Shame on you Dick Cheney and your twisted lesbian daughter!

[Midnight Judges]

Believing something entirely unbelievable and naturally, obviously, out of the ordinary and, itself, unnatural would not be a method for improving one's position on homosexuality, would it? I don't happen to believe homosexuality or hetrosexuality is, inherently, genetic, though, the natural disposition in animals to continue the species is ingrained. That natural continuance can only occur in couplings between the opposite sex, lending credence to the possibility such relationships are, themselves, natural and perhaps even more than I think they are with regard to genetic dispositions.

That you happen to think homosexuality is a medical condition leading people to do the medically and naturally wrong thing necessarily means you believe rapists are genetically disposed to preferring the type of sex they are interested in, just as you likely excuse the medical condition in pedophiles that leads them to prefer children. Of course, since no one who actually believes this one narrow sexual disposition is natural can admit that means they must believe each sexual disposition must be probably would hurt you if you fall there.

But, you're also hurt that you happen to think homosexuality is a medical deviancy from the human race. I happen just to think sex is primal and some happen to want to allow themselves to enjoy or experience something not naturally easy to explain and that's fine.

Believing homosexuality is genetic does not mean you believe rape or child molestation is. Besides, there is one not-so-subtle difference here, your analogy involves a victim, whereas in a relationship between two consenting adults, there is no victim.

Homosexuality is a natural occurance. It happens in nature among insects, various mammals, primates and throughout history.

I've had this conversation with close friends I grew up with who were gay, and they say they were born gay and I believe them, not people who are proud to not associate with gays, and then proport to know more about being gay than gays themselves.

I agree that certain norms must be followed for a society to succeed, but this is not one of them. Individuality and diversity are as American as apple pie. Your view on homosexuality is old fashioned, self-centered, and unrealistic. Most people in a free country are not going to change their sexual preferences to fit your interpretation of what is normal, nor will they stand for being discriminated against by Senators, and on their tax forms.

[Art]

Believing homosexuality is genetic does not mean you believe rape or child molestation is. Besides, there is one not-so-subtle difference here, your analogy involves a victim, whereas in a relationship between two consenting adults, there is no victim.

Homosexuality is a natural occurance. It happens in nature among insects, various mammals, primates and throughout history.

I have no doubt that in order to allow yourself to adopt this deviant, perverted behavior as acceptable you've had to convince yourself that it is this behavior and ONLY this behavior that is genetic, while no other sexual deviancy shares that common genetic allowance. But, simply realizing this vast and idiotic contradiction in your views should probably jolt you to some sense of reason, don't you think?

Perhaps I should feel guilty breaking it to you that you don't get to suggest being gay is genetic but being straight isn't, or liking blondes over brunettes isn't, or preferring doggie to missionary isn't. Indeed, primal sexual drive is inherent among all animal species I believe. And, just as a rabbit who humps a soccer ball or my girl dog who humps my leg isn't genetically predisposed to hump either the ball or my leg, human animals are not genetically triggered toward any actual sexual activity OTHER than the ONE unquestioned natural drive of procreation. As animals we enjoy feeling good as well. As in the animal kingdom there are acts of dominance similar to what you tend to find rape defined as in our world. Hell, watch two of any animal mate and you can't help but come to the conclusion if the female could speak, she almost certainly is saying no throughout the process.

The simple fact is, pedophilia doesn't exist in the animal kingdom because animals mate with beasties who can breed, but, if we were to draw a human correlation of our laws to the jungle, in fact, pedophilia exists constantly within every animal species, as older males nail younger females. The fact is you haven't come to the point that you've allowed yourself to adopt pedophilia as a societal norm.

You will because you've done so with homosexuality. Over time you'll come to adopt more liberal sexual laws in other, more enlightened contries, which place far less sexual restriction on society than we do. While I'm encouraged you probably actually value the morals our society places on protecting those we determine are children, I know you will be lost as you've been lost in this area.

