Total Posts:57|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

"Curing" homosexuality

laurenbedell
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2014 8:57:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Hello. I am doing a research project for college and I need to engage the public in terms of the debate surrounding the "treatment" or "curing" of homosexuality. Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals? If so, what methods do you believe are most effective for the "treatment" process? If you disagree and believe homosexual individuals cannot be "cured", why do you feel this way? Do you think culture plays an important role on your opinion?
Thank you so much for your input. I will be using your responses in my research presentation.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:29:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/6/2014 8:57:49 PM, laurenbedell wrote:
Hello. I am doing a research project for college and I need to engage the public in terms of the debate surrounding the "treatment" or "curing" of homosexuality. Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals? If so, what methods do you believe are most effective for the "treatment" process? If you disagree and believe homosexual individuals cannot be "cured", why do you feel this way? Do you think culture plays an important role on your opinion?
Thank you so much for your input. I will be using your responses in my research presentation.

Asking people to debate whether homosexuality can be cured is like asking people to debate whether black people are human beings or no smarter than beasts, or whether the Jews deserved the Holocaust because they caused the Great Depression, or whether vaccines cause autism. These are all things that people at one time, place, or another believed were legitimate issues. But one side is just right. And the other side are a bunch of horrible bigots and/or idiots.

The very fact that this is a real research project is upsetting to me. It's kind of a dumb project. You can look at polls to see what Americans believe about this issue. But science has already provided the answer to the actual question: being gay is not a choice. Conversion therapy fails. Studies that show that it works are methodologically flawed (the participants are too scared not to say they are cured). The few success cases of conversion therapy were merely forced back into the closet. The belief among the ultra-religious that conversion therapy is successful is why gay teens in ultra-religious regions of the country have such high suicide rates.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 4:22:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 1:29:16 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/6/2014 8:57:49 PM, laurenbedell wrote:
Hello. I am doing a research project for college and I need to engage the public in terms of the debate surrounding the "treatment" or "curing" of homosexuality. Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals? If so, what methods do you believe are most effective for the "treatment" process? If you disagree and believe homosexual individuals cannot be "cured", why do you feel this way? Do you think culture plays an important role on your opinion?
Thank you so much for your input. I will be using your responses in my research presentation.

Asking people to debate whether homosexuality can be cured is like asking people to debate whether black people are human beings or no smarter than beasts, or whether the Jews deserved the Holocaust because they caused the Great Depression, or whether vaccines cause autism. These are all things that people at one time, place, or another believed were legitimate issues. But one side is just right. And the other side are a bunch of horrible bigots and/or idiots.

The very fact that this is a real research project is upsetting to me. It's kind of a dumb project. You can look at polls to see what Americans believe about this issue. But science has already provided the answer to the actual question: being gay is not a choice. Conversion therapy fails. Studies that show that it works are methodologically flawed (the participants are too scared not to say they are cured). The few success cases of conversion therapy were merely forced back into the closet. The belief among the ultra-religious that conversion therapy is successful is why gay teens in ultra-religious regions of the country have such high suicide rates.

I am confused. Are you saying that homosexuality is not a behavior or a subjective state of mind?

Also, can you please cite me a study that absolutely proves gays are "born this way"?
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 4:30:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
As for the original questions.

Describing homosexuality as something to be "cured" is a debatable issue. Some people might even be offended.
Anyway, the first step for a genuine change is to want it. So we can't just force someone to act a certain way against his/her will without external pressure. Being a state of mind, it can potentially change in the same sense someone can change his taste of food. However, it isn't really any body's please to interfere in people's private life. We are talking about adults not children.

Regarding culture, individuals might express disapproval and varying levels of tolerance regarding behavior. However, people's opinions are to be respected from both sides.
laurenbedell
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 9:33:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Thank you for your input so far, everyone. I really appreciate it. The point of my research project is not to prove that homosexuality can or cannot be "cured"; rather, this portion of my project involved engaging the public to obtain the opinions of others on this issue. I recognize that not everyone is going to agree, and that is okay. That is the nature of a debate. I do ask that everyone be respectful of each other, regardless of differing view points. Your opinions and viewpoints are greatly appreciated, and I will be sure to properly cite all of your responses in my research presentation. Feel free to continue this discussion. Again, I am just trying to gather different view points and opinions from the public about this topic, I am not stating my position on it to avoid any biases or extraneous variables or anything like that.

Also, if you would like, I could e-mail you my presentation after I have completed it (it will be in a power point format), so that you can see how I utilized your responses. If you would like me to do so, please provide your e-mail address. Thank you.
YYW
Posts: 36,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:47:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/6/2014 8:57:49 PM, laurenbedell wrote:
Hello. I am doing a research project for college and I need to engage the public in terms of the debate surrounding the "treatment" or "curing" of homosexuality. Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals? If so, what methods do you believe are most effective for the "treatment" process? If you disagree and believe homosexual individuals cannot be "cured", why do you feel this way? Do you think culture plays an important role on your opinion?
Thank you so much for your input. I will be using your responses in my research presentation.

