This topic is locked from further discussion.
Um I admit I dont know what happens in all sexual transitions but cant the cases here be different?[QUOTE="Teenaged"]
[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]
To let you understand how incredibly wrong what you just said is, allow me to rephrase that from my point of view:
As an asexual I think the only reason a straight person will want to change to asexuality (which as we all know is the morally superior sexual orientation, one need look no farther than the Bible for proof) is not because he/she doesn't like what he/she is, but because of what others think about it.
gameguy6700
No. I can assure you that a gay man no less chose to be homosexual than I chose to be asexual or you chose to be straight. Which is to say that none of us ever had a choice. You suddenly started liking girls sometime between 4th and 6th grade, he suddenly started liking boys during the same time span, and I never did develop any new, special feelings towards either sex.
Actually, I didn't start liking boys until the end of my senior year.
It's psychological, in your mind.[QUOTE="angusclone2"][QUOTE="BlueBirdTS"]
Which is caused by what? Magical feelings in your heart?
BlueBirdTS
Take a look at this:
Psychology is just a sub-branch of biology in a way.
I heart xkcd.There isn't anygay gene, as you choose to call it. It's either a lack of a certain hormones, or an overabundance of one. People wouldhave found a gay gene years ago if it existed. You can be in denial about your sexuality, but it's not a choice and it cannot disappear.
No, it's by choice, and influence.CantiusHmm, I think modern science would like to have a word with you. Then again, if by "influence" you mean a lack of testosterone to the fetus, then yes. If you mean by "influence" the outdated and debunked Freudian theories of lack of a father presence, or too much mother influence then no.
[QUOTE="Santesyu"]
Very much a choice..
So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
He never pondered whether or not he was gay or straight he just feels straight just like gay people. You tread on cautious ground there.[QUOTE="Santesyu"]
Very much a choice..
So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best. So what if a man naturally like men. They just feel it and never thought about it? Its the same thing you did just diffrent outcome.Well I certainly didn't choose to be gay :?Sim_geniusThat doesn't necessarily imply that homosexuality is genetic.
[QUOTE="Santesyu"][QUOTE="mfacek"]I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best. So what if a man naturally like men. They just feel it and never thought about it? Its the same thing you did just diffrent outcome. Personally this nation and everything it founded on was between a man and a woman, if it was any other way it would be un-natural.So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
Sway-
[QUOTE="Santesyu"]
Very much a choice..
So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best. And, in this instance, what is "natural instinct?" It is nothing but hormones. So, perhaps these hormones were upset, or something like that, it might change so the person is gay instead of straight. Then that would be THEIR "natural instinct"So what if a man naturally like men. They just feel it and never thought about it? Its the same thing you did just diffrent outcome. Personally this nation and everything it founded on was between a man and a woman, if it was any other way it would be un-natural. So you're saying your nation's people should all conform to heterosexual tendencies just to satisfy the values of long dead?[QUOTE="Sway-"][QUOTE="Santesyu"] I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best.Santesyu
[QUOTE="mfacek"][QUOTE="Santesyu"]
Very much a choice..
Santesyu
So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best. Funny, every gay person I've ever talked to has told me it was just instinct for them as well.So what if a man naturally like men. They just feel it and never thought about it? Its the same thing you did just diffrent outcome. Personally this nation and everything it founded on was between a man and a woman, if it was any other way it would be un-natural. Really? Show me.[QUOTE="Sway-"][QUOTE="Santesyu"] I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best.Santesyu
[QUOTE="mfacek"][QUOTE="Santesyu"]
Very much a choice..
Santesyu
So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best. I can't even parse what the hell you are trying to say in that last sentence...[QUOTE="Santesyu"]Personally this nation and everything it founded on was between a man and a woman, if it was any other way it would be un-natural.GabuEx
Driving a car is orders of magnitude more "un-natural" than being attracted to members of the same sex.
True. This country was founded on the basis of an agrarian society (Thomas Jefferson) rather than an industrial one (Hamilton). Yet, look where we are now.
[QUOTE="Santesyu"][QUOTE="mfacek"]I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best. And, in this instance, what is "natural instinct?" It is nothing but hormones. So, perhaps these hormones were upset, or something like that, it might change so the person is gay instead of straight. Then that would be THEIR "natural instinct" That would still be un-natural.. if a bear was coming at you and bit you your natural instinct would be to scream, if a person stays there calmly while they are getting chewed out, that isn't natural, there is clearly something wrong.So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
Grodus5
[QUOTE="Santesyu"][QUOTE="mfacek"]I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best. I can't even parse what the hell you are trying to say in that last sentence... He's trying to say do what it for.So at what age did you decide to be straight or gay?
xaos
[QUOTE="Santesyu"]Personally this nation and everything it founded on was between a man and a woman, if it was any other way it would be un-natural. Really? Show me. How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please![QUOTE="Sway-"] So what if a man naturally like men. They just feel it and never thought about it? Its the same thing you did just diffrent outcome.mfacek
How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!Santesyu
And yet, homosexual attractions have been observed many times in other animals.
So the question remains: what does it mean for something to be "natural"? This word is often used, seldom defined.
And, in this instance, what is "natural instinct?" It is nothing but hormones. So, perhaps these hormones were upset, or something like that, it might change so the person is gay instead of straight. Then that would be THEIR "natural instinct" That would still be un-natural.. if a bear was coming at you and bit you your natural instinct would be to scream, if a person stays there calmly while they are getting chewed out, that isn't natural, there is clearly something wrong. Care to define natural?[QUOTE="Grodus5"][QUOTE="Santesyu"] I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best.Santesyu
EDIT: Dang GabuEx, beat me too it. I can tell we're on the same page here.
