The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[GT_Prologue5]

I don't care about homosexuality. They're people with a choice. I'm not going to care if people thing I'm gay, because I know I'm not. They can do as they please, and the whole "heeeeey" stereotype, I've found tather annoying. I'm not gay, but if you want to be, go ahead I say.

 

[blaaah]

For another matter, we have been together for 10 years now, and our relationship has never been stronger, which is more than can be said for some of our hetrosexual friends.

That is just like saying myself and my wife are white skinned we're enjoying a 10 year relationship which is more than can be said for some of our black skinned friends.
It creates a division of characteristics, but if it's true I think that is ok.

 

[DG_Silva]

That is just like saying myself and my wife are white skinned we're enjoying a 10 year relationship which is more than can be said for some of our black skinned friends.
It creates a division of characteristics, but if it's true I think that is ok.

Ermmm... I thiink that may have come out wrong. The point I was trying to make is that most people think that homosexuals are promiscuous, where the majority of cases is not true. I sincerely apologise for any offence caused, and wasn't trying to make an analgous point.

I really should think more before I start typing...

Personally, I don't see why people should be offended by homosexuality. If you don't like it, turn away. It's the old issue with TV; don't like it, turn it off.

 

[Keef]

I'm endlessly fascinated as to how the law is sussed out, between the state and federal level. Example: medical marijuana. Legal in California, but illegal at the federal level.

This cool trick called "nullification" allows states to basically ignore Federal laws that are unconstitutional. Like marijuana laws. The Constitution gives no authority to the Federal government to regulate such things. Therefore, whether they knowingly did it or not, some states have decided to ignore the Federal law and do it their own way.

This could and should be done with many, many current Federal laws. Why it isn't, I have no idea.

 

[Dan_]

Homossexuality is a pretty complicated subject to discuss, not because people usually think that gays are promiscuous or sinners, but because society has planted firm roots on ignoring and opressing them. I found quite funny that people still attribute it to the Devil or that the word of God says you can't be this or that way, I know opinions are opinions and therefore biased to whoever is talking, but you can't go again natural flow of things, and homossexuality was always existent and therefore a natural human and animal characteristic.

As a hetero, I find myself as a pretty liberal thinker, if someone has a natural tendency he should follow it. No matter if that's due to biological and hormonal characteristics, or whatever.

I have two homossexual friends and they're awesome, of course everyone jokes about them and make funny about the couple, but still, everyone in my circle of friendships treats them normally and some even consider them friends ( they're great guys, we just don't hang out to hit chicks...but we still can have beer together... )

As a side note, I must confess I'm also a bit of a jerk when it comes to homossexuality, I wouldn't for example accept the most remote possibility of my (future) sons being gay, that also goes on about: "I want my son to be like me, to drive along, hit chicks and show up saturday night, holding the left hand of Barbara, the hottest chick on the college". Which is fine as a paternal feeling, but when family is involved things get harder you know.

 

[G.T.Ace]

As a side note, I must confess I'm also a bit of a jerk when it comes to homossexuality, I wouldn't for example accept the most remote possibility of my (future) sons being gay, that also goes on about: "I want my son to be like me, to drive along, hit chicks and show up saturday night, holding the left hand of Barbara, the hottest chick on the college". Which is fine as a paternal feeling, but when family is involved things get harder you know.

But why? Maybe he won't hold the hand of Barbara, the "hot chick", but Bob, that hot guy. You can be proud of him, the gender shouldn't matter if your son finds someone he loves.

 

[Dan_]

But why? Maybe he won't hold the hand of Barbara, the "hot chick", but Bob, that hot guy. You can be proud of him, the gender shouldn't matter if your son finds someone he loves.

You're saying that just because you have never seen Barb.

But your point is fair and well-centered. 👍

I'll attribute this mainly to my creation, which was catholic and straight to the obedience of dogmas and all those religious stuff, however I'm trying to change my mind, if you don't place you son above your opinions and proud, you don't deserve to be a father.

I'll go phone my GF and tell her that our son is going to be gay then. Credits to GTAce.

My 2 cents.

 

[G.T.Ace]

however I'm trying to change my mind, if you don't place you son above your opinions and proud, you don't deserve to be a father.

It's fantastic to read things like that.

I'll go phone my GF and tell her that our son is going to be gay then. Credits to GTAce.

 

[SuperShouden]

I've known some homosexual people and as far as I can tell there's nothing about being homosexual that effects anyone but the people involved. If you've got an issue with it, it's your problem. If they're harassing you, then call the cops and report them or talk to them.

I used to think it was a sin, and according to the Bible it is, but the Bible also tells use to LOVE one another not condemn people to hell. And that's what I choose to do: love 'em. I really have no qualms against homosexuals. And I've seen homosexual couples that are happier in their relationship/marriage than some heterosexual couples.