Right, then. Let's talk about that question.

Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals?

Whether I think something, insofar as my opinion is one thing or another, is irrelevant unless my opinion happens to be based on scientific evidence, research, trials, etc. As it happens, it is -but that's beside the point. Unless the purpose of your paper is to understand how people engage this subject in their own minds, asking people's opinions on a scientific question isn't going to be very productive.

Secondly, to incorporate the word "cured" in the question you're asking is fundamentally problematic because it implies that homosexuality could be a disease/disorder for which there might be treatment -which is, how shall I put this politely? Manifestly absurd. There is no legitimate medical, mental health or sociological organization on this earth which regards homosexuality as something that even could be "cured." That is because sexual identity cannot be altered.

Thirdly, the question implies that heterosexuality is a norm which homosexuality is a deviation from -and that is not the case. Both fall within the range of "normalcy" and to realize this will be a prudent endeavor on your part. The suggestion that in order to "cure" homosexuals, they need to become straight, ignores the reality that (1) homosexuality is not abnormal, (2) heterosexuality alone is not the norm and (3) sexual identity itself is static.

Unless you go to some financial religious fundamentalist college, it is shocking to me that any student would even write a paper on this because the debate is settled. What the ignorant think on this subject has no bearing on what actually "is" regarding whether sexual identity could be altered -which is to say nothing of whether it 'should' even if it 'could.'
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:50:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 4:30:39 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
As for the original questions.

Describing homosexuality as something to be "cured" is a debatable issue.

If by "debatable" you mean "some ignorant people still have not chosen to join the rest of the world and accept reality," then sure, its "debatable" insofar as there are a number of dumbfucks in this world who have consciously chosen to live with their heads resolutely lodged up their asses and resent anyone who would tell them otherwise.

Some people might even be offended.

When the ignorant cling to ignorance as truth, yes, I find that extremely offensive.
Tsar of DDO
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:52:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 4:22:49 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 4/7/2014 1:29:16 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/6/2014 8:57:49 PM, laurenbedell wrote:
Hello. I am doing a research project for college and I need to engage the public in terms of the debate surrounding the "treatment" or "curing" of homosexuality. Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals? If so, what methods do you believe are most effective for the "treatment" process? If you disagree and believe homosexual individuals cannot be "cured", why do you feel this way? Do you think culture plays an important role on your opinion?
Thank you so much for your input. I will be using your responses in my research presentation.

Asking people to debate whether homosexuality can be cured is like asking people to debate whether black people are human beings or no smarter than beasts, or whether the Jews deserved the Holocaust because they caused the Great Depression, or whether vaccines cause autism. These are all things that people at one time, place, or another believed were legitimate issues. But one side is just right. And the other side are a bunch of horrible bigots and/or idiots.

The very fact that this is a real research project is upsetting to me. It's kind of a dumb project. You can look at polls to see what Americans believe about this issue. But science has already provided the answer to the actual question: being gay is not a choice. Conversion therapy fails. Studies that show that it works are methodologically flawed (the participants are too scared not to say they are cured). The few success cases of conversion therapy were merely forced back into the closet. The belief among the ultra-religious that conversion therapy is successful is why gay teens in ultra-religious regions of the country have such high suicide rates.

I am confused. Are you saying that homosexuality is not a behavior or a subjective state of mind?

Also, can you please cite me a study that absolutely proves gays are "born this way"?

The 2200 species of animals that have been proven to have 10% or more homosexuals in their populations. If people just chose to be gay then it would require rationality and would not be based on instinct. The multiple studies proving that homosexuality is caused by the amount of testerone that people get in utero and during pregnancy (gay males -- too little; gay females -- too much). The multiple testosterone based traits that lesbians share with straight men (e.g. middle finger size relative to point finger size).

For the actual source citations, you can check out my various debates on homosexuality.

If sexuality is a choice, when did you choose to be straight?
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:53:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/6/2014 8:57:49 PM, laurenbedell wrote:
Hello. I am doing a research project for college and I need to engage the public in terms of the debate surrounding the "treatment" or "curing" of homosexuality.

There is no cure or treatment of homosexuality.

Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals?

No, people are born as a heterosexual or homosexual. Can you convince a bisexual to stop having relations with a guy or a girl? Maybe. Can you convince a homosexual to stop having relations with the same gender? Maybe. Can you convince a homosexual to be attracted to the opposite gender? No.

If so, what methods do you believe are most effective for the "treatment" process? If you disagree and believe homosexual individuals cannot be "cured", why do you feel this way?

Because there is more evidence that people are born gay then it being a choice.

Do you think culture plays an important role on your opinion?

If evidence and science is culture, then yes.

Thank you so much for your input. I will be using your responses in my research presentation.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:54:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Shall we cure heterosexuality? Homosexuality is indicative of a disease or illness? Does the common individual allow themselves to ponder such claims as prodigious as that or are they dogmatic whims whereby no thoughtful thinking occurs? Alternatively, I propose you should write your paper with the intent to persuade others to cogitate human sexuality. I find it profoundly distasteful that an ample majority of those who postulate that sexuality is either sinful, immoral, a mental illness, and/or an abomination do so on the premises of irrational doxastic thinking.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:55:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 4:30:39 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
As for the original questions.

