Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, what he has is some courage....to publicly stand for what he believes and what his gut tell him is truth - against today's avalanche of PC intolerance for any explanation or discussion that strays from the progressive party line.
Who are these supposedly "educated people" who believe sexual orientation is a choice?
A person can have the opinion that the earth is only 6000 years old and they would be free to express that opinion. They might even find others that agree with them. But I doubt you will find any educated person, especially scientists, agreeing with them. And the evidence-free opinions of people who believe the earth is only 6000 years old, would certainly not be as valid as the evidence based opinions of educated scientists.
All opinions are not "equally" valid.
Yes all opinions of sane people are equally valid in the abstract sense. They have to be, or else the opinions of the many uneducated individuals who also believe sexuality is innate, would be rendered invalid; by simple virtue of the fact that they have less "education".
Which evidence one chooses to accept as valid is the contingent; which makes the individual the variable. I guarantee you an educated Ghanaian doesnt view the opinion of U.S. "educated" professionals as gospel. Nor do many of the other foreign countries who are running circles around the U.S. and Europe in the maths and sciences. To be honest, much of the U.S.'s education, in their eyes, is a joke. There is no universally arbitrary standard of belief that makes any one opinion more valid than the next. If one person chooses to accept another human being's opinion as sacred scripture, because they have a piece of paper then thats fine. However, not everyone values that person's opinion, educated or not.
why should gays have to prove anything? why do they have to justify their existence and their choices to the heterosexual world?
Because they are the ones trying to do several things:
1. Tell society that homosexuality is normal.
2. Tell society that it's not a choice (completely unproven)
3. Change the rules within the military (which WILL have a negative impact in the short term).
4. Force gay history down our throats as just that "gay" history (I don't remember hearing about anyone in any elementary, high school, or college history class being heterosexual, only what they did).
5. Force tolerance of something that goes against some people's religion.
I think that's more than enough reasons for some people to resent having the issues forced down their throats.
From what I've read by most of the posters here who question the MAIN question of "are people born gay?", those who disagree don't disagree with people being homosexual. They don't even disagree that they have homosexual relationships.
What they disagree with is:
1. Trying to convince people that it's "normal"
2. Certain homosexual groups forcing their way of life into society that has no reason to accept it (since it's not a proven fact).
3. Forcing the educational system to teach homosexuality as a normal thing.
So, yeah. I can understand that there's some resentment against the homosexual community. Unfortunately, what they don't realize is that as long as it can't be proven (like race or biological sex), then the more they forceably push the issue, they may get their little victories "marriage, openly serving in the military", but they make more and more of society regard them with contempt.
It's really akin to religious organizations trying to push themselves on society. They chose their way of life, but forcing others to accept it is wrong. No difference, in my opinion.
Because they are the ones trying to do several things:
1. Tell society that homosexuality is normal.
2. Tell society that it's not a choice (completely unproven)
3. Change the rules within the military (which WILL have a negative impact in the short term).
4. Force gay history down our throats as just that "gay" history (I don't remember hearing about anyone in any elementary, high school, or college history class being heterosexual, only what they did).
5. Force tolerance of something that goes against some people's religion.
I think that's more than enough reasons for some people to resent having the issues forced down their throats.
From what I've read by most of the posters here who question the MAIN question of "are people born gay?", those who disagree don't disagree with people being homosexual. They don't even disagree that they have homosexual relationships.
What they disagree with is:
1. Trying to convince people that it's "normal"
2. Certain homosexual groups forcing their way of life into society that has no reason to accept it (since it's not a proven fact).
3. Forcing the educational system to teach homosexuality as a normal thing.
So, yeah. I can understand that there's some resentment against the homosexual community. Unfortunately, what they don't realize is that as long as it can't be proven (like race or biological sex), then the more they forceably push the issue, they may get their little victories "marriage, openly serving in the military", but they make more and more of society regard them with contempt.
It's really akin to religious organizations trying to push themselves on society. They chose their way of life, but forcing others to accept it is wrong. No difference, in my opinion.
you don't seem to get it. gays don't have to prove that they were born that way or that same sex relationships are "normal" to me, or to many other people for that matter. it is not something that can be scientifically proven. no, it is not normal to me but it is "normal" for gays. as has been stated by many, it is beyond belief that someone who is heterosexual would choose to live as a gay, a life totally in opposition to their basic sexual nature, and, in doing so, endure being reviled, laughed at, and attacked in order to gain attention or because they want to appear different. as far as the military, gays will continue to serve along side straights and i'm certain it has always been known who was who. they might have some protection now under the law ; it remains to be seen. i know many gays who have no interest in marriage but for those who feel more comfortable with that level of committment, more power to them. i have never heard of any attempts to dispense "gay history". concerning education in the schools, my feeling is that education about different cultures and different lifestyles helps to promote understanding and decreases prejudice.
and yes, there are many religions which have and promote beliefs i find inpossible to accept. while i'm not trying to discredit anyone's religious beliefs ( you brought up the topic ) certainly i cannot understand anyone who believes in the infallibility of a pope or a group who totally is against abortion under any circumstances. but, as contrary to my beliefs as some are, religions ultimately are chosen. they are not a manifestation of a person's basic sexual nature.
you don't seem to get it. gays don't have to prove that they were born that way or that same sex relationships are "normal" to me, or to many other people for that matter.
