Free speech issue (controversial)

[Trancendental]

Society attempts to stamp each person with it's idea of what is sexually "normal", and almost every person does his best to live up to this normalcy and hide his/her kinks. Since homosexuals are basicly tolerated (yet not totally accepted) by modern American society, some choose to be open about their tendencies.

If you ask me, elprincipe has an aruguement that suffers from flawed logic. Handicapped people from birth are a drastic disadvantage in terms of reproductive capacity, yet we all know they exist. People who are autistic from birth are a drastic disadvantage in terms of reproductive capacity, yet we all know they exist. I could go on but you get the point - probably 99.999% of mutations are not advantageous to survival, its just that one advantageous mutation that gets passed on from generation to generation.

However gayness may be advantageous to the survival of the species as a whole - to a rational person it's obvious that visionaries like Socrates and Davinci changed the world for the better.

 

[loserboy]

I'm getting back on topic here....

1) The picture depicts Mohammed, not any particular nationality or race, but rather a person that represents a religion...posting a picture of Jesus does not refer to Jews, posting a picture of Gandhi does not refer to India...they are RELIGIOUS (not ethnic) symbols. Religion has been the subject of political satire on all levels for hundreds of hears.

2) The protests and embassy burnings ENHANCE the idea of the cartoon. To respond to a cartoon saying your belief system is stemmed in violence WITH violence is ignorant and stupid. War protestors who tip over police cars, anti-abortion activistw who shoot doctors, anti-violence protestors burning buildings...IDIOTS.

As for homosexuals...who cares...as long as they still have girl on girl pictures on the web, all is good.

 

[KrAzY3]

On another note, I'm watching the news now and they are saying that the people that set the Danish embassy (not just the Danish embassy mind you) on fire ended up trapped and had to be rescued.

Yeah, smart people... real smart.

 

[elprincipe]

[quote name='rodeojones903']Wasn't this thread about cartoons and such? [/QUOTE]

Yeah, sorry, we did go off on quite a tangent! I'll stop stirring things up

 

[alonzomourning23]

[quote name='elprincipe']Speak for yourself. Have you asked many people if they are attracted to members of their same sex?[/quote]

I can't find the study I was referring to. It was in a book I no longer have (or at least can't find). I tried looking on google but no luck.

Why is it insulting to have an opinion based on logic?

Your opinion isn't based on good logic, as you don't seem to understand the biological argument.

Do you think gays are so insecure in their sexual behavior that they need to prove that it's genetic to be okay? Are you also insulted that there is a genetic basis for women being shorter and weaker than men?

It doesn't have to be genetic for it to not to be a choice and, if it is, it could be a specific mixture of genes that only produce the extreme end of 100% homosexual, or that it arises only when everything that goes into a persons biology falls into place properly, or when certain environmental factors have an effect on biology. You don't seem to understand what is incorporated into a person biology. And what's insulting is if you're arguing that gays are misleading people by saying it's not a choice. You're argument seems to indicate you believe they actually made a choice.

If you feel people don't rationalize their actions you're very, very naive. I never said anything about a conspiracy, but people excuse their actions in many ways or rationalize them to the point of believing they take them for different reasons than the real reasons. "I don't need a cigarette; I can quit anytime." "She was asking for this when she dressed that way." Want some more examples?

Those are very different things. One relates to an addiction to a chemical substance, another is not in any way saying that rape was inevitable. It does not explain why great emotional distress can result by homosexuals attempting to force themselves to be heterosexual who have never engaged in homosexual relationships or actions of any kind. It does not explain, in any way, why they enjoy homosexual activites (to varying degrees depending on their sexuality) while you don't.

No benefits other than engaging in a behavioral pattern you personally enjoy (I'd have to conclude). Why not ask Jews who survived the Holocaust why they didn't renounce their religion and become Protestant during that time?

But how do you enjoy a behavioral pattern you never were involved with? Also, how do you make it so you are not attracted to women but men? It makes no sense that people can completely control their sexual attraction, choosing which people they want to be attracted to, or not attracted to. For example, despite your best efforts I doubt you could convince yourself to get aroused at the site of a naked rosie o'donnel or george w. bush. And despite your best efforts you cannot stop yourself from being aroused at the site of your ideal woman naked.

Also, just because I want to nitpick here, some jews did change their religion and raise their children as other religions due to the that time period. Madelaine Albright is probably the most famous example, her parents were jewish but she never knew.

When we're talking about reproduction.

You're saying it's choice, and the environment they're raised in would affect what they find acceptable and what their future choices would be.

I figured this was relevant to the overal discussion, it's what the APA has to say about sexual orientation:

What Is Sexual Orientation?

