Question to those who say being gay is a choice?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I'm enjoying this debate because no ones being silly and going overboard. lets keep it like that.

I said from the beginning homosexuality isn't natural, you're not born gay the same way you're not born to be a bus driver. Through life experiences you become attracted to men/women.
It has nothing to do with genetics!

homosexuality was something you're born with to control the number of population? I'd say that's nonsense. but please, id be keen to discuss it!

originally posted by: WizardVanWizard
a reply to: Agit8dChop

How is it not natural when it has been a fluke/mistake that has been repeated many many times in our history? It's not standard; doesn't mean not natural.

a couple of quick searches puts someone being born as a hermaphrodite at under 0.05%

that sounds like a fluke to me.

Our history is what, thousands of years? something repeated many times in that thousands of years still makes it a fluke / genetic mutation.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

I said from the beginning homosexuality isn't natural, you're not born gay the same way you're not born to be a bus driver.

You might not be born to be a specific worker (such as a bus driver), but you are certainly predisposed to be in such a job or similar menial job. Some people are born musical. Some people are born geniuses. Artists. Etc.

Geniuses are born that way but they are in different fields be it musical, science, mathematics, art, etc.

Perhaps predisposition would be a better term.

homosexuality was something you're born with to control the number of population? I'd say that's nonsense

Nope its not nonsense. It's been experimented.

a reply to: Onslaught2996

Gay?, now how come. Being gay or not doesn't matter one jot. But what would you say if you were taking hormones, that would highly likely make a man more feminine.? Like they were being slipped to you in a staple food item . You wouldn't like it much would you. Now what if this.. lets say for now hypothetical female hormone, did certain things to your developing anatomy? being a male, the sensitisation of certain body areas, around Puberty being one of them.. That's what hormones do. But in this case, it would also make you think more feminine, if you were a male and have a very early puberty if female, because that's also what hormones do. Well, it so happens that this hormone , is consumed in massive amounts compared to what it was thirty years back. I can hear you say NO! this cant be true. They would stop it,... wouldn't they?. www.health101.org... They wouldn't stop it because they don't give a stuff!

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Yes I know the number is tiny, it is a fluke. I think we're differing on our definitions of 'natural'. I'm saying Because it is not the norm does not make it not-natural, especially when it has been a repeated anomaly throughout the course of humans. Nature has not seen fit to get rid of it yet.

a reply to: anonentity

But what would you say if you were taking hormones, that would highly likely make a man more feminine.? Like they were being slipped to you in a staple food item . You wouldn't like it much would you. Now what if this.. lets say for now hypothetical female hormone, did certain things to your developing anatomy? being a male, the sensitisation of certain body areas, around Puberty being one of them.. That's what hormones do. But in this case, it would also make you think more feminine, if you were a male and have a very early puberty if female, because that's also what hormones do. Well, it so happens that this hormone , is consumed in massive amounts compared to what it was thirty years back. I can hear you say NO! this cant be true. They would stop it,... wouldn't they?.

In that case (hypothetical) those people were forced into it so that makes it not a choice for those people.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

originally posted by: WizardVanWizard
a reply to: Agit8dChop

How is it not natural when it has been a fluke/mistake that has been repeated many many times in our history? It's not standard; doesn't mean not natural.

a couple of quick searches puts someone being born as a hermaphrodite at under 0.05%

that sounds like a fluke to me.

Our history is what, thousands of years? something repeated many times in that thousands of years still makes it a fluke / genetic mutation.

So why can't being gay be a genetic mutation?

originally posted by: WizardVanWizard
a reply to: Agit8dChop

Yes I know the number is tiny, it is a fluke. I think we're differing on our definitions of 'natural'. I'm saying Because it is not the norm does not make it not-natural, especially when it has been a repeated anomaly throughout the course of humans. Nature has not seen fit to get rid of it yet.

Maybe its not nature but a genetic flaw in the mother/father? something they ate, something they drank maybe some prevailing winds from Pripyat?

What I'm getting at, is being born a hermaphrodite isn't natural, its not the way its meant to be, its a genetic mutation that reoccurs by a fluke.

originally posted by: LoopyLou
So why can't being gay be a genetic mutation?

