Cure yourself from homosexuality!

[Legion]

And rape is of course quite wrong, as it involves nonconsentual sex, and in nearly all cases also involves some kind of physical damage.

Some would say homosexuality is "quite wrong". Even ancient judaism justifies rape on many occassions within the bible. Its a matter of perspective not absolute morality.

Ooh. I'll have to look those verses up - more proof that religion is pathetic.

just as pathetic as the alternatives humanism and evolutionism, which i'd state are psuedo-religions.

Have you ever met or known a rape victim?

My fiance.

 

[Tagrineth]

And rape is of course quite wrong, as it involves nonconsentual sex, and in nearly all cases also involves some kind of physical damage.

Some would say homosexuality is "quite wrong". Even ancient judaism justifies rape on many occassions within the bible. Its a matter of perspective not absolute morality.

Ooh. I'll have to look those verses up - more proof that religion is pathetic.

just as pathetic as the alternatives humanism and evolutionism, which i'd state are psuedo-religions.

Have you ever met or known a rape victim?

My fiance.

What's her opinion of rape?

 

[Legion]

What's her opinion of rape?

is this a rhetorical question?

 

[Tagrineth]

What's her opinion of rape?

is this a rhetorical question?

You said there might be cases where rape would be "justified" in Judaism.

You know, if you want to take this a step further, there's a verse in the Bible which says that if a woman isn't a virgin until marriage, she should be put to death. Wow, religion must be right about everything!

 

[Legion]

You said there might be cases where rape would be "justified" in Judaism.

No, i said there are cases where it is justified.

You know, if you want to take this a step further, there's a verse in the Bible which says that if a woman isn't a virgin until marriage, she should be put to death. Wow, religion must be right about everything!

And evolutionary thought has been used to justify everything including Manchster Utilitarianism to Nazi rhetoric.

Humanism will always be reduced to hedonism and utilitarianism.

 

[Vince]

You know, on reading Vince's posts in this thread...

I can't help but think of Adolf Hitler.

He's different, and his difference is a minority, therefore it is an aberration and should be eliminated from society or 'fixed' somehow...

HAHA, I love it. *shakes head* Where did I say any of this? Ever think that maybe I'm not questioning his validity or intrinsic rights as a human or standing in society - but rather the biological causes behind what seperates homosexual sexual tendencies and heterosexual ones?

I'd further cite that it's generally an illiterate and unintelligent/unknowledgable person who makes such connections to Nazi-ism. It's people, much like yourself, that hold back research and thinking into topics such as what define homosexuality on a biological level because it's so easy to make the case to the general populace of morons that you're discriminating and the next Hitler.

Hey Tag, do you think the cause of his Homosexual tendencies is Biological in origion? Or God given, or what?

PS. Hey Digiwanderer is back... care to follow up where you left off in explaining how I'm a retard and need to use my brain.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Hey Digiwanderer is back... care to follow up where you left off in explaining how I'm a retard and need to use my brain.

No, you're doing quite a fine job all by yourself. 8)

 

[Tagrineth]

Vince, I understand and do not contest that homosexuality has nothing to do with genetics.

But... well, I don't know how to put my thoughts into words, so I'll come up with a good analogy:

Do you like chocolate?

 

[Vince]

Do you like chocolate?

Um, Sure.

PS. Hey Digiwanderer, did you actually make it through my posts this time? If so, I'm waiting for your responce to the post on biology and selforganizing systems. Thanks, I cant wait to see your opinion on these matters.

 

[PeterAce]

Hey Tag, do you think the cause of his Homosexual tendencies is Biological in origion? Or God given, or what?

Hmm... I wonder why I posted this earlyer :

I get the feeling that on this message board the more socially conservative members get a far to involved with 'why are people gay' and seem to miss that - 'It doesn't really matter'.

Millions of gay people are perfectly happy just they way they are.

One more time :

While the 'origins of homosexuality' is an interesting subject to research, ultimately : it should make no difference to civil, political and human rights. Equality does not require scientific justification.

 

[Tagrineth]

Do you like chocolate?

Um, Sure.

Why do you like chocolate?

 

[digitalwanderer]

Do you like chocolate?

Um, Sure.

PS. Hey Digiwanderer, did you actually make it through my posts this time? If so, I'm waiting for your responce to the post on biology and selforganizing systems. Thanks, I cant wait to see your opinion on these matters.

Oh that? I read it, I thought it was utter bullshit.

Any other things you want opinions on? :|

 

[Vince]

While the 'origins of homosexuality' is an interesting subject to research, ultimately : it should make no difference to civil, political and human rights. Equality does not require scientific justification.

You're absolutely right Peter, I can't agree more. Truely, I have no problem with homosexuals in life, I don't.

But, this thread - unlike what Natoma's trying to inject - wasn't started to discuss if Homosexuals are human or should be allowed to live or be killed by a neo-Nazi skinhead. It was started because of an article talking about how Homosexuality can be cured due to it being a biological problem - this is what I'm basing by discussion off of. Nothing more, nothing less.

But, see, Natoma didn't stick to this. Nor does any person in an analogous position - they reach into their pocket and immediatly pull out the emotional argument about how their being discriminated against and emotionally scarred and talk about how people are "bigots" and hate them. They ressurect the story of Matthew Sheppard and compare all of us to the assholes who killed him. Yet others call us Hitler wantabes and resurrect the Nazi's and Jew killing.

And all because some people, many of whom are highly literate in related fields of study, dared to wonder if Homosexuality is a disease, a 'problem' in the eyes of biology which has an enviromental cause and enviromental answer. How dare we think, I'll just go drink my Hemlock..

