|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
 Posted - 09/28/2007 : 12:48:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by chaloobi
Originally posted by filthy
I have stated that more and more the scientific evidence is showing that homosexuality is a genetic trait rather than a "choice." |
Of course it's a choice. Homosexuals can, and are expected to by God, deny their evil urges. Like Job, God has given homosexuals a very special challenge in their lives. It's a gift really; an opportunity to prove the strength of their Faith that most of us never get.
|
I wish God had given me homosexual urges.  |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
 |
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2007 : 13:11:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
|
| I do not recall stating this, Bill. |
I looked but it must be archived. It was a good 2 years ago by now. I am surprised you don't remember. It was funny because Marf went off when you said it. She started rambling on and on about your advanced age and living back in the sticks is what caused you to come to your conclusion. Oh well, it's not that important anyway.
| I have also stated that it's not something I'd like to be involved in. Makes me feel a little queasy -- I have never been comfortable around homosexuals. |
Why do you think that is?
| What's "natural," anyway? |
Well one look at the human anatomy and it becomes rather clear that it is not natural for this to fit into that as far as man on man sex goes. No matter how hard you try this was not designed to fit into that. I could go further but I would rather not. It makes me queasy as well.
| If homosexuality is indeed genetic as the science is showing, is that not a quirk of nature? Of course, there's no procreation involved in it, so it's sort of an evolutionary blank, and I suppose that one might call it unnatural from that point of view, but as for the species as a whole it makes no difference at all due to homosexuals being way in the minority. |
Homosexuality is a dead end road as far as preservation of the species goes. It is rather obvious that the design intent was for the man and women to engage in sexual intercourse and this produces life. Man on man and women on women sex produces nothing but ultimate despair. So to combat the natural process the homosexual couple may use an artificial way to obtain children, since the homosexual way is a dead end.
| Anyhow, where and when did I state that "homosexuality did not appear to be natural?" I think that you might have misread some statement of mine. |
It was at least two years ago and involved mostly VD, Marf, you and myself.
| Y'know, this is kinda funny. I sometimes wonder about those who rant about the "choice" of homosexuality. Does it really appear so attractive to them that they have had to make a choice? |
Either way I still think it is BS for them to lie about it just to try and fool the voters, while running for office.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2007 : 13:34:46 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| I hope we all can agree on this. |
No matter what you say, there's always someone who'll disagree or worse, take offense. |
I hope we all can agree on this, as well.
| Had Craig kept this in his bedroom then this discussion would not even be taking place. The problem is that Craig, by his own freewill, took this out of the bedroom and into the restroom. Now it just so happened that this was a public restroom. Low and behold a scandal. |
Yes, and I'm pretty sure that most will agree that public dalliances are fair game for the public. That's why it wasn't the question. |
I suppose I can live with don't ask and don't tell as far as people running for office. Like I said though, once these cats out themselves the toothpaste is out of the tube.
| Bill, given a choice between two unmarried male candidates for your state senate who share your political ideals on the big issues and are otherwise identically qualified for office, would you vote for the one who answered a question about his sexuality by announcing that he is looking for a nice lady to marry (candidate "A"), or would you vote for the one who politely told the questioner that it's none of his business (candidate "B")? |
Under your scenario it would be a flip of the coin. |
Well, that answer, Bill, is actually a pleasant surprise. But given that knowledge of a person's sexuality "may have swayed" your vote, I suspect that if "B" were instead openly gay it wouldn't have been a coin toss, would it? |
I already said that I would not vote for a open homosexual. However, if (B) said it was nobody's business and truly kept his private life his private life then I could vote for (B) if he shared my political beliefs more then (A).
What if I voted for (A) and then he gets busted in a men's restroom trolling for sex? Am I wrong to be upset for being lied to and deceived for a vote?
| Just as it would be the right of the homosexual to not vote for me for claiming to be a Christian. |
Why would one do so? What does your Christianity have to do with your competence to govern? |
So you don't think my Christian beliefs would play a role in how I voted on different legislation?