Because you are not born gay. You become attracted to a man/women through your life experiences and growing up.

Sometimes it happens quicker, sometimes it happens slower.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Because you are not born gay. You become attracted to a man/women through your life experiences and growing up.

Interesting how you view sexual attraction that way.

You seem to think that family, environment and experiences guide their sexuality. And maybe they make the decision what their attraction is based on that.

What if I was to tell you there was a boy raised in a perfect home with good Christian parents with no problem whatsoever turned out to be gay? What influenced him to become gay? Some hidden chemicals around house? Wouldn't that influence other people around as well?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

If God doesn't make any mistakes, AND there are men and women attracted to their own sex, then it follows that "God" designed them like that to begin with.

That's an interesting point to ponder. Apparently gay genes play a big role in His plan for us. Why else would He want gays to suppress their homosexual desires and "go forth and multiply"?

a reply to: Agit8dChop

I know what you're getting at haha. That's why I said we're differing on our definitions of natural. I'm saying that something that is continually happening in nature is in fact natural, even though it's not the norm, that's all.

What if I was to tell you there was a boy raised in a perfect home with good Christian parents with no problem whatsoever turned out to be gay? What influenced him to become gay? Some hidden chemicals around house? Wouldn't that influence other people around as well?

That's a very good point, perfect home and with good parents is , in my opinion, is 50% of what molds a child's mind. You've got school, bullying, clothing, movies, internet, dreams, friends, something you see randomly on the street..

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

If God doesn't make any mistakes, AND there are men and women attracted to their own sex, then it follows that "God" designed them like that to begin with.

That's an interesting point to ponder. Apparently gay genes play a big role in His plan for us. Why else would He want gays to suppress their homosexual desires and "go forth and multiply"?

Why does a fictional character even need to come into this? God/Jesus/Bible has 0 to do with homosexuality.
Personally, religion is a con, sure its a good con for people who use their faith for good and positive enlightment, but its still a con! But that's a whole other topic.

I would think having sex is always a choice. plenty of people go through life never having sex. I guess if its not a choice you've been raped.

Personally. I find the whole debate somewhat foolish. Is it normal....no. Are people born with it...not normally but anything is possible.

If i was gay i just wouldnt have sex...problem solved. Dont have to worry about a lot of things. The purpose of sex is to reproduce afterall.

a reply to: Bone75

Apparently gay genes play a big role in His plan for us. Why else would He want gays to suppress their homosexual desires and "go forth and multiply"?

Pretty strange if he wanted them to be fruitful and multiply.

Actually many homosexual men have been fruitful and they do multiply.

a reply to: Bone75

Do sparrows play big into God's plan for us? He made those, too. There have always been plenty of people going forth and multiplying, God never needed absolutely every human to do it.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

Interesting how you view sexual attraction that way.

genuinely curious why so?

a reply to: Onslaught2996

Well I think there is a problem... You say you know for a fact you were born attracted to women?

Do you remember being attracted to women prior to having any interaction with other humans? Because that would be the only basis that would be relevant to you argument.

I'm guessing, like me and most others, that as long as you can remember you were only attracted to females. That's a more accurate statement, I would think.

The argument from the other side would be that exposure to conversation and expectations expressed or implied from those around you from birth to the point of our first memory of this, could have influenced our opinion. So with that influence one may choose to conform or potentially stray.

So I remember as early as kindergarten having extreme attraction to the females around me, and very little to almost no memory of the males (I am a guy, and yes, even in kindergarten had an agenda ). But I accept that may have been influenced by other factors. If I was conscious enough to have these opinions and consider them and remember them, then I'm sure I was also registering and considering the influences around me.

So that's the logic behind it. The problem is that we start learning long before we start remembering. So the idea that at a certain point one makes a conscious choice cannot be validated. A choice whether conscious or not, is determined based on specific factors and influences though.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

genuinely curious why so?

Because since you think sexual orientation isn't inborn you think environment lead that person to a orientation.

I have given you a contrary point in which you responded to me.

What about those boys who wanted to be a girl? Certainly they haven't had enough time for anything to influence them?