirely unreliable source that can be edited by nearly anyone?
Do you have scientific proof of macro evolution to back up your mocking?
quote:
Originally posted by unknown
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Ye, choice is occurring. You discount the human spirit and subject man and women to nothing more than genetic robots. You can't just throw choice out like that. Then you could start advocating that murderers are genetically disposed to murder and therefore not responsible for their actions.
Well, actually the study done by Yoon-Mi Hur and Thomas Bouchard in 1997 on the Twins spilt (sic)apart has shown a strong link between impulsivity (sic)and sensation-seeking behavior... which are attirbuted (sic) to geneitc (sic) makeup/factors and are found to be higher in drug abusers, delinquents, and psychopaths.
you are right though, there are no, "killing genes", but some genes due lead to violent behavior... mixed in with a bad enviroemnt (sic) or with an extra y or x chrosome... you might have the next serial killer.
Yes, you are a genetic robot... you are who you are... even if your creator created you a few genes short[}:)] Who knows maybe your creator is transgenderd (sic)??? that might expalin (sic) why such things happen.
Same can be said for homosexuals, the genetic makeup of a person along with the enviroment (sic)they are brought up in... might just be the cause for their lifestyle.
You talk a lot about Choice... do you think Homosexuals actually choose to be looked down upon by people like yourself and choose to be an outcast to society? why would anyone in their right mind make that choice?
You talk a lot about might, may, could. Nice argument!
I never said I look down upon homosexuals. I think it's a very unhealthy, and damaging lifestyle choice that is contrary to nature and to Gods clear directive. I am able to separate the choice from the chooser.
In your case it looks like you merit a good dose of disdain and mockery purely on your lacking ability to judge the character of a man, and obvious disdain for opposing opinions.
Great start!
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Someone help me. I fail to see any relevance to homosexuality, whether it be caused by genes or environment
Here ya go...
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995papers/satinover.html
Basically there is no gene that causes homosexuality, but when you combine all the factors of a certain genetic code and certain environmental factors you could have a homosexual.
I can't use wikipedia as the reference definition for a made-up word that's been embraced by the internet populace?
"furthermore," What does evolution have to do with us humans clearly being an animal.
Merriam Webster (or wikipedia).
Human : a bipedal primate mammal
Just because you don't consider the facts, doesn't mean they're not there. Stating outright that you're ignoring facts, a good argument does not one make.
quote:
Originally posted by tulsa1603
quote:
Originally posted by unknown
QuoteOriginally posted by truth4freedom
You talk a lot about Choice... do you think Homosexuals actually choose to be looked down upon by people like yourself and choose to be an outcast to society? why would anyone in their right mind make that choice?
Thank you! That is the best argument against it being "choice". And comparing the homosexual to someone who murders (a choice one shouldn't choose) or one who fights the urge to sleep with a 13 year old? A man sleeps with a 13 year old - that hurts the 13 year old. A man murders another man, that hurts the murdered man. What does a man sleeping with another man hurt? What happens behind closed doors between two consenting adults has nothing to do with you.
Well, there's the AIDS epidemic, brought here to the good old USA by a homosexual from Africa, and now most cases here consist of homosexuals. The treatment for an AIDS patient usually reaches the $600,000 mark much of which is paid by the US taxpayer, me. Combine that with the average age a homosexual lives to reach is a little over half of what a heterosexual reaches, and the push to create 'special classes' of hate speech that would make preaching the Bible illegal since it condemns homosexuality, and you've got a few reasons that it is hurting me. Do I want it to be illegal? No, if you want to do that in your bedroom then have at it, I could care less. But when homo fascists start pushing for hate speech laws, homosexual marriage, and demean me at every chance because I don't agree with them, then it's war. Homosexuals want 'tolerance' until it is 'intolerant' of their lifestyle choice. That they won't 'tolerate'.
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Truth4freedumb....you seem new to this game.
"what church do you attend?"
Actually, with a question like that, you stoop to the low of a character attack instead of honest and open debate. That says volumes about your character and motive, not to mention the validity of your position in this fun little conversation. Do you wish to attack my doctrinal credibility? What bearing does that have on this debate?
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Quote
You talk a lot about might, may, could. Nice argument!
I never said I look down upon homosexuals. I think it's a very unhealthy, and damaging lifestyle choice that is contrary to nature and to Gods clear directive. I am able to separate the choice from the chooser.
In your case it looks like you merit a good dose of disdain and mockery purely on your lacking ability to judge the character of a man, and obvious disdain for opposing opinions.
Great start!
You didn't have to say it... you make it crystal clear yourself.
How do you know what is God's clear directive? you don't
What character am I misjuding? yours? Sorry if I have offended you by making the notion that your creator might be Transgenderd. I guess you will find that out when you die and I am rotting in hell[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
...open debate...
Ha. is that code for flame war and character assassination?
BTW, The church you attend is perfectly relevant. It lets us know just how "open" for "debate" you are concerning this subject. Catholics teach evolution, southern baptists do not.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Someone help me. I fail to see any relevance to homosexuality, whether it be caused by genes or environment, and the insipid story of three men ogling a 13yr old girl. Have you no children or proximity to them? Are you just totally unaware of humanity and human nature?
I could see embarrassment as a natural reaction to seeing my neighbor's daughter and mistakenly lusting after her, but anything else is ludicrous. The real moral of the story is that if men behave as pigs, swilling beer on the beach and judging women like cuts of beef, the result is not good. But then to jump to the conclusion that sex would be the inevitable response to admiring that beauty is crude thinking. If you intend to hide your hate under such flimsy arguments as you have proposed here, expect to be taken as a lightweight and laughed off. That's my response anyway.
Read it again, slowwwly. Breath. Think about it. And if still puzzled, read again.
No, no children. I have spent much time with children though, and love their innocence and simple faith.
No, but I think that's where the debate is at this point. What is human nature? Are we a helpless product of our environment, an accident, a haphazard evolution. Or are we created in the image of God and have a divine, set purpose for our lives, and are we held to a moral absolute. Basically, do we believe ourselves as being god, or do we believe in the Creator, the God of the Bible. I choose the latter.
Laugh away! It doesn't change a thing. I never supposed to hate anyone here, and yet I'm receiving a lot of flak for wanting to express my opinion, which I believe I have expressed openly and factually to the best of my ability.
