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.

 

Homophobes:: GET A CLUE!!!

page: 28
113
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegiftbearer
reply to post by Dendro
 

im not here to call names or make any assumptions about anyone's personal life, simply stated because i don't care about your personal life at this point. right now i just want you to understand that it IS a choice.


But you are making assumptions about people's personal lives whether they are straight or gay. You assume to know the exact nature of a gay person's lifestyle, mind and feelings, an arrogant claim no matter which way you try to spin it. Unless you are a telepath or empath, you can only go by your assumptions. Calling it anything but is disingenuous.




posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


Neural pathways may change, but a whole half of a brain hemisphere won't shrink or enlarge. That is science fiction.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


just as you assume to understand the intentions of scientists working hard at trying to determine whether or not it is some sort of natural disposition which causes the phenomenon. science is what science is. it is a method to determine somethings validity through experimentation.

they will state all of the environmental concerns at the outset and also what they are attempting to observe. the only thing you can really determine from a scientific experiment is that over so many experiments from so many subjects a certain outcome was observed predominantly. there will always exist a debately sample.

it is fascinating that we have based pretty much everything we know on a system that can't say for a fact that anything we know is correct. we only "know" what we have observed.

im not saying that it is completely wrong to listen to what a majority tells you, but i am airing caution. some things you don't need a PhD to understand or figure out for yourself. listen to other people more often and you can "read between the lines" better than you realise perhaps even for yourself.

do you know what you believe? do you know about what part of this argument in this thread you even feel passionately about? have you thought about it deeply enough? ive always considered myself an empath. i like to think telepathy isnt what lots of people think it is made out to be. i can see when people are troubled. i can sense when something is wrong. do i need a PhD to do this? no. neither do you. you don't know half of your own potential because you are limiting yourself. you need to find out who you are. don't let someone else tell you who you are, because that is where much of this debate is settled.

everyone can relate to the "coming out of the closet" scenario. you spend a lot of time trying to figure out who you are or who you want to be and when you make the choice to go down that path you feel rewarded. choice in the end is the driving factor. whether or not it is biologically driven doesn't matter at this point because we haven't really observed anything that says it is this way from birth.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 

Fine, believe what you want. I stand by it's something determined by your experiences in life and what habits you form in response to those experiences. It's not a politically correct stance, because gay activists WANT people to believe that it is something innate and non-changing.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by thegiftbearer
 


There you go making assumptions about me. I'm 3/4 of the way of becoming a scientist myself, a social scientist, but a scientist nonetheless. Not only do I believe in the validity of the scientific method but I'm working to uphold its integrity as well.

You think I just jumped into this debate? Closed my eyes and went eenie meanie miney moe and ended up on the side of the gay community? And still you try and say you aren't making assumptions. Tsk-tsk.

My family had the same attitude towards my mom about her mental illness. They didn't understand it so they didn't believe it existed. They thought she was making it up and could stop being the way she was anytime she chose.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


It's politically incorrect to say that it is a choice when people are dying.

If religion and faith can be determined biologically then why not orientation?
edit on 4-3-2011 by Dendro because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-3-2011 by Dendro because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


It is as much of a choice as finding BDSM hot is a choice. I'm not saying you consciously choose something to be sexy, only that I don't think it is predetermined by birth.

I went from a straight up nihilist to a christian because of the spiritual experience I had. Otherwise most spiritual stuff seemed like crap to me. Did my latent genes activate or something?
edit on 4-3-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


And I don't believe I can determine my sexual orientation any more than you can.

How this high school senior explains it is almost synonymous for everyone in the gay community.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi
Not condoning or approving homosexual behavior does not make one a homophobe.



interesting sentence you put together there...


homophobic: prejudiced against homosexual people

to condone means: To forgive, excuse or overlook (something); To allow, accept or permit (something);
to not condone means: to not forgive, give reason to or not overlook(something); Not allow, not accept and not permit(something)

approve means: judge to be right or commendable; think well of; To regard as good; to commend; to be pleased with; to think well of; To make proof of; to demonstrate; to prove or show practically; To consider or show to be worthy of approbation or acceptance
to not approve of means: judge to be wrong and unworthy; think poorly of; To regard as bad; not accept; to be upset/angered with; to think low of; To make false of; to dismantle; to prove nonfunctional; To never consider or think of as worthy or ever be accepted


it all looks pretty similar to me....



