Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

More gays in the world?

Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2009 5:44:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Hey.
I know I can't say anything with the word gay in it without some gay people getting mad. But I am going to ask anyway.

Do you think that there are more gays in the world now compared to the 1800?
Or do you think that there were just as much but they stayed hidden?
kfc
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2009 6:10:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/23/2009 5:44:03 PM, Koopin wrote:
Hey.
I know I can't say anything with the word gay in it without some gay people getting mad. But I am going to ask anyway.

Do you think that there are more gays in the world now compared to the 1800?

Yes, there are also a lot more people generally. :)

Or do you think that there were just as much but they stayed hidden?

I think there's prolly around the same percentage that naturally tend to be gay
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2009 6:40:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/23/2009 6:17:19 PM, Mirza wrote:
I don't think we will ever have an answer on this.

I think the logical answer is roughly the same naturally tend that way.

Culture is obviously a huge factor in how people turn out, and how they decide to present themselves, but I think it's clear there's a physical component which I see no reason to think ought be any different now than then.

If it comes out that widespread modern chemicals or something or other somehow affects these things my understanding may change considerably, but for the moment it would seem that it is mostly a tendancy with a strong, regular, and natural, physical component.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Procrastarian
Posts: 21
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/23/2009 8:28:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I think the percentage has climbed a little because societies are far kinder towards gays in modern times. I think there are some people who will be gay no matter what time they live in and some people who are on the fence enough that an anti-gay social environment would make them straight.
Homosexuality is caused by both biology and society. The biological component hasn't changed, but the societal component has made it easier to be gay.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2009 7:47:39 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
More exist because more are visible. People aren't afraid to come out as gay. More people identify themselves as gay is all.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2009 1:31:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/23/2009 5:44:03 PM, Koopin wrote:
Hey.
I know I can't say anything with the word gay in it without some gay people getting mad. But I am going to ask anyway.

Do you think that there are more gays in the world now compared to the 1800?
Or do you think that there were just as much but they stayed hidden?

It is all on how you define gay.
If gay meant that they were attracted to the opposite sex and want to bang them, then it is the same in the 1800 as today

If by gay you mean that the have to act on those feelings than no.

Back than it was not acceptable so more people suppress it and married women, had children, dying with out truly being themselves.

So it is all in how you define "being gay"
It is hard to answer, but i would suspect that same amount of gay people.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 4:30:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/24/2009 2:06:08 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
There were more gay clubs in the 1800s but they were underground

Well they had to be since being gay was considered a criminal offense, likely since much less was understood about it. With that being said, gay people would have been alot less open about their sexuality back in those days.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 4:35:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 4:30:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 12/24/2009 2:06:08 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
There were more gay clubs in the 1800s but they were underground

Well they had to be since being gay was considered a criminal offense, likely since much less was understood about it. With that being said, gay people would have been alot less open about their sexuality back in those days.

I am glad we are past those days.

Man that had to be tough.

Too bad they are still considered social outlaws in some places and feel like they still need to remain "underground" to be accepted.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 4:40:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 4:35:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 12/29/2009 4:30:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 12/24/2009 2:06:08 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
There were more gay clubs in the 1800s but they were underground

Well they had to be since being gay was considered a criminal offense, likely since much less was understood about it. With that being said, gay people would have been alot less open about their sexuality back in those days.

I am glad we are past those days.

Man that had to be tough.

Too bad they are still considered social outlaws in some places and feel like they still need to remain "underground" to be accepted.

Yes, sadly there's still people out there who won't accept homosexuality. Sure I don't neccesary agree with it, but I still accept gays for who they are.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 4:41:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 4:40:29 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 12/29/2009 4:35:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 12/29/2009 4:30:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 12/24/2009 2:06:08 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
There were more gay clubs in the 1800s but they were underground

Well they had to be since being gay was considered a criminal offense, likely since much less was understood about it. With that being said, gay people would have been alot less open about their sexuality back in those days.

I am glad we are past those days.

Man that had to be tough.

Too bad they are still considered social outlaws in some places and feel like they still need to remain "underground" to be accepted.

Yes, sadly there's still people out there who won't accept homosexuality. Sure I don't neccesary agree with it, but I still accept gays for who they are.

I think i am there also. Some what. Yeah.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 4:43:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 4:41:15 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 12/29/2009 4:40:29 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 12/29/2009 4:35:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 12/29/2009 4:30:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 12/24/2009 2:06:08 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
There were more gay clubs in the 1800s but they were underground

Well they had to be since being gay was considered a criminal offense, likely since much less was understood about it. With that being said, gay people would have been alot less open about their sexuality back in those days.

I am glad we are past those days.

Man that had to be tough.

Too bad they are still considered social outlaws in some places and feel like they still need to remain "underground" to be accepted.

Yes, sadly there's still people out there who won't accept homosexuality. Sure I don't neccesary agree with it, but I still accept gays for who they are.

I think i am there also. Some what. Yeah.