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
...open debate...
Ha. is that code for flame war and character assassination?
BTW, The church you attend is perfectly relevant. It lets us know just how "open" for "debate" you are concerning this subject. Catholics teach evolution, southern baptists do not.
Where in the Catholic faith is evolution taught as fact?
In that case I go to a Southern Baptist Church. Do you know the name of one I can fill in?
So let me get this straight. If I attend a church that's accepted your opinion, then I'm open for debate. But if I attend a church that does not, I'm no longer open for debate. But you somehow are? The hypocrisy is deafening. I must hold all opinions as equally valid, unless I find someone who doesn't hold my opinion as equally valid. I then will refuse to accept their opinion as being equally valid, since it doesn't agree with my opinion of the equal value of opinions. Did I get it right?
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Where in the Catholic faith is evolution taught as fact?
In that case I go to a Southern Baptist Church. Do you know the name of one I can fill in?
So let me get this straight. If I attend a church that's accepted your opinion, then I'm open for debate. But if I attend a church that does not, I'm no longer open for debate. But you somehow are? The hypocrisy is deafening. I must hold all opinions as equally valid, unless I find someone who doesn't hold my opinion as equally valid. I then will refuse to accept their opinion as being equally valid, since it doesn't agree with my opinion of the equal value of opinions. Did I get it right?
Did I say "taught as fact"?
Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36).Where did I compare my level of openness to yours??
Valid opinion?? What kind of oxymoron is that? One can have valid theories, not opinions. Fact by majority rule?
Then you start rambling...
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Quote
So let me get this straight. If I attend a church that's accepted your opinion, then I'm open for debate. But if I attend a church that does not, I'm no longer open for debate. But you somehow are? The hypocrisy is deafening. I must hold all opinions as equally valid, unless I find someone who doesn't hold my opinion as equally valid. I then will refuse to accept their opinion as being equally valid, since it doesn't agree with my opinion of the equal value of opinions. Did I get it right?
no, it just means that if you attend a Church where the Bible is taught as fact and history and not as a simple guideline for a moral code of beliefs... more than likely you are closeminded and do not adhere to debates very well.
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
I can't use wikipedia as the reference definition for a made-up word that's been embraced by the internet populace?
"furthermore," What does evolution have to do with us humans clearly being an animal.
Merriam Webster (or wikipedia).
Human : a bipedal primate mammal
Just because you don't consider the facts, doesn't mean they're not there. Stating outright that you're ignoring facts, a good argument does not one make.
First time I've seen it, but I haven't been in the trenches of the lib's for awhile.
You really expect me to respond to that? I never tried to connect the two. Read my post again.
We both consider the facts. We're just interpreting the same facts with different world views. It's called diversity. You get a lot of that in college!
quote:
Originally posted by unknown
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Quote
You talk a lot about might, may, could. Nice argument!
I never said I look down upon homosexuals. I think it's a very unhealthy, and damaging lifestyle choice that is contrary to nature and to Gods clear directive. I am able to separate the choice from the chooser.
In your case it looks like you merit a good dose of disdain and mockery purely on your lacking ability to judge the character of a man, and obvious disdain for opposing opinions.
Great start!
You didn't have to say it... you make it crystal clear yourself.
How do you know what is God's clear directive? you don't
What character am I misjuding (sic)? yours? Sorry if I have offended you by making the notion that your creator might be Transgenderd(sic). I guess you will find that out when you die and I am rotting in hell[;)]
Well you've got your wires crossed or some wax in your ears. I never stated that, and playing the victim card will only make things worse for your argument.
Actually, I do. It's all in the Bible. A wondrous book written by men as inspired by the Holy spirit. In it God lays out His clear will for us and His loving kindness toward us. It's absolute and irrefutable. Some men have spent their entire lives, learned men at that, trying to refute it, and nearly all have come to believe it as inerrant.
Where does your absolute truth come from?
You've made false statements about me and tried to twist my words to mean what they were not intended to.
If you haven't repented of your sins, believed in your heart that Jesus has paid the price for them with His sinless life and atoning blood, and confessed Him with your mouth as being Lord, then yes, you will end up in hell for eternity. And I don't want to see that happen to anyone.
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Well you've got your wires crossed or some wax in your ears. I never stated that, and playing the victim card will only make things worse for your argument.
Actually, I do. It's all in the Bible. A wondrous book written by men as inspired by the Holy spirit. In it God lays out His clear will for us and His loving kindness toward us. It's absolute and irrefutable. Some men have spent their entire lives, learned men at that, trying to refute it, and nearly all have come to believe it as inerrant.
Where does your absolute truth come from?
You've made false statements about me and tried to twist my words to mean what they were not intended to.
If you haven't repented of your sins, believed in your heart that Jesus has paid the price for them with His sinless life and atoning blood, and confessed Him with your mouth as being Lord, then yes, you will end up in hell for eternity. And I don't want to see that happen to anyone.
and the truth comes out...
Thanks, but see my problem with the Bible is that is was written by man and then it was translated from Hebrew by men drunk off wine.... Which would make it far from being, "absolute and irrefutable," I have a hard time putting my full faith in that kind of thing, but the Bible does provide a good moral code and some sort of purpose in life, but still the Bible is full of contradictions.
Why are there two creation stories???
The Bible is a collection of stories... kind of reminds me of the game we play as kids, when one kids whispers a sentence into another's ear and at the end of the line you get something completely different... The Bible is the same way and should only be regarded as a book of faith and nothing more.
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Someone help me. I fail to see any relevance to homosexuality, whether it be caused by genes or environment, and the insipid story of three men ogling a 13yr old girl. Have you no children or proximity to them? Are you just totally unaware of humanity and human nature?
I could see embarrassment as a natural reaction to seeing my neighbor's daughter and mistakenly lusting after her, but anything else is ludicrous. The real moral of the story is that if men behave as pigs, swilling beer on the beach and judging women like cuts of beef, the result is not good. But then to jump to the conclusion that sex would be the inevitable response to admiring that beauty is crude thinking. If you intend to hide your hate under such flimsy arguments as you have proposed here, expect to be taken as a lightweight and laughed off. That's my response anyway.
Read it again, slowwwly. Breath. Think about it. And if still puzzled, read again.
No, no children. I have spent much time with children though, and love their innocence and simple faith.
