By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - How will homosexuality will affect us in the future,Are you happy about it?

Esmoreit on 30 June 2008
luinil said:
Esmoreit said:

Gutenberg's bible-printer was considered a devil's machine by conservatives then.

My real question up for debate was in the last point: Why do certain groups want other groups not to be able to go public with their sexual preferences, political ideas or religious thoughts? 

(1)Gutenburg I am sure would be a conservative while the church would not be. The people that want to stifle free speech of any kind in the USA are not the conservatives, but the die-hard liberals scum in the media and elected officials. They want to kill Talk Radio. They want to enact hate speech laws. They want to do away with secret ballots for unionizing. They want to do so much more. Why is it that Christianity is constantly derided and nobody but Conservatives (In my experience) speak up for it (2)?

(3)I couldn't care less what people do in private, as long as you do not harm someone in the process. Leave the children out of it and make it consensual and I don't have an issue. Doesn't mean I want to know about it, nor that I agree with it. I am tired of my values and the values of my country being constantly assailed from both sides, inside and out. How long can a structure stand if its foundation is destroyed?

1: As stated, during those times the church would rather be denoted as conservative. People like Galileo and Copernicus with for the time progressive ideas where almost burnt on the stake, unless they swallowed their words.

2: I think it works both ways. Protests happen on both sides of the fence (I'm surprised no one has thrown in the "American soldiers die in Iraq as a punishment for God for allowing gay people to exist" group yet). But you are right that liberals are just as guilty of killing the freedom of speech.

3: Here we have an issue. Keeping it private is what is hurting gay people for a long time now. They should be able to hold hands in public as heterosexual people might do it. Hell, they might even kiss in public(though rather not - heterosexual people slobbering is equally unattractive though). And how can we keep childeren out of this? Shield them of from a colonized state especially made for gays? the more they come into contact with different cultures and ideas, the better. Let kids figure out for themselves what they enjoy.

I'll not go into you're last point. I wish I could put up a video of a Dutchman perfectly debating why the religious should not have sole-right on feeling insulted once their believes are questioned but that's going off topic. 



The Doctor will see you now  Promoting Lesbianism -->

                              

Around the Network
Starmistkarmic on 30 June 2008
The Ghost of RubangB said:
superchunk said:
To me, everything about you is coded in your genes. Even your tastes, sex included. Granted those tastes can have minor transitions through time, i.e. I have always disliked pickles and mustard, however, within the last few years I have become to enjoy mustard on my food. Now, I personally think that is because I never special order food and have been eating mustard occasionally for so long I just got used to it.

You were born with X amount of taste buds, and as you grew up, your tongue expanded, making the taste buds farther apart.  Everybody has a few things that gross them out early on, because everything is a taste explosion to kids, especially in the bitter department (coffee, wine, beer, grapefruit, brussel sprouts, etc.).  Some people still have more than average taste buds, and some people have fewer.  25% of people are supertasters (hypersensitive to bitterness), 50% are "average", and 25% are non-tasters (very insensitive to bitterness).  There's even a way to measure this, but I forgot what it is.  It's easy to find online, and you can do it at home and it's hilarious.

psrock said:

Can someone explain to me why would anyone choose to be gay?

Because they want to be hated for their whole life, OBVIOUSLY.

HappySqurriel said:

 

 Being "gay" in the animal kingdom is quite a bit different from being "gay" in the human sense... In fact sex in general is quite a bit different being that most animals do not have sex for personal pleasure.

In the animal kingdom homosexuality is more often a sign of a dominant and submissive behavior which is more related to sexual activity in a prison than a bedroom.


While many animals have different ideas about sex, they overlap with human ideas on the subject in several ways.

In fact, dolphins fall in love with each other and have families and very intense emotional bonds.  When some tuna fishermen kill a dolphin, their "spouse" will actually commit suicide out of grief.

And Bonobos are known for having bisexual orgies and even trading food for sexual favors, i.e. monkey prostitution!

 

And the prison gayness you mentioned is very common in any situation that involves all men and no women, like pirates, sailors, coal miner, cowboys, basically any macho idea where it's all manly men and no women around... they're fucking.

