h0m0sexu@lity choice or born that way???

[QUOTE="artsickdiscipl"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] WIth this logic, infertile heterosexual couples have a mental condition. DroidPhysX

Obviously not. They have a physical condition. Illnesses can be physical or mental, no? You have to play with the cards you're dealt to function best as a human being. If you're a male, you were dealt a penis testicles, and various other factors that make you a male. If you're a woman, you were dealt female reproductive organs chemical makeup.

But they cant reproduce without some interference

therefore they have a mental condition

No, those people have the right parts. Those parts happen to be malfunctioning. At least they can admit that it's a malfunction and try to fix it.

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"]Now according to this logic old people or infertile couples shouldnt get married. The cases or really old people getting married are very few, and I dont think anyone would support a fertility test to get married. -Toshy-

Expanding my point, is that its not worth the bother to ban old people from getting married, and you cannot stop infertile couples or couples not wanting kids. (ask them? They would just lie?)

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="artsickdiscipl"]

Obviously not. They have a physical condition. Illnesses can be physical or mental, no? You have to play with the cards you're dealt to function best as a human being. If you're a male, you were dealt a penis testicles, and various other factors that make you a male. If you're a woman, you were dealt female reproductive organs chemical makeup.

hartsickdiscipl

But they cant reproduce without some interference

therefore they have a mental condition

No, those people have the right parts. Those parts happen to be malfunctioning. At least they can admit that it's a malfunction and try to fix it.

[QUOTE="-Toshy-"][QUOTE="AdamPA1006"]Now according to this logic old people or infertile couples shouldnt get married. The cases or really old people getting married are very few, and I dont think anyone would support a fertility test to get married. AdamPA1006

Expanding my point, is that its not worth the bother to ban old people from getting married, and you cannot stop infertile couples or couples not wanting kids. (ask them? They would just lie?)

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] The two men have sex with the two women. They may not be sexually attracted to the women but that doesn't make it impossible. Besides that we DO have the technological means. So who cares. We don't discriminate against infertile people, why should we discriminate against gays who just don't want to have sex with the gender that would allow them to have natural children?Ace6301

You just demonstrated that a man and a woman have to have sex to reproduce. The 2 men or 2 women didn't procreate together, nor were their bodies designed to do so. Congratulations, you just proved my point. A person who uses their body the way it is clearly configured to be used is obviously entitled to help in reproduction, because they're trying to play with the cards they were dealt. People can change themselves from within without technological help. People can't change sexes without major surgery and ongoing treatments. You tell me which one is more healty.

To deny and belittle someone is different than diagnosing them with a disorder. The fact that so many people feel so offended about the idea that homosexuals have a disorder actually helps the case that they do. When someone takes great offense to something said about them, it's often because there's truth to it. Homsexuality fits all the criteria for a disorder.

[QUOTE="-Toshy-"][QUOTE="AdamPA1006"]Now according to this logic old people or infertile couples shouldnt get married. The cases or really old people getting married are very few, and I dont think anyone would support a fertility test to get married. AdamPA1006

Expanding my point, is that its not worth the bother to ban old people from getting married, and you cannot stop infertile couples or couples not wanting kids. (ask them? They would just lie?)

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

But they cant reproduce without some interference

therefore they have a mental condition

DroidPhysX

No, those people have the right parts. Those parts happen to be malfunctioning. At least they can admit that it's a malfunction and try to fix it.

No, you didn't. You either didn't grasp my logic, or chose to try to twist it. This is a very simple issue, as most are. The solution just happens to be harder than going on living with the issue for many people. That's why they choose to ignore the facts. That's their choice, but don't deny that it happened. The easy way out appeals to most.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

No, those people have the right parts. Those parts happen to be malfunctioning. At least they can admit that it's a malfunction and try to fix it.

hartsickdiscipl

No, you didn't. You either didn't grasp my logic, or chose to try to twist it. This is a very simple issue, as most are. The solution just happens to be harder than going on living with the issue for many people. That's why they choose to ignore the facts. That's their choice, but don't deny that it happened. The easy way out appeals to most.

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"]

[QUOTE="-Toshy-"]But didn't you just say couples shouldn't get monetary benefits (marriage) for that very reason? What separates gay couples from the elderly and the infertile? If you're going to side with fidosim with regards to monetary benefits being the determining factor, at least be consistent in the reasons you give out those benefits. At this point, it sounds like the sole reason is purely because they engage in homosexual behavior.Ace6301

Expanding my point, is that its not worth the bother to ban old people from getting married, and you cannot stop infertile couples or couples not wanting kids. (ask them? They would just lie?)

