[Natoma]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

What evidance? Where is the gay gene?

We've been through this before. There is no gay gene anymore than there is a straight gene. We simply have genes that encode our sexuality, which is then expressed mostly during puberty through the release of hormones and endorphins which alter our physicality, mentality, and emotional state tremendously. The genes that control our sexuality express themselves in that manner, and in the end are seen through the human sexual arousal response lens.

Originally Posted by Sabastian

God and the search for whatever it is has little in common with society putting a gag order on itself (by force) so that none may make negative opinions with regards to homosexuality, only positive ones are permitted.

So there are no penalties against religious defamation in our society? Go out in public and make a defamatory statement regarding Muslims or Jews or Christians or any other religious group and see if you keep your job.

[Sabastian]

Originally Posted by Humus

As long as people didn't choose to become a homosexual there's no reason why it should be treated any different than other non-choice attributes such as color of the skin.

With that argument the necrophilia, pedophilia, bestiality, stiletto shoes or what ever else turns your crank can be classified as something they never chose to be excited by.

But lets not turn away from the freedom of speech debate, ok.

[Sabastian]

Originally Posted by Natoma

So there are no penalties against religious defamation in our society? Go out in public and make a defamatory statement regarding Muslims or Jews or Christians or any other religious group and see if you keep your job.

There is a constant berating of religious people and there beliefs but I see very little in the way of charges against people who perpetrate them. I think that there are lots of infringements on religious people of all types, everyday, every hour even every minute. You do not get fired for saying you do not like Christianity or Christians for that matter.

[Natoma]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

There is a constant berating of religious people and there beliefs but I see very little in the way of charges against people who perpetrate them. I think that there are lots of infringements on religious people of all types, everyday, every hour even every minute. You do not get fired for saying you do not like Christianity or Christians for that matter.

Who said anything about charges? No, you can't be prosecuted for saying what you wish, unless someone brings a libel suit against you or a defamation suit.

In that same vein, employers can certainly fire you for defamatory comments against religious groups, racial groups, etc. In fact it is in the employee handbooks of many of the largest corporations such as IBM, which my brother happens to work for. If you state that you believe Islam is a wrong religion, you can be fired. If you state that you believe Judaism is evil, you can be fired. Etc etc etc.

Maybe it's different in Canada where you live, but in the US it happens all the time.

[RussSchultz]

As long as that behavior does not happen at work, you cannot be fired. At least not without having your employer open themselves up for a lawsuit.

[Sabastian]

Originally Posted by Natoma

Who said anything about charges? No, you can't be prosecuted for saying what you wish, unless someone brings a libel suit against you or a defamation suit.

In that same vein, employers can certainly fire you for defamatory comments against religious groups, racial groups, etc. In fact it is in the employee handbooks of many of the largest corporations such as IBM, which my brother happens to work for. If you state that you believe Islam is a wrong religion, you can be fired. If you state that you believe Judaism is evil, you can be fired. Etc etc etc.

Maybe it's different in Canada where you live, but in the US it happens all the time.

There is no equivalent between religious convictions (search for God or what ever it is.) and homosexuals behavior. It is like comparing stars with raisins, for Christ's sake.

When was the last time a professor or teacher was ever fired for making a statement (not even in the classroom mind you.) that "Christianity should not be applauded". I will tell you I have never heard of such a ridiculous thing.

Regardless freedom of speech ought to be upheld despite some who are offended. If I am asked if I approve of homosexuality by my employer or co worker I should be allowed to give a negative response. If they have a pro-homosexual day I ought to be able to denounce it, openly as a fundamental right to express my opinion without fear of losing my employment. Same goes with Christianity, when Christmas roles around I ought to be able to curse Christians (and they do.) and their dense rituals. Bah humbug! (BTW I really like Christmas and some of the most decent people I know are Christians but just for the sake of argument…)

[Natoma]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

There is no equivalent between religious convictions (search for God or what ever it is.) and homosexuals behavior. It is like comparing stars with raisins, for Christ's sake.

