(06-18-2012, 11:08 PM)Bridge Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting opinion (no, really), but it is not entirely logical. I don't want to twist your words, but by your definition of sexuality, homosexual virgins that get raped by the opposite sex are heterosexual. If you are turned on by a certain gender, then it is not unrealistic to pursue sex with that gender. So it really is a nonsequitur that sexuality=choice because celibacy!=confirmation. If you think about a word during conversation, then it is what you want to say. Just because you didn't actually say it doesn't mean the word changed. Y'know?
Playing the old exception card now aren't we?
I like to believe all my opinions are nonsensical so I can have somebody shed some light on it and teach me something new.
(06-19-2012, 12:09 AM)Gharren Wrote: [ -> ]No matter what you think, but this is simply wrong. You can have sex with the opposite gender and still be homosexual. You can't alter your sexuality, therefore it's not a choice. It's simple as that.
If sexuality would be a choice, how could anyone choose to be a homosexual, with all the biases, discrimination and problems in social life?
Greetings,
Gharren
I see what you mean here and even re-read my previous statements and made a conclusion that I was wrong. Realizing that the actual act of the sex is caused by being attracted to a certain gender/person; this you cannot control.
Hrm, biases and discrimination are things that don't bother be in particular, but bother others. True be told, if you are truly happy about a decision your made with no one hurting in the process, you have ever right to ignore all of the disorganized hatred and whathaveyou.
(06-19-2012, 12:09 AM)Gharren Wrote: [ -> ]No matter what you think, but this is simply wrong. You can have sex with the opposite gender and still be homosexual. You can't alter your sexuality, therefore it's not a choice. It's simple as that.
If sexuality would be a choice, how could anyone choose to be a homosexual, with all the biases, discrimination and problems in social life?
Would you allow choice to be limited only in the person, animal or object that the sexual act is directed to? If you question my inclusion of animals and objects, then you should likewise question your belief of being born a certain way. For if a person be labelled with a sexuality before ever committing an act towards said sexuality, wouldn't it be likewise right to declare that a person was born a sex toy addict or with beastiality? Would considering this not direct one towards the idea that the only thing natural within a person's sexuality is only their desire to self pleasure, regardless of the method chosen to satisfy? For if attraction were not nuture but nature, you could not deny anyone
any form of sexuality; afterall, they were "born with it."
(06-19-2012, 12:34 AM)Miss Rigi Wrote: [ -> ]Even if sexuality were a choice, who are we to deny an individual this choice?
"We" are those who would likewise deny people choices other than homosexuality and prove to be in the right in doing so. Yet, when people choose to deny others homosexuality it shouldn't be taken within the same context as denying others different, so-called choices?
What you keep calling talent is nothing other than a genetic predisposition that can or not be worked on by the individual. I rather not even comment on the rest of the discussion.
We're already a corrupt society full of addictions(no, I'm not talking about drugs, which are the less problematic addictions for our society), and it is so easy to put some idea into people's minds.
For all you can say murder may not be wrong, and yes, there's a genetic predisposition for it(Child abuse generally triggers it). Is it right to kill people?
Jeez, somethings not even the Devil himself can make up...
I wonder where does this road lead to now... if somewhere.
I regret starting this thread
(06-19-2012, 03:04 AM)Dagrocks Wrote: [ -> ]I regret starting this thread
Who knew such a controversial topic could end with people that have such polar opposite opinions flaming each other over the course of 17 pages? You should have made a thread about a safer topic, i.e. racism or sexism, that would've ended much better
I jest of course, but how could you not have seen this coming?
(06-19-2012, 01:41 AM)Your Computer Wrote: [ -> ] (06-19-2012, 12:09 AM)Gharren Wrote: [ -> ]No matter what you think, but this is simply wrong. You can have sex with the opposite gender and still be homosexual. You can't alter your sexuality, therefore it's not a choice. It's simple as that.
If sexuality would be a choice, how could anyone choose to be a homosexual, with all the biases, discrimination and problems in social life?
Would you allow choice to be limited only in the person, animal or object that the sexual act is directed to? If you question my inclusion of animals and objects, then you should likewise question your belief of being born a certain way. For if a person be labelled with a sexuality before ever committing an act towards said sexuality, wouldn't it be likewise right to declare that a person was born a sex toy addict or with beastiality? Would considering this not direct one towards the idea that the only thing natural within a person's sexuality is only their desire to self pleasure, regardless of the method chosen to satisfy? For if attraction were not nuture but nature, you could not deny anyone any form of sexuality; afterall, they were "born with it."
(06-19-2012, 12:34 AM)Miss Rigi Wrote: [ -> ]Even if sexuality were a choice, who are we to deny an individual this choice?
"We" are those who would likewise deny people choices other than homosexuality and prove to be in the right in doing so. Yet, when people choose to deny others homosexuality it shouldn't be taken within the same context as denying others different, so-called choices?
Beastiality and homosexuality are two different things, and I really don't see how you can compare them. Yes, someone could be born really fucked up and for some reason want to bone a horse, same goes for someone being born homosexual. The difference is though that a guy finds another guy that he loves, there's a chance that that person would love them back. In that situation both members of the party would be ok with it, and would both want to partake in said sex. Now if you drive out to the nearest farm, find some horse and... well, do things to it, it does not have any affection for you, and I'm sure it wouldn't want to partake in whatever you're doing to it. Not only that, but it can damage the animal physically (depending on the size of the animal and what not), making it animal abuse. The most that could happen in two men having anal sex is one of them getting an STD, and in that case it would be their fault since they wanted and were ok with doing something that could potentially lead to getting such diseases. Those two choices are different, when someone takes part in beastiality the only purpose it serves is to get pleasure, but with homosexuality there is actually room for a more intimate feelings.
GOD that was awkward to write.
(06-19-2012, 03:14 AM)andyrockin123 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-19-2012, 03:04 AM)Dagrocks Wrote: [ -> ]I regret starting this thread
Who knew such a controversial topic could end with people that have such polar opposite opinions flaming each other over the course of 17 pages? You should have made a thread about a safer topic, i.e. racism or sexism, that would've ended much better
I jest of course, but how could you not have seen this coming?
I saw a little bit of fighting coming, but I didn't expect some stupid shit being posted, and some weird explanations about ancient Greeks and stuuuff.
the topic went on nice but it all starts when either an atheist or religious invidual states something like this:Atheist: Religionz for stupid people, its evil or i blame religion its a wicked thing.. Or:Christian: homosexuals are not normal and should die and go to hell cuz god doesnt allow it.
seriously why do people always point fingers at each other
I think that homosexuality will proprally be more accepted in the future. For example: not for so long ago women were not alowed to vote. Which seem like a obvious thing for us now that women are alowed to vote. in switzerland women didn't have right to vote in local elections intill 1990. What i wanted to say is it will probly be the same thing with
homosexuality, that it will be more common and more accepted which i think is good.