Do you believe Homosexuals Are Not "Born That Way."?

[corneo]

I blame all of this on Mr. Rogers and Captain Kangaroo. When they said "Your special" they meant just because your fat and lazy doesn't mean your a loser. (they lied kids)

They didn't mean now that you've played Dr. with somebody of the same sex, it was natural.
People over the years have tried the best to change nature views on life. Weather it's to live longer, be stronger, think faster or whom they mate with.

Personally, I think it's a fad. Ignore the gay person and they no longer feel special. (If we ignore them, what will they do next for attention?)

[Muddy]

Originally Posted by corneo

People over the years have tried the best to change nature views on life. Weather it's to live longer, be stronger, think faster or whom they mate with.

They've tried to change the weather too.

Originally Posted by corneo

Personally, I think it's a fad. Ignore the gay person and they no longer feel special. (If we ignore them, what will they do next for attention?)

Continue to be gay because that's what feels natural to them.

I have a question for you. If you take your statement above and trade the word gay for the word black, or Jew or handicapped or Filipino...what kind of statement would it be?

[krahmaan]

Originally Posted by Muddy

I have a question for you. If you take your statement above and trade the word gay for the word black, or Jew or handicapped or Filipino...what kind of statement would it be?

What does has a inherited creed have to do with a sexual preference? Or a religious upbringing, or an impairment? I don't like it when people compare the struggles of homosexuals, to the racial and religious struggles many have had to endure. It's far from the same IMHO.

Being beat because of a uncontrollable factor of race cannot be compared to a sexual preference. Nor can it be compared to a religious group who was slaughtered for their religious upbringing. Homosexuality doesn't come close to even a unforeseen impairment that one has no control over.

Sex can be controlled (having sex). If sexual relations with the same sex is bred, why then can people choose to practice celibacy? That's no sex at all, even if you may desire the same gender. There are no comparisons in my honest opinion.

It's an insult to compare a sexual preference to race, religion, or disability. Why? If homosexuality was bred, even then they could choose to be chaste. That way avoiding all scrutiny. Now someone born black, cannot just choose to take off his skin color and choose another -like a different coat. If, some group of people decided to hang them just because of their skin color.

If homosexuality was a religion, yes gays have been bashed before. But never has the gay community ever endured attempted utter annihilation at the hands of extremists practicing genocide.

And, some one who is a homosexual and is not impaired. They can walk, run, see, hear and play just like the rest of us. I see no comparison here -I'm sorry.

[South]

Originally Posted by Muddy

I have a question for you. If you take your statement above and trade the word gay for the word black, or Jew or handicapped or Filipino...what kind of statement would it be?

My lord. Now who a person wants to be naked with is equal to their race or handicap status? I'm sure someone confined to a wheelchair because someone else decided to drive drunk would love to know that his life stifling encasement can can be equally swapped out in a sentence with how someone swings their pheromones.

Same with race.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by corneo

(...) Personally, I think it's a fad. Ignore the gay person and they no longer feel special. (If we ignore them, what will they do next for attention?)

A fad for the maybe's maybe, but what of bonafide gays, you know, the real ones? The ones peculiar from an early age and that progress naturally to the obvious category? I thought those were what we were talking about. Mother nature's sex scheme is obviously extremely biased to one side or the other, but if something goes wrong, we can't simply ignore the mistakes, because they are real people.

I think the real mistake occurs when we've lost sight of this. They are not some odd group that have made bad decisions. That just doesn't fly in the realm of common sense.

[Atom]

If the existence of these people is simply a moral issue, I will eat my hat.

[corneo]

Originally Posted by Muddy

I have a question for you. If you take your statement above and trade the word gay for the word black, or Jew or handicapped or Filipino...what kind of statement would it be?

A honest one.

[Atom]

If we were to assume that religion is the cause of nature, that is all the more reason to respect nature's supposed mistakes.

[Atom]

I think it's only common sense to view gays as mistakes in nature, to begin with.

[Harveyj]

Originally Posted by krahmaan

Sex can be controlled (having sex). If sexual relations with the same sex is bred, why then can people choose to practice celibacy? That's no sex at all, even if you may desire the same gender. There are no comparisons in my honest opinion.

Precisely how is celibacy natural?
If anything, it's less natural than homosexuality.
There are a lot of animals that participate in homosexual practices in nature... None, other than the sick or impaired, practice celibacy.

Originally Posted by krahmaan

Now someone born black, cannot just choose to take off his skin color and choose another -like a different coat. If, some group of people decided to hang them just because of their skin color.

There are a number of skin pigmentation alteration procedures available to people, and have been for some 40-50 years. This is not taking into account natural methods of lightening or darkening skin tones.
Many Indians use a product called Fair & Lovely to make themselves "whiter". Many Japanese tan excessively in an effort to look "blacker"

Originally Posted by krahmaan

If homosexuality was a religion, yes gays have been bashed before. But never has the gay community ever endured attempted utter annihilation at the hands of extremists practicing genocide.

Yeaaaah, there was this little party that Germany had at Berkenow and Auschwitz that you may want to look into... loooooooots of gays there.