1. Whether homosexuality is natural or not is irrelevant because it doesn't hurt anyone

2. Being gay doesn't preclude the desire to have children of one's own; it only implies a lack of attraction to the opposite sex

and 3. Gay people can still engage in heterosexual sex.

Got it, folks? Or do I need to yell this into your ears?

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

You just demonstrated that a man and a woman have to have sex to reproduce. The 2 men or 2 women didn't procreate together, nor were their bodies designed to do so. Congratulations, you just proved my point. A person who uses their body the way it is clearly configured to be used is obviously entitled to help in reproduction, because they're trying to play with the cards they were dealt. People can change themselves from within without technological help. People can't change sexes without major surgery and ongoing treatments. You tell me which one is more healty.

hartsickdiscipl

To deny and belittle someone is different than diagnosing them with a disorder. The fact that so many people feel so offended about the idea that homosexuals have a disorder actually helps the case that they do. When someone takes great offense to something said about them, it's often because there's truth to it. Homsexuality fits all the criteria for a disorder.

1. Whether homosexuality is natural or not is irrelevant because it doesn't hurt anyone 2. Being gay doesn't preclude the desire to have children of one's own; it only implies a lack of attraction to the opposite sex 3. Gay people can have still engage in heterosexual sex Got it, folks? Or do I need to yell this into your ears?ghoklebutter

You may need a megaphone that fires missiles of 'Logic, Reason and Intellect' into the minds of the ignorant and then smack them over the head a few thousand times with the 'Almighty Smiting Stick Of Reason'.

On a serious note, I've found that the ignorant refuse to listen to reason and logic since in their deluded minds they think that anyone who does not conform to their narrow ideals of existence are a threat to them, when the real threat are the ignorant, not those who are simply born differently.

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"]

[QUOTE="-Toshy-"]But didn't you just say couples shouldn't get monetary benefits (marriage) for that very reason? What separates gay couples from the elderly and the infertile? If you're going to side with fidosim with regards to monetary benefits being the determining factor, at least be consistent in the reasons you give out those benefits. At this point, it sounds like the sole reason is purely because they engage in homosexual behavior.l4dak47

Expanding my point, is that its not worth the bother to ban old people from getting married, and you cannot stop infertile couples or couples not wanting kids. (ask them? They would just lie?)

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]1. Whether homosexuality is natural or not is irrelevant because it doesn't hurt anyone 2. Being gay doesn't preclude the desire to have children of one's own; it only implies a lack of attraction to the opposite sex 3. Gay people can have still engage in heterosexual sex Got it, folks? Or do I need to yell this into your ears?Smokescreened84

You may need a megaphone that fires missiles of 'Logic, Reason and Intellect' into the minds of the ignorant and then smack them over the head a few thousand times with the 'Almighty Smiting Stick Of Reason'.

On a serious note, I've found that the ignorant refuse to listen to reason and logic since in their deluded minds they think that anyone who does not conform to their narrow ideals of existence are a threat to them, when the real threat are the ignorant, not those who are simply born differently.

[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="AdamPA1006"]

Expanding my point, is that its not worth the bother to ban old people from getting married, and you cannot stop infertile couples or couples not wanting kids. (ask them? They would just lie?)

AdamPA1006

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] Just using your logic here.DroidPhysX

No, you didn't. You either didn't grasp my logic, or chose to try to twist it. This is a very simple issue, as most are. The solution just happens to be harder than going on living with the issue for many people. That's why they choose to ignore the facts. That's their choice, but don't deny that it happened. The easy way out appeals to most.

-Gay people are born with the physical configuration to be compatible with the opposite sex. The hardware is presumably functioning correctly. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to pursue another person of the same sex.

-Straight people are born with the same physical configuration. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to use their hardware in the way that human biology dictates is the correct way.

-Straight people who are infertile have a hardware malfunction, not a software one. That means that they don't have a mental condition.

I hope that explains it.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

No, you didn't. You either didn't grasp my logic, or chose to try to twist it. This is a very simple issue, as most are. The solution just happens to be harder than going on living with the issue for many people. That's why they choose to ignore the facts. That's their choice, but don't deny that it happened. The easy way out appeals to most.

hartsickdiscipl

-Gay people are born with the physical configuration to be compatible with the opposite sex. The hardware is presumably functioning correctly. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to pursue another person of the same sex.

-Straight people are born with the same physical configuration. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to use their hardware in the way that human biology dictates is the correct way.

-Straight people who are infertile have a hardware malfunction, not a software one. That means that they don't have a mental condition.

I hope that explains it.

