Gay Marriage

[leftism]

Originally posted by Busyman
Tell me this. If homosexuality IS a chemical imbalance or whatever, and it's been proven, why is there no anti-gay drug?

If you think that argument proves your "homosexuality is learned" theory correct Im afraid your mistaken.

If homosexuality is a learned Pavlovian response, as you suggest, then it should be susceptible to standard Pavlovian methods of punishment and reward such as aversion therapy, yes?

They tried this back in the 50's and it didnt "cure" anybody.

I would also suggest that the reason there is no anti-gay drug is because homosexuality is not seen as an illness these days. The corporations who invent medicines probably have higher priorities.

Tell me, apart from your girflriend going over to the other side, whats wrong with homosexuality?

PS

Ever heard of Alan Turing? The genius who invented computers back in the late 40's?
He killed himself because people found out he was homosexual. Its kind of ironic that you're using his invention to express the same opinions that led to his death.

[protak]

Hobbes,

Some people take their faith (for lack of a better word) a little more seriously then other's, and that is there right. Egyptian's for example will decapitate a spouse or child if they dishonour the family name. Pretty extreme. And we as a free society have the right to judge those action's, as we do any other issue.

As for the statement about the moral fiber, it was directed at Arm, not gay's. As you can see by Arm's statement's (that I qouted) about minorities and children.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by leftism+20 February 2004 - 07:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 20 February 2004 - 07:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
Tell me this. If homosexuality IS a chemical imbalance or whatever, and it&#39;s been proven, why is there no anti-gay drug?

If you think that argument proves your "homosexuality is learned" theory correct Im afraid your mistaken.

If homosexuality is a learned Pavlovian response, as you suggest, then it should be susceptible to standard Pavlovian methods of punishment and reward such as aversion therapy, yes?

They tried this back in the 50&#39;s and it didnt "cure" anybody.

I would also suggest that the reason there is no anti-gay drug is because homosexuality is not seen as an illness these days. The corporations who invent medicines probably have higher priorities.

Tell me, apart from your girflriend going over to the other side, whats wrong with homosexuality? Or are you just bitter?

PS

Ever heard of Alan Turing? The genius who invented computers back in the late 40&#39;s?
He killed himself because people found out he was homosexual. Its kind of ironic that you&#39;re using his invention to express the same opinions that led to his death.[/b][/quote]
Yes, even in societies where the punishment of homosexual activity is death, they still exist, some say in an equal percentage as an open society, though this data is hard to gather. Hard to believe this came from liking someones hairstyle and trying to emulate and hardly "logical".

Enough gentleman, good fun and good night.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by hobbes@20 February 2004 - 02:18
You make it too linear, it is not a simple imbalance at all. It is about how the brain was formed before birth, and how it responses to hormonal stimulation. It is a multifactorial event.

This would require gene therapy and not just one, but a multitude and they would have to be timed perfectly in the unborn child.

It would be as logical to think that a pill could alter these peoples sexual orientation as it would be to think it could remove your religious faith. They are hardwired now, just as you are.

Wow and scientists figured all this out or..........not.

@protak - I did say that if you are going to allow gay marriage, allow alot of other things, polygamy, prostitution, etc.

I am Christian but also can see it from hobbes point of view.

If there is to be a separation of church and state, the government should separate it, make America&#39;s transformation into a real Babylon complete, and shut-up with the rhetoric.

While we&#39;re at it........church&#39;s are no longer tax exempt.
I always thought that was ridiculous.

btw, I refrain from remarking to trollers who have been blacklisted.

edit: my bad leftism. I get you and 1234 mixed up alot. You two are like two anti-American bodies with one head.

Anyway, aversion therapy doesn&#39;t work forever. Also I couldn&#39;t use it to let&#39;s say...... make you hate your mother (maybe for awhile) . Spurious argument.

Regarding my ex-girlfriend, all I will say is that some you on this forum need lessons in reading comprehension. Read what I said again then get back to me.




Edit by RF:

Removed a couple of remarks that could be interpreted as Flamebate or offending (im sure not intentionally)...I think i left the context intact and didnt detract from the intent

edit by Busy: Wow RF you left the rest of my remarks. Some quite obvious.
Also left leftisms. Which is why I guess mine are still here? Interesting.

