Solving the issue of homosexuality

[the cac mamba]

what a tolerant thread

 

[88m3]

what a tolerant thread

Their religion justifies their tolerance!

 

[Blackking]

what a tolerant thread

The only part that is my actual own opinion... is

I say that even if someone wasn't born gay - if something traumatic happened that made them want to be gay - then that is also mental along the lines of PTSD.

Side note: if it was accepted as a disorder there will be no barriers to any gay rights agendas.

but what I did learn is... Stay off scientific sites brehs....

 

[88m3]

but what I did learn is... Stay off scientific sites brehs....

scientific sites make brehs gay,breh?

 

[The Real]

I agree they can be parents and productive members of society. It's strange to me that they are overrepresented in the media and TV shows - not sure if there is an agenda, but it seems very strange - what do you think about the cool to be gay push??? However, our species wouldn't be here today if everyone had this disorder, so there really is a fine line with claiming something isn't a debilitating element.

It's true that our species wouldn't be here without homos, but conversely, they wouldn't be here without straight people having kids. They've never been a growing population, and since they can't have kids, they can never spread their own sexuality. I'm not sure what you mean by the "cool to be gay" push. And again- disorder is determined on the basis of threat to oneself or to others. A homosexual individual, even by their very existence, doesn't threaten themselves or the rest of us. Assuming one day that suddenly the majority of the population of the world was homo, that wouldn't be their fault- it would be our own, since they don't reproduce, so the debilitating element would be traced to us, not them. There's no scenario under which it can be labeled their disorder.

Yeah I agree, but I'm not sure if that's what anyone is suggesting.

Not directly, but once you start getting into the "cure" language, that's the inevitable result in the end.

 

[Blackking]

It's true that our species wouldn't be here without homos, but conversely, they wouldn't be here without straight people having kids. They've never been a growing population, and since they can't have kids, they can never spread their own sexuality. I'm not sure what you mean by the "cool to be gay" push. And again- disorder is determined on the basis of threat to oneself or to others. A homosexual individual, even by their very existence, doesn't threaten themselves or the rest of us. Assuming one day that suddenly the majority of the population of the world was homo, that wouldn't be their fault- it would be our own, since they don't reproduce, so the debilitating element would be traced to us, not them. There's no scenario under which it can be labeled their disorder.

I feel that labeling it a disorder would help out the gay rights debate and issues.. It truly would, so why are gays against that idea? Clearly something that only affects 5%, includes very flamboyant men, and scientist are researching the causes of.. is gonna be considered defective by most people. I didn't even post the other research breaking down behaviors, testosterone, brain functions, etc... cuz that would have just been too much for u guys.... Seems to me like they are trying to figure out the disorder without calling it a disorder or defect for PC reasons.


I mean what do you think of this statement ?

It's been said that homosexual behavior is natural in the sense that it is extensively found in nature. It has been observed in: antelopes, boars, bulls, chimpanzees, cows, ducks, cats, dogs, fruit flies, geese, gorillas, gulls, horses, humans, langurs, rams, sheep, macaques, monkeys, turkeys and vervets. Homosexuality exists in proven ratios in all mammal species....It is as natural as blue eyes, left-handedness, or the genetic predisposition to walk on two legs. Whiptail lizards, (Cnemidophorus neomexicanus) found in the American southwest, are all females. They reproduce by parthenogenesis. Unfertilized eggs develop, producing an exact clone of its mother. Even though no males exist, the females still exhibit sexual mating behavior. Those that attract a partner have been found to produce more and healthier eggs. Homosexuality exists in proven ratios in all
However, chemical imbalances and chromosomal disorders are ABNORMALITIES in nature. blue eyes, left-handedness, etc are neither of these things, but simply inherent traits; they are part of our genetic makeup which was originally formed due to environmental conditions, but now is just code passed down through offspring. simply because its found in nature doesnt mean its natural. nature makes mistakes, to put it bluntly. defects, mutations, and abnormalities exist all throught the animal (as well as plant) kingdom; some more apparent than others. human beings, as do most animals, have two sexes to further the species through procreation. we are predispositioned to be attracted to the opposite sex in order to mate. since two memebers of the same sex cannot procreate, there is no bilogical reason for two like sexes to have a physical or chemical attraction to each other.

Not directly, but once you start getting into the "cure" language, that's the inevitable result in the end.

Then why are they using money and researching the possible genes, brain disorders, birth defects n all that shyt?? fyi most civilized societies don't have a problem with gay people. In certain cultures, like in America, gay = hip in pop culture.... There won't be any gay hate or round up regardless of what they determine about the subject.

 

[The Real]

I feel that labeling it a disorder would help out the gay rights debate and issues.. It truly would, so why are gays against that idea? Clearly something that only affects 5%, includes very flamboyant men, and scientist are researching the causes of.. is gonna be considered defective by most people. I didn't even post the other research breaking down behaviors, testosterone, brain functions, etc... cuz that would have just been too much for u guys.... Seems to me like they are trying to figure out the disorder without calling it a disorder or defect for PC reasons.

