Homosexuality: Lifestyle Choice?

[Dark Virtue]

Quote[/b] (Jim @ Oct. 27 2004,12:46)]Where the difference lies between a disability/ debilitating disease and homosexuality is that homosexuality is not an aggresive disease that destroys life, livelihoods and health, but a state of mind, wether it is choice or not.

As a state of mind, the normal function of that person would be to become attracted to members of the same gender. Imagine that is all you know. Would you like to have that taken from you?

To put it clearer, imagine homosexuality was the norm. Would you be inclined to 'cure' your disease?

If it was the norm, then yes, why live outside the norm if you don't have to? HOWEVER, if homosexuality were the norm, then how does a homosexual society procreate? Especially before science allowed for invitro fertilization?

For some people, they have known nothing but blindness all their lives. Does that stop them from gaining sight? What about deaf people?

Don't you think that some homosexuals would argue that their lifestyle DOES destroy life and livelihood?

 

[ByblosHex]

heh yeah.. Homosexuality couldnt be the norm as we would be extinct if that were so.

 

[Dark Virtue]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,12:51)]

Quote[/b] (Dark Virtue @ Oct. 27 2004,12:39)]

Quote[/b] ]But I think the real question is this: With so many unknowns, is it right for our government to make legislations that discriminate against this group?

Until the group comes to grips with its cause, then yes, I think the government is well within its rights.

They are 'well within' their rights with the possibility of homosexuality not being a lifestyle choice still largely up in the air? I do not see how that can be DV.

I think it's putting the cart before the horse.

Once the homosexual community can agree, on a whole, whether their sexuality is a choice or some sort of mutation, then and only then can other matters be solved.

One thing at a time.

 

[PapaToad]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,12:54)]Byblos, in an attempt to illustrate what you are saying, lets turn the tables.  Let's assume that heterosexuality was the immoral practice that society despises, and homosexuality was the one that society and god condones.  Would you realistically be able to force yourself to be attracted to members of the same sex?

I am attached to women now and then , but I do not think MY WIFE would appreciate me acting on that impluse.

If I can control that impluse, it is a choice. If I single I would have to control my impluses to "Be Lustful" with some other woman I found attractive. Once again a choice

Does goverment have a right to enforce thier ideals of "Marriage" Yes thats why its goverment. If they it comes about that we as a Country(USA) allows gay marrige. I will not condone it. But I will not give up my citzenshiip either in demostration.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Come on Byblos, just answer the question. In order to understand this issue, you have to imagine yourself in a homosexuals' shoes.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Quote[/b] (MontrezAnthony @ Oct. 27 2004,1:03)]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,12:54)]Byblos, in an attempt to illustrate what you are saying, lets turn the tables.  Let's assume that heterosexuality was the immoral practice that society despises, and homosexuality was the one that society and god condones.  Would you realistically be able to force yourself to be attracted to members of the same sex?

I am attached to women now and then  , but I do not think MY WIFE would appreciate me acting on that impluse.

If I can control that impluse, it is a choice. If I single I would have to control my impluses to "Be Lustful" with some other woman I found attractive. Once again a choice

Does goverment have a right to enforce thier ideals of "Marriage" Yes thats why its goverment. If they it comes about that we as a Country(USA) allows gay marrige. I will not condone it. But I will not give up my citzenshiip either in demostration.

So basically it is within a government's power to dictate who its citizens can and cannot love? When it boils down to it, that's what you're saying.

I think we need to re-exaimine the word choice. Yes, if you were homosexual, you should be able to control yourself from having sexual activity with members of your sex. Heterosexuals can abstain, homosexuals can too. Does this make sexual orientation a choice? No, no I'm afraid not. It's much more complicated than that.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Quote[/b] (Dark Virtue @ Oct. 27 2004,1:03)]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,12:51)]

Quote[/b] (Dark Virtue @ Oct. 27 2004,12:39)]

Quote[/b] ]But I think the real question is this: With so many unknowns, is it right for our government to make legislations that discriminate against this group?

Until the group comes to grips with its cause, then yes, I think the government is well within its rights.

They are 'well within' their rights with the possibility of homosexuality not being a lifestyle choice still largely up in the air?  I do not see how that can be DV.

I think it's putting the cart before the horse.

Once the homosexual community can agree, on a whole, whether their sexuality is a choice or some sort of mutation, then and only then can other matters be solved.

One thing at a time.

But DV, I don't think it's their fault that they do not understand the nature of their sexual orientation. There is much controversy in the science of the issue, as well as the ethics. Basically nothing is for sure, other than the fact that there are homosexuals and there are heterosexuals, and each are the way they are for some reason.

To say that the government should be allowed to discriminate against the homosexual population until they fully understand themselves does not seem fair to me.

 

[Jim]

Quote[/b] ]If it was the norm, then yes, why live outside the norm if you don't have to? HOWEVER, if homosexuality were the norm, then how does a homosexual society procreate? Especially before science allowed for invitro fertilization?

Alright, it may have been an innaccurate analogy, but then imagine you were homosexual. Try to imagine how you would feel if something you knew all your life to be normal was not only considered 'wrong' but was generally treated with hostility.

