Total Posts:105|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Do you support gay marriage?

katebutler
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2013 1:24:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm actually very curious to hear about this, and i think its probably been posted before but im new so let's start afresh!
i'm on the bench about gay marriage, because i'm an atheist and so i am fully supportive of gay people all over the world, but i'm not sure whether it's right to test religion and force them to change.
still, i don't quite know the boundaries or classifications of marriage around the world, so let's hear everyone's views! don't hold back, i'm looking forward to it!
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2013 1:48:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/29/2013 1:24:25 AM, katebutler wrote:
I'm actually very curious to hear about this, and i think its probably been posted before but im new so let's start afresh!
i'm on the bench about gay marriage, because i'm an atheist and so i am fully supportive of gay people all over the world, but i'm not sure whether it's right to test religion and force them to change.
still, i don't quite know the boundaries or classifications of marriage around the world, so let's hear everyone's views! don't hold back, i'm looking forward to it!

I'm gay, and a Christian, and I support gay marriage.

Surprise.

lol
Tsar of DDO
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2013 2:34:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
What do you mean, "i'm not sure whether it's right to test religion and force them to change."

The first question you should ask is do you believe that separation of church and state is a universally good idea. Meaning good for any and every country. If yes, then you can argue that allowing gay marriage on the state level is separate from forcing religious people to accept gay marriage (by allowing the state to marry people and not forcing pastors to do it).

If no, then the society that is better off with the church running it should do what the church supports.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 12:00:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yes. Of course.

I take my view from a non-religious standpoint though...
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 12:29:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/29/2013 1:24:25 AM, katebutler wrote:
I'm actually very curious to hear about this, and i think its probably been posted before but im new so let's start afresh!
i'm on the bench about gay marriage, because i'm an atheist and so i am fully supportive of gay people all over the world, but i'm not sure whether it's right to test religion and force them to change.
still, i don't quite know the boundaries or classifications of marriage around the world, so let's hear everyone's views! don't hold back, i'm looking forward to it!

I am a staunch supporter of homosexuals and gay marriage.
kiryasjoelvillage
Posts: 190
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 12:42:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Totally supported!

Why shouldn't it be supported?
Just because two people fell in love, why should any religion define them?
Nobody has given anybody the rights of not-falling-in-love!
Why is it even considered a crime, It is weird that even broad minded people have to question this. Love is a feeling which comes from within, it shouldn't be moulded outside.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 3:37:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
"Homophobe" is a political term used by homosexual advocates.
Here is the legit medical term for reference:

homophobia
Type: Term

Definitions:
1. Irrational fear of homosexual feelings, thoughts, behaviors, or people.


http://www.medilexicon.com...

There is no irrationality or fear involved. Only logic.

1- Sexual orientation =/= Sexual behavior

Believing otherwise is the first pitfall.

Orientation is a subjective preference or a state of mind that is normally not consciously chosen. All states of mind are potentially subject to change, and they do not necessarily represent the person's behavior.
Perhabs homosexuals and heterosexuals are equal on that aspect, but so are pedophiles and every single sexual orientation you can think of. Thoughts and feelings have no implications and they are not judged.

Sexual behaviors are conscious unless rape is involved. Therefore, homosexuality is a conscious sexual behavior. Desire does not provide justification for behavior, otherwise every single behavior including murder can be justified. Society either requires or encourages people to suppress harmful behavior for the common good.

2- Equality & "Born this way"

No. Homosexuality is not equal to heterosexuality.
By believing otherwise you are suppressing a basic fundamental truth about being a human.

You see, heterosexuality is immutable. Every single human, with the exception of hermaphrodites, are either males or females with their respective reproductive system.
Any sexual feeling or desire is rooted within chemicals and processes in that heterosexual design.
Therefore, heterosexuality is an objective physical reality.

For homosexuality to be equal to heterosexuality, homosexuals need to have their own physiology or gender. The truth is, homosexuals are human beings, who are unchangeably heterosexual, who identify themselves with engaging or the desire to engage in same-sex conduct.

Biologically, homosexuals are not different than thousands of other paraphilia like pedophilia or bestiality. In the end they are heterosexual by design.

Then there is the "We are born this way"!
First of all, there is no scientific evidence other than outdated refuted studies from the 20th century. It is simply pseudo-science, a legal and political strategy.
Second of all, it doesn't matter. Nobody except people sucked into political agendas believe in biological determinism. Unless you have an extremely severe mental illness, you have the freedom of choice.