I've had this conversation with close friends I grew up with who were gay, and they say they were born gay and I believe them, not people who are proud to not associate with gays, and then proport to know more about being gay than gays themselves.

I agree that certain norms must be followed for a society to succeed, but this is not one of them. Individuality and diversity are as American as apple pie. Your view on homosexuality is old fashioned, self-centered, and unrealistic. Most people in a free country are not going to change their sexual preferences to fit your interpretation of what is normal, nor will they stand for being discriminated against by Senators, and on their tax forms.

Your close friends who you grew up with and told you they were born gay are merely adopting a slogan they feel is effective in explaining their deviant behavior. I have no problem with your willingness to accept that behavior as acceptable in your world. I do have a problem when you aren't even intellectually honest enough to understand if you're born gay, EVERY single other sexual prediliction known to the human race must necessarily have SOME genetic component.

Indeed, most people in a free country are, absolutely, going to conduct themselves in accord with societal norms. Some segment will always fall outside those norms. Until very recently, though, those segments have never had the potency of guilty white liberals with little actually wrong to fight for putting themselves squarely behind such a group.

Your views on homosexuality are ignorant, blind and harmful to a moral, ordered society. They are contradictory and wholly without merit at any point. Society defines its norms. People live within them for the most part. The choice to live outside those norms may or may not be a decision you know you make. Or, it may just be something you feel you are.

There's no gay gene anymore than there's a "goth" gene. People deviate from norms because of something else missing or wrong in their world, or, hell, just because they are too weak to fight general primal animalistic urges common to men.

[techboy]

Every family has problems and skeletons in the closet, including his own. He shouldn't tempt fate by making an example of his own clan. :2cents:

That was my first thought too. Anyone else getting images of Gary Hart daring reporters to follow him?

[Art]

touche Art.

...but we're not going to destroy ourselves without exporting MTV and trying to take them all down with us. If the fight is blowjobs vs. suicide bombers, I think we're putting the better offer on the table.

Look, we already turned Osama's niece to our side:

You're not without a point. While we will destroy ourselves under the decadance of society slowly evolving into one lacking self-restraint or self-responsibility, we may well destroy such backward nations as exist in the Middle East with our twisted provisions. The difference is they have a loud, vocal, fevered minority fighting very hard to retain the moral center and belief system they feel is natural to their way of life. We have a very vocal, fevered minority systematically targeting all typical values to destroy us.

My money's on them.

[Midnight Judges]

I have no doubt that in order to allow yourself to adopt this deviant, perverted behavior as acceptable you've had to convince yourself that it is this behavior and ONLY this behavior that is genetic, while no other sexual deviancy shares that common genetic allowance. But, simply realizing this vast and idiotic contradiction in your views should probably jolt you to some sense of reason, don't you think?

Homosexuality is not deviant or perverted given the proper historical context. It's only deviant when one's views are shaped by a spapshot in time, ignoring thousands of years of patterns of homosexual behavior.

deviant: deviating from some accepted norm

You keep calling homosexuality "deviant" as if your opinion is fact. That's not to say homosexuality is normal in terms of the majority of the population engaging in it, but it is to say, having a certain percentage of the population being gay is normal-because it's happened throughout history. To have 0% of the population gay would be deviant IMO.

Same goes for the word "perverted." Many conservatives assume certain human organs are only for reproduction, not social interaction. It's a complete denial of the "sex life"-something many Americans have. If this is your view then yes, homosexuality is perverted in your opinion, but since my view of the purpose of the female organs involves more than just baby-making, a social purpose for the sexual organs among mature adults refutes your assumptions that homosexuality is an unquestionable perversion of the sexual organs and what you think is their sole purpose.