No, but I think that's where the debate is at this point. What is human nature? Are we a helpless product of our environment, an accident, a haphazard evolution. Or are we created in the image of God and have a divine, set purpose for our lives, and are we held to a moral absolute. Basically, do we believe ourselves as being god, or do we believe in the Creator, the God of the Bible. I choose the latter.
Laugh away! It doesn't change a thing. I never supposed to hate anyone here, and yet I'm receiving a lot of flak for wanting to express my opinion, which I believe I have expressed openly and factually to the best of my ability.
Drop to your knees, perk your nose up, close your eyes, and kiss my arse.
You seem to have missed the true meaning of that story of three horny men. But then it didn't suit you so you made it fit.
When you have experienced more life and less preaching, then you can start preaching to us. Meanwhile you're just another religious nut job, ignoring science and history, incorrectly interpreting the Bible, and generally espousing hateful ideology.
For instance, what is your proof that a homosexual brought Aids to America? None. Could have been (probably was) due to blood transfusions, intravenous drug usage or even animals. But that doesn't fit your scheme and then we would have to demonize doctors, hospitals, animal labs and hemophiliacs. Just doesn't work for your religion, does it?
I heard Jesus died in LA during his comeback. Was I wrong?
Jesus proof (//%22http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVL656my8Sc%22)
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Truth4freedumb....you seem new to this game.
"what church do you attend?"
Actually, with a question like that, you stoop to the low of a character attack instead of honest and open debate. That says volumes about your character and motive, not to mention the validity of your position in this fun little conversation. Do you wish to attack my doctrinal credibility? What bearing does that have on this debate?
Hey, I want to know your frame of reference. So, it has plenty to do with it.
Honestly, I was making my typical sarcastic remark to newbies who act as though religious beliefs are something you wear on your sleeve.....that and the question is the most asked question around town. Comes before "what's your name?" and "what do you do?".
Besides, I started this thread giving me the right to ask follow up questions.
quote:
Originally posted by BKDotCom
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Where in the Catholic faith is evolution taught as fact?
In that case I go to a Southern Baptist Church. Do you know the name of one I can fill in?
So let me get this straight. If I attend a church that's accepted your opinion, then I'm open for debate. But if I attend a church that does not, I'm no longer open for debate. But you somehow are? The hypocrisy is deafening. I must hold all opinions as equally valid, unless I find someone who doesn't hold my opinion as equally valid. I then will refuse to accept their opinion as being equally valid, since it doesn't agree with my opinion of the equal value of opinions. Did I get it right?
Did I say "taught as fact"?
Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36).
Where did I compare my level of openness to yours??
Valid opinion?? What kind of oxymoron is that? One can have valid theories, not opinions. Fact by majority rule?
Then you start rambling...
So do you think that debate is only 'open', if one does not hold to an absolute view. That's quite an 'open' opinion.
It's not. how do you refute a valid opinion? So, then what constitutes a valid theory? I can say with confidence that Darwins philosophy is not a valid theory.
You're rambling, and if you just want to have a flame war and do not quit the circular reasoning nonsense, I'll end this discussion and leave the readers, not your forum buddies to decide the outcome.
quote:
Originally posted by unknown
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
Quote
So let me get this straight. If I attend a church that's accepted your opinion, then I'm open for debate. But if I attend a church that does not, I'm no longer open for debate. But you somehow are? The hypocrisy is deafening. I must hold all opinions as equally valid, unless I find someone who doesn't hold my opinion as equally valid. I then will refuse to accept their opinion as being equally valid, since it doesn't agree with my opinion of the equal value of opinions. Did I get it right?
no, it just means that if you attend a Church where the Bible is taught as fact and history and not as a simple guideline for a moral code of beliefs... more than likely you are closeminded (sic) and do not adhere to debates very well.
On the contrary, you do not. I have investigated and been a proponent for both. You are close minded if you believe that those who do not share your moral relativism are not capable of debate. In effect, you close your mind to any world view that holds an absolute truth, because your world view holds all truth as valid to the them that believe it, but not to you. Anyone who holds an absolute worldview is not relative like you, so you deem their worldview as closed minded and not valid. You're a hypocrite, and my previous description fits you perfectly.
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Hey, I want to know your frame of reference. So, it has plenty to do with it.
Honestly, I was making my typical sarcastic remark to newbies who act as though religious beliefs are something you wear on your sleeve.....that and the question is the most asked question around town. Comes before "what's your name?" and "what do you do?".
Besides, I started this thread giving me the right to ask follow up questions.
Great! Heavy sarcasm is my favorite method of communication. I can tell we'll fast become friends.
Truth is, I'm a preachers kid, and after observing the game of church politics, and the way people treat the Gospel with such contempt, I hold church in my home with my wife and myself. I am currently looking for a good church to get involved with.
I believe religion, true religion should permeate every area of your life, just as post modernism does with many here. I'm preaching and you're preaching. We both have differing world views and what's so hard about debating those?
I'm sorry, where are my manners. My name is Jeremy, and I work at an international company arranging services for their VIP clients. I am also very interested and involved in Conservative grassroots politics.
Ask away!
quote:
Originally posted by unknown
and the truth comes out...
Thanks, but see my problem with the Bible is that is was written by man and then it was translated from Hebrew by men drunk off wine.... Which would make it far from being, "absolute and irrefutable," I have a hard time putting my full faith in that kind of thing, but the Bible does provide a good moral code and some sort of purpose in life, but still the Bible is full of contradictions.
Why are there two creation stories???
The Bible is a collection of stories... kind of reminds me of the game we play as kids, when one kids whispers a sentence into another's ear and at the end of the line you get something completely different... The Bible is the same way and should only be regarded as a book of faith and nothing more.
You really think they were drunk when they translated it? How come original Greek and Hebrew translations from the first century keep turning up that validate out current King James translation?
Find me one clear contradiction, in context. Just one.
I've never seen two. Where do they appear, and how do they contradict each other?
Funny thing, there are 300 prophesies written about Jesus thousands of years before His life that were fulfilled by Him to the letter. Also, Jesus was prophesied, on several occasions to die in a manner not even used during the time of the prophecy. I could go on, and on, and on....
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Drop to your knees, perk your nose up, close your eyes, and kiss my arse.
That's the best argument I've seen all day!