3- Civil rights & Marriage

Isn't it insulting to compare a cultural behavior to the oppression black people had?
Were homosexuals hunted, captured, decapitated, traded, forced into servitude, or placed in zoos?

Regardless. Homosexuals are citizens, they have all the obligations and rights as the person next door.
Civil right discrimination is treating equal parties unequally. As demonstrated above, they are equal as human beings. However, behavior is not included in civil rights.
Homosexuality is not objective and potentially changeable; there is no blood or DNA test that proves someone to be a homosexual. In fact, it would be impossible to tell whether someone is homosexual except by witnessing homosexual behavior or the person associates self with the said behavior.

And before someone brings up "Hate crimes pandemic!"...

According to the 2011 FBI hate crime report: http://www.fbi.gov... 1508 total sexual orientation hate crimes.
If we excluding intimidation and simple assault (pushing) we have about 637 violent hate crimes.
According to NCAVP which is a pro-homosexual organization: avp.org/resources/reports/term/summary
The reported domestic/partner violence among homosexuals in 2011 is roughly 3,930.

So statistically, 3930>1508 which means homosexuals were 260.6% more likely to receive violence amongst themselves than immature thugs in 2011. Epidemic.

I am astonished when those pushing political agenda focus on pushing hate crime laws (Punching a homosexual is a bigger offense than punching a grandmother since citizens don't deserve equal protection) when murder and theft statistics are massively larger.

Regarding marriage, I will only discuss it in legal terms.
First of all, the law does not care about love. You want to love? No body is stopping you: Go love your family, friends, partner in a romantic or non-romantic way. However, there is no check box in an official document that says "In love".

Homosexual marriage contract goes beyond being a private contract. It demands legal and social benefits, thus it becomes a public contract. However, I have yet to learn of a beneficial social function that is exclusive to homosexuality. If there is none, then the government is not entitled to legally protect and finance such a contract.

Furthermore, by recognizing a private behavior, the government promotes it which is unreasonable since if it is not innate, then it is acquired. Homosexuals accounted for more than 80% of the AIDS diagnosis in 2011.
www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics_surveillance_MSM.pdf

I hope this cleared up the main objections. Thanks for reading.
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:07:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 3:37:48 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
"Homophobe" is a political term used by homosexual advocates.
Here is the legit medical term for reference:

homophobia
Type: Term

Definitions:
1. Irrational fear of homosexual feelings, thoughts, behaviors, or people.


http://www.medilexicon.com...


There is no irrationality or fear involved. Only logic.

1- Sexual orientation =/= Sexual behavior

Believing otherwise is the first pitfall.

Orientation is a subjective preference or a state of mind that is normally not consciously chosen. All states of mind are potentially subject to change, and they do not necessarily represent the person's behavior.
Perhabs homosexuals and heterosexuals are equal on that aspect, but so are pedophiles and every single sexual orientation you can think of. Thoughts and feelings have no implications and they are not judged.

Sexual behaviors are conscious unless rape is involved. Therefore, homosexuality is a conscious sexual behavior. Desire does not provide justification for behavior, otherwise every single behavior including murder can be justified. Society either requires or encourages people to suppress harmful behavior for the common good.

2- Equality & "Born this way"

No. Homosexuality is not equal to heterosexuality.
By believing otherwise you are suppressing a basic fundamental truth about being a human.

You see, heterosexuality is immutable. Every single human, with the exception of hermaphrodites, are either males or females with their respective reproductive system.
Any sexual feeling or desire is rooted within chemicals and processes in that heterosexual design.
Therefore, heterosexuality is an objective physical reality.

For homosexuality to be equal to heterosexuality, homosexuals need to have their own physiology or gender. The truth is, homosexuals are human beings, who are unchangeably heterosexual, who identify themselves with engaging or the desire to engage in same-sex conduct.

Biologically, homosexuals are not different than thousands of other paraphilia like pedophilia or bestiality. In the end they are heterosexual by design.


Then there is the "We are born this way"!
First of all, there is no scientific evidence other than outdated refuted studies from the 20th century. It is simply pseudo-science, a legal and political strategy.
Second of all, it doesn't matter. Nobody except people sucked into political agendas believe in biological determinism. Unless you have an extremely severe mental illness, you have the freedom of choice.


