It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Most homosexuality is a choice

page: 67
76
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH



The kid should have access to all his parents, as he grows up.

They do.



A gay couple could adopt, but then it's not their genes. The kids don't look like them. So, it's not exactly the same kind of parenting, as when it's your own flesh and blood.

So could hetrosexual couples. Your point? You do realize that some hetrosexual couples can't reproduce?



To solve all these things, we only need one resolution, to allow 3 to enter into marriage.

You are seeing too much of a problem in it than what is really there.

Don't worry. Usually children turn out to be fine.


edit on 10/8/2015 by Deaf Alien because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: AMPTAH


A person cannot be a homosexual by himself. He needs a willing partner.


Yes a person can.

You are incredibly stubborn. We have explained numerous times what an orientation is. You refuse to acknowledge this. I'll try one more time.

This is what a sexual orientation means:

Sexual orientation refers to an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic and/or sexual attractions to men, women or both sexes. APA

The implication of your thinking is that all virgins have no sexual orientation since it's the sex act itself that defines it. Think about that. Really think about it...


Dead on. Man, I can't believe some of the terrible arguments being used in this thread. So basically he's saying that if a male masturbates to gay porn on the internet, he is not homosexual because he doesn't have a partner.

Is it coincidence that all of the anti-gay folks are also anti-evolution and anti science? It's like the whole package put into one. People so blindled by faith they take the anti gay passages literally, but all the other commandment are ignored, including what Jesus taught about empathy. So so sad.
edit on 8-10-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bicent76
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

totally agree.. I just dont understand why their is a faction on this thread trying to brainwash our members in saying homosexuals are born that way and their is no other reason why a man or woman used free will to be gay..



How is it brainwashing, when you ask homosexuals themselves and they say that it is not a choice? Straight from the horses mouth, yet you still deny it. Orientation is not a choice. It's the way you are. The only choosers are bisexuals because they chose between male and female, but even saying that is a stretch because the orientation is already there, they didn't choose to be bi.


originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Bicent76

Cya don't let your ignorance hit you on your way out eh?.
Still didn't answer my question did you.


I haven't caught up with today's posts yet, but I guarantee he'll be back.....

He supposedly was going to leave some 30-40 pages back.....

His argument style reminds me of the guy with the captain kirk avatar that was arguing that god was provable using nothing but falsehoods...

Every point he made was an extremely simplistic one liner followed by multiple dots...

And he always got upset when folks didn't agree with him....


edit on 8-10-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

I would take gay folk bringing up kids everytime If it meant not having those kids exposed to backward dumb ass thinking like yours.
You are the problem you know and you can not even see it.
We can you are a ignorant and bigoted and should come out of the closet.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Why do they want to? Why do people who have no sexual attraction to the gender that would help them continue their lineage care?

I am trying to understand why people who are not interested in the sexual activity that creates kids... want to have kids.

Simply really. How do two biological scenarios that are at odds with each other come together?


The two things are not related. Many couples call it "making love", not just having sex. It is an act of love, not just lust, and not just to have kids. Nothing is at odds here. 2 people that love each other will usually have sex with each other, and the sole purpose is definitely not just procreation.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
I still firmly believe that anti-gay folks think that it is a choice, because they have an underlying attraction to the same sex. Therefor to them, they feel they could make a choice like that. The fact that they repeatedly dodge the question of how they chose to be straight, speaks volumes. Religious folks dismiss it as the devil tempting them, when it is really an underlying attraction that they deny exists. They hate homosexuals because they hate that aspect of themselves, because they are super religious. In fact, there have been studies done on sexual arousal that have shown that homophobic people are more likely to be turned on by gay porn. I don't think it is a coincidence in the least.

Study Reveals Homophobic Men Are, In Fact, More Likely To Be Gay

I wonder if the "choice" people in this thread would be willing to participate in a study like this. I doubt it, as it would reveal their true nature and they despise it.
edit on 8-10-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

Seriously stop it, you have insulted people enough, you have equaled us to Bestiality, Mental Illness, and now "Baby Snatchers"

and you speak the words of "God"....
edit on 8-10-2015 by Darth_Prime because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: AMPTAH

I would take gay folk bringing up kids everytime If it meant not having those kids exposed to backward dumb ass thinking like yours.
You are the problem you know and you can not even see it.
We can you are a ignorant and bigoted and should come out of the closet.


How is this. That's the thing that is puzzling me. Here I am agreeing that everybody is entitled to think and say whatever they want. Not controlling anyone. I point out that politicians are being controlled, and can't even mention therapy for homosexuals, without getting the boot. And yet, homosexuals can't see that they are being the bigots of today.

I suppose, every age has to have their bigots.

In the last century, maybe it was the Christians. They didn't allow gays and lesbians to "come out."

Today, however, most homosexuals are out. And now that they are, they are the one's denying others free speech and freedom of expression.

They deny the religious, like Kim Davis, to practice her belief. They deny politicians, like the Canadian electoral candidate, the right to ask a reasonable question. They deny that forum posters, who don't immediately accept their "homo-doctrine" without question, could ever have something reasonable and rational to say. And by these "behaviors" they identify the exact nature of their group.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: AMPTAH

Seriously stop it, you have insulted people enough, you have equaled us to Bestiality, Mental Illness, and now "Baby Snatchers"

and you speak the words of "God"....


Who has been insulted? Did the bible insult someone? I don't know if you and the animal lovers are the same. I never said you're the same. I said these are different things, and so is heterosexual from homosexuality. Please point to the forum post where I said "homosexuals are the same as ...whatever" when making your accusation. The only comparison I myself made, is that homosexuals are like smokers. It's a habit. You can kick a habit.

My post clearly said "no homosexuals have been baby snatchers".