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
You seem to have missed the true meaning of that story of three horny men. But then it didn't suit you so you made it fit.
No, that would be you that's missed it. But how is that view of the world with your head so far up...ahh, never mind. Enjoy your self confident delusion.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
When you have experienced more life and less preaching, then you can start preaching to us. Meanwhile you're just another religious nut job, ignoring science and history, incorrectly interpreting the Bible, and generally espousing hateful ideology.
I believe you are in need of more preaching, and less life. You're just another intolerant moral relativist with no original thoughts or arguments, ignoring that the fathers of modern science were strong Christians and not refuting anything I say, but attacking me personally as I contribute historical and Biblical fact.
Refute me. Point by point. I dare you.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
For instance, what is your proof that a homosexual brought Aids to America? None. Could have been (probably was) due to blood transfusions, intravenous drug usage or even animals. But that doesn't fit your scheme and then we would have to demonize doctors, hospitals, animal labs and hemophiliacs. Just doesn't work for your religion, does it?
All personal attack and no fact yourself. I will get it tomorrow when I come back to play!
The most accepted view is that aids came from chimps in Africa... how it came into contact with man is not known, but to say that it is only spread by homosexuals.... is... well, fits right up truth4freedom's alley
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
You can't deny there must be a genetic factor involved in what sex an animal is primarily attracted to or not.
Yes I can, and do. There has not been a gene ever found to control sexual choice, being choosing between homosexuality and heterosexuality. Furthermore, I don't consider myself an animal, nor descended from one, so an animals behavior does not apply to this topic, especially when considering moral choices.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist Or do we all choose? Does a red breasted robin "choose" to be attracted to a robin without a red breast and to fight one who does? Or is he genetically predisposed to do so? Either you choose to be attracted to the opposite sex or you don't.
Which is it?
Choice is the defining characteristic here. In the case of an animal, they have no spirit and act entirely on genetic predisposition, in essence they have no choice.
Humans by contrast have a spirit and make choices using that spirit, and knowing right from wrong in their spirit as set forth by God our Creator.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Did the man and his buddies, as mentioned above, choose to be attracted to females? We often use the term, "sexual preference", this is not the most accurate or scientific word to use because it has several meanings, the word preference can mean choice, as in I prefer pepperoni over Canadian bacon. Ones food preferences are different than the basic drive to eat. The basic sexual drive and what one is attracted to underlies all preferences, fetishes, etc. Whether he is attracted to females is basic, what kind of females, older, younger, blondes, sheep, whatever those are added on top of that basic attraction or instict. Was it a choice for you to be attracted to the opposite sex or not?
Of course it's a choice.
What differentiates a 'basic drive' from a choice, scientifically speaking of course?
What determines your imaginary 'basic drive', scientifically speaking of course?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Basically it can't be that there aren't any homosexuals if there are differences between the male and female brain, such that males are supposed to be attracted to females and vice versa. Are those differences a choice or genetic? Did the man choose to be attracted to females?
Ye, choice is occurring. You discount the human spirit and subject man and women to nothing more than genetic robots. You can't just throw choice out like that. Then you could start advocating that murderers are genetically disposed to murder and therefore not responsible for their actions.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
If there are differences between male and female bodies, are those differences a choice or genetic and isn't the brain part of the body?
Genetic, however you are making an outlandish assumption that all of our actions are based on genetics. They are not. What separates a sexual choice vs. which kind of milk to buy at the store? According to you, nothing, it's all genetically predisposed.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
If you agree that there is a difference between a male and female brain to determine the sex one is attracted to it has to be that on occasion some xy brains may be more female just as some xy bodies are more female (they are called hermaphrodites or transphenotype).
No, I don't. And what gene causes this?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Just because you can't see hermaphroditism in the brain doesn't mean it is any less real than what you can see when it is on the outside.
Gene that causes this?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Many times it used to be that a baby whose genitalia were ambiguous, would have its sex "assigned" to it with surgery. And many times this would result in the person growing up to discover they were attracted to the same sex. The xy baby was "assigned" to be a girl, but this xy baby grew up and was not attracted to boys.
That's called a really bad mistake!
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Is it normal or genetic for an xy baby to grow up and be attracted to females? If we cut off your male genitalia and gave you female hormones would you now suddenly as a girl become attracted to men? Or would your brain still be wired to be attracted to females?
I make choices using my spirit, as every other human does. I'm not a robot. I'm not an accident of nature. I'm not a pointless evolution of a puddle.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Would that attraction be considered genetic or a choice?
A choice. I know who I was created to be by my Creator. You're still trying to avoid that recognition.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
At what age can this genetic attraction be changed or at what age should you choose?
It cannot be both genetic and a choice. You're quite good at attempting to blur lines!
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Its now more common to allow the person to choose his sex when they are older if the genitalia are ambiguous, because it is recognized that just because you can guess or change the outside sex, you can't yet change and determine the sex of the brain on the inside. And just as the outside of the body may be "mixed" it is realized that in these cases that it is more likely that the inside in the brain the sex is "mixed" as well.
All you need is this elusive gene to figure it out!
It's a choice of a much larger consequence than most ever have to make, but a choice still. Few of these hermaphrodites ever are so closely middle of the road that they have a hard time with this. The hard time comes when they make a choice based on their emotions and not their spirit.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
There is a difference between the basic sexual attraction someone has, the sex, they are attracted to, and all the "preferences", behaviors, social mores, fetishes etc. that are added on top of that basic attraction.
Nonsense. You failed to prove this genetically which is your thrust. That one cannot help who they are in their mind by genetic predisposition.
It seems the thread I am seeing in your response may have something to do with this...
Homosexuality is to you mostly behaviors or a way of choosing to think. In other words if you are a man who has sex with a man you are a homosexual. In one sense that is true, but what is different from that is whether or not that man is "by nature" attracted to men vrs women. If a person were a virgin, they could still be a homosexual, no sex act need be involved. If a straight person engaged in a homosexual act that would not make them a homosexual, it was a homosexual act but they would not identify as a homosexual any more than a homosexual male who had sex with a woman would be straight. You could choose to not have sex at all, but you would still either be heterosexual or a homosexual. A homosexual male can choose to only have sex with women, but would still be a homosexual. And would be going against his nature.
But see how clumsy those arguments are? I think that is because of the language being used and the different meanings implied in that one word, "homosexual" and how its easy to trip from one meaning to another.