3- Civil rights & Marriage

Isn't it insulting to compare a cultural behavior to the oppression black people had?
Were homosexuals hunted, captured, decapitated, traded, forced into servitude, or placed in zoos?


Regardless. Homosexuals are citizens, they have all the obligations and rights as the person next door.
Civil right discrimination is treating equal parties unequally. As demonstrated above, they are equal as human beings. However, behavior is not included in civil rights.
Homosexuality is not objective and potentially changeable; there is no blood or DNA test that proves someone to be a homosexual. In fact, it would be impossible to tell whether someone is homosexual except by witnessing homosexual behavior or the person associates self with the said behavior.

And before someone brings up "Hate crimes pandemic!"...

According to the 2011 FBI hate crime report: http://www.fbi.gov... 1508 total sexual orientation hate crimes.
If we excluding intimidation and simple assault (pushing) we have about 637 violent hate crimes.
According to NCAVP which is a pro-homosexual organization: avp.org/resources/reports/term/summary
The reported domestic/partner violence among homosexuals in 2011 is roughly 3,930.

So statistically, 3930>1508 which means homosexuals were 260.6% more likely to receive violence amongst themselves than immature thugs in 2011. Epidemic.

I am astonished when those pushing political agenda focus on pushing hate crime laws (Punching a homosexual is a bigger offense than punching a grandmother since citizens don't deserve equal protection) when murder and theft statistics are massively larger.


Regarding marriage, I will only discuss it in legal terms.
First of all, the law does not care about love. You want to love? No body is stopping you: Go love your family, friends, partner in a romantic or non-romantic way. However, there is no check box in an official document that says "In love".


Homosexual marriage contract goes beyond being a private contract. It demands legal and social benefits, thus it becomes a public contract. However, I have yet to learn of a beneficial social function that is exclusive to homosexuality. If there is none, then the government is not entitled to legally protect and finance such a contract.

Furthermore, by recognizing a private behavior, the government promotes it which is unreasonable since if it is not innate, then it is acquired. Homosexuals accounted for more than 80% of the AIDS diagnosis in 2011.
www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics_surveillance_MSM.pdf


I hope this cleared up the main objections. Thanks for reading.

If I were grading that as a college paper, I would probably give that about a D-, because of the extent to which you make asinine logical leaps, baseless assertions and include irrelevant information that doesn't actually prove your point.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...
Tsar of DDO
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:26:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...

Oh no! Please raise the grade a bit and tell me what I did wrong! I promise I will use the APA format next time!
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:30:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:26:16 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...

Oh no! Please raise the grade a bit and tell me what I did wrong! I promise I will use the APA format next time!

I actually wouldn't care how you cited your sources, so long as you did, and it wasn't in an unrecognizable way. But, I'd make you rewrite it and then I'd grade it again. I'd also send you to the student union for writing assistance.
Tsar of DDO
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:33:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:26:16 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...

Oh no! Please raise the grade a bit and tell me what I did wrong! I promise I will use the APA format next time!

Most of what you said didn't really relate to gay marriage. Hate crimes? Really? Most people supporting gay marriage may think it will drive down murder, hate crime, and suicide rates, but it is rarely their main argument...

I would give it a D+.

I am against marriage, by the way. I am biased. ;)
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:34:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Your style, phraseology and structure are also problematic... but that's something that can only be fixed after you fix the basic logic of what you're trying to argue.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:35:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:33:08 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:26:16 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...

Oh no! Please raise the grade a bit and tell me what I did wrong! I promise I will use the APA format next time!

Most of what you said didn't really relate to gay marriage. Hate crimes? Really? Most people supporting gay marriage may think it will drive down murder, hate crime, and suicide rates, but it is rarely their main argument...

I would give it a D+.

I am against marriage, by the way. I am biased. ;)

Welcome back, 16k!
Tsar of DDO
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:37:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:35:58 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:33:08 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:26:16 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...

Oh no! Please raise the grade a bit and tell me what I did wrong! I promise I will use the APA format next time!

Most of what you said didn't really relate to gay marriage. Hate crimes? Really? Most people supporting gay marriage may think it will drive down murder, hate crime, and suicide rates, but it is rarely their main argument...

I would give it a D+.

I am against marriage, by the way. I am biased. ;)

Welcome back, 16k!

Thanks. Haven't decided whether or not I will stay, since my computer that lures me to gaming is broken. :P
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:39:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...

Atypically, this isn't very constructive input.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:41:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Since there is no actual objections presented on my arguments, other than complains about not using an academic format on the internet and admittedly biased baseless assertions, I am satisfied.

