I would "accept" it in the same way I would "accept" my child being heterosexual. In that I do not see it as something I have to "accept" at all in the first place. The word "accept" to me speaks of compromise, disappointment, resignation, loss, failure, or like something has to be justified somehow. None of those things would be true. They are who they are any their sexuality will be essentially irrelevant to me. There is nothing TO "accept" for me.
To think some people lose their child to disease or accidents or other deaths. Or they are kidnapped and lost, with the parent not even knowing if they are alive or dead. Some people watch their children get conditions that do not kill them, but cause physical or mental decline so they literally watch their own child disappear before them. And some parents watch their childs get taken by lives of drugs or crime.
And in a world populated by that level of agony and grief..... there are some parents obsessing over who their child falls in LOVE with? That their child might find love and happiness with someone they personally do not approve of? Get. Over. Yourselves. Is all I can say to such "people".
As a parent all I want is my children to grow up happy, loved, and as cared for by a partner as they care for that partner. The genitals that happen to occupy the underwear of the person who gives them that, could not be less relevant to me if I tried.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1
If a parent has a kid who turns out to be homosexual, those things are out the window.
|
Not necessarily. MANY homosexuals find ways to reproduce, usually through things like surrogacy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1
So aside from the sickening feeling a parent might get at the thought of their daughter or son engaged in homo acts, the worst part is no grand kids.
|
Would it not be more sickening that the parent is sitting around imagining their child engaged in ANY sexual acts? Is it something you think parents sit around picturing much?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logan Savage
Should be legal to cull them just like a farmer would cull such a defective animal from his herd .
|
Yeah history has seen the result of that approach before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logan Savage
Even in the animal world nature takes its course & males & females seek out each other , otherwise living things such as humans & animals would quickly become extinct .
|
Even that "fact" comes with a whole host of caveats. Actually those of us who work in the field of biology could tell you that quite often species that survive VERY well have MANY elements within it that never procreate.
So for something that impinges upon procreation..... asexuality, sterility, homosexuality, or anything else..... to cause a species to go extinct.... you would require a significant % of that species to have that issue. And homosexuality in our species is not even REMOTELY close to that threshold.
Take hive species for example..... many insects..... or mammals like the mole rat...... VERY significant %s of their species are non-reproducing. Yet both the species AND that non-reproducing trait are surviving quite nicely. No extinction or evolutionary dead ends in sight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NxtGen
Accepting the reality that ones child has a mental illness can be difficult for some, but approving of it and encouraging it is not the same as accepting it.
|
You might want to bring that up on a thread ABOUT mental illness. This is not that thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeclanMadden
Because they don't all enter the world that way. That's a myth purported by liberals pushing an agenda.
|
^ Citations needed. Also interesting to consider whether you think heterosexuals are "born that way" either?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeclanMadden
Now if you want to break out the shovel and start splitting hairs over what "gay" means, you may as well go outside and speak into an empty trash can. Because YES, it does matter who you have sex with.
|
Except no it does not. Homosexuality refers only to who you are ATTRACTED to. Not who you have sex with. Many people who are homosexual for example suppress that side of themselves and force themselves into the straight life style, find a partner, get married, have children, the works. They might be HAVING sex with the opposite sex, but they are still homosexual.
Similarly, just as a point of comparison, a virgin may be heterosexual. Because they are ATTRACTED to the opposite sex. The fact they are not having, and never have had, does not change what their sexuality is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roaddog
Nobody is born gay, no gay gene no dna test no nothing, it's a man created social mental disorder.
|
Being born gay would not necessitate a "gay gene" however. The people who suggest homosexuality is genetic are not actually postulating the existence of a gay gene. That is a common error/myth perpetuated mostly by science writers in the media who do not actually know science.
Any evidence for it being a mental disorder however, I am all ears to hear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeclanMadden
Look, we get it. If they were "born that way", it ends the discussion.
|
Not really. I do not think it actually matters either way. Whether they are born that way, or choose to be that way, is irrelevant to me. What is relevant to me ONLY is whether there is any moral or ethical basis for indicting what they actually DO with their life, and other people.
For example if I learned tomorrow that pedophiles were "born that way" that would not change my opinion that they should not act on their sexuality. Because there are moral and ethical reasons arguing against what they want to do (mostly centering on the concept of "informed consent").
This is not so of homosexuals. Whether they are homosexual by nature or nurture or choice.... at the end of the day I see no reason morally or ethically to be against the sexual actions of consensual adults. I see nothing wrong with homosexuality, it's acts, or it's marriage under law.
The "born that way" discussion is just a pile of red herrings large enough to make fish stew for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogburn
Premarital sex is immoral and may result in damnation in hell.
|
Except there is no moral or ethical arguments against it it seems, least of all from you. Merely asserting something to be immoral does not magically make it so. I want to know the basis for decreeing it so.
Further I am not seeing any evidence there even is a "hell" or a "god. If you want to bring such concepts into the discussion, it might be useful if you are at least willing to ATTEMPT to offer some level of arguments, evidence, data or reasoning that such things even exist.
Otherwise we can all just make up whatever the hell we like. You know 1000 studies show that homosexual parents are MUCH better at bringing up children? No I will not be citing any of those studies, you just have to take it on faith they exist.
See how it works?
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310
I love my child unconditionally except for that deviant lifestyle choice. To me it's disgusting.
|
Again, these people are telling us in their droves that it is not a "choice".
However, you do realize personal disgust = deviant lifestyle right?
It does not matter how much YOU are disgusted by it, that does not mean IT has anything wrong with it. I, for example, am personally disgusted at the sight of morbidly obese people squashed into lyca cycling outfits. That is MY problem however, not theirs, any my PERSONAL disgust is not a measure of the rightness, or wrongness, of their actions.
Similarly homosexuality might be disgusting to you..... but that does not make it wrong, immoral, or deviant. I myself ALSO find the idea of having sex with another man repellent. I would never, ever ever, want to do it. But that is ME. It does not make anything THEY do wrong.
One of my co-workers is married to a very morbidly obese woman that he presumably has sex with too. Their sex is ALSO disgusting to ME. That does not make him a deviant for wanting sex that I do not, does it?