This is why I think its useful to use the terms straight and gay as different from the term homosexual and heterosexual. Homosexual and heterosexual would be used to describe acts or thoughts, Gay or straight would be used to describe the nature. This would help clear up the different meanings or definitions we are using within one word. Give each meaning a different word.
We can confuse the issue when we try to use the term homosexual as both nature and choice. A homosexual can indeed choose to not have sex with someone of the same sex, to not have sex at all. Or to even be with someone of the opposite sex. But he would still be gay. A straight person could have sex with someone of the same sex and be described as a homosexual, but not gay.
A gay gene? Show me the gene for being male or female?
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Drop to your knees, perk your nose up, close your eyes, and kiss my arse.
That's the best argument I've seen all day!
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
You seem to have missed the true meaning of that story of three horny men. But then it didn't suit you so you made it fit.
No, that would be you that's missed it. But how is that view of the world with your head so far up...ahh, never mind. Enjoy your self confident delusion.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
When you have experienced more life and less preaching, then you can start preaching to us. Meanwhile you're just another religious nut job, ignoring science and history, incorrectly interpreting the Bible, and generally espousing hateful ideology.
I believe you are in need of more preaching, and less life. You're just another intolerant moral relativist with no original thoughts or arguments, ignoring that the fathers of modern science were strong Christians and not refuting anything I say, but attacking me personally as I contribute historical and Biblical fact.
Refute me. Point by point. I dare you.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
For instance, what is your proof that a homosexual brought Aids to America? None. Could have been (probably was) due to blood transfusions, intravenous drug usage or even animals. But that doesn't fit your scheme and then we would have to demonize doctors, hospitals, animal labs and hemophiliacs. Just doesn't work for your religion, does it?
All personal attack and no fact yourself. I will get it tomorrow when I come back to play!
Silly little preacher's boy. Learn life's lessons on your own. I could accept your name calling, your smugness, your general condescension and overt immaturity but refusing to answer my one true criticism of your remark about the origin of Aids excludes you from my discourse list.
One tip though before I bow out and return to the comfort of my intolerant, moral relativism. (I'm only intolerant of those who disagree with me!) Work at differentiating and separating the competing forces of politics, spiritualism and religion. My time too precious.
Originally posted by truth4freedom.
quote:
There is no homosexual gene, and therefore no way to genetically engineer a way to create or prevent it's presence in a human being. All the hype about being unable to deny the natural urges and ones God given homosexuality can be summed up quite clearly this column written by my favorite college professor Dr Mike S Adams...
I noticed your favorite Professor teaches Criminology.. In North Carolina...!
Tell me Jeremy... How is it that a Professor of Criminology is thought to know more about Science than the other Scientist and experts on the subject of this debate..?
And one final thing... Do you suppose that Dr. Kamau Kambon, also of North Carolina, should be thought of as a world class philosopher because some absorb his venom at the same rate that you absorb "Dogma and Exorcisms".........?
"Live and let live..." Tranquilino Altamirano 1986 A.D.
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Hey, I want to know your frame of reference. So, it has plenty to do with it.
Honestly, I was making my typical sarcastic remark to newbies who act as though religious beliefs are something you wear on your sleeve.....that and the question is the most asked question around town. Comes before "what's your name?" and "what do you do?".
Besides, I started this thread giving me the right to ask follow up questions.
Great! Heavy sarcasm is my favorite method of communication. I can tell we'll fast become friends.
Truth is, I'm a preachers kid, and after observing the game of church politics, and the way people treat the Gospel with such contempt, I hold church in my home with my wife and myself. I am currently looking for a good church to get involved with.
I believe religion, true religion should permeate every area of your life, just as post modernism does with many here. I'm preaching and you're preaching. We both have differing world views and what's so hard about debating those?
I'm sorry, where are my manners. My name is Jeremy, and I work at an international company arranging services for their VIP clients. I am also very interested and involved in Conservative grassroots politics.
Ask away!
"My religion is kindness"
The Dalai Lama
"Direct your eye right inward, and you'll find
A thousand regions in your mind
Yet undiscovered. Travel them and be
Expert in home-cosmography."
Thoreau, Walden
quote:
Originally posted by truth4freedom
I believe you are in need of more preaching, and less life. You're just another intolerant moral relativist with no original thoughts or arguments, ignoring that the fathers of modern science were strong Christians and not refuting anything I say, but attacking me personally as I contribute historical and Biblical fact.
Refute me. Point by point. I dare you.
Oh, pick me, please...
I'll take "The Fathers of Modern Science were Strong Christians" for $500 please...
What an interesting world you live in... a world of re-writing history, calling tolerant people "intolerant" and listing yourself as an example of "diversity."
You've married politics and religion again... you've deified all sorts of people who agree with your dogma... you are the LORD AND MASTER of circular arguments....
Welcome to the world of modern Republi-christianity... a legacy that stains the traditional republican party and stains the questioning legacy of christianity... moral relativism is especially prevalent for all those modern republi-christians who treat their friends to the New Testament and people they don't know/don't like to the Old Testament... talk about "moral relativism"... welcome to the republi-christian's "leviticus buffet."
These folks just don't understand the differences between charismatic/fundamentalist christians and the deists who founded this country...
Your opinions are lifted from Liberty Univ and Bob Jones Univ texts... your agenda is something the founding fathers and all honorable scientists seeking truth would scorn... your religion has forsaken the mystery/reverence for yah-weh and replaced it with a grandly deluded "personal relationship" with Jesus.
Jeremy, I honestly don't know how you can consider yourself a "religious" man yet you do nothing but spew intolerance and judgement of another group of people.
Stop preaching and open up your heart and embrace all the differences that make us unique human beings. You may learn a thing or two.
I still don't get how two people loving each other (whatever sex they are) can be so offensive to some people. I'm not sure how it affects you whatsoever.
Timely article (//%22http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-2527347,00.html%22)
^The article will be debunked by truthforefreedom in nothing flat...
I think the proper term for Jeremy would be "Christianist."
Which, incidentally, was popularized by a conservative who is none too happy to see fundamentalists bullying people.
I skipped over most of the discussion in this thread because this topic seems to come up every 6 months or so and always decends into moronic, name calling posts.