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


how is it an assumption when you make apparent your intentions. (not to mention avoid the actual argument which i haven't been doing.) i am trying to explain to YOU how it is a choice with very simple examples. to say you want to be a social scientist is one thing. to say you were born to be a social scientist is another.

you pursue that which seems to make you happy. it has nothing to do with your birth. i try not to stick with any profession any longer than it holds my attention span. the main thing i focus on is what i like to do. i like to fix things (plain and simple). so i find different jobs where i see something i want to fix. once ive fixed all the fun out of it i find something new to fix.

you pursue the social sciences (as you stated no assumptions). perhaps you like to understand people's intentions. you like to understand the purpose behind their interations with each other. you can do this everyday. perhaps you possess a deeper ability to do so than i do, considering you are undergoing training in this area of expertise? or do i misunderstand the term social science?

i am a scientist as well. i am a computer scientist though. computers like things to be simple because that is what they understand. the world isn't simple and lots of people don't understand that. i try to make it simple because much like a computer "likes" simple things, i do too.

i made no assumption about you that wasn't qualified. you used several "scientific" examples in other posts. why would i be wrong in assuming you were scientifically minded and try and put my argument in terms that you might understand?



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


And I can't deny your spiritual experience/faith because it is something I have not personally felt, but instead I have to trust your emotions/instincts on this matter.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by thegiftbearer
 


To go into an experiment to test for a specific result is not science, but your posts imply that every scientific study I have provided falls under this category. I could say the exact same things about the studies you provide - that they were fabricated specifically for Christian/Conservative interests.

I've provided studies too but I haven't seen any of your posts acknowledging or refuting them.

Specifically, I'm studying cultural anthropology and archaeology. Humans and human history.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by loagun

Originally posted by jjkenobi
Not condoning or approving homosexual behavior does not make one a homophobe.



interesting sentence you put together there...


homophobic: prejudiced against homosexual people

to condone means: To forgive, excuse or overlook (something); To allow, accept or permit (something);
to not condone means: to not forgive, give reason to or not overlook(something); Not allow, not accept and not permit(something)

approve means: judge to be right or commendable; think well of; To regard as good; to commend; to be pleased with; to think well of; To make proof of; to demonstrate; to prove or show practically; To consider or show to be worthy of approbation or acceptance
to not approve of means: judge to be wrong and unworthy; think poorly of; To regard as bad; not accept; to be upset/angered with; to think low of; To make false of; to dismantle; to prove nonfunctional; To never consider or think of as worthy or ever be accepted


it all looks pretty similar to me....



That is a load of BS. The world "homophobic" was invented by homosexuals and it's defeniion as well.........hmmmmmm....I wonder why???

I found someone that wrote something on the web who said it perfectly... Here ya go:

"It's a very clever tactic to "turn the tables" on those that correctly feel that homosexuality is an abnormal lifestyle. Homosexuals are deviants. Meaning, their sexual preferences for those of the same sex deviates from the norm which is heterosexuality. Remember that the purpose of sex is to procreate. Homosexuals cannot procreate. This deviates from the purpose of sex. Hence, homosexuals are sexual deviants. Now by calling those that find homosexuality disgusting "homophobic", it attempts to label those as having some form of psychological neurosis. "Homophobia" is not a recognized form of neurosis by the medical profession. It should be noted that in the not so distant past homosexuality was classified as abnormal by the Psychiatric community"

To add: I still why nobody will acknowledge that fact that the majority should set the rules of "engagement"...lol Just a little humor there. We still do live in a land ruled by the People correct??? A majority??? Sometimes these types of discussions make me wonder..
Respectfully

Riff

edit on 4-3-2011 by Riff2525 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Riff2525
 


Then I hope any and every time you have sex it is only to produce children.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dendro
reply to post by Riff2525
 


Then I hope any and every time you have sex it is only to produce children.


U said you were 3/4 the way to being a social scientist right? Then you should know that the pleasure/arousal from the OPOSSITE sex is a means of producing children. The litteral continuation of our species...lol Of course that does not mean you MUST have a child evertime you have sex since it is pleasureable. We've come a long way with contraception. Why do you think just about less that a hundered years ago people had huge families. HUGE... You should know the chemistry at work here some I'm not going to explain it.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Riff2525
 


Huge families still exist today and in recent times. My mom is the youngest of seven.

So you don't see the hypocrisy between your posts?


Remember that the purpose of sex is to procreate. Homosexuals cannot procreate. This deviates from the purpose of sex. Hence, homosexuals are sexual deviants.


By using contraception, you too then are a deviant, because you are having sex for the sole reason of pleasure.