[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'>btw, I refrain from remarking to trollers who have been blacklisted.

edit: my bad leftism. I get you and 1234 mixed up alot. You two are like two anti-American bodies with one head.[/b]

anti-American? wtf?

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'>If there is to be a separation of church and state, the government should separate it, make America&#39;s transformation into a real Babylon complete, and shut-up with the rhetoric.[/b]

You&#39;re the one who disagrees with the constitution Busyman, which makes you anti-American.

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@
Anyway, aversion therapy doesn&#39;t work forever. Also I couldn&#39;t use it to let&#39;s say...... make you hate your mother (maybe for awhile)[/quote]

Hehe, you accuse me of trolling then insult my mother? Whatever dude... lets stick to the topic eh? Before we get back to gay marrriages/civil unions I just thought I&#39;d point this out to you.

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
Regarding my ex-girlfriend, all I will say is that some you on this forum need lessons in reading comprehension. Read what I said again then get back to me.
[/quote]

"Some you" need lessons in writing.

The issue of averision therapy is not a spurious point. Some people do hate their parents because of what they&#39;ve done to them (e.g. child abuse). This is a standard Pavlovian response.

Any behavior that is not based solely on biology can be modified through negative or positive experiences. Like Hobbes pointed out, in some countries people can be killed for being gay but they still do it. Even if they desist from gay behaviour they are still attracted to members of the same sex. It cannot be changed.

The only issue here is that of giving gay couples the same rights as married couples. It wont destroy the family. Its not special treatment. Its just a legal thing to give them equal rights.

Try and bear in mind that "All men are created equal", even the gay ones.




Edit by RF:

Copied through an edit from the previous page, quoted in this post.

[iamtheoneandonlyone]

I&#39;m not for or against any of this. I&#39;m just hoping someone or they can just get this resolved because I&#39;m really sick of this hearing it on the news.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by leftism+20 February 2004 - 02:56--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism @ 20 February 2004 - 02:56)</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'>btw, I refrain from remarking to trollers who have been blacklisted.

edit: my bad leftism. I get you and 1234 mixed up alot. You two are like two anti-American bodies with one head.[/b]

anti-American? wtf?

Originally posted by Busyman
If there is to be a separation of church and state, the government should separate it, make America&#39;s transformation into a real Babylon complete, and shut-up with the rhetoric.

You&#39;re the one who disagrees with the constitution Busyman, which makes you anti-American.

Originally posted by Busyman
Anyway, aversion therapy doesn&#39;t work forever. Also I couldn&#39;t use it to let&#39;s say...... make you hate your mother (maybe for awhile)

Hehe, you accuse me of trolling then insult my mother? Whatever dude... lets stick to the topic eh? Before we get back to gay marrriages/civil unions I just thought I&#39;d point this out to you.

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@
Regarding my ex-girlfriend, all I will say is that some you on this forum need lessons in reading comprehension. Read what I said again then get back to me.

"Some you" need lessons in writing.

The issue of averision therapy is not a spurious point. Some people do hate their parents because of what they&#39;ve done to them (e.g. child abuse). This is a standard Pavlovian response.

Any behavior that is not based solely on biology can be modified through negative or positive experiences. Like Hobbes pointed out, in some countries people can be killed for being gay but they still do it. Even if they desist from gay behaviour they are still attracted to members of the same sex. It cannot be changed.

The only issue here is that of giving gay couples the same rights as married couples. It wont destroy the family. Its not special treatment. Its just a legal thing to give them equal rights.

Try and bear in mind that "All men are created equal", even the gay ones.




Edit by RF:

Copied through an edit from the previous page, quoted in this post. [/b][/quote]
Funny how you took a jab at me and when a jab comes back, you are offended and part of MY post is removed. STICK TO THE TOPIC&#33;&#33; Right?

If you read, I did say well ...exactly what you post in your post.
My original post tells you my preference but based on the current laws......

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
If there is to be a separation of church and state, the government should separate it, make America&#39;s transformation into a real Babylon complete, and shut-up with the rhetoric.[/quote]

READ READ READ. This passage agrees with the majority of the thread (and the constitution).

Then you say that I DISagree right after it.

btw, I "biologically" don&#39;t like the color blue. Will aversion therapy change that forever? I&#39;m not physically hardwired to NOT like it.
According to you gays are physically hardwired to like the same sex.

Funny how all of this "evidence" to support this is not breaking news.
I guess it&#39;s a cover up by the religious right.

[Rat Faced]

Funny how you took a jab at me and when a jab comes back, you are offended and part of MY post is removed. STICK TO THE TOPIC&#33;&#33; Right?

I looked back and only saw one thing that i think was a jab at you...i&#39;ve removed that now, missed it the 1st time.

If im incorrect, and there is something else that was personal..let me know.

For Info:

Leftism never complained about anything.....I did this coz i want the thread to stay "On Topic" and not get personal.

So far, its done that very well.

I also removed a remark aimed at a particular church...if it had been aimed at religion in general, i would have left it alone.

Im sure you understand

[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'>

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'>
If there is to be a separation of church and state, the government should separate it, make America&#39;s transformation into a real Babylon complete, and shut-up with the rhetoric.[/b]

READ READ READ. This passage agrees with the majority of the thread (and the constitution).

Then you say that I DISagree right after it.
[/b]

Oh I see. So you want the US to be "a real Bablyon complete"? This would be the same Babylon that God destroyed? So, you either want God to destroy America or you&#39;ve just contradicted yourself.

Originally posted by Busyman
btw, I "biologically" don&#39;t like the color blue. Will aversion therapy change that forever? I&#39;m not physically hardwired to NOT like it.

If you "biologically" dont like the colour blue then it IS hardwired. Maybe if you calm down a bit you wont be so confused?

Unless that was your attempt at humour? In which case I&#39;m forced to point out the obvious. There is a "subtle" difference between sexuality and colour preference.

Anyway to answer your question.. aversion therapy, when it works, can only be used to make someone dislike something. So it couldnt make you like the colour blue if you already disliked it. If you&#39;d applied a little thought to what the word &#39;aversion&#39; means you wouldnt need to ask.

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@

According to you gays are physically hardwired to like the same sex.
[/quote]

And according to you its a "lifestyle" choice. They make this choice even when they live in countries where they could be killed for it. Very logical...

What about Alan Turing? Do you sincerely believe that this genius decided he was going to risk his livelihood, reputation and ultimately his life out of pure choice, just so he could be gay? Bear in mind that the man was not stupid and that his work on computers was based around LOGIC. Hardly the first person you would expect to make a completely illogical "lifestyle choice" that ultimately led to his death.

<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
Funny how all of this "evidence" to support this is not breaking news.[/quote]

There&#39;s loads of evidence to support it. If you choose to look. I suggest a few neuropsychology journals.

Please answer one question for me. When did you "choose" to be heterosexual?

You see it was different for me. I didnt wake up one day and thought "well you know what, I&#39;ve decided Im going to be heterosexual for the rest of my life.". I have always been heterosexual and I always will be. I couldnt "choose" to be gay, even if I wanted to. Could you?

[Skweeky]

Ah, the old debate is back, good good

I read through all of the posts and I&#39;m just going to reply to a few points that struck me.

First of all I think marriage between homosexuals should be allowed. Gay people love each other the same way straight people do. If they feel they need a piece of paper to prove that to one another, then why not let them?
The marriage in front of the Church is a bit tricky though. As was said, it is the belief of the Church that homosexuality is a sin, so it would be unfair to ask them to change their views on it. On the other hand, this same Church says that premarital sex is a sin, I don&#39;t think they try to find out whether you commited to that &#39;sin&#39; or not before straight couples get married, so in my opinion they&#39;re using double standards here. Also are these rules based on a book that was written nearly 2000 years ago, surely times have changed a lot ever since and maybe the Church should consider adapting the rules to the age we live in...

Busyman said he thinks that homosexuality is something you &#39;develop&#39;, influenced by your environment. I must disagree here. I am bisexual, I realy like guys, but I really like girls as well. I went to a catolic school, a very strict one too. My parent were very conservative and I didn&#39;t know any gay people until I was 17 or so. One day I just fell in love with my best friend (was 15 then) and that was that. A simple fact for me and not nurtured or influenced by anyone else.


Anyway,
a few years ago in Belgium a priest was &#39;fired&#39; because he openly had admitted to be gay. Ever since he sort of started his own movement and marries homosexuals, you can imagine the reaction from all the bishops there. The movement still is a big success and in many ways more popular than the &#39;normal&#39; Church ( if you look at it in perspective that is)
I think that&#39;s a good initiative and it offeres a valid alternative.