Whether Or Not Homosexuality Is A Choice Is Irrelevant

originally posted by: flammadraco

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: ISeekTruth101

you want to compare the natural order of humanity with the natural order of animals.

Humans ARE animals. Primates. Primates with vivid imaginations and opposable thumbs.

If you want to be labelled an animal, good for you. I am not an animal.

Actually, yes you are. We all are!

Scientists describe virtually everything that is alive as animal or plant. So, if you’re not a plant then you are an animal! In fact, you are a specific kind of animal called a mammal. Know what you all have in common? Your mothers have breast milk that can feed young; you have hair or fur; and you are born live instead of inside an egg or case! In fact, human mammals are born not only alive — but kicking and screaming!

More sidestepping !!! You are preparing for the olympics? There is a deeper level than just a physical classification for humans beings, you just conveniently ignore all that mumbo jumbo don't you

I think there is a strong distinction between an animal and a human being, beyond the scope of scientific goggles, but again we are going off-topic here.

a reply to: HarryJoy

Would that be the quantum/spiritual "body" referred to by Jesus here:

And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:

Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Luke 20:34-36

Or by Paul here:

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Galatians 3:28

originally posted by: MstWntd
You know I always find it funny that people are ready to defend the "choice" of two same sex people wanting to bring up a child.. but no one says "wait.. what does the child want?.. is this infringing his/her rights to a hetrosexual family?.. are we doing the best for the child?.."

Everyone just assumes its OK for the child.. and people marginalise the role of a hetrosexual couple in a childs life so easily.. as if they think that "if we start throwing babies at same sex couples we can have a future where homosexuality is accepted".. which what seems to be the case because clearly the mental and emotional well being of the child is secondary to the rights of the homosexual couple..

Dont get me wrong, people can do whatever they want.. what gets me going is when you place a child in this mix.. an impressionable child, with no idea about sexuality, one that hasnt formed its own views nor has the emotional and rationational maturity to be in such an environment.. it just doesnt make sense to put a child through that..

having friends with just such a background, i can tell you that a same sex relationship offers no less of the essentials than a heterosexual relationship. i dont know the numbers right offhand, but shall we look at the divorce statistics for the last decade? how many children raised by single parents? how many were shuffled in between? how many children are raised by alcoholics? or drug addicts? or gamblers? how "impressionable" are they when dad comes home drunk and hits mom, or when theres no food on the table because grandpa spent the money on blackjack. so while we are on the subject of mental and emotional wellbeing, lets talk about all those problems that EVERYONE grew up with, whether it be under same sex parents or heterosexual. i can tell you that those kids are not secondary. gay people love just as deeply, just as sincerely, and just as...well...rollercoaster-y as the rest of us. they are people, dude. they love just like you and me. so do gamblers and alcoholics and prostitutes. so do lawyers, mormons, republicans and the ku klux klan. you would be surprised where you can find love. even under layers and layers of stigma.

a reply to: MKMoniker

You have every right to be concerned:

And you have every right to move to the Middle East.

a reply to: babybunnies


I didn't consciously choose to be Irish/Welsh, but I'm proud of my heritage. It's who I am and what makes me... me. I would only bring up the fact that I didn't choose it if someone who hated the Irish accused me of forcing myself to be Irish. I would say I was just born with this heritage - but I'm not ashamed of it!

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: MstWntd

What child brought into any family anywhere at anytime gets to choose life circumstances?

Every child is impressionable ... should parents be restricted in inflicting a religion on the child?

Good questions!

Moot points. Im not justifying them in any manner, but will answer them.

What child gets to choose the circumstances of life?.. what child gets to choose his race?.. what child gets to choose his gender?.. I mean come on, we are not talking about the natural course of life here, we are talking about actual directly related actions to change the course of life for someone.. clearly the "choice" of two people.. who have nothing to do with the child is being given priority over the childs right to being raised in a hetro-nuclear family.. which is widely accepted.. a child has a right to have a male father and female mother.. there is no shortage of hetrosexual families that would take the child in.. then why is right of this child taken away at the whim of homosexual couples?.. it beggars belief that the child is thought of in anyway other than a pet that is given of to be raised and conform to a certain way of thinking.. kinda sadistic tbh..


oh and your next question is worse than the first.. yes children are impressionable.. they are mostly given a religion by their parents.. you know.. the ones that brought the child into this world.. the only ones that have the right to impose a faith system on the child until that child knows better..

Whats your view?.. will throwing babies at same sex couples lead to a future where homosexuality is accepted?..

originally posted by: babybunnies

Until quite recently, homosexuality was seen as a mental disorder, and many psychiatrists still see homosexuality as a sign of sexual immaturity.

Care to quote some of those psychiatrists who are now on record as saying that homosexuality is a sign of sexual immaturity?

Anyone more modern than Sigmund Freud, for example?

