Gay Marriage

[leftism]

Originally posted by busyman+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (busyman)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>lefty, the reason I keep bringing up the color blue is because YOU and HOBBES have a preconceived position.[/b]

Agrajag, in all seriousness and with all due respect, can you see what Ive been getting at now?

Busyman, for the millionth time. Colour preference is not equivalent to sexuality. Arguing that because colour preference is not affected by your genes therefore sexuality is not affected by your genes is completely illogical. Even if you repeat it a million times, its still illogical.

Our position is quite clear.

Its supported by science.
Its supported by case studies.
Its supported by what everyone whos reading this instinctively knows based on their own experience.

What is there to support your position? Nothing&#33;

You guys explanation towards sexuality is basically..... YOUR BORN WITH IT END OF DISCUSSION.
For something that has no proof, you guys seem to have all the answers. Maybe you could help the scientists.

Maybe you should READ that document properly. Because you know what is missing? Your position. They are researching the genetic connection because that seems to be the most promising. They have ruled out "psychosocial or family dynamic cause".

They dont even mention like/dislike as a possible cause. Do you think that means anything?

Originally posted by busyman+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (busyman)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>You basically claim my position is spurious when it is quite logical.[/b]

Its utterly illogical&#33; Your arguing that sexuality is a simple like/dislike that has nothing to do with evolutiion or its resulting effect on human genetics.

Originally posted by Busyman
Person likes WOMAN A because she has a nice face.
Another dislikes her because he thinks she&#39;s ugly. I guess all of that was hardwired.

It is actually. Research has been done that shows the idea of what is attractive is largely similar across different countries and cultures with a few minor exceptions.

They even came up with a mathematical formula that represented the ideal ratio between certain features of the face.

There are individual differences in taste but on average there is a consensus. To put it in really really simple terms for you. Some men get off on fat women, but very very few do. Most men like a slim women with &#39;nice&#39; hips.

You know why? Because it signifies a healthy female who can bear children. Its the result of millions of years of evolution. <--- logic

btw the "perfect" hip/waist ratio is 0.7 (the waist is 70% the size of the hips).

This has been scientifically proven to be true, although Im sure you&#39;ll deny it.

<!--QuoteBegin-busyman@
You guys still haven&#39;t explained BIsexuals. You know why.......you can&#39;t. Even with your pseudoscientific explanations that have no... BASIS...IN....FACT.[/quote]

Yes it does have basis in fact. Its called evolutionary psychology. YOUR opinions have no basis in fact. I challenge you to find one respected scientific study that says sexualitty is a simple like/dislike similar to colour preference.

If sexuality is defined by genetics then theres no reason why bi-sexuality cant be decided by it too.

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
You can go through life liking woman then in your 40&#39;s have an affair with a man .
Did the gay brain chemical jump up and bite you in the ass?
Oh I guess you were gay all along and fighting the urge until you were 40.
If you have a gay thought, are you gay?[/quote]

Who the hell does that? Just switches from straight to gay overnight? You&#39;ve got to be joking....

hobbes read some more psychological studies. Straight people have had gay thoughts. You either liked or disliked them. Get it...like or disLIKE.

Thats it&#33; Just repeat it 10 more times and it&#39;ll be true&#33;&#33;

WHERE ARE THESE STUDIES????????


btw, Im still waiting for a reason why your against civil unions. You havent mentioned it at all in this post.

lefty- off topic question- Do you know 1234 personally or are you the same person?

No and no.

Now will you extend me the same courtesy by answering my question about civil unions? I think this is the 3rd time Ive asked without getting an answer.

[hobbes]

Some homosexual animals have one-night stands and some have long marriages. Gay and lesbian geese stay together year after year. Bottlenose dolphins don&#39;t form male-female couples, but males often form lifelong pairs with other males. Some are interested only in males, but others are bisexual and happily indulge in beak-genital propulsion and more with male or female alike.

When I look at the animal world and see that a certain percentage live EXCLUSIVELY homosexual lifestyles, I imagine that the cause in both man and animal is likely the same.

It was said by Busyman that animals just stick their naughty bits into whatever gives pleasure. Unfortunately it has been shown that is not the case.

I find it hard to believe that animals are making free will decisions to ignore females and be only with males. This observation makes me consider that there may be a genetic cause.