They're against the idea because disorder is a label of negative value. Homosexuality can be studied just fine without labeling it a disorder.

I mean what do you think of this statement ?

I think it's not science. It commits the fallacy of functionalism, by conflating statistical normality, or how common something is, with a metaphysical judgment of value. Nature can only make mistakes if it's preprogrammed, even if imperfectly, for a particular purpose, and thus can be judged according to the value of its specific developments in serving that purpose. That's an argument with religious origins, even when it's disguised. For example, when someone says "the purpose of life is to reproduce," that is a functionalist fallacy, since it assumes nature is the vessel of some kind of end goal, and then that phenomena that help towards achieving this end are thus inherently good while those that do not are inherently bad. Even having the instinct to reproduce in one's DNA does not and cannot demonstrate that reproduction is a goal in this ultimately religious sense, and thus, cannot be used to judge people who do not want to reproduce as bad in some way. Similarly, the author's distinction between homosexuality and left-handedness is completely unsupported and unsupportable without resorting to this same fallacy.

Life has no demonstrable purpose. It only has tendencies that we can measure and declare stronger or weaker. Thus, homosexuality is a statistical abnormality, or a weaker tendency, since it is not common- but being a statistical abnormality is not an indication of any inherent value or lack thereof. In other words, it's not unnatural. Being the result of uncommon genetic mutations and chemical ratios and life experiences doesn't make it unnatural.

If nature contains no inherent meanings and values, then the only meanings there are come from us. We have decided that something like depression is a disorder, because it impairs the ability of an individual by their own standards (and survival, or living a fulfilling life, or any other standard here, is ultimately man-made, even if it's influenced by instinct.) We have decided that psychosis is a disorder, because it not only impairs the individual, but can cause that individual to harm others around them. Homosexuality does none of these things. Therefore, it makes no sense to label it a disorder.

Then why are they using money and researching the possible genes, brain disorders, birth defects n all that shyt?? fyi most civilized societies don't have a problem with gay people. In certain cultures, like in America, gay = hip in pop culture.... There won't be any gay hate or round up regardless of what they determine about the subject.

Studying the origins of all these phenomena are useful for different reasons. Again, labeling homosexuality a disorder automatically leads to social and political problems because it devalues it to the status of something that must be fixed or otherwise eliminated, as with the other things that people label disorders.

 

[thekingsmen]

Because you deserve to be attacked personally if you think homosexuality is a disorder.

You got too much emotion in this subject. Are you homosexual?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Ya'll ever considered how much hatred and bigotry must be in these dudes hearts to type the shyt they're typing?

I mean PARAGRAPHS worth of material.

 

[thekingsmen]

Ya'll ever considered how much hatred and bigotry must be in these dudes hearts to type the shyt they're typing?

I mean PARAGRAPHS worth of material.

So when people discuss homosexuality outside the support it's hate and bigotry? Same kats who hate and bigot over religion are the first ones to claim this for homosexuals.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

So when people discuss homosexuality outside the support it's hate and bigotry? Same kats who hate and bigot over religion are the first ones to claim this for homosexuals.

This doesn't even make sense.

I'm not gay.

I'm not religious.

Therefore I must be gay?

Run that by me again.

 

[thekingsmen]

This doesn't even make sense.

I'm not gay.

I'm not religious.

Therefore I must be gay?

Run that by me again.

Yes but since you jumped the gun too soon, let me rewind it back for you. Those who want to discuss homosexuality who don't support it are considered bigots and have hatred in their hearts by those who support homosexuality and hate and bigot over religion.

 

[The Real]

Yes but since you jumped the gun too soon, let me rewind it back for you. Those who want to discuss homosexuality who don't support it are considered bigots and have hatred in their hearts by those who support homosexuality and hate and bigot over religion.

Bigotry is about hating a group of people. Hating a religion doesn't make you a bigot unless you treat the followers of that religion with hatred. If I say I hate Christianity, but treat all Christians the same as everyone else, then I'm not a bigot.

People who discuss homos outside of "support" aren't necessarily bigots either, though they are wrong in their views.

 

[thekingsmen]

Bigotry is about hating a group of people. Hating a religion doesn't make you a bigot unless you treat the followers of that religion with hatred. If I say I hate Christianity, but treat all Christians the same as everyone else, then I'm not a bigot.

People who discuss homos outside of "support" aren't necessarily bigots either, though they are wrong in their views.

1. Hating Christians or any religious group....which are a group of people is bigotry...plain and simple. Hating the institution is your own problem.

2. Wrong in their views why? Cause it doesn't go with your views?

 

[Brown Ant]

Being gay is the only mental disease that is glorified as 'good.' Population control :