So...that's my opinion. Also, the title to this thread is pretty offensive.

 

[GT5Junkie]

People being gay from a genetic point of view is most likely a myth perpetuated by an anointed class of 'victims' and their political cohorts. It's personal choice and there's nothing wrong with that. Likewise, some say that being an alcoholic or a substance abuser is genetic or one can be genetically predisposed to leading such a lifestyle. It's not. It's a culture of blaming anything but themselves.

And this is based on your extensive research in the field of genetics? I'm guessing, not. Seems more like you're simply stating your uninformed opinion and pretending it's fact. Genetics can make someone predisposed to addiction, you are wrong.

 

[Joel]

It doesn't matter if it's genetic or not. Some people are gay, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

 

[chances14]

i don't have really have a problem with homosexuals. i could care less what people do in their lives. it doesnt effect me.

but for those that think that God doesnt consider homosexuality a sin needs to go re read the bible again

 

[BrutherSuperior]

And this is based on your extensive research in the field of genetics? I'm guessing, not. Seems more like you're simply stating your uninformed opinion and pretending it's fact. Genetics can make someone predisposed to addiction, you are wrong.

And that's based on your research in genetics or your ability to use wikipedia?

I'm skeptical when it comes to politically sensitive research. Look at the farce global warming research has become. Think that can't happen to other research?

In addition, this is part of the larger debate of 'nature vs. nurture'.

 

[GT_Prologue5]

I'm skeptical when it comes to politically sensitive research. Look at the farce global warming research has become. Think that can't happen to other research?

How is stuff like that false? While this isn't the place for Global Warming, it's quite obvious it does occur. Whether or not the research has to tell you is pointless. If there's more CO2 in the atmosphere, O3 levels dropping, and climate change occuring, then it's true.

I don't see how Homosexuality is genetic. If I love a man (I don't), then hell, I'd be gay. If I love a women, then I'm Hetero. It's not that all gay people love all men or straight people love all women; it's a choice based almost purely on the fact of loving one person regardless of gender.

 

[BrutherSuperior]

How is stuff like that false? While this isn't the place for Global Warming, it's quite obvious it does occur. Whether or not the research has to tell you is pointless. If there's more CO2 in the atmosphere, O3 levels dropping, and climate change occuring, then it's true.

I don't see how Homosexuality is genetic. If I love a man (I don't), then hell, I'd be gay. If I love a women, then I'm Hetero. It's not that all gay people love all men or straight people love all women; it's a choice based almost purely on the fact of loving one person regardless of gender.

AGW is an example of only using data that agrees with the politically expedient outcome. Recently, they've found the glaciers of the Himalayas growing and not receding as was previously stated. That is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to that scientific farce. I bring that up as only as an example on how political correctness can corrupt science.

Likewise, if homosexuality was genetic; there would be no homosexuality. Think of a punnett square, I don't see how a gay gene would or could be passed from generation to generation unless it is affected by environment. With that, it's still left up to choice/control since humans can control their choices and environment.

 

[Denur]

And that's based on your research in genetics or your ability to use wikipedia?

There have been numerous studies among twins - both identical (MZ) and non-identical (DZ) twins -. This table shows a summary with the results from a few of them. SOURCE

I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions from this data.

 

[Dave x1]

Who cares anyway,i voted for a problem that needs to be cured,just to let you guys know,a bunch of pregnant womens on WW2 in germany who born their babies after the war most of the babies when grown up were homosexuals,studies say that this is caused by the hard stress of the mother during pregnacy.

 

[Famine]

And that's based on your research in genetics or your ability to use wikipedia?

Hi there. Speaking as the site's qualified (BSc. Molecular Biology & Genetics; MSc. Human Genetics & Disease) geneticist, I'd like to point out that there is evidence for a genetic component to homosexuality and a non-genetic component.

There's a major flaw in a lot of the pro-homosexuality-is-genetic research and Denur's table shows some of the classic signs of that flaw (in fact, I'd wager I know exactly who the lead researcher of that particular publication is and I do wish he'd just go away), but it doesn't invalidate the rest of the evidence for a genetic component.

I'd also like to point out that A, C, G and T isn't always the game-ending play it's often made out to be.

 

[maximumattack]

I'd also like to point out that A, C, G and T isn't always the game-ending play it's often made out to be.

 

[Famine]

The bases of DNA - a 3 billion letter long sequence doesn't tell the whole story about the person it generates.

 

[maximumattack]

Ah right

 

[TomDrum]

I work with many homosexuals (I work in a hospital) and I fail to see how someone's sexuality can affect how they are going to perform as a human being.

A number of the nurses/doctors at work are excellent at their jobs, but they happen to like men sexually. It doesn't mean that they are terrible at their jobs or that they are going to try and feel up their male patients. If that is the belief of some people, then that means that straight medical staff would want to feel up opposite sex patients.