Agreed. They don't if they don't want anything to change. If they are demanding their rights, then they do... because the rights are based on birth, not on choice. If you are asking society to change ANYTHING, you should have a reason... and "because I said so" won't go too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsy girl
it is not something that can be scientifically proven. no, it is not normal to me but it is "normal" for gays. as has been stated by many, it is beyond belief that someone who is heterosexual would choose to live as a gay, a life totally in opposition to their basic sexual nature, and, in doing so, endure being reviled, laughed at, and attacked in order to gain attention or because they want to appear different.
You'd be surprised at the lengths SOME people will go to to get attention. And if someone feels they are deprived of something... anything... that adds to it. Your argument is an unsubstantiated red herring argument. The choice may be made unconsciously. If you'd read my previous posts, it's not beyond the scope of possibility that people are born neutral - and that society dictates what is normal through family, friends, media, etc. Especially in an individuals formative years where they consciously and unconsciously determine things like morals, sexuality, etc. Our laws are predicated in this country on Christian values. Does that mean we all have to be Christians or ARE Christians because we obey the law? No. Where did we learn to do that? Doing some research on adolescent and pre-adolescent development you'd find that there are many factors that determine who we are or become.
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsy girl
as far as the military, gays will continue to serve along side straights and i'm certain it has always been known who was who. they might have some protection now under the law ; it remains to be seen. i know many gays who have no interest in marriage but for those who feel more comfortable with that level of committment, more power to them.
Your point? My was simple. After 21 years in the military, I know first hand that there are PLENTY of people who have served with gays and dealt with it because of DADT. That has worked. But now a group of people want to change it, you better have a damn good reason why you're forcing your lifestyle on someone else. Blacks had a good reason... born with it. Women had a good reason... born with it. Gays... well... the jury's still out. But it WILL affect good order and discipline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsy girl
i have never heard of any attempts to dispense "gay history". concerning education in the schools, my feeling is that education about different cultures and different lifestyles helps to promote understanding and decreases prejudice.
One... you're under-informed. Do a search on the recent California ruling about teaching gay history to students there.
Second, your forcing your tolerance of accepting abnormal behavior on my child who I try to teach and tell that they have a responsibility to society before themselves. Who are you to tell me that I have to teach my child tolerance? (Not directed at you, it's a rhetorical question). Tolerance is dictated by society, not by a small pocket. If we are teaching tolerance and avoiding predjudice, why stop at homosexuals? Who are you (or the LGBT community) to demand inclusion as normal, but still outcast pedophiles, or those who prefer animals, or those who prefer sex with dead people? Oh... now it's up to a small group to say WE are normal... the line stops AFTER us... got it. If they are born with that sexual deviance, then so are pedophiles, those who prefer bestiality, necrophiliacs, and the list goes on and on... society should just accept them for who they are, too, right? If not, where's your soapbox stand on tolerance and the "decreasing of predjudice" stand on that?
Rathagos,
How will repealing DADT affect good order & discipline? What it comes down to quite simply is that when talking w/fellow soldiers about everyday things such as family, what'd you do on leave, who do you live with, etc....you know, normal everyday talk that goes on between friends & co-workers, the gay soldiers can feel free to mention that oh, I live w/my boyfriend/husband or whatever. There is no pushing an agenda or lifestyle down society's throat. It's called having a conversation.
And no, a gay person does not have to sit in front of a committee and explain why extending the privilege of marriage to them is not extending "special rights" as so many conservatives like to spout but rather it's bringing them up to the same level as heterosexuals. What you (and by you I mean in the general sense) are doing by denying gays the ability to marry who they love simply based on the gender is separating them into a separate "class", discrimination. You are trying to keep down a group of people purely because you feel what they do in their bedroom is icky. That is a backwards way of thinking. This country should be about progression & affording the simple act of marriage & ALL the benefits that go along w/it is ab out the most simple thing this government could do. All it takes is a "ok, yeah this is no big deal, what the heck are we crying about w/this?" & that's it, a done deal. Unfortunately, too many people like to feel special & by feeling special they take things & deny those same things from others. It's that whole superiority complex. Really distasteful.
Last edited by tippinturtle; 07-29-2011 at 01:20 PM..