Again, your astounding ignorance worries me.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by Harveyj

Precisely how is celibacy natural?
If anything, it's less natural than homosexuality.
There are a lot of animals that participate in homosexual practices in nature... None, other than the sick or impaired, practice celibacy.

There are a number of skin pigmentation alteration procedures available to people, and have been for some 40-50 years. This is not taking into account natural methods of lightening or darkening skin tones.
Many Indians use a product called Fair & Lovely to make themselves "whiter". Many Japanese tan excessively in an effort to look "blacker"

Yeaaaah, there was this little party that Germany had at Berkenow and Auschwitz that you may want to look into... loooooooots of gays there.


Again, your astounding ignorance worries me.

I agree with everything but this:

Originally Posted by Harveyj

(...)There are a lot of animals that participate in homosexual practices in nature... (...)

.. I think that it's far greater the exception than the rule.

[Atom]

Except for that young adolescent thing, we won't count that. I think that most guys and girls grow out of that.

[Atom]

What thing? You know, that one that you'll never admit under any circumstances.

[Atom]

But you can't associate that common adolescent behavior with being gay is my point.

[Atom]

Pretty simply put, most sexes are automatically aroused by the opposite sex, and I think it quite an appreciable minority that aren't.

[South]

Originally Posted by Atom

Pretty simply put, most sexes are automatically aroused by the opposite sex, and I think it quite an appreciable minority that aren't.

Sex itself is a common impulse, humans, cats, bats, and rats. Humans, however, aren't working off of pure impulse. We temper that with logic. The impulse to do it and the logic of knowing what it's for.

Most of our impulses are aimed at species survival. Take a mans impulse to kill. It's primal. I remember when mine kicked in as a boy and have recently seen that arise in my oldest son, now 8. When I saw it come up in him I started taking him hunting and fishing more. I let him follow the natural process of finding, killing, and helping supply food for the family. The pride and satisfaction that he gets when the family eats from a bass he caught or a dove he killed is good because it's satisfying a natural urge.

So every man has the natural ability, even need, to kill without remorse. What happens when that isn't addressed in a positive way? Take a look at any confined inner city where kids have been left without strong male role models to teach them what that instinct is for and healthy ways to fulfill it, or an avenue to carry it out. They kill anyway, but in a way that works contrary to species survival rather than enforcing it. Same thing with some rural kids lacking leadership. Most figure out the proper use of it. Those who don't can wind up in bell towers.

Sex is the same general thing. It's an impulse that can be used for it's natural purpose of the survival of the species, or in a way that's contrary to it. Just like the adolescent practice you referenced above. What guy isn't willing to trade that out for the first willing female he can find? Nature made him want it, impulse drove him toward it, and now logic is there to tell him what it's for. If the logic part of that is breaking down, meaning the person chooses partners who have no chance of fulfilling the natural purpose of the act, then something went wrong somewhere. If you want the sex, then nature worked. What you do with it is your own choice.

[krahmaan]

Originally Posted by Harveyj

Yeaaaah, there was this little party that Germany had at Berkenow and Auschwitz that you may want to look into... loooooooots of gays there.


Again, your astounding ignorance worries me.

Where is your link to back this statement?

It is also astounding that you did not post it here.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by South

Sex itself is a common impulse, humans, cats, bats, and rats. Humans, however, aren't working off of pure impulse. We temper that with logic. The impulse to do it and the logic of knowing what it's for.

Most of our impulses are aimed at species survival. Take a mans impulse to kill. It's primal. I remember when mine kicked in as a boy and have recently seen that arise in my oldest son, now 8. When I saw it come up in him I started taking him hunting and fishing more. I let him follow the natural process of finding, killing, and helping supply food for the family. The pride and satisfaction that he gets when the family eats from a bass he caught or a dove he killed is good because it's satisfying a natural urge.

So every man has the natural ability, even need, to kill without remorse. What happens when that isn't addressed in a positive way? Take a look at any confined inner city where kids have been left without strong male role models to teach them what that instinct is for and healthy ways to fulfill it, or an avenue to carry it out. They kill anyway, but in a way that works contrary to species survival rather than enforcing it. Same thing with some rural kids lacking leadership. Most figure out the proper use of it. Those who don't can wind up in bell towers.

Sex is the same general thing. It's an impulse that can be used for it's natural purpose of the survival of the species, or in a way that's contrary to it. Just like the adolescent practice you referenced above. What guy isn't willing to trade that out for the first willing female he can find? Nature made him want it, impulse drove him toward it, and now logic is there to tell him what it's for. If the logic part of that is breaking down, meaning the person chooses partners who have no chance of fulfilling the natural purpose of the act, then something went wrong somewhere. If you want the sex, then nature worked. What you do with it is your own choice.

Yes I agree that everyone has choice, except for the traits that we are born with, physical and behavioral. We can't choose those, but we certainly can choose to deny their existence, sure.

[Atom]

However, I still maintain that choices are not what makes a person gay, and just to reiterate, my belief is that it is not possible to choose to be gay. Not possible. I think it's something in gays that's present before choices even come into play. And of course by the same token, I believe that it is not possible to choose not to be gay.

[Atom]

That is how strong that I perceive this peculiarity to be.