 

Now here's the fun part: that doesn't make them gay.  People's sexualities are not defined by a one time act but are actually defined by who they love in a romantic sense.  I could go fuck 10 dudes right now on a dare if you paid me $500, and that wouldn't make me gay.  That would make me $500 richer.  What makes me straight is that I'm spending the rest of my life with my wife.  Sexualities are defined by emotional desires, not physical acts.  Booyah!

 


You are great and wise. Disagree, slightly, with one part, though: wouldn't making $500 make you at least a wee bit gay? I know $500 would make me happy as hel.

The Ghost of RubangB on 30 June 2008
luinil said:
Million said:

Esmorit : My main concern with the acceptance of homosexuality is the influence that it'll have on the upcoming generations , the youger more easily influenced minds. we also have no idea what kinda effect this  will have on us.

 

Actually we do have an idea effect it will have if we look at history. Soddom, Gomorah, Greece, and Rome to name a few.

 

IN THE BOOK OF EZEKIEL:

Ezekiel asks G-d why he destroyed Sodom and Gomorah, and G-d says to Ezekiel: "Their sin was selfishness.  They were greedy and gave nothing to the poor."

 

Did somebody tell you it was because they had the gay?  Somebody lied to you and was cherrypicking from the Bible to get you to use religion to believe their agenda.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

psrock on 30 June 2008
DMeisterJ said:
I don't have a problem with gay people. I've had a few friends in High School that were gay and I didn't even know that they were. And they were some good friends to me over those four years. So that's not a problem. I do have a problem with flamboyantly gay people. Guys who wear lip gloss, or are loud, pop their gum, smack their lips, etc. I also don't like gay girls. Nothing about girl-on-girl action remotely turns me on... It's simply disgusting to me. That being said, I have no problem with gay girls either. As long as they're not too "dike-y".

The problem is that it's taboo to be gay, so people tend to hide it (especially in the black community), I remember making fun of gay people all the time when I was younger, so people hide it, and have gay sex with other guys, don't protect themselves, then pass on HIV/AIDS to their female partners. I think if people were more open and accepting of gayness, HIV/AIDS numbers would drastically reduce.

I compute sexual preference to a choice. Much like when you go to a restaurant and order a drink. Do you want lemonade or coke? I don't get mad when people don't choose lemonade (my fav. drink), so why should you hate on people who don't share your sexual preference. And generally, when I'm talking to my friends and whatnot, we're not sharing sexual exploits, or anything like that (not that I've done anything >_>). It's everyone's choice to be what sexual preference they like, and it's their decision to like or not like the same sex, and it's none of my business. If I'm friends with someone that's gay, but they're still there for me, and are cool to hang around with, I don't see a problem with it.

I'm not too sure what that had to do with the OP, but that's my $0.02.

Let me try again?

So you are saying that you capable of being attracted to a man,  if you choose to?

For the amount of abuse gay people have gone through in the balck commmunity, the horrorfying threatment they are receiving in islamic countries and all the songs written about them deserving to die, I frankly dont see why it would a choice at all, unless they are suicidal.

 



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
The Ghost of RubangB on 30 June 2008
hsrob said:
There was some very famous and oft quoted research done in the 60's that put the numbers at 10% for males and >5% for females (working from memory). A lecture series that i attended at Uni said the original study was working from a very biased population, and that the numbers are close to 5% males, 2-3% females and that it's consistent across culture. With the caveate that it's quite hard to get very accurate data on this.

 

That was the Kinsey Reports (before the 60s), but if the numbers were a little off, that's news to me.  I thought they were backed up by a few more recent studies, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt if you've heard that from a reputable source recently.

I also heard that the numbers might've been inflated during the Kinsey reports, because the specific wording he used was "Have you ever been brought to orgasm by a person of the same sex?"  There are non-gay people who can say this, and Kinsey wasn't taking that into account.  This was also right after World War 2, which meant very recently a huge chunk of the American male population was alone with each other and ready to fight and afraid to die.  This leads to a lot of last minute experimenting.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

Around the Network
Retrasado on 30 June 2008
Kasz216 said:
Retrasado said:
Kasz216 said:
Retrasado said:
Kasz216 said:
Retrasado said:

has it ever been conclusively proven that people can be born gay? I mean it defies logic to me because such individuals would be unable to reproduce and any "gay gene" would be eliminated from the genome fairly quickly imo.

