The Flaw In Your Logic Regarding Homosexuality

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

I apologize if I seem like I was attacking you or anything of the sort. I mean that sincerely. It was my mistake to begin with, as I humored a troll. I just don't want to see anyone else falling into the same trap.

No problem Hairlessape! Hey, I wanted to return to the original question of the comments that were made regarding rape, theft and cannibalism.

Something you might want to point out in the faulty logic of that comment, is that he is trying to associate naturally occurring homosexuality (occurring naturally in nature) with heterosexual criminal conduct and heterosexual criminal behavior- And that is absurd.

Rape is a crime
Stealing and theft is a crime.
And, people go to jail for cannibalism, so indeed cannibalism s a crime as well.


I think it's ironic that most people who are rapists and thieves, are heterosexual. !!!
Most rapists are heterosexual men, most thieves are heterosexual men
In most cases of cannibalism, it's a crime committed by a heterosexual male as well.


Why is that important:

He is trying to compare heterosexual CRIMINALS to homosexual men and women.

Most members of the gay community are not rapists.
Most members of the gay community are not prison prone thieves.
Most members of the gay community do not embark on the task of eating other human beings.


Homosexuals have nothing to do with Heterosexual Crime and Heterosexual Criminal Behavior.

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
reply to post by HairlessApe

 

"Run for the Hills, boys"

You boys were perhaps not allowed to play with toy guns when you were kids, and you are too young to remember who Paladin was, so you probably don't realize that when the gun-slinger's belt and holster is worn, one's normal belt buckle must either go above or below the buckle on the gun-belt.

And yeah, if that's Carl Sagan, he sure looked/lisped gay to me.

edit on 2-7-2013 by MuzzleBreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2013 by MuzzleBreak because: (no reason given)

I don't know why you're replying to me, I didn't mention your belt or your avatar.
You don't know who Carl Sagan is?

reply to post by MuzzleBreak


I too believe that fatherlessness is a big issue. However, you can make plenty of arguments supporting measures against it without denigrating gays. Actually you could probably get the support of gays, since the same causes of fatherlessness probably affect gay men wanting to become fathers. These people don't have to be your enemy.

reply to post by MuzzleBreak


Since we're now quoting studies I'll just leave these here.

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35 ) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

Source

When individuals grow up with autonomy-thwarting parents, they may be prevented from exploring internally endorsed values and identities and as a result shut out aspects of the self perceived to be unacceptable. Given the stigmatization of homosexuality, individuals perceiving low autonomy support from parents may be especially motivated to conceal same-sex sexual attraction, leading to defensive processes such as reaction formation. Four studies tested a model wherein perceived parental autonomy support is associated with lower discrepancies between self-reported sexual orientation and implicit sexual orientation (assessed with a reaction time task). These indices interacted to predict anti-gay responding indicative of reaction formation. Studies 2–4 showed that an implicit/explicit discrepancy was particularly pronounced in participants who experienced their fathers as both low in autonomy support and homophobic, though results were inconsistent for mothers. Findings of Study 3 suggested contingent self-esteem as a link between parenting styles and discrepancies in sexual orientation measures.

Source

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
reply to post by HairlessApe

 

"Run for the Hills, boys"

You boys were perhaps not allowed to play with toy guns when you were kids, and you are too young to remember who Paladin was, so you probably don't realize that when the gun-slinger's belt and holster is worn, one's normal belt buckle must either go above or below the buckle on the gun-belt.

And yeah, if that's Carl Sagan, he sure looked/lisped gay to me.

edit on 2-7-2013 by MuzzleBreak because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2013 by MuzzleBreak because: (no reason given)

I've played with plenty of guns my friend, and you always want to wear both belts low alongside the hip..If either of the two belts are too high, it makes it that much more difficult to get to the guns on either side.

Go watch some westerns you'll see the belts are always worn low..
Don't forget the tobacco pouch..

reply to post by Xcalibur254


X. You are my hero.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by tony9802
reply to post by MuzzleBreak

 

Take a look at your avatar Muzzlebreak.. He's wearing his belt a little too high now isn't he?

Hey, I agree with you 100%... But ever since he joined the conversation this thread became a joke. So for the sake of raising ourselves back up to an acceptable level of seriousness... Let's both agree to stop feeding the animals.