Edited to add: If you want to talk chemistry, fine, here you go. Pheromone study.
edit on 4-3-2011 by Dendro because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


you have made an assumption about me. you assume i am either christian or conservative. i haven't said anything about any particular religion nor have i said anything about any political (by political i am stating conservatives wish to prohibit change) agenda. you fail to understand what i am trying to tell you many times and therefore i cannot fix you. i have lost interest in what you have to say because you aren't understand what i am saying, through no fault of my own.

i have tried a few different ways to tell you in as simple of terms as possible that it is a choice.

everything is a choice. you choose to do things constantly. you choose to not understand this. there is something i am saying that you personally are avoiding. ive run out of things to say to you.

change is constant. there is no stopping change. im not conservative.

while i stated earlier that i am religious, i qualified that statement (way back on page 4) that i belive only that which i believe.

for someone to say, "I was born a homo-sexual," is really a lie. that individuals viewpoint has evolved throughout their lifetime.

if you would have asked them when they were a child if they were a homo-sexual they probably wouldn't even know what you were talking about. why then should we assume that anyone knows what anyone is talking about?

you may read what i type and post, but that doesn't mean you understand it. lots of people type out long-winded garbage that goes in circles. i try to keep it short and simple. i give people too much credit i suppose. maybe it's too simple. maybe im wrong (doubt it). im tired of saying the same thing over and over again, waiting for a qualified response, but all i get is someone changing the subject. you haven't tried to refute what i have said about choice. you have merely attacked my method of explanantion, which im pretty sure there wasn't much wrong with it.

you do things that make you happy. you choose what you do because it makes you happy. if something doesn't make you happy you dont do it. all this about research into pleasure centers of the brain blah blah ad nauseam. it doesn't matter if they are male or female. they are still making a choice that stimulates those areas of the brain. choice. they are making a choice to do something that makes them happy. i don't know if i can make it any clearer than that.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dendro
reply to post by Riff2525
 


Huge families still exist today and in recent times. My mom is the youngest of seven.

So you don't see the hypocrisy between your posts?


Remember that the purpose of sex is to procreate. Homosexuals cannot procreate. This deviates from the purpose of sex. Hence, homosexuals are sexual deviants.


By using contraception, you too then are a deviant, because you are having sex for the sole reason of pleasure.


Edited to add: If you want to talk chemistry, fine, here you go. Pheromone study.
edit on 4-3-2011 by Dendro because: (no reason given)


Youngest of seven??? I was referring to families of 15-20 kids. Both of my grandmothers came from families such as these.
Anyway......no disrespect Dendro but I'm really tired of this thread. We are NOT going to change each others minds about this. I would just like to see more serious scientific research into it. That's why I'm on this site to find ultimate truth. (which is probably never obtainable) But you have to admit that the majority of brilliant geneticists that go near the subject of a gay gene is torn to shreds. The science isint even able to be figured out. I know you know that. You seem smart. If anyone has any other idea about this just do a simple google search. Sure, you will find some...but not anything of real substance. The people with the most to lose (the best geneticist) stay away....very far away.....Lastly. I want people to really think about this: We live in America. The way it is supost to be is that the majority of people get their way. I fully support gay people's/sympathizers desire to try and change the laws....Just do it right. Until 51%.......A MAJORITY of people agree that homosexuality/marriage/whatever is OK then I really dont see how there is any argument here. Unless you dont believe in our democratic process....or at least the way it's supost to work lol


Respectfully

Riff



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by thegiftbearer
 


Sorry if you took offense to being referred to in the same sentence as a Christian or a Conservative but majority of the studies you are referring to are published by faith-based organizations like American Family Association and the Family Research Council. I presented publications from neurologists but I didn't say I was a neurologist.

There are gay children. They aren't unicorns or a mythological creature. And many gays have attested to knowing they were gay from early childhood.

You can do whatever you want in your bedroom, stay out of mine.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Very interesting thread! So, I'm curious to hear people's stories, straight or gay, about their sexual orientation, specifically stories about when you first made your choice about your sexual orientation. Below are some questions to get you started. Please read very carefully before you answer since it could be kind of confusing.

Straight people: at what age did you make your choice to to be attracted to people of the opposite sex? Why did you make your choice to be attracted to the opposite sex? Gals, was there a certain boy you were first attracted to that made you decide to be straight, or was it just a general decision that you liked only boys instead of girls? Guys, how about you, was there a certain girl you liked that caused you to make your choice to be heterosexual, or did you just decide you were attracted only to girls in general instead of boys? Did you make the choice quickly or over a period of time?

Gay people: at what age did you make your choice to be attracted to people of the same sex? Why did you make your choice to be attracted to the same sex? Gals, was there a certain girl you were first attracted to that made you decide to be gay, or was it just a general decision that you liked only girls instead of boys? Guys, how about you, was there a certain boy you liked that caused you to make your choice to be homosexual, or did you just decide you were attracted only to boys in general instead of girls? Did you make the choice quickly or over a period of time?

Thanks for helping me out with my research!

edit on 4-3-2011 by dalloway because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-3-2011 by dalloway because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
113
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join