As a gay man, these are my thoughts on "curing" homosexuality:
We will probably never scientifically know the answer to the "nature vs. nurture", genetic or learned behaviour question. Why should anyone care? The only possible reason is that if it is learned behavior, then people that condemn homosexuality on religious grounds could use that to further argue their point. If you think homosexuality is a sin, fine, and live your own life accordingly; but you have no right to force your opinions on the lives of others that believe differently, through civil legislation or just plain verbal bashing. I have known that I was "different" from about the age of 8, although I had no knowledge of human sexuality and such back then. I have always considered myself gay since I fully understood what that meant, and I never wrestled with personal angst, indecision, and self-loathing that some gay adults seem to deal with. And I was raised in a strict Roman Catholic family! Go figure.
What CONSENTING ADULTS do in the privacy of their own homes is nobody's business but their own, and the US Supreme Court basically confirmed this a few years ago by striking down "crimes against nature" laws (sodomy laws) that outlawed consensual sex between same-sex partners.
I think the gay marriage question will become a non-issue within the next 15-20 years. Most young people under 30 have no problem with homosexuality between consenting adults and feel gays should have the right to CIVIL marriage, with the same benefits has heterosexual marriage. Marriage performed and sanctioned by a religious organization should always be the perogative of that denomination, IMO.
Thank you, Steve, for your insightful and rational response.
My eyes continue to be opened every day to the ignorance and arrogance that comes from fellow church people on this topic. As a gay Christian, I don't expect my church peers or family to fully understand, because I realize there is an underlying threat to their faith that they don't want to address. That "threat" has to do with their reading of the Bible through a black-and-white, clear-cut lens. However, I have come to realize that God's Word includes many areas of gray. That is why He created us with rational minds .... so we can discern the gray in light of His greatest commandment to love one another as Christ has loved us.
As much as they may hate me (or profess to love me, but still wanting to change me), the only thing I can do is live my life and love them back.
Sorry for getting preachy, but it hits personal.
For people like truth4freedom, they don't want to hear that God gives us gray areas. They don't want to hear that a boy may become a Christian at age 8, discover he is gay at age 10, pray for 20 years that God would change him, live during that time in self-loathing and depression with a feeling of no way out, then finally accept things at age 31 and seek a loving and monogamous relationship with another man, while all still having that relationship with the Lord (my story in a nutshell). For truth4freedom's simple mind, it's too much to bear.
Personally, I think truth4freedom protests a little too much. :^)
Oh who cares if someone is gay, les, or bi.....that's their business NOT yours, so get over it and quit cutting into someone else's private affairs![V][V]
What if you want your child to be gay?
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
What if you want your child to be gay?
You play them disco when they are in the womb.
it wouldnt bother me none...not one bit! that's their choice and i'd accept it for who they are!
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
What if you want your child to be gay?
I have no children and I have never had a desire for children. Some gay people do however, but I have never heard of any of my gay friends or acquaintences "wanting" their children to be gay. I think any decent parent, gay or straight, would want their children to be happy and content with their lives, and their sexuality is not important. Gay people (myself included) have no desire to "recruit" or spawn gay children. Nature takes quite good care of that without any human intervention.
This thread reminds me of the lessons of psychology that teach us that moral arguments are made up AFTER the emotions have already passed judgement. That is, you have an emotional response to something, and THEN you create a "rational argument" to support your reaction.
This explains why neither side in this debate will ever be able to change the other side's mind through rational debate. The "debate" has already taken place at the visceral level (gut feelings, snap judements, intuitions...and a lifetime of programming) and the only way people will change is when they experience something that forces them to re-evaluate from the inside out.
Having said that, why "cure" homosexuality? Why get rid of all the good-looking, stylish, witty guys on the planet? Without these cultured afficianados to teach everyone else about the finer things in life, there'd be a lot more un-cultured rednecks...and everything served at restaruants would have to be cooked on a grill.[;)]
Admit it...a lot of social conservatives sing Cole Porter songs...and their lives are more beautiful because of it.
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
This thread reminds me of the lessons of psychology that teach us that moral arguments are made up AFTER the emotions have already passed judgement. That is, you have an emotional response to something, and THEN you create a "rational argument" to support your reaction.
This explains why neither side in this debate will ever be able to change the other side's mind through rational debate. The "debate" has already taken place at the visceral level (gut feelings, snap judements, intuitions...and a lifetime of programming) and the only way people will change is when they experience something that forces them to re-evaluate from the inside out.
Having said that, why "cure" homosexuality? Why get rid of all the good-looking, stylish, witty guys on the planet? Without these cultured afficianados to teach everyone else about the finer things in life, there'd be a lot more un-cultured rednecks...and everything served at restaruants would have to be cooked on a grill.[;)]
Admit it...a lot of social conservatives sing Cole Porter songs...and their lives are more beautiful because of it.
I like that. But as in any generalization it didn't work for me (emotions/judgement). Can't remember if I had one of those life changing experiences. I was just as homophobic as any other jr. high school slug. Probably in college when exposed to higher forms of life. But it wasn't cataclysmic. Just over time realized the reality of "different strokes..." Began to see people in terms of their personality and behaviour and not their bed partners. I really feel bad for those who are imprisoned by such emotions.
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Admit it...a lot of social conservatives sing Cole Porter songs...and their lives are more beautiful because of it.
Amen! And Lorenz Hart too. Cole Porter and Lorenz Hart were two of the most sophisticated poets/lyricists the human race has ever seen. The fact that they were both gay men is secondary to their works.
Speaking of oil industry and gays lol. I think someone at TU should do a study about the rate of homosexuality, hermaphroditism, etc. in Sand Springs.
I started noticing an unusual pattern a long time ago concerning the number of gay people from Sand Springs. I know several people from there who are gay and one time while at a "show" a drag queen asked the audience how many people there were from Sand Springs. Waaay too many people raised their hands for such a small town. I would guess that if you were to split the audience into, out of towners, Tulsans, and people from Sand Springs, that the number of gay people from Sand Springs was around 1/3 the number of people from Tulsa. One coincidence perhaps? But then I started paying attention and asking people where they were from on different occasions and the same inordinate skew of gay people from Sand Springs pops up. Sand Springs 18,000 versus Tulsa at say 380,000. My little brain is telling me something is up.