___________________-

: I don't know why you're replying to me, I didn't mention your belt or your avatar.
You don't know who Carl Sagan is?

_______________________

It appears you did mention my Avatar. Your memory may not be working well.

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

I have a question for you Muzzlebreak:

How on earth can you compare happy loving homosexuals to:

heterosexual rapists
heterosexual thieves and
heterosexual cannibals?


Homosexuals are much safer company than heterosexuals in many cases.. Just ask the ladies--
They are the ones who are normally victims of those rapists, and victims of those thieves.

Cannibals?

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
You boys were perhaps not allowed to play with toy guns when you were kids, and you are too young to remember who Paladin was, so you probably don't realize that when the gun-slinger's belt and holster is worn, one's normal belt buckle must either go above or below the buckle on the gun-belt.
And yeah, if that's Carl Sagan, he sure looked/lisped gay to me.

Speaking of 'gay' avatars, I suppose then it is pure irony that rumours of Richard Boone's homosexuality have been out there for some time. But hey...nothing wrong with that.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by MuzzleBreak

 

Since we're now quoting studies I'll just leave these here.

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35 ) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

Source

When individuals grow up with autonomy-thwarting parents, they may be prevented from exploring internally endorsed values and identities and as a result shut out aspects of the self perceived to be unacceptable. Given the stigmatization of homosexuality, individuals perceiving low autonomy support from parents may be especially motivated to conceal same-sex sexual attraction, leading to defensive processes such as reaction formation. Four studies tested a model wherein perceived parental autonomy support is associated with lower discrepancies between self-reported sexual orientation and implicit sexual orientation (assessed with a reaction time task). These indices interacted to predict anti-gay responding indicative of reaction formation. Studies 2–4 showed that an implicit/explicit discrepancy was particularly pronounced in participants who experienced their fathers as both low in autonomy support and homophobic, though results were inconsistent for mothers. Findings of Study 3 suggested contingent self-esteem as a link between parenting styles and discrepancies in sexual orientation measures.

Source

The conclusion sentence of the first study is obviously at-odds with the findings quoted.

The second study has a too high BS coefficient to be worthy of any dialogue.

Hey Muzzlebreak...

I'm the one who brought up your avatar.


I also posted this in response to you and I quote:


"I've played with plenty of guns my friend, and you always want to wear both belts low alongside the hip..If either of the two belts are too high, it makes it that much more difficult to get to the guns on either side.

Go watch some westerns you'll see the belts are always worn low..
Don't forget the tobacco pouch.."


Also asked if you could answer my question up above concerning rapists, thieves and cannibals..
have you seen that question directed to you yet?

No problem Hairlessape-- Hey, I wanted to return to the original question of the comments that were made regarding rape, theft and cannibalism.

Something you might want to point out in the faulty logic of that comment, is that he is trying to associate naturally occurring homosexuality (occurring naturally in nature) with heterosexual criminal conduct and heterosexual criminal behavior- And that is absurd.

Rape is a crime
Stealing and theft is a crime.
And, people go to jail for cannibalism, so indeed cannibalism s a crime as well.


I think it's ironic that most people who are rapists and thieves, are heterosexual. !!!
Most rapists are heterosexual men, most thieves are heterosexual men.
In most cases of cannibalism, it's a crime committed by a heterosexual male as well.


Why is that important:

He is trying to compare heterosexual CRIMINALS to homosexual men and women.

Most members of the gay community are not rapists.
Most members of the gay community are not prison prone thieves.
Most members of the gay community do not embark on the task of eating other human beings.


Homosexuals have nothing to do with Heterosexual Crime and Heterosexual Criminal Behavior.

Originally posted by scojak
Ummmm... The rights of the homosexual community should not be compared to the former rights of the African American community. Unless you want to be enslaved, or only be counted for 3/5 of a person, or not be able to eat a the same restaurants as heterosexuals, then you can talk about that.