Perhaps I should feel guilty breaking it to you that you don't get to suggest being gay is genetic but being straight isn't, or liking blondes over brunettes isn't, or preferring doggie to missionary isn't. Indeed, primal sexual drive is inherent among all animal species I believe. And, just as a rabbit who humps a soccer ball or my girl dog who humps my leg isn't genetically predisposed to hump either the ball or my leg, human animals are not genetically triggered toward any actual sexual activity OTHER than the ONE unquestioned natural drive of procreation. As animals we enjoy feeling good as well. As in the animal kingdom there are acts of dominance similar to what you tend to find rape defined as in our world. Hell, watch two of any animal mate and you can't help but come to the conclusion if the female could speak, she almost certainly is saying no throughout the process.

I do believe that being straight is a genteic trait, and that being homosexual is a genetic trait. That is to say, I'm not gay and I never could be gay. It simply wouldn't work. You are jumping to conclusions by assuming if one sexual preference is genetic then they all must be. This belongs in the nature/nurture debate. Again, there is another natural drive to the sexual organs: social interaction.

Yes, rape occurs in nature, maybe rapists do share a genetic aspect, but it's not their right to victimize another person, so their urges must be controlled, and that includes taking medication, therapy, or prison sentences if need be. Since homosexuality has no victims, it's harmless, no need to cause a person to suppress.

The simple fact is, pedophilia doesn't exist in the animal kingdom because animals mate with beasties who can breed, but, if we were to draw a human correlation of our laws to the jungle, in fact, pedophilia exists constantly within every animal species, as older males nail younger females. The fact is you haven't come to the point that you've allowed yourself to adopt pedophilia as a societal norm.

You will because you've done so with homosexuality. Over time you'll come to adopt more liberal sexual laws in other, more enlightened contries, which place far less sexual restriction on society than we do. While I'm encouraged you probably actually value the morals our society places on protecting those we determine are children, I know you will be lost as you've been lost in this area.

It's as if the distinction between a victimless act and an act with a victim is not clear cut enough for you. There is a hard line there and you are doing your best to pretend it's a grey area.

Your close friends who you grew up with and told you they were born gay are merely adopting a slogan they feel is effective in explaining their deviant behavior.

That crossed my mind but after pondering two decades of events, I don't believe that to be the case. Again, having a certain percentage of the population engage in homosexuality is not deviant, especially when given it's long history in virtually every society.

I have no problem with your willingness to accept that behavior as acceptable in your world. I do have a problem when you aren't even intellectually honest enough to understand if you're born gay, EVERY single other sexual prediliction known to the human race must necessarily have SOME genetic component.

No, you are trying to force my opinions to the extremes so you may criticise them. Unfortunately for your case, there is grey area in Nature vs. Nurture. Personally, I suspect sexual preference is nature but most other sexual traits are a product of one's environment. Did you know a relatively high percentage of child molesters were molested themselves?

Indeed, most people in a free country are, absolutely, going to conduct themselves in accord with societal norms. Some segment will always fall outside those norms. Until very recently, though, those segments have never had the potency of guilty white liberals with little actually wrong to fight for putting themselves squarely behind such a group.

Yeah, civil rights suck right? Especially for groups that are outside what you wrongly percieve to be the norm.

Your views on homosexuality are ignorant, blind and harmful to a moral, ordered society. They are contradictory and wholly without merit at any point. Society defines its norms. People live within them for the most part. The choice to live outside those norms may or may not be a decision you know you make. Or, it may just be something you feel you are.

My views on homosexuality are realistic, fair, informed, moral, and above all, enlightened. There is no contradiction. You created the contradiction with your false interpretation.

There's no gay gene anymore than there's a "goth" gene.

You have absolutely no way of knowing that.

People deviate from norms because of something else missing or wrong in their world, or, hell, just because they are too weak to fight general primal animalistic urges common to men.

__________________

This statement might have some truth in it for rapists but it does not apply to homosexuality.

[Midnight Judges]

edit double post.

[smsmith40]

Guys

My only question is why do you all care? Why do you care what two (or more I guess) consenting adults get up to in the bedroom? Whether its "deviant" or "normal", inbron or learned behaviour, what does it matter? If they freely choose to engage in it, why would that bother you

Even if they then decide to run down the street shouting "gay sex is brilliant, everyone should try it" why would that bother you? Surely you have enough free will left to make your own mind up.