Then lets add onto this news article after news article, study after study showing how plastics and petrochemicals break down into types of female hormones in the environment. Certain plastics have been banned in parts of Europe for just this reason. Then studies showing that places where these chemicals are found in the environment correlate with more "gay" animals. Parts of the florida everglades where the male alligators have smaller than usual "male parts" and are more interested in eachother than the females and scientists worry that the population may be affected. Some species of birds in Cali, etc. etc. And most importantly the studies in Europe on human exposures to these chemicals.
Female hormones from the environment are known to have an effect on the developing fetus. (it doesnt happen like that one christian group was saying because of guys drinking soy milk lol, soy does have female hormones in it but an adult male drinking it will not have any effect, [unless he is pregnant and we can save that for another discussion] they have the basic idea of cause and effect, just not the timing lol)
Soooo lets see,,,, Quite large number of gay people coming from one small town next to petrochemical refineries. Hmmmmmm And where do they get their water from anyway? Perhaps some soil sample checks wouldn't hurt either lol.
Would make a great paper for some grad student I would say.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Speaking of oil industry and gays lol. I think someone at TU should do a study about the rate of homosexuality, hermaphroditism, etc. in Sand Springs.
I started noticing an unusual pattern a long time ago concerning the number of gay people from Sand Springs. I know several people from there who are gay and one time while at a "show" a drag queen asked the audience how many people there were from Sand Springs. Waaay too many people raised their hands for such a small town. I would guess that if you were to split the audience into, out of towners, Tulsans, and people from Sand Springs, that the number of gay people from Sand Springs was around 1/3 the number of people from Tulsa. One coincidence perhaps? But then I started paying attention and asking people where they were from on different occasions and the same inordinate skew of gay people from Sand Springs pops up. Sand Springs 18,000 versus Tulsa at say 380,000. My little brain is telling me something is up.
Then lets add onto this news article after news article, study after study showing how plastics and petrochemicals break down into types of female hormones in the environment. Certain plastics have been banned in parts of Europe for just this reason. Then studies showing that places where these chemicals are found in the environment correlate with more "gay" animals. Parts of the florida everglades where the male alligators have smaller than usual "male parts" and are more interested in eachother than the females and scientists worry that the population may be affected. Some species of birds in Cali, etc. etc. And most importantly the studies in Europe on human exposures to these chemicals.
Female hormones from the environment are known to have an effect on the developing fetus. (it doesnt happen like that one christian group was saying because of guys drinking soy milk lol, soy does have female hormones in it but an adult male drinking it will not have any effect, [unless he is pregnant and we can save that for another discussion] they have the basic idea of cause and effect, just not the timing lol)
Soooo lets see,,,, Quite large number of gay people coming from one small town next to petrochemical refineries. Hmmmmmm And where do they get their water from anyway? Perhaps some soil sample checks wouldn't hurt either lol.
Would make a great paper for some grad student I would say.
Honestly...
The first thing that comes to mind is, how many of these Sand Springs residents are native to the city(and thus affected in the womb)? Then how does that number compare to other suburban towns around the metro?(could be a result of the natural migration of population to burbs.) But lastly and most importantly, Sand Springs is not a predominantly Petrochemical dominated town. There is one plant, Baker Petrolite, that I know of that makes oil well blasting materials. It is predominantly a steel production & mining town. The large steel plant next to the WalMart is the largest employer. Mineral mining is also big with all the limestone and sand in the area.
There water comes mostly from Shell Lake, an impound once considered for Tulsa water. No industrial plants near it or the creek.
Wouldn't be the thesis I would work on.[;)]
I wouldn't use the refinery theory, either, mainly because the closest refinery is about eight miles east of Sand Springs. The prevailing winds wouldn't bring the air pollutants into Sand Springs, except for those very rare days it comes from the east.
If there is indeed a high ratio of gays in Sand Springs (and I'm not saying there are), it's more likely because it's an old community with a lot of cool fixer-upper houses and plenty of undeveloped land in nearby Osage County. My wife and I were astounded by the architecture I saw in The Line neighborhood not far from Sand Springs. I think creative types, as gays have a tendency to be, like older, distinctive homes instead of the bland subdivisions you typically see in south Tulsa.
That's my theory. Then again, I could be wrong.
No no no, these aren't older gay people these are always either younger gay people, early 20s who have moved to Tulsa from Sand Springs or people who are older and were raised there but now live in Tulsa. No gay person I know of would purposefully move TO Sand Springs. Most gay people I know of leave Tulsa and most gays wouldnt move here from some where else let alone to Sand Springs. If its not the refinery angle, there must be something lol. The one idea that could be possible is as many of my friends have noticed,,, Gay people who are born in Tulsa tend to leave to go to the more "hip or best places to live" or big cities. And for the small towns around Tulsa, Tulsa is the big city for them. The gay population in Tulsa is very poor and uneducated compared to what you will find in say Dallas or Austin. Here we basically start talking about that "creative class" disparity thing that Tulsa has a problem with.
But that still wouldn't explain why you see more of them from Sand Springs than say Owasso and BA? Unless they are likely to be the more "severely closeted" types from being brought up in those more religious environments lol? Although more and more they are coming from those areas. Perhaps its because the age demographics of the people who have moved to BA, started their families, many of those kids havent yet become old enough to move out on their own. Just guesses.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
No no no, these aren't older gay people these are always either younger gay people, early 20s who have moved to Tulsa from Sand Springs or people who are older and were raised there but now live in Tulsa. No gay person I know of would purposefully move TO Sand Springs. Most gay people I know of leave Tulsa and most gays wouldnt move here from some where else let alone to Sand Springs. If its not the refinery angle, there must be something lol. The one idea that could be possible is as many of my friends have noticed,,, Gay people who are born in Tulsa tend to leave to go to the more "hip or best places to live" or big cities. And for the small towns around Tulsa, Tulsa is the big city for them. The gay population in Tulsa is very poor and uneducated compared to what you will find in say Dallas or Austin. Here we basically start talking about that "creative class" disparity thing that Tulsa has a problem with.
But that still wouldn't explain why you see more of them from Sand Springs than say Owasso and BA? Unless they are likely to be the more "severely closeted" types from being brought up in those more religious environments lol? Although more and more they are coming from those areas. Perhaps its because the age demographics of the people who have moved to BA, started their families, many of those kids havent yet become old enough to move out on their own. Just guesses.