[QUOTE="Smokescreened84"]

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]1. Whether homosexuality is natural or not is irrelevant because it doesn't hurt anyone 2. Being gay doesn't preclude the desire to have children of one's own; it only implies a lack of attraction to the opposite sex 3. Gay people can have still engage in heterosexual sex Got it, folks? Or do I need to yell this into your ears?ghoklebutter

You may need a megaphone that fires missiles of 'Logic, Reason and Intellect' into the minds of the ignorant and then smack them over the head a few thousand times with the 'Almighty Smiting Stick Of Reason'.

On a serious note, I've found that the ignorant refuse to listen to reason and logic since in their deluded minds they think that anyone who does not conform to their narrow ideals of existence are a threat to them, when the real threat are the ignorant, not those who are simply born differently.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] People desire to be who they wish to be. It's unhealthy to make them pretend to be something they aren't. Since when is technology a bad thing? It's the reason why we're the most advanced species we know of and it's the reason why we're even having this conversation. To say we should deny and belittle others because you don't think it's natural is idiotic. I think you're a paranoid schizo but I don't hold it against you or treat you any different than how I would treat anyone else saying the same things you say.Ace6301

To deny and belittle someone is different than diagnosing them with a disorder. The fact that so many people feel so offended about the idea that homosexuals have a disorder actually helps the case that they do. When someone takes great offense to something said about them, it's often because there's truth to it. Homsexuality fits all the criteria for a disorder.

I'm not opposed to gay marriage. I'm opposed to it in my life.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] Gay people cant reproduce without interference, ergo they have a mental condition Neat, since infertile couples can't do the same, they also have a mental condition.DroidPhysX

-Gay people are born with the physical configuration to be compatible with the opposite sex. The hardware is presumably functioning correctly. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to pursue another person of the same sex.

-Straight people are born with the same physical configuration. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to use their hardware in the way that human biology dictates is the correct way.

-Straight people who are infertile have a hardware malfunction, not a software one. That means that they don't have a mental condition.

I hope that explains it.

Incorrect. I'm putting it in terms that you can understand, since you didn't get the full sense of what I was saying earlier.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

-Gay people are born with the physical configuration to be compatible with the opposite sex. The hardware is presumably functioning correctly. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to pursue another person of the same sex.

-Straight people are born with the same physical configuration. Their software (mental condition) is telling them to use their hardware in the way that human biology dictates is the correct way.

-Straight people who are infertile have a hardware malfunction, not a software one. That means that they don't have a mental condition.

I hope that explains it.

hartsickdiscipl

Incorrect. I'm putting it in terms that you can understand, since you didn't get the full sense of what I was saying earlier.

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] Being outspoken against a persons rights is kind of disrespectful if you didn't know. Especially when you're admitting equal rights for gays shouldn't happen simply because it would be a "bother". You're pretty much saying their equality isn't worth the time or effort.DroidPhysX

I believe there is no reason to allow/encourage it because they do not benefit the state in the same way a heterosexual couple does.

I'm not opposed to gay marriage. I'm opposed to it in my life.

hartsickdiscipl

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="AdamPA1006"] How is getting married a right? Where does it say that in the constitution? Every single person doesnt meet the requirements for the privileged of marriage. TO receive those monetary benefits, you need to fulfill certain requirements. And it is not like racial descrimination. Gay people are allowed to get married. They just choose not to fulfill the requirements. It is not the same as saying they cant get married bc they are black or not white. AdamPA1006

I believe there is no reason to allow/encourage it because they do not benefit the state in the same way a heterosexual couple does.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="AdamPA1006"] How is getting married a right? Where does it say that in the constitution? Every single person doesnt meet the requirements for the privileged of marriage. TO receive those monetary benefits, you need to fulfill certain requirements. And it is not like racial descrimination. Gay people are allowed to get married. They just choose not to fulfill the requirements. It is not the same as saying they cant get married bc they are black or not white. AdamPA1006

I believe there is no reason to allow/encourage it because they do not benefit the state in the same way a heterosexual couple does.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] So basically, you're retracting the original statement and putting out an edited one that better suits you.DroidPhysX

Incorrect. I'm putting it in terms that you can understand, since you didn't get the full sense of what I was saying earlier.

What is unclear about the facts that I just presented? Sometimes I assume a certain level of insight in the people reading my posts, so I don't put every detail of my train of thought out there in print. Sometimes I'm wrong, and people don't follow. That's why I simplified my thoughts and put them in black and white.

I believe there is no reason to allow/encourage it because they do not benefit the state in the same way a heterosexual couple does.

AdamPA1006

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Incorrect. I'm putting it in terms that you can understand, since you didn't get the full sense of what I was saying earlier.

hartsickdiscipl

What is unclear about the facts that I just presented? Sometimes I assume a certain level of insight in the people reading my posts, so I don't put every detail of my train of thought out there in print. Sometimes I'm wrong, and people don't follow. That's why I simplified my thoughts and put them in black and white.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I'm not opposed to gay marriage. I'm opposed to it in my life.