Thanks.

originally posted by: flammadraco

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ISeekTruth101

But you've shown no scientific link between single parenting and homosexual parents. We have shown you numerous studies and multiple national associations who say that children do not suffer more with homosexual parents. I'm still waiting for someone of intelligence to come along and adequately - and scientifically - debate that.

Pffffft. You got nuthin but salad.

So you want scientific data, I didn't realise I was preparing a thesis here, I would have wasted more time - none the less, I will come back with a small thesis to explain the obvious for you with facts and figures and lots of fun stuff.

Which we wait for in anticipation to debunk and prove your view of the World is a tad out of touch!

Pfahaha my view of the world, okay now you guys got me to laugh out loud. There is world beyond ATS (particularly this thread), try seeing what the 'real' majority think

We should do some surveys, it will be fun

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101
By saying 'a person', as oppose to 'a homosexual', you are evading the topic and desensitising readers from the actual issue.

Dear lord...'these homosexuals aren't people like us'...now I've heard it all...I'm glad we always have members who are able to be caricatures of 'the problem' on these threads...you do as much to discredit your own argument as anyone else could...saying we shouldn't call homosexuals people...lmao...

originally posted by: TzarChasm
having friends with just such a background, i can tell you that a same sex relationship offers no less of the essentials than a heterosexual relationship. i dont know the numbers right offhand, but shall we look at the divorce statistics for the last decade? how many children raised by single parents? how many were shuffled in between? how many children are raised by alcoholics? or drug addicts? or gamblers? how "impressionable" are they when dad comes home drunk and hits mom, or when theres no food on the table because grandpa spent the money on blackjack. so while we are on the subject of mental and emotional wellbeing, lets talk about all those problems that EVERYONE grew up with, whether it be under same sex parents or heterosexual. i can tell you that those kids are not secondary. gay people love just as deeply, just as sincerely, and just as...well...rollercoaster-y as the rest of us. they are people, dude. they love just like you and me. so do gamblers and alcoholics and prostitutes. so do lawyers, mormons, republicans and the ku klux klan. you would be surprised where you can find love. even under layers and layers of stigma.

My friend you are conflating my argument for the "rights of the child" vs "the whining of a same sex couple" to "are hetrosexual parents better than homosexual parents?"

any attempt to address your post (and believe me there is much to say) will derail the topic/convo/entire discussion.. so yeah please start another thread for this..

a reply to: MstWntd

Whats your view?.. will throwing babies at same sex couples lead to a future where homosexuality is accepted?..

First of all, who is throwing babies?

Second: Who is stomping their heads in?

Third: And who is carrying them around after they die because mom doesn't know how to put them down?

Fourth: What about the babies that the natural parents didn't want - you know, the babies brought into this world because laws prohibit the mother from making a decision about whether to have them at all and can legally take care of a potentially life-threatening (in many ways) situation before the zygote can feel anything at all? WAY before it is even 'gender-specific', or 'thinking', or even has a heartbeat?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: babybunnies

Until quite recently, homosexuality was seen as a mental disorder, and many psychiatrists still see homosexuality as a sign of sexual immaturity.

Care to quote some of those psychiatrists who are now on record as saying that homosexuality is a sign of sexual immaturity?

Anyone more modern than Sigmund Freud, for example?

Thanks.

Oooooo, Sigmund Freud (a genius) is now out of date, damn the times move really fast these days, science is so yesterday too. Plato and Aristotle are old news, and Einstein was dyslexic he didn't know anything

(sarcasm)

Where will the madness end.

a reply to: MKMoniker

Haha you're funny! take a look at my signature and that will let you understand my opinion of your faith. With that said anything coming out of the Vatican or any other religious organisation means diddlysquat to me.

If you honestly believe I give two hoots about what some Religion has to say about the way of the world then you are mistaken.

And by the way, the comment you made;

"homosexuality is not just asexual-fetish. It is an entire predatory and promiscuous lifestyle"

Is homophobic and offensive and you are a bigot for even saying such a thing!

I would love to take "The gloves off" and let you know exactly what I think about folk like you using your religion to discriminate against others, but out of respect for other "GOOD" Christian members on this site, I will hold my tongue.

BTW,when you start your post by being homophobic, you can also most guarantee most people wont read through the rest of what you had to say other than other bigots like you. Thank god, folk like you are dying out!

No wonder why so many people are leaving the church and returning to god! Always the way, its always the dumbest that are the most vocal. You are an embarrassment to Christ. Go and read the following passage from your holy book and realise the mistake of your ways!

James 1:26-27 ESV / If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

a reply to: MstWntd

Just for your avoiding future embarrassment the phrase is "moot points" not "mute points."

You're the one that posited the "rights" of the child to choose its birth and family circumstances, not me. I agree completely that it's a pretty silly comparison.