Agreed. They don't if they don't want anything to change. If they are demanding their rights, then they do... because the rights are based on birth, not on choice. If you are asking society to change ANYTHING, you should have a reason... and "because I said so" won't go too far.
You'd be surprised at the lengths SOME people will go to to get attention. And if someone feels they are deprived of something... anything... that adds to it. Your argument is an unsubstantiated red herring argument. The choice may be made unconsciously. If you'd read my previous posts, it's not beyond the scope of possibility that people are born neutral - and that society dictates what is normal through family, friends, media, etc. Especially in an individuals formative years where they consciously and unconsciously determine things like morals, sexuality, etc. Our laws are predicated in this country on Christian values. Does that mean we all have to be Christians or ARE Christians because we obey the law? No. Where did we learn to do that? Doing some research on adolescent and pre-adolescent development you'd find that there are many factors that determine who we are or become.
Your point? My was simple. After 21 years in the military, I know first hand that there are PLENTY of people who have served with gays and dealt with it because of DADT. That has worked. But now a group of people want to change it, you better have a damn good reason why you're forcing your lifestyle on someone else. Blacks had a good reason... born with it. Women had a good reason... born with it. Gays... well... the jury's still out. But it WILL affect good order and discipline.
One... you're under-informed. Do a search on the recent California ruling about teaching gay history to students there.
Second, your forcing your tolerance of accepting abnormal behavior on my child who I try to teach and tell that they have a responsibility to society before themselves. Who are you to tell me that I have to teach my child tolerance? (Not directed at you, it's a rhetorical question). Tolerance is dictated by society, not by a small pocket. If we are teaching tolerance and avoiding predjudice, why stop at homosexuals? Who are you (or the LGBT community) to demand inclusion as normal, but still outcast pedophiles, or those who prefer animals, or those who prefer sex with dead people? Oh... now it's up to a small group to say WE are normal... the line stops AFTER us... got it. If they are born with that sexual deviance, then so are pedophiles, those who prefer bestiality, necrophiliacs, and the list goes on and on... society should just accept them for who they are, too, right? If not, where's your soapbox stand on tolerance and the "decreasing of predjudice" stand on that?
unless you home school your child you do not have control over what he is taught. that's the local school board's decision ; you don't have to agree with it but as long as your kid is in public school, you do not have total control.
again , teaching gay history is not something i've heard anything about, but if it were going to be an issue anywhere, it's not a surprise that it is coming up in california.
i have never thought people were born "neutral" although i certainly believe that nurturing or the lack of it has a major affect on anyone's- heterosexual or homosexual- sense of self and specifically their sexual identity.
i do not feel, as you apparently do, that gays are in the same category as pedophiles, or people who have sex with animals, corpses, etc. this kind of thinking would suggest that you feel homosexuality is a disease requiring treatment, and i don't agree with this assessment. neither do i believe it is a mental illness that needs to be cured. no, it is not mainstream sexuality. it does deviate from the norm and the majority. to many, and i would suggest to you, it is repugnant, and therefore, needs to remain invisible. in those instances when it does become more visible, it needs to be manifested in behavior that is acceptable to heterosexuals.
this is an opinion forum and these are what i'm expressing. it is not my intent to change your opinions concerning homosexuality, although i don't agree with them. indeed i don't think it would be possible to change your feelings as is also my opinion that many of your ideas about homosexuality are rooted in fear- fear of being tainted in some way, if gays are more accepted into society, and fear of your children being tainted, and ultimately losing control over what is important in your life.
If we are teaching tolerance and avoiding predjudice, why stop at homosexuals? Who are you (or the LGBT community) to demand inclusion as normal, but still outcast pedophiles, or those who prefer animals, or those who prefer sex with dead people? Oh... now it's up to a small group to say WE are normal... the line stops AFTER us... got it.
Did you hear this from fox news? Sounds like something they would say. Apparently you didn't get the memo, but in gay relationships, the relationship is consensual. In the other cases, not so. You don't have to accept anything, just give others the common courtesy to live their life, especially in matters that are none of your business. They aren't imposing their lifestyle on you, rather quite the opposite.
Trust me, we will look back on this and think it was just as bad as any other formerly normal discrimination we as a society have overcome in the past.
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 07-29-2011 at 06:59 PM..
Reason: Deleted personal comment.
Scientists have known for a long time that there are structural and functional differences between the brains of men and women. More recently, studies like those I’ve linked to below, have shown conclusively that there are structural and functional differences between the brains of heterosexuals and homosexuals.
The significance of these studies is that the structural differences were fixed in place before birth and were not likely to be the result of learning or “nurture”.