Aljosa23

What's confusing about that post? It means that people can do whatever they want. It also means that I'm not gay

I acknowledge there is certain things that are importand it any serious relationship, like hospital visitation and inheritance. This stuff is open to any gay gay couple with a living will and naming the other person your heir.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="AdamPA1006"] How is getting married a right? Where does it say that in the constitution? Every single person doesnt meet the requirements for the privileged of marriage. TO receive those monetary benefits, you need to fulfill certain requirements. And it is not like racial descrimination. Gay people are allowed to get married. They just choose not to fulfill the requirements. It is not the same as saying they cant get married bc they are black or not white. AdamPA1006

I believe there is no reason to allow/encourage it because they do not benefit the state in the same way a heterosexual couple does.

What's confusing about that post? It means that people can do whatever they want. It also means that I'm not gay

hartsickdiscipl

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

To deny and belittle someone is different than diagnosing them with a disorder. The fact that so many people feel so offended about the idea that homosexuals have a disorder actually helps the case that they do. When someone takes great offense to something said about them, it's often because there's truth to it. Homsexuality fits all the criteria for a disorder.

hartsickdiscipl

I'm not opposed to gay marriage. I'm opposed to it in my life.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] I can't understand something that doesn't have facts behind it.DroidPhysX

What is unclear about the facts that I just presented? Sometimes I assume a certain level of insight in the people reading my posts, so I don't put every detail of my train of thought out there in print. Sometimes I'm wrong, and people don't follow. That's why I simplified my thoughts and put them in black and white.

I thought I just explained that. It's analogous to having the wrong software on a piece of hardware. It also interferes with the continuation of the human race through natural procreation if it spreads far enough. How is that not a disorder?

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] You're opposed to gay marriage, correct? If so you're not just diagnosing them with a disorder but also denying and belittling them using that very same disorder you're diagnosing them with. This despite homosexuals being the same as heterosexuals when it comes to societal contributions. I don't really see very many people saying that it's certainly not a disorder, for all we know it could be and the results from scientists are inconclusive. Most gays just don't want to be looked down upon or discriminated against. If in the end it does turn out to be a disorder why would it matter? All we'd do is give them the choice to become hetero if they wished. Smokescreened84

I'm not opposed to gay marriage. I'm opposed to it in my life.

I just said that I'm not opposed to gay marriage. Gay people can do what they want. You can take your anger elsewhere, thank you.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

What is unclear about the facts that I just presented? Sometimes I assume a certain level of insight in the people reading my posts, so I don't put every detail of my train of thought out there in print. Sometimes I'm wrong, and people don't follow. That's why I simplified my thoughts and put them in black and white.

hartsickdiscipl

I thought I just explained that. It's analogous to having the wrong software on a piece of hardware. It also interferes with the continuation of the human race through natural procreation if it spreads far enough. How is that not a disorder?

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

What is unclear about the facts that I just presented? Sometimes I assume a certain level of insight in the people reading my posts, so I don't put every detail of my train of thought out there in print. Sometimes I'm wrong, and people don't follow. That's why I simplified my thoughts and put them in black and white.

hartsickdiscipl

I thought I just explained that. It's analogous to having the wrong software on a piece of hardware. It also interferes with the continuation of the human race through natural procreation if it spreads far enough. How is that not a disorder?

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

What's confusing about that post? It means that people can do whatever they want. It also means that I'm not gay

Aljosa23

Not what I meant.

lol @ assuming that heterosexuality and the desire to procreate are the sameghoklebutter

Of course they're not synonymous. They are compatible, though.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]lol @ assuming that heterosexuality and the desire to procreate are the samehartsickdiscipl

Of course they're not synonymous. They are compatible, though.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] How is being gay is a disability or defect of some sort. I don't see any proof.MannyDelgado

I thought I just explained that. It's analogous to having the wrong software on a piece of hardware. It also interferes with the continuation of the human race through natural procreation if it spreads far enough. How is that not a disorder?

The wonders of basic logic. It tends to trump the overly complex atttempts of people trying to argue that putting a square peg in a round hole is natural.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]lol @ assuming that heterosexuality and the desire to procreate are the samehartsickdiscipl

Of course they're not synonymous. They are compatible, though.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]lol @ assuming that heterosexuality and the desire to procreate are the samehartsickdiscipl

Of course they're not synonymous. They are compatible, though.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]lol @ assuming that heterosexuality and the desire to procreate are the sameMannyDelgado

Of course they're not synonymous. They are compatible, though.

I find that my life is much simpler than most people that I know. That comes from clarity of thought. I do have some issues of my own, don't get me wrong. However, I've been pretty lucky.