By the way, I'm sure nature would have come up with something if that was how the cookie crumbled. After all, it came up with our current method of reproduction, didn't it?

Quote[/b] ]For some people, they have known nothing but blindness all their lives. Does that stop them from gaining sight? What about deaf people?

The difference between a disability such as deafness and blindness is that, once restored, bestows a useful ability that enables a person to partake in activities they normally would be unable to, makes their life easier, etc. For a homosexual to be 'cured' and become heterosexual, it is not bestowing a useful sense upon them, to enable them better participation, removing something that is a hindrance, it more like tailoring yourself to fit a more socially acceptable mould. That is the main difference.

Quote[/b] ]Don't you think that some homosexuals would argue that their lifestyle DOES destroy life and livelihood?

I'm sure, but so does heterosexual habits.

Montrez:

Quote[/b] ]If I can control that impluse, it is a choice. If I single I would have to control my impluses to "Be Lustful" with some other woman I found attractive. Once again a choice

Sure, but homosexuals don't jump into bed and unleash their urges as and when they feel like it. We are not talking about sexual monsters here, they are as sensitive to these things as you or I. They control their impulses too, but they don't view it as wrong when those impulses are toward the same gender.

 

[Dark Virtue]

Quote[/b] ]But DV, I don't think it's their fault that they do not understand the nature of their sexual orientation. There is much controversy in the science of the issue, as well as the ethics. Basically nothing is for sure, other than the fact that there are homosexuals and there are heterosexuals, and each are the way they are for some reason.

To say that the government should be allowed to discriminate against the homosexual population until they fully understand themselves does not seem fair to me.

I agree with you, but change takes time.

Let's not put the cart before the horse.

If change is deemed necessary, then it will happen. History doesn't forget those that fought for change. Rosa Parks anyone?

Would it be fair to grant them rights only to realize that it was wrong and have them taken away?

 

[PapaToad]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,1:07)]

Quote[/b] (MontrezAnthony @ Oct. 27 2004,1:03)]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,12:54)]Byblos, in an attempt to illustrate what you are saying, lets turn the tables.  Let's assume that heterosexuality was the immoral practice that society despises, and homosexuality was the one that society and god condones.  Would you realistically be able to force yourself to be attracted to members of the same sex?

I am attached to women now and then  , but I do not think MY WIFE would appreciate me acting on that impluse.

If I can control that impluse, it is a choice. If I single I would have to control my impluses to "Be Lustful" with some other woman I found attractive. Once again a choice

Does goverment have a right to enforce thier ideals of "Marriage" Yes thats why its goverment. If they it comes about that we as a Country(USA) allows gay marrige. I will not condone it. But I will not give up my citzenshiip either in demostration.

So basically it is within a government's power to dictate who its citizens can and cannot love?  When it boils down to it, that's what you're saying.

I think we need to re-exaimine the word choice.  Yes, if you were homosexual, you should be able to control yourself from having sexual activity with members of your sex.  Heterosexuals can abstain, homosexuals can too.  Does this make sexual orientation a choice?  No, no I'm afraid not.  It's much more complicated than that.

Yes the USA goverment has that right to dictate the standard of marriage.

Yes its a choice to act on lustful feelings. Why do some like thier own genger, why do some like other things BEST NOT LISTED here. I do not know demopnic influnce, bad wiring crazy kool aid. I do not know

But it is a choice to act on these impulses

I will now refrain from posting in this discussion anymore. I fear where is might lead.

Bottom line is its a choice whether you chose to participate or now.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Quote[/b] (Dark Virtue @ Oct. 27 2004,1:16)]

Quote[/b] ]But DV, I don't think it's their fault that they do not understand the nature of their sexual orientation.  There is much controversy in the science of the issue, as well as the ethics.  Basically nothing is for sure, other than the fact that there are homosexuals and there are heterosexuals, and each are the way they are for some reason.  

To say that the government should be allowed to discriminate against the homosexual population until they fully understand themselves does not seem fair to me.

I agree with you, but change takes time.

Let's not put the cart before the horse.

If change is deemed necessary, then it will happen.  History doesn't forget those that fought for change.  Rosa Parks anyone?

Would it be fair to grant them rights only to realize that it was wrong and have them taken away?

That is a good point. However, I believe that most of those against homosexual marriages are so ultimately, and will not budge despite contrary evidence discovered in the future. This is what gay activists are afraid of, so they feel they must act now.

 

[Dark Virtue]

Quote[/b] (Jim @ Oct. 27 2004,1:15)]

Quote[/b] ]Alright, it may have been an innaccurate analogy, but then imagine you were homosexual. Try to imagine how you would feel if something you knew all your life to be normal was not only considered 'wrong' but was generally treated with hostility.

Like being an Atheist?

I do understand the ramifications. I never said it would be easy. I also never said I was implicitly against homosexuality. I AM against blaming it on genetics though.

Quote[/b] ]By the way, I'm sure nature would have come up with something if that was how the cookie crumbled. After all, it came up with our current method of reproduction, didn't it?

Nature abhors a vaccum, it will always right itself. I guess that means we're this way for a reason. Male+Female=Continuance of the species.