 

[Vince]

Oh that? I read it, I thought it was utter bullshit.

Any other things you want opinions on? :|

Interesting. Why? What specifically? I ask because much of that is dumbed down versions of current thinking in the field.

Why do you like chocolate?

Because it tastes good of course. Silly. (this will be interesting me thinks)

 

[Tagrineth]

Why do you like chocolate?

Because it tastes good of course. Silly. (this will be interesting me thinks)

Ah, but there are individuals who definitely do not like the tast of chocolate (I know one, myself!)... though, biologically, in theory, they're tasting exactly the same thing.

Would you consider this a deviation?

 

[digitalwanderer]

Oh that? I read it, I thought it was utter bullshit.

Any other things you want opinions on? :|

Interesting. Why? What specifically? I ask because much of that is dumbed down versions of current thinking in the field.

You'll have to be more specific, I thought most of it was bullshit.

 

[Vince]

Ah, but there are individuals who definitely do not like the tast of chocolate (I know one, myself!)... though, biologically, in theory, they're tasting exactly the same thing.

Would you consider this a deviation?

A deviation between us, hard to believe of course, but sure. What you failed to consider in your thinking is that there is no tangible downside to eating chocolate or not eating chocolate in todays world. You'll just get your energy needs elsewhere...

But, Homosexuality is a bit different in the larger scheme of things. In the natural world it can't be replaced by something else - it's a genetic dead end, which is a big no-no.

It would be akin to living on a island made of nothing but chocolate, everything of chocolate and nothing else. And then not liking chocolate. Would you consider not liking chocolate to be a viable strategy in that case?

PS. Their tasting the same compound, but their perception of it is different. This is due to the differential levels of certain constructs and entities in your body (I'm sick of repeating them) - the easiest way to think about it is the difference in color perception between your two eyes. It ties in with what I was talking about with DigitialWanderer, he's BSing right now, but in actuality its a good example of self organisation in nature. Your Genes code for the cones and rods and general construct shape and organisation - but not all are coded equally. So, alot of data is there on eye shape and corrected readily, where as there is less implicit coding of the positions and numbers of cones and rods which leads to slight color differentials between people, between eyes, etc.

You'll have to be more specific, I thought most of it was bullshit.

Well, I'm a big boy, I can take your post I hope. So, just as I nicely explained the position; perhaps you can reciprocate and explain to me where my post on self-organization (which you said was stupid and wrong) went wrong. I'm eagerly awaiting your post. Thanks.

 

[Tagrineth]

Ah, but there are individuals who definitely do not like the tast of chocolate (I know one, myself!)... though, biologically, in theory, they're tasting exactly the same thing.

Would you consider this a deviation?

A deviation between us, hard to believe of course, but sure. What you failed to consider in your thinking is that there is no tangible downside to eating chocolate or not eating chocolate in todays world. You'll just get your energy needs elsewhere...

But, Homosexuality is a bit different in the larger scheme of things. In the natural world it can't be replaced by something else - it's a genetic dead end, which is a big no-no.

It would be akin to living on a island made of nothing but chocolate, everything of chocolate and nothing else. And then not liking chocolate. Would you consider not liking chocolate to be a viable strategy in that case?

So are you saying that homosexuals will die a painful death within about a week, just like the poor sod stuck on that chocolate island and hating the stuff?

And, I suppose if I were stuck on an island made of, say, creamed spinach (OMG BLEH) and brussels sprouts, I'd probably make myself eat at least enough to survive, despite the awful taste.

Likewise, if everyone was homosexual - don't you think at least a decent number would bite the bullet, so to speak, and get some hetero goin' on specifically for procreation?

 

[Vince]

So are you saying that homosexuals will die a painful death within about a week, just like the poor sod stuck on that chocolate island and hating the stuff?

Of course not. It's a much more subtle analogy which is comparing the longterm strategy of genetic survival and how it relates to evolution, etc, and your short-term strategy of surival on the island.

If you life on an island of chocolate and don't like chocolate, that strategy will die out as it's not optimal (or even close). The same would apply in a macroscopic view to the 'strategy' of homosexuality and the gene pool.

And, I suppose if I were stuck on an island made of, say, creamed spinach (OMG BLEH) and brussels sprouts, I'd probably make myself eat at least enough to survive, despite the awful taste.

Well, thats why the analogy isn't perfect. You realize you'll die when your food runs out. Natoma doesn't appear to be so concerned about his genes not being passd on because of his lifestyle. But, nature does concern itself with these things, allways has, allways will.

Likewise, if everyone was homosexual - don't you think at least a decent number would bite the bullet, so to speak, and get some hetero goin' on specifically for procreation?

This is getting beside the point, but ask Natoma for shits and giggles. Also, it reflects an earlier point I made about our advancing cognative ability and how it's influencing the acceptance of the practice. I question if very early 'man' and most animals we're 'recently' related to think about it in such terms, with such logic. My money is on evolution and them dying.

 

[Tagrineth]

Oh, and my chocolate analogy was more focused toward why homosexuality even exists.

What is the biological basis, if any, for homosexuality?

Probably about the same one for whether or not you like chocolate.

Can you train a homosexual to be heterosexual?

Yes, considering it's possible to make someone who loves certain foods hate them, and vice versa.

In fact, some peoples' orientations can change as they grow older (I've seen this happen among some friends' relatives) - not drastically, of course, but like... a normally bisexual individual might favour one gender over the other in their teens, then shift the other way toward their 20's and 30's... then possibly back the other way later on.

Likewise taste in foods can vary.