So you don't think a homosexual would be swayed in anyway by his lifestyle while voting on different legislation? |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2007 : 14:59:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
I already said that I would not vote for a open homosexual. |
But why not? There are far-right conservative Repbulican gay men, Bill. I mean, they do exist. Your only point of difference with them would probably be that they're going to Hell and you're not.| What if I voted for (A) and then he gets busted in a men's restroom trolling for sex? Am I wrong to be upset for being lied to and deceived for a vote? |
Not in my mind.| So you don't think my Christian beliefs would play a role in how I voted on different legislation? |
Oh, I certainly do, but if I voted for you, it would have been because I knew that you understand that your constituency comprises people of many different faiths (and none at all), and so justifying certain legislative votes on your faith would be to do a disservice to those you represent.| So you don't think a homosexual would be swayed in anyway by his lifestyle while voting on different legislation? |
I do, but the same expectation would exist. On top of that, the "homosexual agenda" is a myth. A gay representative isn't going to try to legislate gayness. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2007 : 16:40:16 [Permalink]
|
This has been remarked upon in here before; homosexuality is very common among many other species. Also, it seems to be restricted to birds and mammals. There is a school of thought that considers virtually all bonobos bisexual, the ultimate playboys/girls.
Incidently, anyone who has spent any time around cattle has surely seen one heifer hump another. This is pretty common among other ungulates as well. I've seen it in whitetail deer.
Some fish seem to change gender as casually as we change our socks, although this is a hetrosexual breeding strategy. Others start out as males, then change to female. All of the big largemouth bass are female, for example.
So if you take procreation out of the equasion, where does this leave us? What exactly is "natural" sexual behavior? I rather think that it depends on the individual; "whatever floats yer boat," as they say.
But some boats don't float all that well in our various societies, and this brings up an interesting question: It has been stated long and loud by the usual suspects that homosexuality is a choice. Then we look at Iran, where they execute gays every time they find any, and we wonder; are their gays so hung up on their version of sex that they'd choose to risk hanging for it? Haven't heard any of the usual suspects answer that one yet & don't expect to.
| Why do you think that is? |
I am not a social scientist, but I'd say from growing up in the "sticks" in a time when everybody was either a bit homophobic or so far in the closet that the only daylight they saw was last week's. That homophobia includes my family and myself, although I've mellowed considerably over time.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 00:56:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
It was at least two years ago and involved mostly VD, Marf, you and myself. |
Wow, sounds like quite a party. I hope the VD has cleared up.
I know that was somewhat puerile, but some opportunities are just too good to pass up.
|
John's just this guy, you know. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 03:43:04 [Permalink]
|
I wish I could get VD.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 05:00:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
I wish I could get VD.
|
Not to worry, we can hook you up for a mere two bits an hour.
Or is that too expensive? Don't want to price her out of the market, y'know.
Oh hell, make an offer!
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 07:51:35 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: That's not true. I remember a while back you agreeing with me that homosexuality did not appear to be natural. If you recall this got MARF all is a tissy and she went on and on about your age and rural location being the main factor behind your observance.
…
I looked but it must be archived. It was a good 2 years ago by now. I am surprised you don't remember. It was funny because Marf went off when you said it. She started rambling on and on about your advanced age and living back in the sticks is what caused you to come to your conclusion. |
Given that filthy apparently doesn't even recall this, whatever I wrote couldn't have been very offensive, if offensive at all. I vaguely remember this incident, and I think you are misrepresenting what was said by both myself an filthy. All the archived stuff is available, you just have to take the time to search for it. If you don't know how, PM a moderator about it. If you can't quote the original argument, you're just being a jerk giving a questionable summary that describes me in such a unfavorable light.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 09/29/2007 08:06:36 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 08:03:12 [Permalink]
|
Humbert made this excellent point: | Yes, but if these politicians are married with children, then this dishonesty goes far beyond the "this guy lied to get my vote" spin that Bill is trying to put on it. These guys' whole lives are exercises in denial. We're talking deep, deep psychological repression here. |
Indeed, Craig did not lie to get votes. Craig lied because he is totally ashamed of his own homosexual urges and actions. He's probably in denial of them, too. There is a whole culture of men who tell themselves – and sometimes others, too – that a little "dick on the side" doesn't make them gay, or that if they are a top and only have sex with men (opposed to having relationships and feelings of love) they aren't really gay.
Bill keeps saying Craig should go to some more liberal state and run for office. First of all, even in the most liberal areas of this country, it would not be a plus to be a homosexual who is married to a woman and only has casual sex with men. This isn't an activity that is exactly embraced by gay communities. Rather, it marks fear, shame, and denial. And if he was not married, and simply a gay "swinger", I don't think that would be popular either. If he were to be an out gay man politician, he would do best to have either a partner or a series of meaningful relationships. Like anyone else, most liberals respect love and loyalty and are distrustful of emotionally vacuous hedonism.