The evidence is there, the exact mechanism has not yet been detailed.


On the other hand, we have gay priests, who, despite knowing that their lifestyle will win them eternity in hell, can&#39;t fight their urges. And we have homosexual men who despite wanting to become straight can&#39;t, even with the assistance of doctors.

Kind of weird that you can chose to be one way, but be unable to reverse that decision.

And yes, I have explained bisexuality and no "genetics" is not pseudoscience.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by leftism@22 February 2004 - 19:20
Now will you extend me the same courtesy by answering my question about civil unions? I think this is the 3rd time Ive asked without getting an answer.

He is against civil unions because he chooses not to like the color blue. That much is obvious enough.

[Wizard_Mon1]

I find it hard to believe that animals are making free will decisions to ignore females and be only with males. This observation makes me consider that there may be a genetic cause.

Or a mental one??

On the other hand, we have gay priests, who, despite knowing that their lifestyle will win them eternity in hell, can&#39;t fight their urges. And we have homosexual men who despite wanting to become straight can&#39;t, even with the assistance of doctors.

I&#39;m sure i gave examples of how those can happen.... Now where were they.

Heres one: Because they don&#39;t have the right methods?
Heres a theory for how: Your body stores this information e.g. body posture. Your body posture is interconnected with your mental process, one affects the other and vice versa. So in this way all your&#39;e feelings from past experiences, and emotional reactions to them (e.g. abuse), have a direct influence on your actions.

Heres the other: I do not for one second believe that just because you devote yourself to god you have a pure mental thought process, but i also think that living that life can be extremely stressful and often they don&#39;t have any vent for there thoughts or feelings, this can lead to execesive thinking and self doubt. In the case were they become celebate, just this act can cas tremendous damage if there is no vent e.g. if a priest has sexual feelings towards a woman he will tell himself of because it is not what he has pledged to god. After a while of this confusion sets in because he has built up such a mental block against opposite sex attraction that his mind starts looking for somewhere else to explain his feelings. In the case of going in gay their are experiences in the individuals past that explain there homosexual tendancies - even if the individual is not aware of them.

I&#39;m not saying this is it and thats all there is, i&#39;m saying here is another view that shows that biological reason is not the the sole or undisputed reason.

But it&#39;s pointless saying any off this because it seems no one is listen to anyone else.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by leftism+22 February 2004 - 14:20--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 22 February 2004 - 14:20)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by busyman+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (busyman)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>lefty, the reason I keep bringing up the color blue is because YOU and HOBBES have a preconceived position.[/b]

Agrajag, in all seriousness and with all due respect, can you see what Ive been getting at now?

Busyman, for the millionth time. Colour preference is not equivalent to sexuality. Arguing that because colour preference is not affected by your genes therefore sexuality is not affected by your genes is completely illogical. Even if you repeat it a million times, its still illogical.

Our position is quite clear.

Its supported by science.
Its supported by case studies.
Its supported by what everyone whos reading this instinctively knows based on their own experience.

What is there to support your position? Nothing&#33;

You guys explanation towards sexuality is basically..... YOUR BORN WITH IT END OF DISCUSSION.
For something that has no proof, you guys seem to have all the answers. Maybe you could help the scientists.

Maybe you should READ that document properly. Because you know what is missing? Your position. They are researching the genetic connection because that seems to be the most promising. They have ruled out "psychosocial or family dynamic cause".

They dont even mention like/dislike as a possible cause. Do you think that means anything?

Originally posted by busyman
You basically claim my position is spurious when it is quite logical.

Its utterly illogical&#33; Your arguing that sexuality is a simple like/dislike that has nothing to do with evolutiion or its resulting effect on human genetics.

Originally posted by Busyman
Person likes WOMAN A because she has a nice face.
Another dislikes her because he thinks she&#39;s ugly. I guess all of that was hardwired.

It is actually. Research has been done that shows the idea of what is attractive is largely similar across different countries and cultures with a few minor exceptions.

They even came up with a mathematical formula that represented the ideal ratio between certain features of the face.

There are individual differences in taste but on average there is a consensus. To put it in really really simple terms for you. Some men get off on fat women, but very very few do. Most men like a slim women with &#39;nice&#39; hips.