As it is, homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals, African Americans have the same rights as white people, Hispanics, Asian, or any other race. You are talking about a judgement that someone else makes about you. That will never changed. You will always be judged, be it as a gay person, a black person, or anyone with a difference from someone else. An African American who goes to the deep south will be judged very harshly despite having equal rights. Sure there was reform and African Americans have equal rights, but there is still judgement, and there always will be. You are beating a dead horse and the more you bitch about it, the more it affects you. Best thing to do is just shut up about it and do what you will to be happy.

PS - I have lots of gay friends and they agree with these statements.

edit on 7/1/2013 by scojak because: (no reason given)

The problem is, Scojak, that there are still a large group of individuals in the world that believe that a homosexual individual is only 3/5 of a human being. It is disgusting that there is this level of hatred still in force on our planet in this day and age but it is fact.

That being said, there are certainly a group of homosexuals (men and women) who flaunt their sexuality in what I believe are inappropriate manners. There is no need for aggressive advances, flamboyant behavior and such in public places... I completely agree.

There are idiots and azzhates on both side of the discussion.

Im going to go out on a limb here, I expect what Im about to say will be inflammatory. But being as this thread is about logic I will try to apply my thoughts in a logical way.
Firstly.. comparing the gay rights movement to the black civil rights movement is ridiculous and has already been disputed in this thread adequately.
Now for the controversy...

Forget comparing homosexuality to murder, rape etc.

But it can be compared side by side with paedophilia.

Homosexuals have sexual attraction to members of the same sex.(once illegal)
Paedophiles have a sexual attraction to prepubescent children. (still illegal)
Meaning they are both sexual preferences.

Neither homosexuals nor paedophiles can be "cured". "They were born that way".

"They didnt choose their sexual preference"
Homosexuals were and often still are in the closet(due to societies views on such things)
Paedophiles are still very much in the closet(also due to societies views)

Now with that in mind, Id like to ask some homosexuals what they think about these very distinct similarities.

Now should we be accepting of paedophiles?

Im very much playing devils advocate, I couldnt care less for someones sexual preference as long as it doesnt affect me. Im straight and have a sexual preference for the opposite sex, I have no sexual feelings for children, but thought the analogy was logically sound. Please prove me wrong.

reply to post by MuzzleBreak


How is the conclusion at odds with the findings? The non-homophobes did not display physiological arousal when shown male-on-male images. The homophobes did. That's pretty clear cut. Also, would you care to elaborate on the "BS coefficient" of the second study?

reply to post by OneManArmy



Hi Onemanarmy..

Most pedophiles are heterosexual. Straight men. Not the other way around.

1) When a poster quotes another poster and "agrees 100%" then he is directly saying the same thing. Why are you both having trouble understanding this?

2) My mention of rape, murder, and cannibalism was in the context of showing that many behaviors that occur in other species are not acceptable behaviors in society. This was after the OP in the mentioned thread was trying to justify homosexuality since it occurred "naturally" in other species.

3) The rest of your arguments are against things you have imagined that I was saying regarding #2. And your imaginations are working overtime. You should try to not read things into posts that are not there.

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by MuzzleBreak

 

Since we're now quoting studies I'll just leave these here.

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35 ) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

Source

When individuals grow up with autonomy-thwarting parents, they may be prevented from exploring internally endorsed values and identities and as a result shut out aspects of the self perceived to be unacceptable. Given the stigmatization of homosexuality, individuals perceiving low autonomy support from parents may be especially motivated to conceal same-sex sexual attraction, leading to defensive processes such as reaction formation. Four studies tested a model wherein perceived parental autonomy support is associated with lower discrepancies between self-reported sexual orientation and implicit sexual orientation (assessed with a reaction time task). These indices interacted to predict anti-gay responding indicative of reaction formation. Studies 2–4 showed that an implicit/explicit discrepancy was particularly pronounced in participants who experienced their fathers as both low in autonomy support and homophobic, though results were inconsistent for mothers. Findings of Study 3 suggested contingent self-esteem as a link between parenting styles and discrepancies in sexual orientation measures.

Source

The conclusion sentence of the first study is obviously at-odds with the findings quoted.

The second study has a too high BS coefficient to be worthy of any dialogue.

Actually those are both published in respected scientific journals and have undergone an intense peer-review process. Unlike the "study" you provided, which was done by an independent source.

Could you please quote this supposed contradiction in the conclusion that you read? I provided a quote for you, it's only fair.