Sexual Orientation is an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual or affectional attraction to another person. It is easily distinguished from other components of sexuality including biological sex, gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female) and the social gender role (adherence to cultural norms for feminine and masculine behavior).

Sexual orientation exists along a continuum that ranges from exclusive homosexuality to exclusive heterosexuality and includes various forms of bisexuality. Bisexual persons can experience sexual, emotional and affectional attraction to both their own sex and the opposite sex. Persons with a homosexual orientation are sometimes referred to as gay (both men and women) or as lesbian (women only).

Sexual orientation is different from sexual behavior because it refers to feelings and self-concept. Persons may or may not express their sexual orientation in their behaviors.

What Causes a Person To Have a Particular Sexual Orientation?

There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality. In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many reasons for a person's sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people.

Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?

No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.



Can Therapy Change Sexual Orientation?

No. Even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual orientation through therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable.

However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who seek assistance from a mental health professional want to change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people may seek psychological help with the coming out process or for strategies to deal with prejudice, but most go into therapy for the same reasons and life issues that bring straight people to mental health professionals.

http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html

 

[elprincipe]

Although I don't put a great deal of stock in the psychobabble of the APA, this is definitely a psychological issue, I'll give you that much. Depending on your viewpoint, then, you could classify being attracted to the same sex as a psychological disorder, psychological addiction, subconscious choice, or something else. And I do agree that once the decision is made (even if subconsciously at a very young age) it is very difficult to change. Of course, much of this area is pure speculation based on very limited known facts.

 

[KrAzY3]

I really hate to do this...

I'll jump in on the issues because hell, I like to discuss things.

Evolution: From a limited perspective it is a perfectly functional theory. Things change, arguing they change for the better isn't much of a leap. However, evolution as the explanation for life as we know it on the planet is a huge leap with almost nothing to support it. It is not even a theory, it is just hypothetical. The fact is we do not know how we got here, we can just guess and no religion nor theory has provided a explanation I consider valid.

If God made everything how did God get here? If everything came from a giant mass that exploded, how did that get here? We want to pretend we know everything, but on those matters we really know nothing.

Homosexuality:
I'm far from a expert on the matter. But, I did do security in a gay club and I have been friends with a few gay people. So, I would like to think that I am not simply speaking out of ignorance. I think that people who wish for homosexuality to realize more acceptance have been pushing far too hard to classify it as a biological thing. If they can classify it as biological and not a choice, then much like race they can argue that any bias against gay people has no basis other than bigotry. While I admire the goals, I think they are clouding scientific reason.

I do believe that biology can play a part in homosexuality, but even from that perspective it would be a mutation. I think it is a minority of the cases demonstrate ample proof of it being genetic. For example, hermaphrodites or people exhibiting secondary male or female characteristics (female for male or vice versa) obviously have a very good case for biology playing a part.

From my experience though, development and deviance are the primary factors. It is obvious that sexual activity can be affected by trauma of one sort or another. Take for example two females I know and how their actions were influenced. One is my niece, she was abused when she was around 12 and has been sexually active (with males) since then. She is now 15 and is out of control, she goes from one boyfriend to the next often daying men over 18. Her mother (father is divorced, another factor) has little control over her. Anyway, for example over the past year she's probably had 5 or 6 boyfriends and most likely been active with all of them. A friend of mine growing up, had her father die while she was relatively young. Looking for a father figure, she dated at a very high rate and I'd say from my knowledge she was sexually active by 8th grade (at least). Once again dating men 18 and older and litterally dating innumerable people. I personally knew 6 guys she dated (mind you we didn't go to the same school or anything). I'm talking about her dating probably 100 guys by the time she was 18. Obviously not normal. I met a guy from her town once, I was like hey do you know her? Yeah, I dated her...

Ok, now how does that compare to homosexuality? The first gay guy I knew (read: knew he was gay) was a man who had been orphaned and raised by a priest. Do I really need to say more? The other gay man I knew best was someone who had been raised by a abusive alcholic father. My brother's first wife decided she was gay after a few years of marriage. I mentioned this in a chat room once, only to have someone inform me that you don't "decide you are gay". Well, she did. My brother also dated a bisexual chick, I didn't know her well enough to comment but...

Bisexuality is something that flies in the face of people that claim homosexuality is not a choice. I think bisexuals tend to be more deviant than their homosexual counterparts (in other words they'll anything because they looovee ing, not all mind you). They have a choice and they choose both, something which is very hard to explain biologically (unless of course they are a hermaphrodite).

So? What am I saying?

We can't prove evolution as a explanation for our existance. So, I think we should focus less on trying to make it "fit" and leave our minds open to all possibilities.