If the answer to above question is "yes, there is a gay gene." I don't really care, but regardless, I will physically harm any guy who starts hitting on me. *shudder*

If the answer is "no, there is not a gay gene." I will avoid them. If they start hitting on me, well, prepare for Judgment Day....

Animals are born gay.... people are animals... so yeah. I'd say it's been conclusively proven. Genes are pretty complicated by the way... so it's more complicated then you'd think. After all redheads are still going strong. It's likely a combination of many genes as sexuality goes across a large range of prefrence and just recessive genes.

There isn't an animal in nature that's 100% straight that i'm aware of.

Penguin's I believe are the most gay.

no, that's not what I meant. I meant show me a reputable scientific research project that conslusively proved that being gay is a genetic issue. I personally have yet to see one and as such I doubt the proposition's accuracy for the aforementioned reasons of natural selection.

 

How about a study that shows the brains of gay men are different then straight men?

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html?cnn=yes

There have also been many twin studies where peolple who have a twin were MUCH more likely to be gay. Either Fraternal or Twin. Of course it's not 100% considering the attitude people have about gay people.

 

 

That doesn't prove anything. The statement being made is that being gay is a genetic variation and I have yet to see any research on the subject of a gay gene. A paper or two documenting reseach into the human genome and pinpointing a genetic variation in gay people that causes them to be gay is what I would like to see. Until I see said paper, I remain unconvinced and the inability of anyone, anywhere, to show me that paper is starting to convince me that there is not a gay gene at all and gay people are just weirdos. I do however remain open to the possibility that they are not just being weirdos if someone can show me a scientific study that identified and verified the presence of a gene(s) that "make" someone gay.

 

Wow, that's a ridiculious precedent.  It's a good thing the scientific community doesn't have the same precedent.

For one... sexual prefrence is way more complicated then just one gene.

Secodly there have been lots of studiest that show a lot of similar genetic markers in gay people though.

You can  disagree but you're being a bit intellectuially dishonest if you actually look at the research.  It's like saying you don't belive in the elments that are purely theoretical because we haven't created them in a lab setting yet despite fitting the formula. (Or had we finally created them all....?)

hold on a minute. Everyone keeps saying that people are gay because they have no choice and the only way that would be the case is if they were genetically forced to be. If people want to be gay, well, I personally think that's weird and all, but you do what you like. (but please, not where I can see it)

My problem is this: A lot of people keep saying that being gay is not a choice, but no one can show me any evidence to the contrary. Thus I am forced to conclude that being gay is a choice.

Also, tests that show similar genetic markers between gay people do not prove/help anything. I could pick any random group of people and find loads of similar genetic markers because well over 99% of DNA is the same in every human.

If being gay is truely not a choice, than there HAS to be a consistant genetic variation in gay people as opposed to "normal" people . (Much in the way there is a consistant genetic variation in people with down's syndrome, sickle-cell anemia, hemophilia, etc.) I realize it would take more than one gene to make the difference, but if being gay is a genetic issue, (ie. not a choice by an individual) there would be a detectable genetic variation.

 



Not trying to be a fanboy. Of course, it's hard when you own the best console eve... dang it

Kasz216 on 30 June 2008

Keep in mind being gay isn't a switch either. It's not a gay or your not type deal.

So if more accepting i'd imagine their will be more gay sex... for people that are like... 50-50... or 60-40 gay etc... who are right on the line and "save themselves some trouble".

Might be a little more college expiermentation as well... more mixed threesomes whatever. Cause if you don't really care about being labeled "gay" you really aren't going to care about having a mixed threesome for your partner... and vice versa.

Unless you actually have moral qualms against threesomes and sex out of marriage or committed relationships... in which case... you aren't going to be affected anyway.

If you don't like gay people no one is going to make you hangout with gay people or anything... it's not like people make racists hang out with blackpeople. Gay people and straight people will likely stay pretty defacto segregated.