So, it's okay for the parents to inflict a system of superstition which will likely cause some level of confusion and discomfort for the rest of the child's life, while the child is still non compos mentis and cannot defend herself or himself from indoctrination by parents?

Wow, and here I thought you were advocating for the child's rights!

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

I'm sorry but how can I take anything you say seriously any more when you don't even know if your an animal or plant!

Homosexuals as parents is very controversial. But the "proof" is out there:

www.investigatemagazine.co.nz...
CHILDREN RAISED IN GAY AND LESBIAN HOUSEHOLDS SUFFER

www.theinterim.com...
STUDY SHOWS LINK BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY AND PEDOPHILIA
A new study confirmed what police and psychiatrists have known for decades: a definitive link exists between male homosexuality and pedophilia.

www.lifesitenews.com...
LINK BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY AND PEDOPHILIA

www.amazon.com...=cm_cd_asin_lnk
OUT FROM UNDER: THE IMPACT OF HOMOSEXUAL PARENTING

Gosh! That was a long read! LOL!

originally posted by: NavyDoc
I'm on the side of individual liberty and I'm against government telling people what to do regardless if I like what they do or not.

The law should not recognize protected classes but should treat everyone the same.

I agree with you. (Had to chime in and make a note of that.) BUT! We can say how things SHOULD be, but if they're not that way, what do we do? Of course, the law SHOULD treat everyone the same, but if they did, we wouldn't have the Supreme Court deciding next month if the law SHOULD treat everyone the same. It's fine to say how it should be, but the law has been corrupted by religious forces that insist gay people be treated, NOT as people, but as gays.

To the OP:

If Being Gay is a Choice, So What?

There are lots of behaviors that we judge to be acceptable or unacceptable even though we don't know their origin. I can't explain why people like basketball over football, but it's legal and it should be. Likewise, I can't explain why people like Ariel Castro kidnap (and apparently rape or even murder) people. I don't know if it's genetic or what, but I do know that it's illegal, as it ought to be.

I don't need to know the origin of behaviors like rape and serial murder in order to figure out whether they're right or wrong. All I need to know is whether they're harmful, and they clearly are. It might help to know their origin in order to figure out how to nip them in the bud, but no amount of information about the genesis of these behaviors is going to change my mind about whether they are morally acceptable.

When it comes to homosexuality, the real issue isn't where it comes from, but whether it's harmful. John Stuart Mill nicely sums things up: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."

And, so we see people trying to "prove" that homosexuality and homosexual families are harmful, not just to others, but to THE CHILDREN! They imagine "mindsets" and "subconscious messages" the child might receive... (Like what???)

AND
a reply to: and14263

What "messages" are children of gay people going to receive that are so damned dangerous COMPARED TO the messages that straight people give their children?

And while we're on the topic, what messages do straight people give their children? Doesn't it vary widely from family to family? Don't some straight families teach their children to hate? To accept? To be religious? That white people are better? That school is important? That they're not worthy? To distrust white people? That they can be whatever they want?

What gives you any indication that the "gay messages" would be any different from the "straight messages"?

TO ISeekTruth101
Whenever the topic of gay marriage comes up, people tend to compare the children of gay people to the most "perfect" environment, where the child is loved and cared for by two parents of opposite gender, is taught respect, self-confidence, is supported and nurtured perfectly into adulthood with every advantage and opportunity known to man... When, in reality, there are only a VERY FEW children who are fortunate enough to be raised in such a "perfect" environment.

If we compared EVERY child to this "perfect" environment child, and based people's rights to have a family on that comparison, our species would become extinct as a result of "unfit" families.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

So you're not as smart as you try and make out, in fact I wonder how much of your thread posts are plagiarised. Don't copy and paste data if you don't have a clue what the data is representing.

Lesson learned I hope!

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101
By saying 'a person', as oppose to 'a homosexual', you are evading the topic and desensitising readers from the actual issue.

Dear lord...'these homosexuals aren't people like us'...now I've heard it all...Im glad we always have members who are able to be caricatures of 'the problem' on these threads...you do as much to discredit your own argument as anyone else could...saying we shouldn't call homosexuals people...lmao...

I believe the entire context of the talk also shifts when you interchangeably use "person" and "homosexual", please dont try and paint me as a homophobe. I am not. I love people, regardless of their race, religion, sexuality and whatever else that they have no control over. I am just pointing out that we are using a medium of communication where words impact the core of the discussion vastly. Lets be honest.. if this thread was about Muslims or Christians.. we wouldnt say "these people" as that is too general for purpose..

a reply to: Gryphon66

Care to quote some of those psychiatrists who are now on record as saying that homosexuality is a sign of sexual immaturity?

I know...right????

I (as a sociologist) just had a whole post ready, with sources and all to refute the idiocy, but then deleted it in exasperation.

"Mute point". Shouldn't have read any further than that and expected a rational argument, let alone attempted to make a serious response as to its utter ignorance!