But religion is a choice at the very least, and a by-product of your environment at the most. If homosexuality is a choice, or it's a by-product of one's environment, how is it any different?

Originally Posted by Sabastian

When was the last time a professor or teacher was ever fired for making a statement (not even in the classroom mind you.) that "Christianity should not be applauded". I will tell you I have never heard of such a ridiculous thing.

I've read about situations such as that, which is why I brought it up. Though it's usually been comments against jews and muslims.

Originally Posted by Sabastian

Regardless freedom of speech ought to be upheld despite some who are offended. If I am asked if I approve of homosexuality by my employer or co worker I should be allowed to give a negative response. If they have a pro-homosexual day I ought to be able to denounce it, openly as a fundamental right to express my opinion without fear of losing my employment. Same goes with Christianity, when Christmas roles around I ought to be able to curse Christians (and they do.) and their dense rituals. Bah humbug!

Never said you shouldn't have a right to express your opinion without fear of losing your job. Just saying that many companies have rules that state that defamatory language will not be tolerated. Some companies extend only to the workplace. Others go beyond it.

To be sure this will probably be fought in court, and the dismissed teacher will probably end up winning.

Here's an example I dug up btw on the opposite end of the spectrum.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/feb/03022504.html

A pro-abortion woman who was fired from her post as a teacher at a private Catholic school after her support for abortion was mentioned in a newspaper ad celebrating Roe v Wade, has launched a discrimination complaint.

Originally Posted by Sabastian

(BTW I really like Christmas and some of the most decent people I know are Christians but just for the sake of argument…)

Now that's funny.

[MfA]

Natoma, only the wrong religions of course :)

[Sabastian]

Originally Posted by Natoma

But religion is a choice at the very least, and a by-product of your environment at the most. If homosexuality is a choice, or it's a by-product of one's environment, how is it any different?

The search for God has nothing to do with impeding freedom of speech, end of story. It is not one bit the equivalent in choice.

Originally Posted by Natoma

I've read about situations such as that, which is why I brought it up. Though it's usually been comments against jews and muslims.

They lost their jobs? Please find a link I would be interested in such an article. Interesting no one lost their job for discrediting Christianity. Looks like a minority rights infringement on freedom of speech. RE:"Multiculturalism"

Originally Posted by Natoma

Never said you shouldn't have a right to express your opinion without fear of losing your job. Just saying that many companies have rules that state that defamatory language will not be tolerated. Some companies extend only to the workplace. Others go beyond it.

To be sure this will probably be fought in court, and the dismissed teacher will probably end up winning.

These company rules are an extension of the courtrooms ruling on human rights. They know based on precedent cases that if they are sued by someone whom was offended they will lose. It isn't as if they all agree but rather they know what the results of such an incident would be in the court room.

Originally Posted by Natoma

Here's an example I dug up btw on the opposite end of the spectrum.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/feb/03022504.html

lol, imagine a Conservative Christian applying at a liberal arts university to teach feminism with a patriarchal twist. Anyhow I am shocked, I went to a Catholic University and was surrounded by the most lefty left lefties(even was one myself) you can imagine. Imagine the outrage amongst the left wing sociology department if they had some professor who was not a welfare advocate. (Supposedly there are some out there, just not too many.) However it is a Catholic private school where Catholics send their own children to be educated but I do not agree with their action. It still is not the same as saying something as benign as homosexuality is "not something to be applauded". Abortion (often condsidered as murder.) is an even more sensitive issue then homosexuality.

Originally Posted by Natoma

Now that's funny.

[Natoma]

Originally Posted by MfA

Natoma, only the wrong religions of course

Indeed. :P

[MfA]

Sabastian, that wasnt all he said on the topic obviously. Would have been a short letter.

[Natoma]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

The search for God has nothing to do with impeding freedom of speech, end of story. It is not one bit the equivalent in choice.