It seems to be only a problem if , in actual fact, you are somehow trying to impose a singular idea of your own morality on everybody else and these strange deviants are refusing to conform. I'd imagine that WOULD be irritating.

[Art]

Guys

My only question is why do you all care? Why do you care what two (or more I guess) consenting adults get up to in the bedroom? Whether its "deviant" or "normal", inbron or learned behaviour, what does it matter? If they freely choose to engage in it, why would that bother you

Even if they then decide to run down the street shouting "gay sex is brilliant, everyone should try it" why would that bother you? Surely you have enough free will left to make your own mind up.

It seems to be only a problem if , in actual fact, you are somehow trying to impose a singular idea of your own morality on everybody else and these strange deviants are refusing to conform. I'd imagine that WOULD be irritating.

Why, in America, is it illegal to sell something it is perfectly legal to give away making prostitution illegal? Why do we care if a man and multiple women, or vice versa, wish to marry and receive the benefits of marriage? Why do we care whether an individual wants to use drugs, harming only himself in the process?

Societies have certain moral beliefs. Those will change over time to reflect natural changes in society, but, in the end, the value the United States places on many morality based laws is something that has helped set us apart from most of the rest of the world.

In the end, though, I imagine few enough actually care at all whether two people do any number of things that only have a direct impact on themselves. My individual concern is the incredible move to adopt this ONE sexual perversion as something exactly the same as my relationship with my life.

There's a reason the gay lobby won't accept a national civil union law giving them the same benefits married couples receive. They WANT the word marriage so they can claim they are entirely the same, which won't be true even if they achieve their goal.

Now, many of the negative effects of prostitution that give society a reason to care -- the spread of disease, the violence, etc. -- can be extended to explain why we might care about homosexual relationships given the higher rate of transmission of disease costing society money inherent in at least male-on-male sexual relations.

The written about, substantial group of gay men who view the transmission of the HIV virus between each other as sharing the greatest gift, harming society in the process. You can certainly justify why you'd be concerned with this type of deviant behavior, as you can many others.

[Bugs']

Art, just one question for you.

Would you think less of me if I told you I was gay?

Just a yes or no please.

[DCsportsfan53]

Art, you're simple using linguistics to ingore and substansiate one MAJOR flaw in your logic. Homosexuality occurs between two consenting adults. Pedophilia occurs when an adult vitcimizes a child, whether it's man to boy, woman to boy, woman, to girl, man to girl. Pedophilia doesn't have a sexuality. A pedophile can be gay or straight, just as a sexually normal person can. Do you see the difference, can you see that there's no victim in the circumstance involving two consenting adults? It's really simple and it comes down to one fact and one alone......you expect the rest of the world to accept the same moral code as you on principle and that you ACT like everyone except miscreants believes in what you do. Don't keep saying "we as a society believe this" because you are only speaking for a portion of society. Conservatives are real good at pointing out that you shouldn't worry about another man's money or get involved in that, why can't that extend to people's personal actions and beliefs?

[EersSkins05]

Why, in America, is it illegal to sell something it is perfectly legal to give away making prostitution illegal? Why do we care if a man and multiple women, or vice versa, wish to marry and receive the benefits of marriage? Why do we care whether an individual wants to use drugs, harming only himself in the process?

You do realize that you're using a direct quote from George Carlin that was intended to demonstrate the complete lack of logic that surrounds the criminality of prostitution, right?

Now, many of the negative effects of prostitution that give society a reason to care -- the spread of disease, the violence, etc. -- can be extended to explain why we might care about homosexual relationships given the higher rate of transmission of disease costing society money inherent in at least male-on-male sexual relations.

The written about, substantial group of gay men who view the transmission of the HIV virus between each other as sharing the greatest gift, harming society in the process. You can certainly justify why you'd be concerned with this type of deviant behavior, as you can many others.

Wow. I mean, freaking WOW.