Good day to you professor emeritus. :)
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:47:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 3:37:48 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
"Homophobe" is a political term used by homosexual advocates.
Here is the legit medical term for reference:

homophobia
Type: Term

Definitions:
1. Irrational fear of homosexual feelings, thoughts, behaviors, or people.


http://www.medilexicon.com...


There is no irrationality or fear involved. Only logic.

1- Sexual orientation =/= Sexual behavior

Believing otherwise is the first pitfall.

Orientation is a subjective preference or a state of mind that is normally not consciously chosen. All states of mind are potentially subject to change, and they do not necessarily represent the person's behavior.
Perhabs homosexuals and heterosexuals are equal on that aspect, but so are pedophiles and every single sexual orientation you can think of. Thoughts and feelings have no implications and they are not judged.

Sexual behaviors are conscious unless rape is involved. Therefore, homosexuality is a conscious sexual behavior. Desire does not provide justification for behavior, otherwise every single behavior including murder can be justified. Society either requires or encourages people to suppress harmful behavior for the common good.

Pedophilia vs. Homosexuality

Foremost, pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. It is depredation. Children are damaged by pedophiles, and they don't understand what is happening to them. Rather than sharing a sexual experience, pedophiles force a sexual experience on children in a way that is self-serving, exploitative, and traumatic. Pedophiles do not court children; they do not seduce children; they do not make those children happy. They, instead, manipulate those children, and often hurt them just as badly physically as they do mentally.

Homosexuals, on the other hand, do not hurt one another, nor do they rely on manipulation. They share a common interest and a common attraction which they act on to engage a mutual, healthy, natural adult relationship.
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:49:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:39:43 AM, Such wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:23:52 AM, YYW wrote:
At 12/30/2013 10:12:20 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh no! Oh unbiased professor... When are your office hours so we can discuss the paper?

I am biased. I'm gay, and extremely liberal -so, I have a perspective on what you're saying. But, just because I disagree with your paper doesn't mean that the grade you would have received is a reflection of my bias. It's only a reflection of your poor writing...

Atypically, this isn't very constructive input.

Yes, because I should have told him why he was in error rather than only told him that he was in error. That way, all the critical thinking could just be taken care of and he wouldn't have to challenge himself to do better.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:49:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:41:19 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Since there is no actual objections presented on my arguments, other than complains about not using an academic format on the internet and admittedly biased baseless assertions, I am satisfied.

Good day to you professor emeritus. :)

You're going to fail your entry level english classes if you write like that. I'm just letting you know...
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 10:51:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:41:19 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
Since there is no actual objections presented on my arguments, other than complains about not using an academic format on the internet and admittedly biased baseless assertions, I am satisfied.

Good day to you professor emeritus. :)

Or, rather, unless you go to Liberty University or something on par with it, you're going to fail your 100 level English classes -and presumably all others that involve writing unless you avail yourself to improve.
Tsar of DDO
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 11:05:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 10:47:27 AM, Such wrote:
At 12/30/2013 3:37:48 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
"Homophobe" is a political term used by homosexual advocates.
Here is the legit medical term for reference:

homophobia
Type: Term

Definitions:
1. Irrational fear of homosexual feelings, thoughts, behaviors, or people.


http://www.medilexicon.com...


There is no irrationality or fear involved. Only logic.

1- Sexual orientation =/= Sexual behavior

Believing otherwise is the first pitfall.

Orientation is a subjective preference or a state of mind that is normally not consciously chosen. All states of mind are potentially subject to change, and they do not necessarily represent the person's behavior.
Perhabs homosexuals and heterosexuals are equal on that aspect, but so are pedophiles and every single sexual orientation you can think of. Thoughts and feelings have no implications and they are not judged.

Sexual behaviors are conscious unless rape is involved. Therefore, homosexuality is a conscious sexual behavior. Desire does not provide justification for behavior, otherwise every single behavior including murder can be justified. Society either requires or encourages people to suppress harmful behavior for the common good.

Pedophilia vs. Homosexuality

Foremost, pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. It is depredation. Children are damaged by pedophiles, and they don't understand what is happening to them. Rather than sharing a sexual experience, pedophiles force a sexual experience on children in a way that is self-serving, exploitative, and traumatic. Pedophiles do not court children; they do not seduce children; they do not make those children happy. They, instead, manipulate those children, and often hurt them just as badly physically as they do mentally.