You should talk to the mormons then. Their form of marriage (polygamy) was outlawed in the late 19th century due to the puritanical majority not thinking it was right. Their freedom of religion was impeded. But that's just trivia more than anything else.

And you keep saying that religion and sexuality are not equivalent in any way choice wise, but have shown in no way that they aren't equivalent. While I do not believe they are equivalent, it is for different reasons. You can't change your sexuality. You can most certainly change your religious beliefs.

Originally Posted by Sabastian

They lost their jobs? Please find a link I would be interested in such an article. Interesting no one lost their job for discrediting Christianity. Looks like a minority rights infringement on freedom of speech. RE:"Multiculturalism"

I've never heard anyone make a comment disparaging christians in the US. Muslims and Jew defamation however comes a dime a dozen. And yes, people have lost their jobs over that kind of anti-religion speak.

Originally Posted by Sabastian

These company rules are an extension of the courtrooms ruling on human rights. They know based on precedent cases that if they are sued by someone whom was offended they will lose. It isn't as if they all agree but rather they know what the results of such an incident would be in the court room.

Not really sure what you're trying to say here.

Originally Posted by Sabastian

lol, imagine a Conservative Christian applying at a liberal arts university to teach feminism with a patriarchal twist. Anyhow I am shocked, I went to a Catholic University and was surrounded by the most lefty left lefties(even was one myself) you can imagine. Imagine the outrage amongst the left wing sociology department if they had some professor who was not a welfare advocate. (Supposedly there are some out there, just not too many.) However it is a Catholic private school where Catholics send their own children to be educated but I do not agree with their action. It still is not the same as saying something as benign as homosexuality is "not something to be applauded".

Are you sure that's all that was said in the newspaper? Is there any evidence to the pro or con that show that this person didn't have a vocal outlook on homosexuality in and around his school and neighborhood?

Before you say it was benign, maybe the full story should be known? Why should a woman saying she agrees with abortion in a newspaper be any different than someone saying they disagree with homosexuality in a newspaper?

Originally Posted by Sabastian

Abortion (often condsidered as murder.) is an even more sensitive issue then homosexuality.

That's debatable. You don't have mass cries from the right for an amendment to ban abortion, or keep those who have undergone abortion or agree with abortion from getting married.

[Sabastian]

Bah, got no more time for this.

This quote sums up my position on freedom of speech.

We need to remember that free speech does not mean freedom for the speech we agree with. Such speech needs no legal protection. If free speech means anything, it means protecting the speech we find disturbing, abhorrent, offensive.

Have a nice day.

[RussSchultz]

You keep asserting you can't change your sexuality.


Let me register my hesitancy to accept that at face value.

[Natoma]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

You keep asserting you can't change your sexuality.


Let me register my hesitancy to accept that at face value.

I spent a few years trying to be heterosexual, i.e. watching straight porn, trying to date girls, etc etc etc. To all around me, I was a run of the mill hetero, though I didn't enjoy it. Came out to everyone a few years ago.

Did I change my sexuality, or did I merely admit my innate sexuality and alter my behavior to express that sexuality (gay porn instead of straight, dating men instead of women, etc. :P)?

If I suddenly started dating women and watching straight porn and all that jazz, would it make me heterosexual "again"?

[Natoma]

Originally Posted by Sabastian

Bah, got no more time for this.

This quote sums up my position on freedom of speech.

Have a nice day.

And to be sure I never said that I thought he should lose his job over anti-gay comments. But that wasn't really the only pressing part of the discussion between the two of us.

[John Reynolds]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

You keep asserting you can't change your sexuality.


Let me register my hesitancy to accept that at face value.

Can you change yours, Russ? Go ahead and try, I dare you.

[Natoma]

Originally Posted by John Reynolds

Can you change yours, Russ? Go ahead and try, I dare you.

Hey I've got a gay friend at University of Texas who might be game if Russ is willing to change his sexuality for a few days. He's 18, quite a cutie, and loves older men.