These two paragraphs are the most stunning examples of drastically exaggerated homophobia I may have ever seen.

[dwbiggs]

Wow. I mean, freaking WOW.

These two paragraphs are the most stunning examples of drastically exaggerated homophobia I may have ever seen.

Pretty incredible isn't it?

Dan

[smsmith40]

Why, in America, is it illegal to sell something it is perfectly legal to give away making prostitution illegal? Why do we care if a man and multiple women, or vice versa, wish to marry and receive the benefits of marriage? Why do we care whether an individual wants to use drugs, harming only himself in the process?

Societies have certain moral beliefs. Those will change over time to reflect natural changes in society, but, in the end, the value the United States places on many morality based laws is something that has helped set us apart from most of the rest of the world.

In the end, though, I imagine few enough actually care at all whether two people do any number of things that only have a direct impact on themselves. My individual concern is the incredible move to adopt this ONE sexual perversion as something exactly the same as my relationship with my life.

There's a reason the gay lobby won't accept a national civil union law giving them the same benefits married couples receive. They WANT the word marriage so they can claim they are entirely the same, which won't be true even if they achieve their goal.

Now, many of the negative effects of prostitution that give society a reason to care -- the spread of disease, the violence, etc. -- can be extended to explain why we might care about homosexual relationships given the higher rate of transmission of disease costing society money inherent in at least male-on-male sexual relations.

The written about, substantial group of gay men who view the transmission of the HIV virus between each other as sharing the greatest gift, harming society in the process. You can certainly justify why you'd be concerned with this type of deviant behavior, as you can many others.

No sorry, still don't get it. Why does the fact that two people of the same gender are married have any bearing on the value of your relationship with your wife. Would you value it any less? Would your wife? Who would value it less? Your friends, your family.

I'm trying to understand why the fact that somebody else's choice of sexual and life partners appears to offend you so much. Why do you want to regulate somebody elses consenting sexual behaviour.

YOu raised a number of other fairly obvious counter examples. I'll briefly run throgh them. Prostitution is difficult and messy and the reason I don't like it is because it is an exploitative relationship, its controlled by criminals and the issue of whether consent is freely given is definitely cloudy. As for polygamu, I don't have a particualr problem on a moral sense but it shouldn't be legally recognised because you should only be able to pool your rights and benefits one person at a time. I'm only bothered about drugs if you start stealing people's stuff to pay for it. Any properly educated person stupid enough to get themselves hooked on crack or heroin is welcome to the misery they are going to cause themselves and others. Educate them and treat them. Decriminalisation is a moot point.

Anyway all of that is off topic. Don't complicate things. Stick to the point, Art (so should I)

[TradeTheBeal!]

Homosexuality is a choice.

Bi-sexuality is a choice.

Asexuality is a choice.

Heterosexuality is a choice.

Only "sexuality" itself is genetic. Once puberty kicks in, people make decisions about how to deal with it, experiment sexually and CHOOSE the path that they like best/offers the least resistance. This garbage about homosexuality being a genetically pre-programmed trait is one of the great lies of our times. It is completely unsupported scientifically and ridiculously self-serving. It reminds me of the old "blacks created rock-n-roll and we stole it" line that guilt-ridden whites like to drop in order to feel better about themselves...thus it is perpetuated. The "gay is genetic" thing is exactly the same - those that ascribe to it do so solely as a means to avoid having to take a position on a rather thorny issue.

So, it's a choice, it's their choice, and I really have no problem with it.

[smsmith40]

Only "sexuality" itself is genetic. Once puberty kicks in, people make decisions about how to deal with it, experiment sexually and CHOSE the path that they like best/offers the least resistance. This garbage about homosexuality being a genetically pre-programmed trait is one of the great lies of our times. It is completely unsupported scientifically and ridiculously self-serving. It reminds me of the old "blacks created rock-n-roll and we stole it" line that guilt-ridden whites like to drop in order to feel better about themselves...thus it is perpetuated. The "gay is genetic" thing is exactly the same - those that ascribe to it do so solely as a means to avoid having to take a position on a rather thorny issue.