[QUOTE="Wilfred_Owen"]The gay gene sounds like Spiderman powers. Thats awesome! Xaos do you have super powers?xaosI do; I've been known to *thwip* my "web fluid" (as I like to call it) all over the place Hey, I have that super power too! Uh, oh, does that mean I'm gay
There isn't anygay gene, as you choose to call it. It's either a lack of a certain hormones, or an overabundance of one. People wouldhave found a gay gene years ago if it existed. You can be in denial about your sexuality, but it's not a choice and it cannot disappear.
calvinsora
Assuming you're talking to me, I'm not the only one who chooses to call it a gay gene, if there is one. It's a debatable cause of homosexuality that some science is trying to find out. If there isn't a gay gene, or genes, then it may be hormonal.
[QUOTE="mfacek"][QUOTE="Santesyu"] Personally this nation and everything it founded on was between a man and a woman, if it was any other way it would be un-natural.Really? Show me. How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!Santesyu
I agree, homosexuality is not "normal". However, just because something is abnormal does not mean it is morally wrong IMO.
And, in this instance, what is "natural instinct?" It is nothing but hormones. So, perhaps these hormones were upset, or something like that, it might change so the person is gay instead of straight. Then that would be THEIR "natural instinct" That would still be un-natural.. if a bear was coming at you and bit you your natural instinct would be to scream, if a person stays there calmly while they are getting chewed out, that isn't natural, there is clearly something wrong.What does it matter whether it's unnatural? Unnaturalness doesn't imply immorality.[QUOTE="Grodus5"][QUOTE="Santesyu"] I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best.Santesyu
How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!SantesyuSo procreation is the end all and be all of existence, and priests and nuns, for instance, are unnatural?
[QUOTE="calvinsora"]
There isn't anygay gene, as you choose to call it. It's either a lack of a certain hormones, or an overabundance of one. People wouldhave found a gay gene years ago if it existed. You can be in denial about your sexuality, but it's not a choice and it cannot disappear.
dog64
Assuming you're talking to me, I'm not the only one who chooses to call it a gay gene, if there is one. It's a debatable cause of homosexuality that some science is trying to find out. If there isn't a gay gene, or genes, then it may be hormonal.
But what causes abnormal hormone levels? Your genes!
[QUOTE="Santesyu"]How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!GabuEx
And yet, homosexual attractions have been observed many times in other animals.
So the question remains: what does it mean for something to be "natural"? This word is often used, seldom defined.
Just because it is observed in other animals doesn't mean its natural, just because a a male horse can get in the mood over a human female is that natural?[QUOTE="Santesyu"]How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!xaosSo procreation is the end all and be all of existence, and priests and nuns, for instance, are unnatural? Now you are bringing religion into it?
[QUOTE="GabuEx"][QUOTE="Santesyu"]How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!Santesyu
And yet, homosexual attractions have been observed many times in other animals.
So the question remains: what does it mean for something to be "natural"? This word is often used, seldom defined.
Just because it is observed in other animals doesn't mean its natural, just because a a male horse can get in the mood over a human female is that natural? Again, define natural.And, in this instance, what is "natural instinct?" It is nothing but hormones. So, perhaps these hormones were upset, or something like that, it might change so the person is gay instead of straight. Then that would be THEIR "natural instinct" That would still be un-natural.. if a bear was coming at you and bit you your natural instinct would be to scream, if a person stays there calmly while they are getting chewed out, that isn't natural, there is clearly something wrong. What is "natural" but a standard put on by society. So are all the people that voted against Bush (just using it as an example, not trying to imply anything) "unnatural" because a majority of people agreed with him? Maybe not the best example, but still ask yourself this: What exactly is this "natural?"[QUOTE="Grodus5"][QUOTE="Santesyu"] I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best.Santesyu
I think its mostly an early childhood phenomena which could be explained by problematic Primary Objects (parents or caregivers), dysfunctional families. Maybe in some cases a common genetic or biochemical situation...but I would put stock in the other.
[QUOTE="Santesyu"]How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!GabuEx
And yet, homosexual attractions have been observed many times in other animals.
So the question remains: what does it mean for something to be "natural"? This word is often used, seldom defined.
Along the same lines, what is "normal"?
So what if a man naturally like men. They just feel it and never thought about it? Its the same thing you did just diffrent outcome. Personally this nation and everything it founded on was between a man and a woman, if it was any other way it would be un-natural.Ehm... so?[QUOTE="Sway-"][QUOTE="Santesyu"] I didn't, thats the differences in choosing and just by natural instinct. And if using science as a back up is hardly really fact good theories at best.Santesyu
[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="Santesyu"]How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!SantesyuSo procreation is the end all and be all of existence, and priests and nuns, for instance, are unnatural? Now you are bringing religion into it? No, I am bringing other individuals who do not reproduce into it; the fact that they do not reproduce for religious reasons is not the issue.
[QUOTE="Santesyu"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]Just because it is observed in other animals doesn't mean its natural, just because a a male horse can get in the mood over a human female is that natural? Again, define natural. You are the genius here, you define it.And yet, homosexual attractions have been observed many times in other animals.
So the question remains: what does it mean for something to be "natural"? This word is often used, seldom defined.
mfacek
[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="Santesyu"]How did you get here, how did everyone get here this generation or the next one or the next one? Next question please!SantesyuSo procreation is the end all and be all of existence, and priests and nuns, for instance, are unnatural? Now you are bringing religion into it? Yes he is obviously religon which has been part of our nation for so long is ruining our society because priests are abstinent.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment