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.
One of the biggest barriers to LGBT rights in America is the fact the two sides disagree over what homosexuality even is.
In the eyes of many conservatives, homosexuality is a lifestyle choice. Because it's a choice, they believe its their right to discriminate against those who make that choice. To them, marriage equality isn't equality, its a special privilege granted to those who choose a relationship other than that of the norm. To them, the homosexual could simply marry someone of the opposite gender and would be equal. The thing is, if their definition of homosexuality was correct, they would have some very valid points.
However, science tells us something different. It tells us that sexual orientation is an immutable, unchangeable trait. It tells us that it isn't any different from gender or race. Sexual orientation, like gender identity, is at the core of who a person is. Even if a gay man never has a relationship with another man he is still gay. Therefore, refusing to serve them or allow them to marry because of an immutable characteristic is in fact discrimination on the same level as race or gender discrimination. Conversion therapy does not work because you cannot change an immutable characteristic. Even ex-gay "success stories" will usually admit they still experience some degree of unwanted same-sex attraction. If the conservatives were right and it was a choice, why would that be?
Until conservatives are willing to accept the science that says sexual orientation is an immutable trait, they will not support LGBT rights. They will cling to the idea that its a choice to justify their discrimination and disgust.
Will you accept the science that a heterosexual couple is not remotely the same as a homosexual couple?
Would it matter? You'll find some way to deny reality as usual:
Quote:
Of respondents, 77.3% had 1 or more lifetime male sexual partners, 70.5% had a lifetime history of vaginal intercourse, 17.2% had a lifetime history of anal intercourse, and 17.2% had a lifetime history of a sexually transmitted disease. Exactly 5.7% reported having had a male sexual partner during the past year.
The government needs to either get out of the marriage business entirely or stand by the traditional definition of marriage. The current tax structure of the government makes marriage essentially a subsidy. When you subsidize a behavior you get more of it. If we attempt to defy common sense, logic, and mother nature by lifting homosexual marriage to the same status of actual marriage we are in essence subsidizing it and promoting it. I don't think anyone really has a problem with gays playing house together in the privacy of their own homes but having the government actively promote the lifestyle or equate it with a real marriage is a bridge too far.
I agree. My understanding is the government originally got into the marriage business to promote stable family units so children would grow up with both fathers and mothers. Then they gave tax breaks to help support the families.
If the government no longer wants to promote that traditional family unit then they need to get out of the business. I don't see that happening because it is so ingrained into our complex society. Think of all the legal or medical documents that require you to list your spouse out there. How do you prove that you are married if not for the government?
One of the biggest barriers to LGBT rights in America is the fact the two sides disagree over what homosexuality even is.
In the eyes of many conservatives, homosexuality is a lifestyle choice. Because it's a choice, they believe its their right to discriminate against those who make that choice. To them, marriage equality isn't equality, its a special privilege granted to those who choose a relationship other than that of the norm. To them, the homosexual could simply marry someone of the opposite gender and would be equal. The thing is, if their definition of homosexuality was correct, they would have some very valid points.
However, science tells us something different. It tells us that sexual orientation is an immutable, unchangeable trait. It tells us that it isn't any different from gender or race. Sexual orientation, like gender identity, is at the core of who a person is. Even if a gay man never has a relationship with another man he is still gay. Therefore, refusing to serve them or allow them to marry because of an immutable characteristic is in fact discrimination on the same level as race or gender discrimination. Conversion therapy does not work because you cannot change an immutable characteristic. Even ex-gay "success stories" will usually admit they still experience some degree of unwanted same-sex attraction. If the conservatives were right and it was a choice, why would that be?
Until conservatives are willing to accept the science that says sexual orientation is an immutable trait, they will not support LGBT rights. They will cling to the idea that its a choice to justify their discrimination and disgust.
Not all conservatives. I think a distinct minority elects that view.
True. It is a biological event in most cases.
It is still an aberration of nature as anyone can see male to female attraction should be the natural result. Properly formed members of the species recoils at traits which are aberrations of nature- suicide, psychopaths, incest,etc. to include homosexuality.Which is why I say if it were truly a natural people would try it. We develop interests in the other sex at/about puberty but those sexual acts which derive pleasure are learned ones for the most part. If homosexuality were truly normal then heterosexuals would attempt or visualize it but No, instead we recoil at the idea as we would if viewing having sex with our parents, siblings or a minor if we are adults.
Of course, homosexuals and such wish to be seen as normal but seriously I wager most heteros think thanks I am not one of them much as you would look at someone who is a dwarf or who has a severe intellectual disability.
And what hetero parent is actually happy their child is a homo. or bi or confused gender?
First of all, "science" has not demonstrated that the desire to engage in homosexual conduct is genetically based. On that, you are flatly mistaken, regardless of what someone told you on MSNBC or some extreme far-left blog.