OK, but why does it matter ? Whether its genetic or a lifestyle choice I don't really care either. I just don't thank anybody has any business telling anybody else which consenting adults they should be having sex with

[Predicto]

So, it's a choice, it's their choice, and I really have no problem with it.

I'm glad you have no problem with it, but let me ask you this:

Is desiring and sleeping with men rather than women a "choice" you could have made? If not, then how is it really a choice?

[TradeTheBeal!]

I'm glad you have no problem with it, but let me ask you this:

Is desiring and sleeping with men rather than women a "choice" you could have made? If not, then how is it really a choice?

Everyone, including me and you, made their choice, and it really was a choice that was made. Are you saying that you did not have a choice and still to this day are unable to make a choice about this issue - In effect, that you are a complete automaton to your genetic sexual programming? Nonsense!!

For example, avowed life-long heterosexuals get thrown in prison for long stretches of time and either CHOOSE to engage in homosexual behavior, or remain celibate and wait it out. That's just the way it is...and you know it.

[shsu1]

Cheney's daughter is coming out with a book about her relationship with her father entitled: Why I Never Got Close to Dick

[MaddogCT]

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/06/inhofe-gay-marriage/

This afternoon on the Senate floor, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) stood before a large photograph of his family and shared this important fact: “I’m really proud to say that in the recorded history of our family, we’ve never had a divorce or any kind of homosexual relationship."

"Recorded history" ohh...nice...three generations...BFD.

And he knows the personal lives of everyone in his family?

Please.

:logo:

[Thiebear]

Cheney's daughter is coming out with a book about her relationship with her father entitled: Why I Never Got Close to Dick

thats pretty good.... :laugh:

I believe its a choice.. watching children grow up it doesnt appear until sexuality is introduced... Some make choice and change their minds later...

[smsmith40]

I believe its a choice.. watching children grow up it doesnt appear until sexuality is introduced... Some make choice and change their minds later...

I don't know whether its a choice or not. I'd imagine that might be depndent on the individual. But why does it matter, why should the state be involved in limiting your choice of sexual/life partner (assuming consent of course)?

[Thiebear]

I don't know whether its a choice or not. I'd imagine that might be depndent on the individual. But why does it matter, why should the state be involved in limiting your choice of sexual/life partner (assuming consent of course)?

What? Where have i ever said anything about gov't and such: I've been married TWICE... IF anyone is ruining marriage its me not homosexuals...

I think there should be two marriages.

Civil: For everyone

Church: For the religious people w/much more severe penalties for divorce.

And whether is choice or genetic is a rather large difference..

[smsmith40]

Thiebear

My question was not specifically directed at you. It was more a rhetorical question to the people who have expressed strong views on this subject to try and understand why they believe the state should have any role in regulating or limiting an indivdual's choice of sexual and/or life partner.

[EersSkins05]

It is completely unsupported scientifically and ridiculously self-serving. It reminds me of the old "blacks created rock-n-roll and we stole it" line that guilt-ridden whites like to drop in order to feel better about themselves...thus it is perpetuated.

Sorry- I couldn't let this tidbit slide unquestioned. Black people did create rock and roll. Rock and roll is derived from the blues, which was unquestionably created by black men. To the extent that rock music isn't blues-oriented, just about all of it comes from Chuck Berry. Just ask Keith Richards, McCartney/Lennon, Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Jimi Hendrix, Pete Townsend...etc, etc, etc.

[smsmith40]

Well not to comepletely hijack thread. To the exent that a genre of music can be invented, Rock music emerged in the mid 60s when Dylan fused the folk/blues lyrical sensibilities of the likes of Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, and Blind Lemon Jefferson with the melodies and beat of Chuck Berry and Little Richard's rock and roll and then turned up the amp on his 66 world tour until everybodies ears started to bleed

p.s Its all part of my Dylan invented the modern world obsession