I mean... if you were gay why would you want to hang around a bunch of straight people? I mean... as it is you're cutting down your potential mating pool to less then 10% of what it would be if you were straight.

Nah.... if you could choose sexuality... straight 50-50 bisexuality would be the way to go.  Then you could play almost the entire field.



psrock on 30 June 2008
Retrasado said:
Kasz216 said:
Retrasado said:
Kasz216 said:
Retrasado said:
Kasz216 said:
Retrasado said:

has it ever been conclusively proven that people can be born gay? I mean it defies logic to me because such individuals would be unable to reproduce and any "gay gene" would be eliminated from the genome fairly quickly imo.

If the answer to above question is "yes, there is a gay gene." I don't really care, but regardless, I will physically harm any guy who starts hitting on me. *shudder*

If the answer is "no, there is not a gay gene." I will avoid them. If they start hitting on me, well, prepare for Judgment Day....

Animals are born gay.... people are animals... so yeah. I'd say it's been conclusively proven. Genes are pretty complicated by the way... so it's more complicated then you'd think. After all redheads are still going strong. It's likely a combination of many genes as sexuality goes across a large range of prefrence and just recessive genes.

There isn't an animal in nature that's 100% straight that i'm aware of.

Penguin's I believe are the most gay.

no, that's not what I meant. I meant show me a reputable scientific research project that conslusively proved that being gay is a genetic issue. I personally have yet to see one and as such I doubt the proposition's accuracy for the aforementioned reasons of natural selection.

 

How about a study that shows the brains of gay men are different then straight men?

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html?cnn=yes

There have also been many twin studies where peolple who have a twin were MUCH more likely to be gay. Either Fraternal or Twin. Of course it's not 100% considering the attitude people have about gay people.

 

 

That doesn't prove anything. The statement being made is that being gay is a genetic variation and I have yet to see any research on the subject of a gay gene. A paper or two documenting reseach into the human genome and pinpointing a genetic variation in gay people that causes them to be gay is what I would like to see. Until I see said paper, I remain unconvinced and the inability of anyone, anywhere, to show me that paper is starting to convince me that there is not a gay gene at all and gay people are just weirdos. I do however remain open to the possibility that they are not just being weirdos if someone can show me a scientific study that identified and verified the presence of a gene(s) that "make" someone gay.

 

Wow, that's a ridiculious precedent.  It's a good thing the scientific community doesn't have the same precedent.

For one... sexual prefrence is way more complicated then just one gene.

Secodly there have been lots of studiest that show a lot of similar genetic markers in gay people though.

You can  disagree but you're being a bit intellectuially dishonest if you actually look at the research.  It's like saying you don't belive in the elments that are purely theoretical because we haven't created them in a lab setting yet despite fitting the formula. (Or had we finally created them all....?)

hold on a minute. Everyone keeps saying that people are gay because they have no choice and the only way that would be the case is if they were genetically forced to be. If people want to be gay, well, I personally think that's weird and all, but you do what you like. (but please, not where I can see it)

My problem is this: A lot of people keep saying that being gay is not a choice, but no one can show me any evidence to the contrary. Thus I am forced to conclude that being gay is a choice.

Also, tests that show similar genetic markers between gay people do not prove/help anything. I could pick any random group of people and find loads of similar genetic markers because well over 99% of DNA is the same in every human.

If being gay is truely not a choice, than there HAS to be a consistant genetic variation in gay people as opposed to "normal" people . (Much in the way there is a consistant genetic variation in people with down's syndrome, sickle-cell anemia, hemophilia, etc.) I realize it would take more than one gene to make the difference, but if being gay is a genetic issue, (ie. not a choice by an individual) there would be a detectable genetic variation.

 

did you choose to be straight or you just are?

 



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
The Ghost of RubangB on 30 June 2008

My problem is this: A lot of people keep saying that being gay is a choice, but no one can show me any evidence. Thus I am forced to conclude that being gay is not a choice.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

Endz on 30 June 2008

I think this will help overpopulation to some point, and the very extreme case in which everyone will be gay doesn't mean the end of humanity.

People will just add sperm and an egg in a lab.