Quote[/b] ]The difference between a disability such as deafness and blindness is that, once restored, bestows a useful ability that enables a person to partake in activities they normally would be unable to, makes their life easier, etc. For a homosexual to be 'cured' and become heterosexual, it is not bestowing a useful sense upon them, to enable them better participation, removing something that is a hindrance, it more like tailoring yourself to fit a more socially acceptable mould. That is the main difference.

EXACTLY my point, which reinforces my belief that it is a CHOICE.

 

[Dark Virtue]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,1:21)]

Quote[/b] ]That is a good point. However, I believe that most of those against homosexual marriages are so ultimately, and will not budge despite contrary evidence discovered in the future. This is what gay activists are afraid of, so they feel they must act now.

I'm sure blacks felt the same way, as did women, when they were both fighting for their rights.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Quote[/b] (MontrezAnthony @ Oct. 27 2004,1:18)]Yes the USA goverment has that right to dictate the standard of marriage.

Yes its a choice to act on lustful feelings. Why do some like thier own genger, why do some like other things BEST NOT LISTED here. I do not know demopnic influnce, bad wiring crazy kool aid. I do not know

But it is a choice to act on these impulses

I will now refrain from posting in this discussion anymore. I fear where is might lead.

Bottom line is its a choice whether you chose to participate or now.

You avoid the question. Do you believe that the USA government has the right to dicate love?

Yes it is a choice to ACT ON lustful feelings. That's not what I said. It is unclear whether the same is true for the lustful feelings themselves.

So if those lustful feelings are there by nature, do you believe it is right to discriminate them for being themselves?

 

[Dark Virtue]

Have I mentioned how much I HATE this topic?

 

[Kidan]

at no time is the US saying who you can and cannot love.

The government is enforcing the will of the majority of the people as to what constitutes marriage.

This is homosexuals forcing their beliefs upon society at large.

Now onto the topic question at hand.  I firmly believe that it is a lifestyle choice.  

Now about some of your specific quotes I saw while reading this thread
There is no such thing as a homosexual animal species.  In fact there is no such thing as homosexuality in animals, and in fact in 1996 a homosexual scientist admited this.

Twin studies.  What is very important to remember, is that in genetic duplicate twins, homosexuality does not always occur in both twins.  If homosexuality was genetic, then when one of the genetic twins was gay, the other would be as well.  Since this does not occur, then it cannot be genetic.



Mr. Bill - while i am firmly against gay marriages, and believe that they will damage the concept of family (as well as my abiilty to practice my freedom of religion), my biggest complaint about how Gay activists are doing this, is that they are not attempting to have a law changed. They are attempting to get sympathetic judges to legislate from the bench.

Gay Marriages has come up on ballots around this country, and have routinely failed (even in California). Realizing this, they feel the need to get judges to tell us that what we, the majority, believe is irrelevent, and only what the judges, and the gay activists beleives matters.

 

[PapaToad]

Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ Oct. 27 2004,1:24)]

Quote[/b] (MontrezAnthony @ Oct. 27 2004,1:18)]Yes the USA goverment has that right to dictate the standard of marriage.

Yes its a choice to act on lustful feelings. Why do some like thier own genger, why do some like other things BEST NOT LISTED here. I do not know demopnic influnce, bad wiring crazy kool aid. I do not know

But it is a choice to act on these impulses

I will now refrain from posting in this discussion anymore. I fear where is might lead.

Bottom line is its a choice whether you chose to participate or now.

You avoid the question.  Do you believe that the USA government has the right to dicate love?

Yes it is a choice to ACT ON lustful feelings.  That's not what I said.  It is unclear whether the same is true for the lustful feelings themselves.

So if those lustful feelings are there by nature, do you believe it is right to discriminate them for being themselves?

Ok I thought my last post was it I was wrong my apologizes.

**You avoid the question. Do you believe that the USA government has the right to dictate love?** I did not realize you expected an answer

NO one is dictating love, The government is dictating marriage! You can love a rotten sock, you can not marry it. (**I am not saying gay people are in any way a rotten sock**)


****So if those lustful feelings are there by nature, do you believe it is right to discriminate them for being themselves?*****

OM GOODNESS, YES if a psycho wants to chop you up I should let him because his noodle is broke. No if fact the government has laws that forbid such behavior.
The Bible says homosexuality is lewdness. The Bible ranks it with sex with animals copulating with whores, adulterers, and those who have sex with family members. These are veiws to Us Gospel believing Christians, it is the Word of Our GOD

Bill grasp this simple but awesome fact I am a BIBLE believing Christian, all of my answers will be based off the fact That that word is my sword. I am sorry if that doesn't make sense but it is the core of my beliefs.

 

[Dark Virtue]

Quote[/b] ]as well as my abiilty to practice my freedom of religion

How does homosexuality affect your ability to practice your religion?

 

[Kidan]

Sorry I was not clear on this. Gay Marriages affects my ability to practice my religion.

If gay marriage becomes legal, then it would be taught in schools, to my children, that my religion is wrong.

It in essence would be Congress placing a law on the practice of my religion.

 

[PapaToad]

Interesting thoughts