Homosexuals, on the other hand, do not hurt one another, nor do they rely on manipulation. They share a common interest and a common attraction which they act on to engage a mutual, healthy, natural adult relationship.

Ahh... Trying to shift the discussion from what can be objectivity and measured to morality. Fyi, I did not morally equate pedophile to anything in my post.

And yes, pedophilia as a term is a sexual inclination and a state of mind, therefore a sexual orientation. You should be careful about equating behavior with sexual orientation as you did with your description of homosexuality.

The implication of being a conscious private behavior is discussed on the third point.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 11:06:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 3:37:48 AM, Dragonfang wrote:

2- Equality & "Born this way"

No. Homosexuality is not equal to heterosexuality.
By believing otherwise you are suppressing a basic fundamental truth about being a human.

You see, heterosexuality is immutable. Every single human, with the exception of hermaphrodites, are either males or females with their respective reproductive system.
Any sexual feeling or desire is rooted within chemicals and processes in that heterosexual design.
Therefore, heterosexuality is an objective physical reality.

For homosexuality to be equal to heterosexuality, homosexuals need to have their own physiology or gender. The truth is, homosexuals are human beings, who are unchangeably heterosexual, who identify themselves with engaging or the desire to engage in same-sex conduct.

Biologically, homosexuals are not different than thousands of other paraphilia like pedophilia or bestiality. In the end they are heterosexual by design.


Then there is the "We are born this way"!
First of all, there is no scientific evidence other than outdated refuted studies from the 20th century. It is simply pseudo-science, a legal and political strategy.
Second of all, it doesn't matter. Nobody except people sucked into political agendas believe in biological determinism. Unless you have an extremely severe mental illness, you have the freedom of choice.

Heterosexual Preference and Sexual Preference in General

Humans look generally the same. That is to say that, from an outside perspective, women are not strikingly dissimilar to men. As humans, we can sense differences based on smell, behavior, and voice, but from a purely biological standpoint, men and women are very similar, especially when one takes into account physiological and behavioral variations.

Indeed, there are men that act and look like women and women that look and act like men, and it wouldn't be a very far leap, or even much of a step, to take an attraction to someone like that and simply cross over to the other sex and try such relations. Men and women both have essentially the same biological makeup, only in varying proportions or arrangements. All the same hormones, the same organs, the same basic physiological construction. All humans start as female within the womb, and are only differentiated as male by an alteration by the balance between testosterone and estrogen, and whether the clitoris elongates into a penis and the ovaries distend into testicles, or remain as they are.

All that said, humans are not "unchangably heterosexual" inasmuch as male humans are not attracted to fair skinned chubby girls exclusively or slender dark skinned girls exclusively. Female humans are not attracted to male humans exclusively, inasmuch as they aren't attracted to male humans with blue eyes or wide shoulders or long legs or stout torsos. Humans are attracted to all sorts of other humans. Their tastes and interests are so diverse that any sort of sweeping claim is bound to be wrong by simple statistical standard. Sex and gender is not some enormous chasm of difference that you make it out to be. Moreover, homosexual is an exclusive gender, although it isn't an exclusive sex, because sex refers to sexual organs, which have nothing to do with sexual preference and sexual enjoyment at all, and instead, have everything to do with the capacity to procreate.

Homosexuals are not "humans beings who..." Homosexuals exist in all sorts of animals, mostly mammals, although they do exist elsewhere.

The New Mexico Whiptail is exclusively lesbian. Literally, it is a species of lizard with only females. They reproduce through concupiscence -- literally, turning one another on. Or, in other words, having lesbian sex.

That is a biological reality. Not a series of non-sequitur, emotionally-charged speculation.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 11:16:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 11:05:21 AM, Dragonfang wrote:

Ahh... Trying to shift the discussion from what can be objectivity and measured to morality. Fyi, I did not morally equate pedophile to anything in my post.

I struggle to believe that I understand your post better than you do, so I'm just going to assume that you're backtracking in refusal to acknowledge how you're wrong.

And yes, pedophilia as a term is a sexual inclination and a state of mind, therefore a sexual orientation. You should be careful about equating behavior with sexual orientation as you did with your description of homosexuality.

Sigh. Okay, so, masturbation is a sexual inclination and a state of mind, so is it a sexual orientation? Are people who masturbate monosexuals?

The implication of being a conscious private behavior is discussed on the thir1d point.