You know why? Because it signifies a healthy female who can bear children. Its the result of millions of years of evolution. <--- logic

btw the "perfect" hip/waist ratio is 0.7 (the waist is 70% the size of the hips).

This has been scientifically proven to be true, although Im sure you&#39;ll deny it.

<!--QuoteBegin-busyman@
You guys still haven&#39;t explained BIsexuals. You know why.......you can&#39;t. Even with your pseudoscientific explanations that have no... BASIS...IN....FACT.

Yes it does have basis in fact. Its called evolutionary psychology. YOUR opinions have no basis in fact. I challenge you to find one respected scientific study that says sexualitty is a simple like/dislike similar to colour preference.

If sexuality is defined by genetics then theres no reason why bi-sexuality cant be decided by it too.

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
You can go through life liking woman then in your 40&#39;s have an affair with a man .
Did the gay brain chemical jump up and bite you in the ass?
Oh I guess you were gay all along and fighting the urge until you were 40.
If you have a gay thought, are you gay?[/quote]

Who the hell does that? Just switches from straight to gay overnight? You&#39;ve got to be joking....

hobbes read some more psychological studies. Straight people have had gay thoughts. You either liked or disliked them. Get it...like or disLIKE.

Thats it&#33; Just repeat it 10 more times and it&#39;ll be true&#33;&#33;

WHERE ARE THESE STUDIES????????


btw, Im still waiting for a reason why your against civil unions. You havent mentioned it at all in this post.

lefty- off topic question- Do you know 1234 personally or are you the same person?

No and no.

Now will you extend me the same courtesy by answering my question about civil unions? I think this is the 3rd time Ive asked without getting an answer. [/b][/quote]
Your support in case studies has been proven and disproven. There still isn&#39;t an answer or ..............having these figured it out. They haven&#39;t.
YOU ARE CLAIMING SOMETHING AS FACT THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN.
All of what you said about bisexuality is well....they "proven" homosexuality is genetic so they CAN do the same with bisexuality.

Next thing you know there will be a pedophilia gene and beastiality gene.

My support is common sense.

Who the hell switches from straight to gay? Alot of people. It&#39;s called being turned out.
Hey did they have the ...gay gene, the straight gene, or bisexual gene?

Yeah that&#39;s REALLY logical.

It is actually. Research has been done that shows the idea of what is attractive is largely similar across different countries and cultures with a few minor exceptions.

They even came up with a mathematical formula that represented the ideal ratio between certain features of the face.

There are individual differences in taste but on average there is a consensus. To put it in really really simple terms for you. Some men get off on fat women, but very very few do. Most men like a slim women with &#39;nice&#39; hips.

You know why? Because it signifies a healthy female who can bear children. Its the result of millions of years of evolution. <--- logic

btw the "perfect" hip/waist ratio is 0.7 (the waist is 70% the size of the hips).

This has been scientifically proven to be true, although Im sure you&#39;ll deny it.

So now there is a "I like hippy women" gene. You just said yourself it&#39;s cultural so HOW IS IT GENETIC&#33;&#33;&#33;
For instance, in my area which is mostly black, we men like women with a fat ass and big tits. But white men living in certain tend to like well.....skinny women with "cute butts". Take a baby from Israel and have him grow up in my area and most likely will like fat ass and big tits but........who knows?

Next thing you know your going to tell me I "genetically" like rap music.

If you read these "studies" you will find that MOST people have had a homosexual "experience" in their lifetime (most as children). Not saying they necessarily had sex.

I remember the comedian Colin Quinn said (in his sorry ass HBO special) that he was walking and was startled to see this certain guy. They both felt awkward because they uh.......used to play with each other penis when they were young. :x

Regarding civil unions.......you need to read dude. I&#39;ve addressed that already.
Since your hung up on it and "asked me three times" go back near the beginning of posts in this thread, pay attention, and READ. I gave a simple answer.

Its funny how things tend to go in circles. At the end of this little head to head we&#39;re back to the starting point. People not reading peoples posts, not keeping up with the thread and simply repeating their own position

Quote from you lefty
As matter of fact it was my VERY FIRST POST. I then explained it due someone asking. Now extend me some courtesy and READ&#33;&#33;

Oh and btw regarding gay priests. That&#39;s very simple.