[MfA]

As they say on the 3D hardware board, nothing is free. Even in the US the law only protects you from the state ... free speech is not consequence-free speech.

[Joe DeFuria]

But Natoma,

Homosexuality is not natural!

(Leaves thread immediately never to return....)

[Natoma]

Begone with ye! Drive-by poker...

[RussSchultz]

I tend to believe that sexuality (beyond run of the mill procreative urges) is a psychological thing that is molded rather than innate.

I don't believe people are destined to be into fetishes or bondage, nor do I think they are innately gay.

While you can't imagine yourself any other way, I don't think that means that you haven't been molded into it, rather than born into it.

[Natoma]

Well I grew up in a very tightly knit christian family with a very tightly knit christian community around me. Didn't know what "gay" or "faggot" meant until I was 13, other than they were insults thrown around by everyone in the schoolyard. Had no clue what sex was until 7th grade (thank you very much for spoiling my innocence St. David's Catholic School sex-ed courses. ). Was never molested. Never saw any porn. Well, I was 16 when I saw my first porn, and it was hetero. Did nothing for me. Now the gay porn, wow that did a number on me.

Seriously though, I don't see how you believe that people are molded into their sexuality rather than discovering what they enjoy and then doing that. You discovered that you liked girls. Were you molded into that by society or was it something that you felt innately?

I discovered I liked guys. My environment certainly was not in any way shape or form conducive to that conclusion. Everything about my environment and the person I was at the time would have certainly molded me to be heterosexual. Hell I must have spent the better part of a decade trying to be straight, to no avail, in part because I wanted to be "normal," didn't want to upset my family, wanted the grandkids and all that, wanted to follow my religion, yadda yadda yadda. Through it all, homosexuality just felt innately right. That feeling when I saw good looking guys walking down the street or in the locker room at school, or in the tight track and field spandex clothing never dissipated. In fact it grew as I became fully sexually aware. I'm sure you had the same feelings for girls as you became fully sexually aware.

Oh and fetishes are in a completely different category than orientations. Fetishes focus on objects for sexual gratification (handcuffs, whips, shoes, etc), not people. Fetishism is an extension of orientation, not an equal category.

[RussSchultz]

So, is liking chocolate innate? Or is it molded? What about seafood?

If you grew up where you never saw fish, would you like it when exposed to it?
What about if you grew up in a fishing village and it was part of every meal?

Vegetarianism? Innate or molded?

Can you change your tastes? Can you grow to like what you once thought was distateful? Or grow to dislike what you once loved? (for example, hot dogs now make me ill, whereas as a kid I loved them)

Was I molded into heterosexuality? No, I believe its the natural order of procreation; without it life doesn't continue.

You show your formative life as anti-gay to show that it couldn't have molded you. My immediate thought was to question whether you suffer from "preacher's son/daughter syndrome".

Sorry, but I believe what I believe. I can see how you believe what you believe, though I tend to think its more out of need for self validation rather than any hard evidence. Of course, I fully recognize there's scant evidence behind my own beliefs.

Or, my alternate theory on homosexuality is that its "God's way" of culling the herd. Feel free to replace God with nature, if you so desire to interpret my feelings in an agnostic manner.

But, then again, this is the third, if not fourth discussion about your undeniable right to be gay and force acceptance of it on others.

Since, this is a thread on freedom of speech, lets contain the discussion to that.

Mfa: Sure, only the state can take away freedom of speech, _however_, there are laws in the US that prohibit hiring practices based on race, religion, (in some places) sexual orientation, etc. Though most states (texas included) is a "employment at will" state (meaning they can fire for any reason), no large corporation with deep pockets would fire anybody for expressing ideas outside of work, especially when they border on religious ideology.

[Joe DeFuria]

Originally Posted by RussSchultz

No, I believe its the natural order of procreation; without it life doesn't continue.

Damnit...there's that word again!