Getting to that. Your post was very long and even more misguided. It takes time.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 11:31:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 3:37:48 AM, Dragonfang wrote:

3- Civil rights & Marriage

Isn't it insulting to compare a cultural behavior to the oppression black people had?
Were homosexuals hunted, captured, decapitated, traded, forced into servitude, or placed in zoos?

Regardless. Homosexuals are citizens, they have all the obligations and rights as the person next door.
Civil right discrimination is treating equal parties unequally. As demonstrated above, they are equal as human beings. However, behavior is not included in civil rights.
Homosexuality is not objective and potentially changeable; there is no blood or DNA test that proves someone to be a homosexual. In fact, it would be impossible to tell whether someone is homosexual except by witnessing homosexual behavior or the person associates self with the said behavior.

And before someone brings up "Hate crimes pandemic!"...

According to the 2011 FBI hate crime report: http://www.fbi.gov... 1508 total sexual orientation hate crimes.
If we excluding intimidation and simple assault (pushing) we have about 637 violent hate crimes.
According to NCAVP which is a pro-homosexual organization: avp.org/resources/reports/term/summary
The reported domestic/partner violence among homosexuals in 2011 is roughly 3,930.

So statistically, 3930>1508 which means homosexuals were 260.6% more likely to receive violence amongst themselves than immature thugs in 2011. Epidemic.

I am astonished when those pushing political agenda focus on pushing hate crime laws (Punching a homosexual is a bigger offense than punching a grandmother since citizens don't deserve equal protection) when murder and theft statistics are massively larger.


Regarding marriage, I will only discuss it in legal terms.
First of all, the law does not care about love. You want to love? No body is stopping you: Go love your family, friends, partner in a romantic or non-romantic way. However, there is no check box in an official document that says "In love".


Homosexual marriage contract goes beyond being a private contract. It demands legal and social benefits, thus it becomes a public contract. However, I have yet to learn of a beneficial social function that is exclusive to homosexuality. If there is none, then the government is not entitled to legally protect and finance such a contract.

Furthermore, by recognizing a private behavior, the government promotes it which is unreasonable since if it is not innate, then it is acquired. Homosexuals accounted for more than 80% of the AIDS diagnosis in 2011.
www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics_surveillance_MSM.pdf


I hope this cleared up the main objections. Thanks for reading.

Homosexuality and Hate Crime

First, Civil Rights deals mostly with beliefs and behaviors. It not only includes "race" and sex, but also nationality, creed, religion, and sexuality. Homosexuals do have a history of being hunted, captured, and decapitated. They don't have a history of slavery, but that's irrelevant -- Civil Rights occurred long after slavery was abolished. It has everything to do, instead, with violence and abused incentivized or rationalized by how someone else is perceived alone.

Although some homosexuals are such due to taste, there are those that are homosexuals due to biological reasons, such as an extra chromosome or a hormone imbalance. Moreover, there are those that act as heterosexuals although they're homosexuals. There are also heterosexuals who act as homosexuals, usually due to some sort of trauma -- most often, molestation when they were children.

The whole grandmother thing is ridiculous. There is no such weight that makes "a hate crime worse than punching a grandmother." Hate crimes fall under civil laws. Elder abuse laws are both state and federal criminal laws. Get your facts straight.

There is no beneficial social function to heterosexual marriage, as you seem to suggest. Procreation and familial units can and do exist without them. There may be higher statistics for domestic homosexual complaints than there are for homosexual hate crimes, but there are also higher statistics for domestic heterosexual complains than there are for general muggings. Nonetheless, mugging is no less illegal, and neither should hate crimes against homosexuals.

The end.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 11:46:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 11:06:21 AM, Such wrote:
At 12/30/2013 3:37:48 AM, Dragonfang wrote:

2- Equality & "Born this way"

No. Homosexuality is not equal to heterosexuality.
By believing otherwise you are suppressing a basic fundamental truth about being a human.

You see, heterosexuality is immutable. Every single human, with the exception of hermaphrodites, are either males or females with their respective reproductive system.
Any sexual feeling or desire is rooted within chemicals and processes in that heterosexual design.
Therefore, heterosexuality is an objective physical reality.

For homosexuality to be equal to heterosexuality, homosexuals need to have their own physiology or gender. The truth is, homosexuals are human beings, who are unchangeably heterosexual, who identify themselves with engaging or the desire to engage in same-sex conduct.