Along with the twin studies that show that identical twins have a more than 50% chance of both being gay compared to the approximately 5% chance in the general population, and the other studies showing biological differences between gays and straights, I’d say that was fairly conclusive evidence that homosexuality has genetic and biological environmental causes, and is not result of “nurture” for most homosexuals. Fetuses do not "choose" the development of their brain structure.
Add to that, there aren't any credible peer-reviewed studies that show that homosexuality is a choice, or is learned, or is caused by parenting, or by being sexually abused as a child, or is a mental illness.
Interestingly, you don’t tend to find the recent studies below mentioned on any of the main anti-gay propaganda websites. I wonder why? [/font][font=Verdana]Perhaps that is why a lot of anti-gay posters here on CD probably aren’t aware of them and keep claiming “there aren’t studies showing that people are born gay!”
All I tend to see is that old ridiculous strawman article “There is no gay gene!” floating around. Yes, yes, we know there is no single gay gene. Scientists have never claimed there was. Only someone who doesn't have a clue about genetics or human sexuality, would think that human sexuality and orientation was caused by a single gene.
Quote:
Sexual orientation and its basis in brain structure and function.
Current evidence indicates that sexual differentiation of the human brain occurs during fetal and neonatal development and programs our gender identity—our feeling of being male or female and our sexual orientation as hetero-, homo-, or bisexual. This sexual differentiation process is accompanied by many structural and functional brain differences among these groups.
During the intrauterine period the human brain develops in the male direction via direct action of a boy's testosterone, and in the female direction through the absence of this hormone in a girl. During this time, gender identity (the feeling of being a man or a woman), sexual orientation, and other behaviors are programmed.
Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex
Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait. The scans reveal that in gay people, key structures of the brain governing emotion, mood, anxiety and aggressiveness resemble those in straight people of the opposite sex.
PET and MRI show differences in cerebral asymmetry and functional connectivity between homo- and heterosexual subjects
The present study shows sex-atypical cerebral asymmetry and functional connections in homosexual subjects. The results cannot be primarily ascribed to learned effects, and they suggest a linkage to neurobiological entities.http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/06/13/0801566105.full.pdf+html
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 07-30-2011 at 07:45 AM..
Reason: Copyright violation -- please post a link and a "snippet" only, per the TOS
I've been wondering this for a long time- do people really believe that gays are born gay? If so, is there really enough scientific evidence to support this theory?
I am very interested in psychology, and I know well that environment is very important in shaping people in various ways- why is this overlooked and discounted so much when we discuss sexual orientation?
I sincerely apologize if this is not really 'Great Debates' worthy- and this is not a topic to encourage hatred toward anyone, because I don't believe in that sort of thing- but I am legitimately curious about the 'gay gene' theory, what basis for it there is, and if it applies to other sexual 'orientations' as well. If not, why?
I'm coming in on this discussion real late and I don't have time to read all the replies so I'll just tell my personal experience and all I can say is that while I've explored this issue in depth for the last 3 years or so, I'm still very much confused.
First, 3 years ago, my very feminine daughter came out gay and said she had never been attracted to boys, only girls. It was a bit of a shock, as I hadn't seen it coming, but fortunately for me, I'm rather liberal about these things, so I reassured her that she's still my daughter and I love her no matter what. I didn't see much reason to punish her for her tastes/choices/identity, whatever you want to call it.
Then six months later, my ex came out as well after a 23 year marriage and he confided that he had known of this "interest" since he first became sexually aware but was so ashamed and horrified by it that he never acted on it. At 50 though, it got to be too much to hide and it was causing problems in our marriage (as you can well imagine!) but again, he didn't seem gay at all--just a regular, slightly frumpy guy. And I got to thinking--his grandfather was also gay! This man was effeminate though and he was married for a number of years, but his wife had found out at some point and though he never spoke of it, the man didn't take pains to hide his lifestyle either. (What I said when I found out about my husband: thank God that divorce is now an option. I can't imagine what that poor woman went through--I never met her as she had passed away.)
So, is this coincidence, or is there something in the theory about genetics? Both probably, but I spoke with a psychiatrist about it and he said that research is pointing to the fact that genetics may have a very big part in it, though maybe not so directly as whether Megan will get blue eyes from mom or brown eyes from dad. To me, it doesn't really matter, but I do believe that it's not just a matter of choice, because I know for a fact that my ex truly did not wish to be gay, but could no longer deny it. He felt that he had a choice at first, but that changed as he got older.
I personally tend to believe that your orientation is determined by which gender you develop feelings for. I think women are attractive, very much so, but I have never developed feelings for one beyond a close friendship, and have no desire to kiss one ever, so I'm guessing I'm purely straight, but my dd said she can't stand the idea of kissing a boy. I'm not sure I believe it anymore, but the ex swore that he'd had feelings for me, so maybe he is purely bi and we were married a very long time. Who knows?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