As far as Craig's politics go, he probably means every word of his anti-gay and pro-"traditional family values" crap, even as he fails to live up to it. To say that he could be successful as a politician in a liberal region is absurd. He would first have to fundamentally change ever aspect of his political being. Craig is absolutely a product of the conservative culture he aims to represent. He is exactly where he belongs.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 08:05:46 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: | Homosexuality is a dead end road as far as preservation of the species goes. |
Homosexual behavior is common enough that to call it a dead end as far as preservation of the species goes shows ignorance of much thought and research on the subject. For example, I read an article from the scientific journal "Human Evolution" a few years ago that talked about the evolutionary advantages of homosexual monkeys who spent an inordinate amount of time helping their siblings raise their children, and thus increasing the chances of survival in their nieces and nephews.
Another example is the bonobo explanation, which says that bisexuality can be a huge social benefit, which increases changes of survival. in that case, pure homosexuality is just one extreme on a scale of common sexual orientations (measured by the Kinsey scale). Genetic traits can be easily magnified by two similar parents. Couples who both have Asperger's Syndrome (a very mild form of autism) are more likely to produce a child with full-blown autism, so it stands to reason that two people with bisexuality are more likely to produce a homosexual child. If bisexuality can be an evolutionary advantage in some context, it will persist. And as long as there are bisexual people, there are likely to also be homosexual people, regardless of whether or not homosexual people procreate. Perfectly natural, rational, and not an evolutionary dead end at all.
| It is rather obvious that the design intent was for the man and women to engage in sexual intercourse and this produces life. |
The "design intent"? Frankly, Bill, part of the reason I'm a stanch atheist is because when I look at the world around me and human beings up close, it seems obvious that there is no design intent, only accidents of nature, geared toward survival, some working more efficiently than other, in whatever immediate environment they happen to be in.
| Man on man and women on women sex produces nothing but ultimate despair. So to combat the natural process the homosexual couple may use an artificial way to obtain children, since the homosexual way is a dead end. |
Yes, sex is how we procreate, and since individuals die, survival necessitates procreation. That hardly makes it obvious that procreation is the only purpose of sexual activities and feelings. And to put a moral judgment based purely on biological mechanics is an either bigger stretch. Sorry to be graphic, but you opened this can of worms: is it immoral for a woman with an very tight and small vaginal canal to have sex with a man with a thick, 10-inch penis? I mean, that don't fit together in the "normal" way either, but if people are in love, that should be more important than biological mechanics that can be overcome through creativity.
The bottom line is that sexuality in social animals plays a much greater role than just procreation. I don't sleep with my husband to produce children, and probably never will, but we do it for a just-as-noble purpose.
It kills me when Christians – who are so often claiming that humans are more than animals – fall back on the "natural" argument against homosexuality. We aren't mere animals. We don't just hump to procreate. We do it to express love, mutual desire, and other complex emotions. It is a form of intense physical communication, one of the most potentially powerful and meaningful acts we can take in our routine lives and that bring two people closer together. To reduce its primary purpose to procreation (something people are rarely thinking about when they have sex) is to strip sex of its many other rich meanings. It is to reduce our very humanity and paint us as mere animals.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 09/29/2007 08:10:23 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 08:26:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
Originally posted by HalfMooner
I wish I could get VD.
|
Not to worry, we can hook you up for a mere two bits an hour.
[Image omitted to protect eyes and souls.]
Or is that too expensive? Don't want to price her out of the market, y'know.
Oh hell, make an offer!
|
Just looking at that chicken-head has me itching all over, thank you.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 08:45:15 [Permalink]
|
Bill, it took me exactly 4 minutes to find this exchange (from February of 2006, not 2 years ago) doing an advanced search of the SFN forums. Filthy's original comment starts on page 12: Link
Here's an abridged version of exchange between you, me, and filthy:
filthy: | And fair enough, I think. But I'm reminded that there are some churches that would marry gays, and these should not be prevented from doing so with whatever religious trappings they employ. As for child adoption, I really don't know. On the one hand, it doesn't seem natural; on the other, gay couples of both genders have successfully raised children origionally belonging to one or the other prior to divorce. So, I'll abstain on that one. |
marf:| Oh, come on, filthy! Are you telling me that we should ever be basing laws on what seems natural (and seriously, what the hell does that even mean? That 4-5% of the population is unnatural?), despite the fact that there is ZERO EVIDENCE that gays make worse parents than straights? I think you are allowing your being uncomfortable with gay men to interfere with your reasoning. |
Note that I went off on filthy because I thought he was taking a neutral stance on whether or not gays should be able to adopt children, not because he said homosexuality seems unnatural.