Biologically, homosexuals are not different than thousands of other paraphilia like pedophilia or bestiality. In the end they are heterosexual by design.


Then there is the "We are born this way"!
First of all, there is no scientific evidence other than outdated refuted studies from the 20th century. It is simply pseudo-science, a legal and political strategy.
Second of all, it doesn't matter. Nobody except people sucked into political agendas believe in biological determinism. Unless you have an extremely severe mental illness, you have the freedom of choice.

Heterosexual Preference and Sexual Preference in General

Humans look generally the same. That is to say that, from an outside perspective, women are not strikingly dissimilar to men. As humans, we can sense differences based on smell, behavior, and voice, but from a purely biological standpoint, men and women are very similar, especially when one takes into account physiological and behavioral variations.

Indeed, there are men that act and look like women and women that look and act like men, and it wouldn't be a very far leap, or even much of a step, to take an attraction to someone like that and simply cross over to the other sex and try such relations. Men and women both have essentially the same biological makeup, only in varying proportions or arrangements. All the same hormones, the same organs, the same basic physiological construction. All humans start as female within the womb, and are only differentiated as male by an alteration by the balance between testosterone and estrogen, and whether the clitoris elongates into a penis and the ovaries distend into testicles, or remain as they are.

All that said, humans are not "unchangably heterosexual" inasmuch as male humans are not attracted to fair skinned chubby girls exclusively or slender dark skinned girls exclusively. Female humans are not attracted to male humans exclusively, inasmuch as they aren't attracted to male humans with blue eyes or wide shoulders or long legs or stout torsos. Humans are attracted to all sorts of other humans. Their tastes and interests are so diverse that any sort of sweeping claim is bound to be wrong by simple statistical standard. Sex and gender is not some enormous chasm of difference that you make it out to be. Moreover, homosexual is an exclusive gender, although it isn't an exclusive sex, because sex refers to sexual organs, which have nothing to do with sexual preference and sexual enjoyment at all, and instead, have everything to do with the capacity to procreate.

Homosexuals are not "humans beings who..." Homosexuals exist in all sorts of animals, mostly mammals, although they do exist elsewhere.

The New Mexico Whiptail is exclusively lesbian. Literally, it is a species of lizard with only females. They reproduce through concupiscence -- literally, turning one another on. Or, in other words, having lesbian sex.

That is a biological reality. Not a series of non-sequitur, emotionally-charged speculation.

There isn't really anything in conflict with my argument that human beings who are not born with deformities are immutably heterosexual.

Starting from your second paragraph, you begin an equivocation from the objective, which is biology, to the subjective.
Semantics is used on the word "Gender". What you are referring to is a social construct, commonly known as "Gender roles", which is how society thinks males and females should act and look like. The justification for that construct may be social or biological. However, that have absolutely zero implication on biological gender or sex, neither is there interchangeability.
Therefore, my point stands; homosexuality or other paraphilias are not equal to heterosexuality.

Regarding animals. You fallaciously equated human conception with animal conception with a vague definition of homosexuality; animals are guided by their instincts, thus some behavior like cannibalism are explained by confused instincts. You realize that many of the homosexual behavior in animals is establishing a hierarchy by expressing dominance, right?

The New Mexico Whiptail lizards use a form of asexual reproduction. The difference between animals and us goes beyond shape, you might as well argue that it is OK to kill your spouse because black widow spiders does it.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 12:03:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 11:46:56 AM, Dragonfang wrote:

There isn't really anything in conflict with my argument that human beings who are not born with deformities are immutably heterosexual.

A hormonal imbalance or an extra chromosome is not a deformity. Nonetheless, you made no case to prove that humans are "immutably heterosexual." You simply said that humans have a biological makeup that forces them to be heterosexual, and I disproved that by indicating that all humans begin as female, that humans are not equipped with enough physiological difference between sexes to make sexuality so concrete, and that sexuality is based on interest alone, whether it regards appearance, behavior, or gender, which is essentially a combination of the two.

Starting from your second paragraph, you begin an equivocation from the objective, which is biology, to the subjective.

You presented no biological claims that I didn't contend with biological claims, such as the definition of gender, the definition of sex, the difference between sexes, and the reasons behind homosexuality.

Semantics is used on the word "Gender". What you are referring to is a social construct, commonly known as "Gender roles", which is how society thinks males and females should act and look like. The justification for that construct may be social or biological. However, that have absolutely zero implication on biological gender or sex, neither is there interchangeability.