You know, i used to think the same thing about Pryor. I know SOOO many gays from there, it's crazy. They have that Mid America Industrial Park...Hmm....Hhahaha
I agree with Artist that Tulsa is a "training bra" city. It's where people from rural areas/small towns come to the "big city." A lot of native Tulsans, on the other hand, can't wait to leave and go somewhere more sophisticated/open-minded/cultural/full of energy, etc.
By the way, instead of searching for a "cure" for homosexuality...perhaps we should work to cure bigotry and arbitrary hatred, instead.
Of all the problems I can think of in the world, not one of them is caused by too many people loving each other.
Just a thought.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
The gay population in Tulsa is very poor and uneducated compared to what you will find in say Dallas...
We must be thinking of different cities named Dallas. [:P] Every person I met in Dallas was a dunce, and don't get me started on Houston.
quote:
Originally posted by TURobY
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
The gay population in Tulsa is very poor and uneducated compared to what you will find in say Dallas...
We must be thinking of different cities named Dallas. [:P] Every person I met in Dallas was a dunce, and don't get me started on Houston.
While this is getting rather off topic, I thought I would reply. I have lived in Tulsa all my life and visited Dallas, Houston many times over the past 40 years and interacted with the gay communities and populations of all 3 cities. I have found there to be no real difference in the education and attitudes of the gay people (and the population in general) in these cities; the only difference to me is sheer numbers of inhabitants.
All 3 cities have their fair share of elite, or self-important elite gay & straight persons that think their "sh*t don't stink" and think civilization would crash without them. The vast majority of gay people in Tulsa/Dallas/Houston are not the people you see at the gay bars and marching in the pride parades, they are average middle class people like myself that are happy to just blend in with the general population and keep their private lives private.
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
The vast majority of gay people in Tulsa/Dallas/Houston are not the people you see at the gay bars and marching in the pride parades, they are average middle class people like myself that are happy to just blend in with the general population and keep their private lives private.
So going to a gay bar or a pride parade equates to not being a average middle class person? I hope you didn't mean to imply that Steve. I don't really go to bars either because I normally have other things I find more entertaining, but I certainly wouldn't say the people at the bars or at the parade are any different than myself.
quote:
Originally posted by okiebybirth
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
The vast majority of gay people in Tulsa/Dallas/Houston are not the people you see at the gay bars and marching in the pride parades, they are average middle class people like myself that are happy to just blend in with the general population and keep their private lives private.
So going to a gay bar or a pride parade equates to not being a average middle class person? I hope you didn't mean to imply that Steve. I don't really go to bars either because I normally have other things I find more entertaining, but I certainly wouldn't say the people at the bars or at the parade are any different than myself.
I have frequented many a gay bar myself in my years; what I was trying to say was that the gay people most in the public eye, those that get the publicity, are the extremes you see at events like the "pride" parades, the Dykes on Bikes, the gay men in nun's habits, etc. I don't think these folks are truly representative of the gay population, but they are the ones that get the publicity. I agree with you, the average gay bar patron is no different than me, except where they choose to socialize.
Ok so what do you think about this then... The dating scene for the college educated,fit, well traveled, yuppy, "creative class" gay person in Tulsa. I think that type of person is practically nonexistent here. Compared to say, Denver or Austin.
Is it equally difficult for both gay and straight people here to find that type?
If it is more difficult regardless, is that because so many of that type leave Tulsa and or Tulsa is not a place where those people would choose to move?
Or is it just a fact of population numbers in general? Less people thus less percentage of gays of any type?
I think that, as that guest speaker who came into town once said,,, "Gays are like the canary in the mine" they are a good indicator of whether the "creative class" type person will find an area attractive or not.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Ok so what do you think about this then... The dating scene for the college educated,fit, well traveled, yuppy, "creative class" gay person in Tulsa. I think that type of person is practically nonexistent here. Compared to say, Denver or Austin.
Is it equally difficult for both gay and straight people here to find that type?
If it is more difficult regardless, is that because so many of that type leave Tulsa and or Tulsa is not a place where those people would choose to move?
Or is it just a fact of population numbers in general? Less people thus less percentage of gays of any type?
I think that, as that guest speaker who came into town once said,,, "Gays are like the canary in the mine" they are a good indicator of whether the "creative class" type person will find an area attractive or not.
But Richard Florida rated Tulsa number 16 in metro areas with population between 500,000 and 1 million. He said 28.7% or 112,700 people were in the creative class.
I'm not saying when it comes to dating Tulsa is great, because I don't know, but in terms of the creative class which i presume you are mentioning Tulsa isn't doing badly.
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
Ok so what do you think about this then... The dating scene for the college educated,fit, well traveled, yuppy, "creative class" gay person in Tulsa. I think that type of person is practically nonexistent here. Compared to say, Denver or Austin.
Is it equally difficult for both gay and straight people here to find that type?
Walk down the street in Denver or Austin and the thing you notice is all the young people. And then you realize what's different about Tulsa: All the spunky young people have moved to places like Denver and Austin!
It's pretty common to hear people in their twenties lamenting that they "will never meet somebody here." It's not a gay/straight thing. I think it's related to the percent of the population that's young and single.
We have a pretty high divorce rate, though, so I suppose the chances of meeting someone increase after 10 or 20 years...if you can wait that long! [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by okiebybirth
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
The vast majority of gay people in Tulsa/Dallas/Houston are not the people you see at the gay bars and marching in the pride parades, they are average middle class people like myself that are happy to just blend in with the general population and keep their private lives private.
So going to a gay bar or a pride parade equates to not being a average middle class person? I hope you didn't mean to imply that Steve. I don't really go to bars either because I normally have other things I find more entertaining, but I certainly wouldn't say the people at the bars or at the parade are any different than myself.
I have frequented many a gay bar myself in my years; what I was trying to say was that the gay people most in the public eye, those that get the publicity, are the extremes you see at events like the "pride" parades, the Dykes on Bikes, the gay men in nun's habits, etc. I don't think these folks are truly representative of the gay population, but they are the ones that get the publicity. I agree with you, the average gay bar patron is no different than me, except where they choose to socialize.
Of course watching the defectives (//%22http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2005/07/watching-defectives.html%22) is going to be more entertaining and get more publicity. Gay bankers and lawyers are
boring to put in the papers, so says Joe.My.God. [;)]