Second, to the extent that this is a scientific hypothesis, which it certainly is, science has also come to the same conclusions about gambling, alcoholism, and of course other sexual tendencies like pedophilia, bestiality, etc. These are all temptations that people who have them appear to have from early days, and in most cases, those temptations may be denied and constrained, but they usually never entirely go away.
We are all tempted without any choice that we can discern, but we choose to act on our temptations. The temptation is not the sin, the action is. It is not the desire that is the sin, as most people have very limited controls over their desires. It is the fulfillment of those desires that is the sin.
Virtually nobody is refusing to serve homosexuals based solely on their sexual "orientation", as I am confident you are well aware. As far as homosexual "marriage," there is no such thing. There never has been and there never will be, this current bizarre homosexual "marriage" fad notwithstanding.
Whether the desire of homosexuals is immutable or not, I do not know. However, there is no solid science that backs that assertion up the way that you have cavalierly insisted that it does.
Nevertheless, just like other types of temptations, such as gambling, alcoholism, and of course other sexual tendencies like pedophilia, bestiality, etc.; just because the temptation is there, that does not justify the conduct. Just because we feel like doing something, that does not make it right or alleviate its status as a sinful behavior.
^^^Worth repeating!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618
I think the American Psychiatric Association is a reputable, unbiased source. The Family Research Council isn't.
Every other wrong Christian-conservatives compare homosexuality to harms the person or somebody else. Murder is taking somebody's life. Gambling and alcoholism harms the individual. Pedophilia harms children. Bestiality harms the individual and is animal cruelty. Homosexuality between consenting adults harms nobody. And yes, I am aware of the statistics put out by the Family Research Council (an official hate group) on this subject regarding the disease and shortened life expectancy of homosexuals. My guess is you would see similar results if you took a look at the most promiscuous scenes in the heterosexual world as well.
The prohibition against homosexuality is purely religious in nature, similar to the Jewish prohibition against pork, which means it has no place in the laws of a secular nation.
Other than a religious objection, what is wrong with two consenting adults of the same-sex falling in love? Who is it hurting? Answer is NOBODY.
Only themselves until they step on others with it while pursuing the "agenda" (for those that think it doesn't exist: The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media ) Seriously, if you look for the health articles that I reference above, these people need help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bettafish
Wrong. No evidence shows sexual orientation must be 100% genetic or even prenatal.
Also, race is not really a scientific term.
Yes, I have yet to see that "reference".
Quote:
Originally Posted by brownbagg
what right do you not have that everybody else have.
Other than "gay marriage", a deviation of "marriage" but with the same entitlements (for those that think there are some), I don't see what they want. This idea of being a "protected" class is insane but then........
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618
Most religious conservatives would tell a gay person to either get conversion therapy or remain celibate for life.
I wouldn't. I would avoid them as I think they already know what I think. I choose to associate with people who share my moral values. They can do as they please IF they would just stay out of my face.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Park
In one sense you are right. Homosexuality is not "normal" in the mathematical or statistical sense. It is not normal to have blond hair or stand over 6'3" tall or have an IQ over 150 either. Gay folks, along with Bisexuals (which I suspect have much larger numbers than people give credit for) and Transgender people are still in the minority. No one disputes that.
However the wit Dorothy Parker once said: "Heterosexuality is not normal, just common."
You are entirely wrong and misinformed if you believe it is not "natural" however ... it is perfectly natural. It occurs in scores of species in the animal kingdom. If we are talking about human beings I can assure it has existed throughout the centuries and even millenia and has been found in every society and country around the world.
Seriously, do homosexuals actually bring up the argument that lower forms of animals are homosexuals? I sure hope not as I would not want my behavior equated with that of lower forms of animals. Ever been to the zoo? Think about just what your household pets do and if your son was doing that, licking themselves, eating unmentionable things, would you consider that OK? Sexual intercourse while families are standing around at the zoo watching the animals? Picking bugs off an animal nearby and eating them? I would just rather be compared to my own species Also, animals "riding" one another has to do with dominance, not that they are homosexual.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynternight
There's tonnes of data supporting the immutable nature of same sex attraction but you, in typical fashion, choose to ignore it. [MOD CUT/trolling]
Please list your source? Should be easy since there are "tonnes of data". Why the heck aren't sources being linked in?
You can find data on both sides of the issue. It is a draw which leaves everyone making their own decision on what causes homosexuality or other sexual deviations amount to. This is just like the "surveys" and "polls", they say what the people taking/doing them want them to say.
Rights? What rights don't homosexuals have? Gay marriage or are we talking about the right to have to force others into their web of sins? I'm just not going there. Unnatural, unhealthy (both physically and psychologically) and for those that follow Biblical Law, sinful. Minds are not changing. The Supreme Court will never be making a decision on what is moral and what is not as they are not my God.
Asians are about 5% of the US population, with that percentage on the rise. Worldwide Asians are about 60% of the total human population, so to compare them to homosexuals at only 2.3% is beyond absurd.
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.