I use that fact, to show that the "urge" to have kids is not the same.

What is interesting, however, is how you see all these things as saying something other than what is in the statements themselves. Maybe there is a mental virus. It was a postulate, but the evidence is mounting, that the true source of all this may, in fact, be an illness.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH



Today, however, most homosexuals are out. And now that they are, they are the one's denying others free speech and freedom of expression.

No.



They deny the religious, like Kim Davis, to practice her belief.

Oh brother here we go again. NOBODY has denied her the right to practice her belief.



They deny that forum posters, who don't immediately accept their "homo-doctrine" without question, could ever have something reasonable and rational to say.

No. We have been listening to posters' well thought out posts and pointing the errors of their logic. That is the nature of debate. You are the one who don't seem to accept that WE could ever have something reasonable and rational to say.

I don't know what to tell you about the politicians. It has nothing to do with the topic.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

It's true, i have a Sickness.. a Illness... and it's being Too Fabulous!



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oh look another one.
Proves my thread.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime



It's true, i have a Sickness.. a Illness... and it's being Too Fabulous!

Thank you for your sickness. People with this sickness add flavors and colors to life. They make things more fun for us.




posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs
I still firmly believe that anti-gay folks think that it is a choice,


Do you think that some anti-gay folks have no choice but to be anti-gay? And therefore they can't help it? It is perhaps, in their inner nature? It's their form of orientation. They can't control their orientation. It is who they naturally are.

So, trying to make some anti-gay folks into pro-gay may be just as difficult as making some gays into straight people.

Should we be trying to change anyone?

Or, just let us all be who we are?



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: AMPTAH

It's true, i have a Sickness.. a Illness... and it's being Too Fabulous!


Well, that's one way to look at it



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

I'm like Skittles Gurl...Taste the Rainbow



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH



Do you think that some anti-gay folks have no choice but to be anti-gay? And therefore they can't help it? It is perhaps, in their inner nature?

There was actually a thread about this here I think.



Or, just let us all be who we are?

Bingo.

Just let gay people be who they are. Don't force beliefs on them and don't take away their rights. If the "anti-gay" folks would leave them alone then they would leave them alone.

Law of action and reaction.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

I don't know what to tell you about the politicians. It has nothing to do with the topic.


Well, there I beg to disagree.

The topic of this thread is "Most Homosexuality is a choice".

If it is a choice, then it is reasonable to say some people simply try it out, get addicted to it, and get stuck in that pattern of behavior. They may even come to believe that it is natural or normal for them, just to convince themselves that all is well. They are even more likely to hold the view that it is normal, if everyone they meet keeps telling them it is. But, is it ever normal for a heterosexual person to be practicing homosexuality? Maybe it is normal behavior for true homosexuals, the ones with the biochemical structures that motivate them. But, other people are motivated by ideas and thoughts from their friends. So, all the people practicing the gay lifestyle do not necessarily have the same inner orientation.

What if someone wants to change? But, finds it as difficult as the smoker to quit the habit?

Is that person not entitled to get help, to have somewhere to go to, and find a therapy that might work for him?

That is what the politician was trying to get at, when he asked the question "Is it wrong for a homosexual to become a straight person?"

He was seeking government funding for those who would want the therapy.

But, the question itself, suggests that there are some homosexuals who can choose, which is exactly what this thread is all about. A person can choose to begin smoking. But, after awhile, it's no longer an "easy choice" to stop smoking. The smoker needs help.

The smoker can still "choose". It's just more of a challenge to do it all alone. Hence the therapy.

Why can't a politician, engage in any debate, on this same thing? Why is it so touchy a subject, to the gay community, that they would demand his removal?

In his mind, he was trying to help. But, obviously, the gays do not want his kind of help.

At least, the gays that are fully committed to their lifestyle, don't want his help.

Now, what about those "uncertain gays" to whom the politician was really directing his attention to?

Should they also be denied the right to get help?

It would seem to me, everyone has the right to become a homosexual, but nobody has the right to change back.

That could be explained, if the gays want to protect a "promiscuous" lifestyle, and require more sheep to enter the fold to get that playing field, and any attempt to remove some of those sheep from the game is seen as a threat, for it reduces the availability of partners from the pool.

But, I thought with all the "gay marriage" demands being made by the group, that things were changing, and the gays wanted to settle down to a single partner, giving up the famous promiscuity that was a pattern in the old days.

So, why refuse to let any gay person convert to the straight religion?




edit on 8-10-2015 by AMPTAH because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

The gay adults have the right to seek therapy and try to "change" their orientation even though it has been proven not to work.

However, Mr. Grewal was talking about therapy for gay children and teenagers. It will cause more harm than helpful to those youths. Not a good idea. Also his view does not reflect the views of the Conservative Party of Canada.



posted on Oct, 8 2015 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: Barcs
I still firmly believe that anti-gay folks think that it is a choice,


Do you think that some anti-gay folks have no choice but to be anti-gay? And therefore they can't help it? It is perhaps, in their inner nature? It's their form of orientation. They can't control their orientation. It is who they naturally are.

So, trying to make some anti-gay folks into pro-gay may be just as difficult as making some gays into straight people.

Should we be trying to change anyone?

Or, just let us all be who we are?


Perhaps you could volunteer for a similar study and let us know the results. Like I said, I feel that they dislike gays because they dislike that aspect of themselves due to religion. I'm not advocating to force anybody to do anything. I'd just like further confirmation of the study I posted. I believe it is accurate and quite frankly it makes perfect sense.

Religion is poison. Don't let it make you a different person than you are. If you believe that god created all people, then he made homosexuals as well and they are part of the same plan. Judge not, lest ye be judged.


edit on 8-10-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
76
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join