Gay Marriage

[Agrajag]

Originally posted by hobbes@20 February 2004 - 22:00
I don't think any point has been missed. The thread just progressed on from the initial question to explore why people came to the conclusions they did.

Elsewhere it would be described as "hijacking", what is the difference here ? is it the big words ? the well written posts ? or something else.

Could it be that the erudite consider what they do to be "stream of consciousness" whereas in others it is lack of focus ?

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Agrajag+20 February 2004 - 23:37--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agrajag &#064; 20 February 2004 - 23:37)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@20 February 2004 - 22:00
I don&#39;t think any point has been missed.&nbsp; The thread just progressed on from the initial question to explore why people came to the conclusions they did.

Elsewhere it would be described as "hijacking", what is the difference here ? is it the big words ? the well written posts ? or something else.

Could it be that the erudite consider what they do to be "stream of consciousness" whereas in others it is lack of focus ?[/b][/quote]
It is a relevant topic which precedes and bears upon the question. It was only embarked upon after the intial question had been well settled. How can you you talk about the health of a plant without first exploring the soil upon which it has blossomed?

Hijacking requisitely involves the mention of NikkiD. You&#39;re new here so you may not be aware of this.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Wizard_Mon1@20 February 2004 - 23:12
However, lack of male sex hormone can only made you less drawn towards women it cannot make you attracted to males. In the case of males that a high amount of female sex hormone, they are not neccesarily drawn to men. Feminine males are not neccessarily drawn to men, it is more likely that they are seen as slighly different to other males and outcast during adolescence which leads them to question them selves because they are not like other males. After this what is left? They seek an alternative or an answer to why they are different.

We are not talking about hormone levels. You are describing effects on the mature brain. Just like growth hormone will not make you grow after your bone growth plates have fused.

We are talking about brain maturation, which relies on, but is not exclusive to sex hormones. Once the sexual identity center is matured (4-6 years), hormones will not effect sexuality.

Remember my comments about thyroid hormone replacement. You can&#39;t give a retarded teenager thyroid hormone to cure him. The horses are well out of the barn by then.

[Agrajag]

Originally posted by hobbes+20 February 2004 - 22:46--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 20 February 2004 - 22:46)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by Agrajag@20 February 2004 - 23:37
<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes

@20 February 2004 - 22:00
I don&#39;t think any point has been missed. The thread just progressed on from the initial question to explore why people came to the conclusions they did.

Elsewhere it would be described as "hijacking", what is the difference here ? is it the big words ? the well written posts ? or something else.

Could it be that the erudite consider what they do to be "stream of consciousness" whereas in others it is lack of focus ?

It is a relevant topic which precedes and bears upon the question. It was only embarked upon after the intial question had been well settled. How can you you talk about the health of a plant without first exploring the soil upon which it has blossomed?

Hijacking requisitely involves the mention of NikkiD. You&#39;re new here so you may not be aware of this. [/b][/quote]
Do you truly feel that the original question was setled ? if so I would appreciate it if you could inform me of the outcome, because I cannot find the definitive answer anywhere in the thread. Unless of course you consider your own proclamations to be definitive.

How does the off topic (as I see it) discussion bear upon the question ? How does why people are gay matter when deciding upon the rights of gay people ? Does this go for other groups as well ? Do we have to decide on why they are how they are before we decide on their rights ? Or do we feel that all men are born equal and have equal rights ?

[Rat Faced]

A quick look at the poll results show that the original question was settled rather conclusively (in the opinions of the people that frequent this area of the board)...

The rest of the thread appears to be an investigation as to why people think this way...

[hobbes]

Outcome:

What are your views on Gay Marriage?
Against Marriage and Civil Union. Should be in Constitution [ 3 ]&nbsp; [6.67%]

Against Marriage and Civil Union. Shouldn&#39;t be in Constitution. [ 4 ]&nbsp; [8.89%]

Against Marriage, For Civil Union. Should be in Constitution [ 0 ]&nbsp; [0.00%]

Against Marriage, For Civil Union. Shouldn&#39;t be in Constitution [ 3 ]&nbsp; [6.67%]

For Gay Marriages and Civil Union, makes me uncomfortable [ 1 ]&nbsp; [2.22%]

For Gay Marriages and Civil Union, doesnt bother me [ 34 ]&nbsp; [75.56%]

Total Votes: 45

You&#39;re so cute when you&#39;re pissy

[Biggles]

Agrajag

The erudite don&#39;t hijack






...they merely digress - its just some digressions are more tenuous than others.


To be fair to Hobbes and Busyman the subject of their discussion is adjacent to the topic. A complex issue like this can probably sustain two, or even three, separate discussions at the same time.

I personally was more interested in the socio-political drivers for the reaction against than anything else, consequently my contribution on the nature vs nurture debate has been non-existent (plus I preferred plant biology )

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by Biggles@20 February 2004 - 23:14
Agrajag

The erudite don&#39;t hijack






...they merely digress -&nbsp; its just some digressions are more tenuous than others.&nbsp;

Of course they dont.....

[Agrajag]

My apologies, I took "the initial question had been well settled" as meaning that we had come up with a definitive answer for this problem. As opposed to, nobody is voting any more, so there is a "winner" in this poll. Being a simple soul I took the combination of words in their normal meaning. Forgive this aberration, I will try to do better as I learn the subtleties of interpretation in this board area. I was hoping this would happen through osmosis, however so far this has been unsuccessful.

The fact that I did not vote in the poll and as such could not see the current position may not have helped

[Biggles]

Some digressions are, of course, quite, quite tenuous.





:"> :-"