Gay priests are fighting the urge to........fuck.
THAT IT&#33;&#33;&#33;

Now there preference is guys but the urge is to fuck.

If you think about it this applies to...guess what? STRAIGHT PRIESTS TOO.
We are compelled to fuck that&#39;s is all. Orgasms make it feel good and that&#39;s why we do it. Simple logic. Priests in general are trying to stop that urge to devote their life to god. THE URGE TO FORNICATE&#33;&#33;&#33;

[Busyman]

Originally posted by hobbes+22 February 2004 - 14:49--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 22 February 2004 - 14:49)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-leftism@22 February 2004 - 19:20
Now will you extend me the same courtesy by answering my question about civil unions? I think this is the 3rd time Ive asked without getting an answer.

He is against civil unions because he chooses not to like the color blue. That much is obvious enough. [/b][/quote]
Hmmmm maybe you should read as well then.

[bigdawgfoxx]

Fuck gay marriage. I mean I guess since the government isnt supposed to be involved with religion, and thats all that is wrong with it. Sept AIDS and shit..that is another issue. I am very strongly against gay marriage...thats fucking disquting and isnt good for the youth and especially kids that they may raise

[_John_Lennon_]

Originally posted by bigdawgfoxx@22 February 2004 - 20:22
Fuck gay marriage. I mean I guess since the government isnt supposed to be involved with religion, and thats all that is wrong with it. Sept AIDS and shit..that is another issue. I am very strongly against gay marriage...thats fucking disquting and isnt good for the youth and especially kids that they may raise

Bigdawg are you trying to say that two girls kissing is disgusting?

Give me a break.

[Biggles]

There has been considerable debate regarding the nature vs nurture debate much of which is arcane in the extreme. However, I am not yet convinced I have seen anything close to a convincing argument to explain why individuals will fly in the face of extreme social pressure to pursue happiness in a same sex relationship. In darker times such relationships carried the death penalty. These indivuals would often play the part of "normal" by marrying and even raising families (ironically, if it is genetic, spreading the gene far and wide). Yet they would always be drawn to that within them which they knew was their preference.

Busyman has put forward the notion that the urge to procreate is the single most important driving force behind all animal behaviour including humans. This is a fair point - this primal urge is indeed very strong and is almost certainly genetic. This does not in my view explain homosexuality. A man through genetic coding may be attracted to a young woman of child bearing age whose symmetrical appearance triggers all the codes that say "pass on your genes through her". It is most unlikely that another man could trigger such codes. Unless of course something is different.

It must also be remembered that many homosexuals are fearful of the genetic argument. It could herald a return the Eugenics style position that they are merely malfunctions, corrupted genetic codes to be repaired as soon as we have the skills to do so. (Although where we would get clothes designers, hairdressers and interior decorators I am not sure ).

However, for many couples, both homosexual and heterosexual, in long lasting stable relationships, the initial passion moves onto other other levels. These individuals may well be in a relationship that has much less sexual activity but they love each other deeply and wish to stay together.

This is the crux of the thread really - why should those who wish to be in a long lasting relationship be dis-allowed the right to make legally binding commitments? Does it really matter to anyone else if a man or woman makes such a commitment? Busyman has already said wild horses would not drag him into such a relationship, so it is hardly likely to undermine his commitment to his family - nor, I suspect, anyone else.

As someone said above, you like what you like. a bit of paper in someone elses hand is not going to change that. Individual churches have the right to say anything they like is wrong and not permitted in their membership, be it homosexuality or eating Black Magic chocolates. However, this cannot impinge on the rights of others who do not share these beliefs. Society as a whole belongs to everyone and not just one viewpoint.

[Busyman]

Biggles I actually don&#39;t even think we as humans have a driving force to procreate.
I think there is the urge to fuck. Procreation is a byproduct. Look at how many "accidents" there are . Take orgasms away and we&#39;ll see how much procreation there is.

Great post btw&#33;&#33;

If homosexuals are genetically that way, should there be marital rights given to the result of a "malfunction"?
Most folks on here agreed that if there is gay marriage that polygamy should also be allowed.
Under what criteria then?
Can I marry 20 wives? 40? Will my medical benefits cover them all?
How are is the estate split up in a divorce..(from x amount of wives)?

I see the writing on wall.