Decision on Prop 8 pending

[MobBoss]

Exactly. They can be in a heterosexual relationship, which is a choice, but they're still gay.

Or maybe they simply....arent.

They still like the same gender even if they're in a mixed-orientation relationship.

You seriously cant believe thats the case in every single circumtance can you?

And you can't simply get rid of your sexual orientation - you can fight it, but you fight it your entire life and it's something terrible to try to become straight.

Nah, its not too terrible. If it were people wouldnt do it.

Like Warpus said, you have a different definition of homosexuality.

Yeah, I actually believe people have choices in regards to it. You dont. Ergo, I actually give people far more credit for being able to be in control of their lives than you do.

A peculiar claim. Do you suggest that molestation by one of your own gender can "convert" a child to homosexuality, or that molestation by one of another gender can cause one to find "refuge" in homosexuality? And, in either case, on what basis do you make this assertion?

No, its not so peculiar at all. In fact, its been researched a bit. Apparently you missed my earlier post: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9452538&postcount=263

 

[warpus]

Yeah, I actually believe people have choices in regards to it. You dont. Ergo, I actually give people far more credit for being able to be in control of their lives than you do.

I don't think you read my post.

You are saying that people are free to choose who they sleep with. That is true, but that's not what makes someone homosexual (or not).

 

[Berzerker]

Yeah, I actually believe people have choices in regards to it. You dont. Ergo, I actually give people far more credit for being able to be in control of their lives than you do.

so you can "control" yourself to the point of being sexually turned on by other men?

anyway, good decision... I dont even like the idea of our freedoms being taken away when the state has a "compelling" interest, but I dont see any reason for denying gays marriage contracts.

 

[Arwon]

Reading a bit more of the ruling.

"Because Proposition 8 disadvantages gays and lesbians without any rational justification, Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."

BAM.

 

[emzie]

No, its not so peculiar at all. In fact, its been researched a bit. Apparently you missed my earlier post: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9452538&postcount=263

And since the majority, vast majority, of child molesters are straight, and following your logic, straight people should not be allowed to have access to children, lest they molest those children, influencing some of the victims to become gay, causing gay marriage.

 

[MobBoss]

I don't think you read my post.

You are saying that people are free to choose who they sleep with. That is true, but that's not what makes someone homosexual (or not).

And your not reading mine apparently. I am saying they can choose that as well.

And since the majority, vast majority, of child molesters are straight, and following your logic, straight people should not be allowed to have access to children, lest they molest those children, influencing some of the victims to become gay, causing gay marriage.

You err greatly, as I dont propose anything in regards to that and thus offer no logic to that particular study except in the fact that it gives decent evidence that homosexuality simply isnt a genetic/born issue and that behavior and environment have effects as well.

Speaking of which:

@Cutlass. I am still waiting for your reply to that. Very much so.

 

[emzie]

You err greatly, as I dont propose anything in regards to that and thus offer no logic to that particular study except in the fact that it gives decent evidence that homosexuality simply isnt a genetic/born issue and that behavior and environment have effects as well.

It would be more convincing if you weren't left explaining the other 55% of gay men and 78% of lesbians.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

it's nice to know that in the future homosexuals will finally get equal rights, while those who opposed it based on fairy tales will be six feet under and being eaten by worms. bon appetit!

 

[MobBoss]

It would be more convincing if you weren't left explaining the other 55% of gay men and 78% of lesbians.

So, science doesnt convince you? /meh.

But I never said the findings were definitive. I merely said that suggest a casual implication that not all homosexuality is merely genetic/chemical, but behavioral/conditioning as well.

Tell you what...you have a legitimate study to refute what this one indicates, by all means link it up. If not, then at least acknowledge the findings and move on.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Does Christianity lay any more restrictions upon marriage besides: it has to be a man and a woman?

 

[Newbunkle]

As I pointed out that evidence is all around us on a daily basis as we see people making choices on their sexuality all the time. To say what you say is to simply ignore reality.

Maybe they're bisexual.

Tell you what, can you point me to a good study that has found that gay gene to prove that its 100% born?

Something doesn't have to be written in genes to make you born with it. Hence why you can get XX males and XY females.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Again on that issue

Sexuality isn't a binary thing. Some people are gayer than the 20's, some people are more 80's gay and some people are as straight as the 50's.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I don;t really care very much about the issue, but am a bit upset about how riled up the decision got my dad, how I suspect it will be mentioned by my family's church's culture-warrior pastor, and how this will likely influence the comming election season.

Your reasoning is flawed. If one were to accept your reasoning, one would say that all virgins are asexual, including those who are Onanist Virgins. Your waters are further muddied if you consider Onanist Virgins with tendencies for homosexual stimulation and those with tendencies for heterosexual stimulation, because under your definition, they are completely asexual.

I don't think there are many virgins who married their deceased elder brother's wife in accordance to the custom of levirate marriage but chose to pull out before ejaculation when having sex with her so as to prevent impregnating her with what would be legally considered his brother's heir, with the intent of claiming the elder brother's double portion of their father's inheritance for himself rather then providing the widow a son to take care if her. Onanism is really a very specific sin, motivated by greed rather than a desire to release one's sexual frustrations.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Onanism is really a very specific sin, motivated by greed rather than a desire to release one's sexual frustrations.

Sadly, when most people say "onanism" they mean "masturbation" nowadays...

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Those people are total onanists though.

 

[Haseri]

If homosexuality (or even bisexuality) was a choice, then how does one explain homosexual animals, creatures driven largely by instinct?

 

[Frank Drebin]

oh, has the great "what causes homosexuality" game already started?

i tell you what, it's completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. (and to most matters, for that matter.)

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

If I was elected ruler of the Universe I would ban marriage altogether.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The 70's caused homosexuality.

I'm a bit fixated on decades today it seems. It needs to stop ... now.

 

[El_Machinae]

No, because a black woman marrying a white man is still normal heterosexual behavior.

Well, if you're going to ignore the genetic discrimination, then your rebuttal to the analogy with interracial marriage doesn't stand. You said that this civil rights battle was different because race wasn't a choice. I point out that neither is your sex (and, for some, maybe their sexual disposition).

Now you're just insisting that interracial marriage is still heterosexual. Well, okay. But it doesn't refute the idea that this civil rights movement is very similar for the civil rights movement pushing for interracial marriage.

In the past, a black woman could choose whether to be attracted to a white man or a black man. If she fell in love with the white man, she'd be denied marriage because of her genetics. Nowadays, a black man could choose whether to fall in love with a white man; if he did fall in love, he'd be denied marriage because of genetic factors.

Both societies are quite happy to discriminate based on genetic heritage. And the arguments used are going to be very similar.

I am saying they can choose that as well.

How would you know? All we have is a bunch of anecdotal evidence. Just because some choose to act straight, it does not mean that everyone feels like they have to choose. It's a bit like taste buds: you don't choose whether you find certain things sweet or bitter. But, there's still a bunch of food that you can decide to like, if you want to. I didn't choose to like chocolate, but I chose to like curry. But a preference for curry certainly has epigenetic factors.

Your position doesn't leave you with certainty, scientifically. All that you're doing is using your own urges to judge the stories of other people. This is silly because people don't feel the same urges.