Homosexuality isn't a choice in most cases, but I'd say it isn't biological in most cases either. We don't choose the facts that affect our development, but from my experience it is mostly a issue of development and most people that say otherwise seem to have a agenda.

 

[alonzomourning23]

[quote name='KrAzY3']I really hate to do this...

I'll jump in on the issues because hell, I like to discuss things.

Evolution: From a limited perspective it is a perfectly functional theory. Things change, arguing they change for the better isn't much of a leap. However, evolution as the explanation for life as we know it on the planet is a huge leap with almost nothing to support it. It is not even a theory, it is just hypothetical. The fact is we do not know how we got here, we can just guess and no religion nor theory has provided a explanation I consider valid.

If God made everything how did God get here? If everything came from a giant mass that exploded, how did that get here? We want to pretend we know everything, but on those matters we really know nothing.[/quote]

Labs have been able to create amino acids (building block of organic life) since the 50's, and labs are on the verge of being able to create articificial life http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/04/13/407b83e38aad5.

I do believe that biology can play a part in homosexuality, but even from that perspective it would be a mutation. I think it is a minority of the cases demonstrate ample proof of it being genetic. For example, hermaphrodites or people exhibiting secondary male or female characteristics (female for male or vice versa) obviously have a very good case for biology playing a part.

Sexuality is not either/or though, people are varying degrees of heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual (labels often don't work too for anything but the extremes, but they're what people know)

From my experience though, development and deviance are the primary factors. It is obvious that sexual activity can be affected by trauma of one sort or another. Take for example two females I know and how their actions were influenced. One is my niece, she was abused when she was around 12 and has been sexually active (with males) since then. She is now 15 and is out of control, she goes from one boyfriend to the next often daying men over 18. Her mother (father is divorced, another factor) has little control over her. Anyway, for example over the past year she's probably had 5 or 6 boyfriends and most likely been active with all of them. A friend of mine growing up, had her father die while she was relatively young. Looking for a father figure, she dated at a very high rate and I'd say from my knowledge she was sexually active by 8th grade (at least). Once again dating men 18 and older and litterally dating innumerable people. I personally knew 6 guys she dated (mind you we didn't go to the same school or anything). I'm talking about her dating probably 100 guys by the time she was 18. Obviously not normal. I met a guy from her town once, I was like hey do you know her? Yeah, I dated her...

Ok, now how does that compare to homosexuality? The first gay guy I knew (read: knew he was gay) was a man who had been orphaned and raised by a priest. Do I really need to say more? The other gay man I knew best was someone who had been raised by a abusive alcholic father. My brother's first wife decided she was gay after a few years of marriage. I mentioned this in a chat room once, only to have someone inform me that you don't "decide you are gay". Well, she did. My brother also dated a bisexual chick, I didn't know her well enough to comment but...

Many people engage in heterosexual relationships due to societal norms and expectations and they're either gay or bisexual. Bisexual people may decide they prefer one sex over another, but it's their bisexuality that allows this. The sexual interest is there, they may come to a realization that they form stronger emotional attachments to one sex or another though.

Sexual behavior and orientation is very different, as activity and are influenced much more heavily from environment. You can give psychological counseling to very sexually promiscuous people (or other negative sexual behaviors, basically something that they feel is a compulsion beyond their control), but the same cannot be done with homosexuals. You cannot "treat" or "cure" it. But one issue people don't understand is the effect environment has on biology and vice versa.

But bisexuals are stereotyped by both homosexual and heterosexual communities, some are influenced by that stereotype as well and therefore fullfill that expectation.

Bisexuality is something that flies in the face of people that claim homosexuality is not a choice. I think bisexuals tend to be more deviant than their homosexual counterparts (in other words they'll anything because they looovee ing, not all mind you). They have a choice and they choose both, something which is very hard to explain biologically (unless of course they are a hermaphrodite).

It's no harder to explain than heterosexuality or homosexuality, since no respectable scientist (or the evidence) suggest that sexuality is either/or.

Homosexuality isn't a choice in most cases, but I'd say it isn't biological in most cases either. We don't choose the facts that affect our development, but from my experience it is mostly a issue of development and most people that say otherwise seem to have a agenda.

Well, development plays a key role in biology. But you are going to be hard pressed to find scientific evidence suggesting that it is anything but a combination of biological and environmental (and in turn biological) factors. The instances where someone claims to be "homosexual by choice" almost always are bisexuals who just happen to like one over the other emotionally, even if the attraction to both is the same.

I don't think you have an agenda here, I don't think you have a problem with homosexuals, but I've never met a reputable psychologist who argues that it is purely environmental, and not environmental in relation to biology.