Gender in general is a social construct. There is no such thing as a biological gender and sex refers to the role one would play in procreation alone, which is only one aspect behind human sexuality, and generally speaking, what contributes the least to reasons behind engaging in sexual acts.

Therefore, my point stands; homosexuality or other paraphilias are not equal to heterosexuality.

Homosexuality is not a paraphilia. I tried to reason with you, but if you insist, it hasn't been considered a paraphilia since the 70's and was further proven dissimilar enough to be excluded from the paraphilia base in 2012. So, you can drop that, now. Homosexuality is not the same as child abuse, sadism, nor bestiality. Scientifically speaking, in terms of the definition and behavioral science that defines paraphilia.

Regarding animals. You fallaciously equated human conception with animal conception with a vague definition of homosexuality; animals are guided by their instincts, thus some behavior like cannibalism are explained by confused instincts. You realize that many of the homosexual behavior in animals is establishing a hierarchy by expressing dominance, right?

A vague definition of homosexuality? Homosexuality is literally sexual relations between two members of the same sex. That isn't vague. It is very direct.

Animals are not necessarily guided by their instincts, but nonetheless, if they were, then those instincts couldn't possibly become "confused," because "confusion" is a rational state that is entertained by a rational entity, "instincts" cannot entertain states nor reason.

The New Mexico Whiptail lizards use a form of asexual reproduction. The difference between animals and us goes beyond shape, you might as well argue that it is OK to kill your spouse because black widow spiders does it.

One can certainly make that argument, if human females needed nutrients from human males to promote the health of her children when impregnated.

No, since this conflation doesn't make any sense, allow me to shed light on my comparison -- the fact is that homosexuality is not an exclusively human condition, as you seemed to believe. It is existent within most, if not all animals with complex sexual behaviors as a biological reality, because it isn't absurd behavior that belies biology.

Oral sex, on the other hand, is pretty rare, deviant, and serves no biological purpose, but I don't see anyone in the world crusading against people who give or get head.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 12:08:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 11:16:22 AM, Such wrote:
At 12/30/2013 11:05:21 AM, Dragonfang wrote:

Ahh... Trying to shift the discussion from what can be objectivity and measured to morality. Fyi, I did not morally equate pedophile to anything in my post.

I struggle to believe that I understand your post better than you do, so I'm just going to assume that you're backtracking in refusal to acknowledge how you're wrong.

Wrong about something never mentioned or implied? Explain.

And yes, pedophilia as a term is a sexual inclination and a state of mind, therefore a sexual orientation. You should be careful about equating behavior with sexual orientation as you did with your description of homosexuality.

Sigh. Okay, so, masturbation is a sexual inclination and a state of mind, so is it a sexual orientation? Are people who masturbate monosexuals?

Orientation describes the subject's (person) inclination toward an object. If the object they are sexually attracted to is themselves, then you can call them monosexual. If they are attracted to sexual stimulus, then they are not asexual.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2013 12:11:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/30/2013 12:08:41 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 12/30/2013 11:16:22 AM, Such wrote:
At 12/30/2013 11:05:21 AM, Dragonfang wrote:

Ahh... Trying to shift the discussion from what can be objectivity and measured to morality. Fyi, I did not morally equate pedophile to anything in my post.

I struggle to believe that I understand your post better than you do, so I'm just going to assume that you're backtracking in refusal to acknowledge how you're wrong.

Wrong about something never mentioned or implied? Explain.

And yes, pedophilia as a term is a sexual inclination and a state of mind, therefore a sexual orientation. You should be careful about equating behavior with sexual orientation as you did with your description of homosexuality.

Sigh. Okay, so, masturbation is a sexual inclination and a state of mind, so is it a sexual orientation? Are people who masturbate monosexuals?

Orientation describes the subject's (person) inclination toward an object. If the object they are sexually attracted to is themselves, then you can call them monosexual. If they are attracted to sexual stimulus, then they are not asexual.

So, if this stimulus is a photo, then they're a photosexual? What about a video? What if they just like the stimulation that comes along with masturbation, and aren't actually stimulated by anything else? What about people who masturbate in public, and are stimulated by the mere act of doing so and nothing else in particular? Those who enjoy being watched? What about people who are stimulated by situations that aren't overtly sexual, such as people who think its hot to watch other people have sex, or watch other people pee, or see other people in certain clothing? What orientation is that?