I have no problem working with these people and I would feel no different being a patient.

 

[AlexGTV]

^I agree. A pervert is a pervert no matter their orientation.

I've observed that there are two types of homosexuals. The ones you could never tell and the others that have those mannerisms where they can't keep a straight voice or movement. The later many times are not real homosexuals, but their mannerisms defy that. And I cincerely can't tell which people may find most shocking if at all.

What do you have to say?

 

[birksy82]

At least one of them can have the exact same feelings as you, it's definitely possible that a gay couple can have one biological father and a lesbian couple one biological mother of a child. I know it's not exactly the same, but homosexual couples with children aren't that much different compared to a heterosexual one.

Very good point but it's not the way I see it, it's my opinion though so I'm not saying it is wrong.

I don't see a "right" or "wrong" there, all ways of reproduction are right, as long as no one will be harmed.

My main issue with this is when the child is growing up, if other children find out then they can use it to bully them thus causing them harm this way, again it's my opinion, not everyone think's like me and there are probably people who can prove me wrong.

 

[Famine]

Kids will pick on other kids for any reason. You don't protect them from it by banning people who would be good, loving parents from being their parents because they like the same shaped genitals as their own.

 

[birksy82]

Kids will pick on other kids for any reason. You don't protect them from it by banning people who would be good, loving parents from being their parents because they like the same shaped genitals as their own.

Like I said it's my opinion, I'm not trying to get and I don't expect anyone to agree with me.

 

[Sureboss]

Not really an issue (I live near Brighton) at school level imo. The worst cases I know of with bullying occurs in young adults and not children. I think it's more often than not "stretched out" by anti-gay groups in to being a bigger issue than it is. Though it does exist (and isn't as big as anti-gay groups make you think), I don't see it as a reason to deny people adopting, as terrible as bullying is it's not the end of the world, would you rather a child be in a happy home with two parents of the same sex and has a slight chance of being bullied about that, or not be adopted and be passed around from pillar to post without any stability in their childhood?

Where do you draw a line? Do you not allow other members of society to adopt? Maybe catholics shouldn't be able to adopt kids due to the systemic child abuse within there (and other religions).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/17/catholic-adoption-gay-parents

"It's unthinkable that anyone engaged in delivering any kind of public or publicly funded service should be given licence to pick and choose service users on the basis of individual prejudice.

Indeed.

Anyway, that's going off the track a little bit. Obviously your opinion is just that, but I don't see this bullying that exists, bear in mind that I know several teachers throughout the region at various ages.

My personal view, as stated, is that the risk is just pure propoganda from anti-gay and religious groups (basically the same thing).

Edit: Famine using the compressed version to explain it a lot easier.

 

[birksy82]

Where do you draw a line? Do you not allow other members of society to adopt? Maybe catholics shouldn't be able to adopt kids due to the systemic child abuse within there (and other religions).

I should have been more specific with my post, my main issue is with surrogacy and artificial insemination in some cases I just don't agree with it as it's not natures way.

This obviously isn't just an issue with homosexuals, adopting on the other hand I have no problem with, I wasn't saying that a gay couple wouldn't make good parents to a child, if they would like children then they should adopt there's nothing wrong with that. As for the bullying I was also talking about surrogacy and artificial insemination so again it doesn't just affect a child of a gay couple.

This is just my view so please don't take it the wrong way as I don't mean to offend anyone.

 

[Duke]

No one seems to be offended (and to some extent, it's OK if they are). On the other hand, those of us that hang out in this forum to tend to expect people to have reasoned arguments backing up their thinking, so we tend to question people's statements.

 

[Sureboss]

I should have been more specific with my post, my main issue is with surrogacy and artificial insemination in some cases I just don't agree with it as it's not natures way.

This obviously isn't just an issue with homosexuals, adopting on the other hand I have no problem with, I wasn't saying that a gay couple wouldn't make good parents to a child, if they would like children then they should adopt there's nothing wrong with that. As for the bullying I was also talking about surrogacy and artificial insemination so again it doesn't just affect a child of a gay couple.

This is just my view so please don't take it the wrong way as I don't mean to offend anyone.

One would imagine it'd be hard for the "bullies" to know about things like artificial insemination, etc. FYI, a friend was a test tube baby, and he told people about it at school, meant nowt to anyone other than what it is.

As for it not being natures way, nor is contraception, etc, they still serve a purpose. A large part of our medical system is against natures way. Again, how far do you extend it with such logic? Is it right to pick and choose what circumstances are acceptable? Who can decide on such issues? I'm not saying it's wrong to have that opinion, but I think the argument of it not being natural is weak, because so much of our health/maternal system is very un-natural, but that's a good thing.

As far as I'm concerned, if you want to be a surrogate, or choose to do IVF, whatever your circumstances, you should always have the choice.

Also, what Duke said.