Gay Marriage

[manker]

I don't know where you're coming from, you keep referring to this gay gene but there isn't one. At least not like how you describe.

JP made an excellent post where he mentioned a kind of sliding scale of how predisposed one was to homosexual behaviour. If it was from zero to ten then you could have a '3' who acted like a '5' or an '8' that was in denial that acted like a '2'.

That incorporates your entire spectrum of points. You don't have to act out your desires, but you do have to experience them as a feeling.

If a person is born with a propensity to fancy guys then he or she can deny it or train themselves to like the opposite sex but the inherent desire for men will always be there, latent or not.

You have mentioned how sexuality is a sentient choice, this is not the case.

You also mentioned how the feeling is not a sentient choice.

Sexuality is a feeling, that is the point here. You've already posted what I am trying to get across to you.

[vidcc]

this non belief in science keeps reminding me of Bush's attitude to global warming...oh and evolution

[3RA1N1AC]

If a person is born with a propensity to fancy guys then he or she can deny it or train themselves to like the opposite sex but the inherent desire for men will always be there, latent or not.

one could blame it on the environment: children grow up to be gay because they're raised in the presence of homosexuals, or because they're exposed to all of those gay movies, gay rock bands, gay rappers, etc.

that'd be a slippery slope, however, because it undermines the "personal responsibility judged in a circumstantial vacuum" idea which is pretty dominant in social conservative politics. extending that doctrine, gays would have only themselves --not their genes or the influence of other gays-- to blame. each gay is a spontaneous combustion of flaming homosexuality, so to speak.

[Busyman]

I don't know where you're coming from, you keep referring to this gay gene but there isn't one. At least not like how you describe.

JP made an excellent post where he mentioned a kind of sliding scale of how predisposed one was to homosexual behaviour. If it was from zero to ten then you could have a '3' who acted like a '5' or an '8' that was in denial that acted like a '2'.

That incorporates your entire spectrum of points. You don't have to act out your desires, but you do have to experience them as a feeling.

If a person is born with a propensity to fancy guys then he or she can deny it or train themselves to like the opposite sex but the inherent desire for men will always be there, latent or not.

You have mentioned how sexuality is a sentient choice, this is not the case.

You also mentioned how the feeling is not a sentient choice.

Sexuality is a feeling, that is the point here. You've already posted what I am trying to get across to you.

Agreed.

Anything that you prefer is your own feeling. That doesn't just involve sex.
The "gay gene", "gay chemical", or corpuschristicollosalwhateverthefuck is just my description of whatever it you say makes a person gay.

So ok, now you believe it's a sliding scale referring to Fugley's "excellent post".
If this sliding exists then it could measured, right?

Also this supposed sliding scale only applies to attraction?

If the sight of dick elicits a warm reaction from gay male 1, the you are saying then that on this sliding scale, which can be measured, then may be on a 3.....

Sorry bud that sounds like....made up bullshit. Read this again....

JP made an excellent post where he mentioned a kind of sliding scale of how predisposed one was to homosexual behaviour. If it was from zero to ten then you could have a '3' who acted like a '5' or an '8' that was in denial that acted like a '2'.

What the hell does this scale refer to, a dominance of a certain chemical?
And you laugh at my posts.

I'd like to know why I like to grip phat ass. Why does one of my boys like skinny women.

I think it's a sliding scale of 1 for skinny ass and 10 for phat ass.
What about the black guy who's turned on by white women?
What about getting toes licked?
The woman who had gay sex in college only?
I guess allllll those women in porn only sex other women for money?
...and so do the guys.

Keep trying to scientificalize every feeling. I won't.

[Busyman]

this non belief in science keeps reminding me of Bush's attitude to global warming...oh and evolution

I believe in science but apparently you attribute a scalable attribute to sexual preference.

You have pigeon holed this particular feeling to science. Why not others? Sexuality must trump everything huh?

If a woman makes a decision to lick twat then her sliding scale must have been at an 8? Or has too much gay chemical?

You guys sure know alot from saying the scientific community believes the "born with" mantra and not going outside of your family atmosphere.

I guess they must correct about the Big Bang too. They said so, so of course they absolutely correct about the beginning of life.

[Busyman]

one could blame it on the environment: children grow up to be gay because they're raised in the presence of homosexuals, or because they're exposed to all of those gay movies, gay rock bands, gay rappers, etc.

that'd be a slippery slope, however, because it undermines the "personal responsibility judged in a circumstantial vacuum" idea which is pretty dominant in social conservative politics. extending that doctrine, gays would have only themselves --not their genes or the influence of other gays-- to blame. each gay is a spontaneous combustion of flaming homosexuality, so to speak.

I believe it is unmeasurable.

There too many environmental variables.

You have this phenomenon in other things as well. Child grows up in a family of criminals and poverty but yet doesn't turn to crime.

A white woman risks everything to be with a black man in the wrong time period.

No matter what, a son hates basketball in a basketball family with friends that play basketball.

The entire sixth grade class likes blue, he likes yellow.

I guess it is measurable.

[Jon L. Obscene]

Sorry bud that sounds like....made up bullshit. Read this again....

JP made an excellent post where he mentioned a kind of sliding scale of how predisposed one was to homosexual behaviour. If it was from zero to ten then you could have a '3' who acted like a '5' or an '8' that was in denial that acted like a '2'

It's not bullshit, it makes perfect sense,think of it this way, you could have a person who finds themself mildly atracted to the same sex (3) who likes the idea and will overplay it, being Camp maybe (5)
Or the other end of the scale you could have someone who is having strong homosexual feelings (8) but refuses to accept them maybe for fear of persicution etc, so will act all homophobic to create the illusion they are straight (2) in actucal fact.....they are bent as a nine bob bit

Is that a little clearer?

In my experience a man who hates gays with a passion is only doing so thru fear because he has had some form of homosexual thought or feeling.

Jonno

[Cheese]

Busyman is an 8 pretending to be a 2.



j/k.

[bigboab]

I tend to agree with Busyman in some of the thing that he says. Homosexuality has gone from 50's 'Dont talk about it' to the 21'st century 'In your face'.

I agree that everbody should be treated equal. But the word should be EQUAL, not 'more equal' as in the case of what has happened in racial equality.

I do tend to get a wee bit worried about the treatment of homosexuality in the UK.
60's Legalised (21 consenting age)
90's Consenting age reduced to 18
0's Consenting age reduced to 16.

I may have the years wrong, but you get the idea. All of these measures have been introduced by Labour Governments. Will the next Labour Government make it compulsary?

[Jon L. Obscene]

I agree that everbody should be treated equal. But the word should be EQUAL, not 'more equal' as in the case of what has happened in racial equality.

That is true Bob, there are a lot of Gay men and women who really push it in people's faces, but I think this has derived from so much opression for so long.
You tell someone for long enough they can't do something then suddenly they can, then so many years of being silent will suddenly explode and people will let loose.
Same as the Black comunity thru the 80's and 90's as the prjudice subsided and they were finally treated as humans they pushed it in people's faces and began taking the piss out of those who opressed them, now we have white people trying to be black

I have never understood why people can't just let people be people.

Jonno