For that reason I support gay marriage. It's their choice. Besides, them marrying isn't harming anybody.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 4:47:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 4:43:47 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
For that reason I support gay marriage. It's their choice. Besides, them marrying isn't harming anybody.

Yeah, i am coming around to it.
I think.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 5:21:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 4:43:47 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
For that reason I support gay marriage. It's their choice. Besides, them marrying isn't harming anybody.
First they want to be together, fine. It's about their love. Then they want to marry, which technically shouldn't mean anything. Then they want to be allowed to adopt kids. This is where the ground starts to shake. I think it would be a disaster if any society should have so many kids that are adopted to gay parents that you don't know whether they have a mother/father or not. Who knows what the long-term effects would be.

I think homosexuals should understand that it should be enough for them to feel love, and that they aren't only different in sexual orientation, but different in other things too. They aren't allowed to reproduce by natural law with each other, so they're different. Therefore they should not be allowed to adopt children. It says itself.

Besides, this can end to being a catastrophe in a society. Then transsexuals would adopt kids, and a kid would be raised by a mother/father who are man/woman. Isn't it just enough to love each other and understand that you're different?
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 5:25:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 5:21:23 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 12/29/2009 4:43:47 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
For that reason I support gay marriage. It's their choice. Besides, them marrying isn't harming anybody.
First they want to be together, fine. It's about their love. Then they want to marry, which technically shouldn't mean anything. Then they want to be allowed to adopt kids. This is where the ground starts to shake. I think it would be a disaster if any society should have so many kids that are adopted to gay parents that you don't know whether they have a mother/father or not. Who knows what the long-term effects would be.

I think homosexuals should understand that it should be enough for them to feel love, and that they aren't only different in sexual orientation, but different in other things too. They aren't allowed to reproduce by natural law with each other, so they're different. Therefore they should not be allowed to adopt children. It says itself.

Besides, this can end to being a catastrophe in a society. Then transsexuals would adopt kids, and a kid would be raised by a mother/father who are man/woman. Isn't it just enough to love each other and understand that you're different?

Think about it though. There's alot of straight couples who end up having children only to have them be abused and/or neglected. Children in these situations could be adopted by loving gay parents. Wouldn't it be better for a child to be in a stable situation with gay parents rather than a poor situation with straight parents?
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 5:33:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 5:25:19 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Think about it though. There's alot of straight couples who end up having children only to have them be abused and/or neglected. Children in these situations could be adopted by loving gay parents. Wouldn't it be better for a child to be in a stable situation with gay parents rather than a poor situation with straight parents?
Unfortunately we cannot ban having children for some couples, because we do not know whether they want children for good or bad purposes. In terms of religion, it's a sin in Islam, so Muslims who fear God would generally never do this.

As for a child having it better with gay couples, you mean that if the parents are bad, then the kids should be allowed to be adopted to better parents, i.e. homosexual ones? If that's what you mean, then I'd rather say they should be adopted to good straight parents.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 5:43:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 5:33:43 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 12/29/2009 5:25:19 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Think about it though. There's alot of straight couples who end up having children only to have them be abused and/or neglected. Children in these situations could be adopted by loving gay parents. Wouldn't it be better for a child to be in a stable situation with gay parents rather than a poor situation with straight parents?
Unfortunately we cannot ban having children for some couples, because we do not know whether they want children for good or bad purposes. In terms of religion, it's a sin in Islam, so Muslims who fear God would generally never do this.

As for a child having it better with gay couples, you mean that if the parents are bad, then the kids should be allowed to be adopted to better parents, i.e. homosexual ones? If that's what you mean, then I'd rather say they should be adopted to good straight parents.

Yes, I realize that homosexuality is a sin in Islam(just like in most religions). However, I don't believe that homosexuals are barred from entering paradise after they die. I feel that somebody could be a good muslim in every other way while being homosexual. As for children being adopted by gay couples, you have to look at the scenario: There's two couples. One is a straight abusive couple while the other is a loving gay couple. Naturally I would favour the gay couple to adopt the child as they would be able to provide the most suitable living environment for it.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 6:12:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/29/2009 5:43:56 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Yes, I realize that homosexuality is a sin in Islam(just like in most religions). However, I don't believe that homosexuals are barred from entering paradise after they die. I feel that somebody could be a good muslim in every other way while being homosexual.
You can surely be a Muslim and homosexuals. Some people think that just being a homosexual means you're going to Hell. This is not true. The act itself is a sin, but even if practiced, it doesn't mean that you cannot go to Paradise. Rather you should always strive to do what is permitted, and fear God. Besides, if you don't repent of some sins before death, they can be forgiven by God, except if you don't repent being a polytheist.

As for children being adopted by gay couples, you have to look at the scenario: There's two couples. One is a straight abusive couple while the other is a loving gay couple. Naturally I would favour the gay couple to adopt the child as they would be able to provide the most suitable living environment for it.
If we can choose as good straight parents for a child then why actually choose a gay one? In fact, it could be very dangerous, as we really don't know how it would affect a child mentally. Perhaps better than if it were with a very bad straight couple, but as I said, alternatives to bad straight couples are good straight couples.