filthy responded with a clarification:| Not at all. Perhaps I worded my statement poorly. I am a little unsure of it, is all. Actually, I believe that any home that is supportive and not abusive, and always works in the best interests of the child, is an acceptable one. Uncertain as I might be, I would rather see a child with a caring and stable, gay couple than one of the straight families that we read about all too often. And all too often, we read that the parents are super-Christians. I think that the real question is: how do you determine that a couple, gay, straight, or undecided, is a stable family unit, my own discomfort not withstanding? |
bill's response to filthy's original statement: | I give Filthy credit here. When he thinks he is right he does not back down, but when he sees a red flag he does not just toss it aside and tow the party line. So while Filthy's intellect told him to read more “studies,” his gut told him that something did not seem right here? (unnatural) Go with your gut Filthy. |
marf: Yeah, Filthy. Go with your gut. Not your brain or nothin'.
Bill, I've been in favor of gay rights ever since I was 12 and first heard about what homosexuality was. My response at that age was to shrug and say “Oh, people do that too? OK.” Given Filthy's age and gender, it is hardly surprising that his gut makes him uncomfortable with homosexuality. My dad isn't totally comfortable with it either. But my 25-year-old brother has had a gay male roommate, curren |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 09/29/2007 08:52:07 |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 10:27:18 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| But why not? There are far-right conservative Repbulican gay men, Bill. I mean, they do exist. Your only point of difference with them would probably be that they're going to Hell and you're not. |
I have given up on titles for politicians. Look at Craig, he played the role of family man and completely denies being one bit homosexual, in light of contradicting evidence. Are we really to believe that he is the only one who cloaks himself as something he is not, from either side of the isle? And, yes, this applies to the pubs who preach family values. I am sure there are cons among them as well.
Then you can see why I have a big problem with Craig. And I would assume that you do as well.
| Oh, I certainly do, but if I voted for you, it would have been because I knew that you understand that your constituency comprises people of many different faiths (and none at all), and so justifying certain legislative votes on your faith would be to do a disservice to those you represent. |
Oh please, GWB pushes for the legislation that defines marriages as between a man and women. He does so based on his beliefs about homosexuality.
| I do, but the same expectation would exist. On top of that, the "homosexual agenda" is a myth. A gay representative isn't going to try to legislate gayness. |
Without even debating the homosexual agenda I wound find it to be a remote chance that I would vote for a open one as I seem to agree very little with the homosexuals that I know and with the known homosexuals already in office.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2007 : 10:35:36 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by filthy |
This has been remarked upon in here before; homosexuality is very common among many other species. Also, it seems to be restricted to birds and mammals. There is a school of thought that considers virtually all bonobos bisexual, the ultimate playboys/girls.
Incidently, anyone who has spent any time around cattle has surely seen one heifer hump another. This is pretty common among other ungulates as well. I've seen it in whitetail deer. |
Yeah, and many dogs will hump a tree until the heifers come home. It shows the dog will result to natural, or unnatural, means to try and relieve his urges.
And if I am not mistaken, the only living being on this planet that has the ability to have sexual intercourse face to face, and has the ability, and the desire, to share affection in this, the most commonly used of positions.
| Some fish seem to change gender as casually as we change our socks, although this is a hetrosexual breeding strategy. Others start out as males, then change to female. All of the big largemouth bass are female, for example. |
So what? Humans in SF start out as male and end up as female all the time. Does not mean they achieved this naturally, nor does it put them on par with the largemouth bass.
| So if you take procreation out of the equasion, where does this leave us? What exactly is "natural" sexual behavior? I rather think that it depends on the individual; "whatever floats yer boat," as they say. |
Why would you ever take the procreation equation out of it? Obviously, the procreation equation is the most important part of the sexual experience. This is what proliferates the species.
| But some boats don't float all that well in our various societies, and this brings up an interesting question: It has been stated long and loud by the usual suspects that homosexuality is a choice. Then we look at Iran, where they execute gays every time they find any, and we wonder; are their gays so hung up on their version of sex that they'd choose to risk hanging for it? Haven't heard any of the usual suspects answer that one yet & don't expect to. |
People risk their lives all the time to have the kind of sex they want to have. People have unprotected sex with multiple partners, all the time knowing they are playing Russian roulette with their lives and heath.
| I am not a social scientist, but I'd say from growing up in the "sticks" in a time when everybody was either a bit homophobic or so far in the closet that the only daylight they saw was last week's. That homophobia includes my family and myself, although I've mellowed considerably over time. |
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 09/29/2007 10:39:19 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Craig returns, 1st votes against hate crime act