Describing homosexuality as something to be "cured" is a debatable issue. Some people might even be offended.
Anyway, the first step for a genuine change is to want it.

Not a single gay person wants to be straight, except to conform to societal expectations. That should tell you something about how much of a choice it is. In a world without stigma and family members theatening to disown them, no gay person has spontaneously decided that they were just wrong all along and that the opposite gender is actually better.

So we can't just force someone to act a certain way against his/her will without external pressure. Being a state of mind, it can potentially change in the same sense someone can change his taste of food. However, it isn't really any body's please to interfere in people's private life. We are talking about adults not children.


Regarding culture, individuals might express disapproval and varying levels of tolerance regarding behavior. However, people's opinions are to be respected from both sides.

False. We don't defend racists who say they think that black people should lighten their skin. There's no reason that we should defend the opinions of homophobes who say that gay people should be forced to "act straight" in order to make *them* more comfortable.

The 1st Amendment allows people to express unpopular opinions. People have the right to say that the Holocaust was justified and that all the Jews should be killed. That doesn't mean there is an actual "debate" about the issue.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 1:59:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 9:33:08 AM, laurenbedell wrote:
Thank you for your input so far, everyone. I really appreciate it. The point of my research project is not to prove that homosexuality can or cannot be "cured"; rather, this portion of my project involved engaging the public to obtain the opinions of others on this issue. I recognize that not everyone is going to agree, and that is okay. That is the nature of a debate. I do ask that everyone be respectful of each other, regardless of differing view points. Your opinions and viewpoints are greatly appreciated, and I will be sure to properly cite all of your responses in my research presentation. Feel free to continue this discussion. Again, I am just trying to gather different view points and opinions from the public about this topic, I am not stating my position on it to avoid any biases or extraneous variables or anything like that.

Your position is kind of obvious from the very fact that you think this is a topic worthy of study. It would be like someone asking us to debate whether whites are a superior race to blacks, and then saying that they held no racist viewpoints. Why would this topic occur to you if you didn't think there was some truth to the whole "cure" thing?


Also, if you would like, I could e-mail you my presentation after I have completed it (it will be in a power point format), so that you can see how I utilized your responses. If you would like me to do so, please provide your e-mail address. Thank you.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 2:56:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think the statistics speak for themselves on this one. A study on identical twins separated at birth found that in pairs with one homosexual twin, the other twin was also homosexual over 50% of the time. This shows that homosexuality is definitely tied to biology, and does not exist purely as a learned behavior. This accounts for the failures of organizations such as Exodus International, which treated homosexuality as a learned behavior.

Obviously, it's probably possible to change someone's sexual orientation, but this raises a few ethical issues. Would changing someone's sexual orientation also change other portions of their personality? Would it feel strange for the patient? The best course of action is probably the one which results in the lowest chance of the patient harming themselves or others. In this case, it currently seems to be the best course of action for people to stop assuming that homosexuals are broken, and to acknowledge that homosexuality is just a difference that doesn't harm anyone.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
Intrepid
Posts: 372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 3:52:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/6/2014 8:57:49 PM, laurenbedell wrote:
Hello. I am doing a research project for college and I need to engage the public in terms of the debate surrounding the "treatment" or "curing" of homosexuality. Do you think homosexual individuals can be "cured" and made into heterosexual individuals? If so, what methods do you believe are most effective for the "treatment" process? If you disagree and believe homosexual individuals cannot be "cured", why do you feel this way? Do you think culture plays an important role on your opinion?
Thank you so much for your input. I will be using your responses in my research presentation.

No. Homosexuality is completely natural. Not common, but natural. It is also not am mental illness, or disease, or anything of the sort.

Like bluesteel said, its just an idiotic thing some people once believed. Really you should change your topic to something where both sides have legitimate arguments.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 5:22:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 1:55:54 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 4/7/2014 4:30:39 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
As for the original questions.

Describing homosexuality as something to be "cured" is a debatable issue. Some people might even be offended.
Anyway, the first step for a genuine change is to want it.

Not a single gay person wants to be straight, except to conform to societal expectations. That should tell you something about how much of a choice it is. In a world without stigma and family members theatening to disown them, no gay person has spontaneously decided that they were just wrong all along and that the opposite gender is actually better.

Many people engage in "Anti-social" behavior or choose lifestyles other people condemn. That doesn't prove anything.

So we can't just force someone to act a certain way against his/her will without external pressure. Being a state of mind, it can potentially change in the same sense someone can change his taste of food. However, it isn't really any body's please to interfere in people's private life. We are talking about adults not children.


Regarding culture, individuals might express disapproval and varying levels of tolerance regarding behavior. However, people's opinions are to be respected from both sides.

False. We don't defend racists who say they think that black people should lighten their skin. There's no reason that we should defend the opinions of homophobes who say that gay people should be forced to "act straight" in order to make *them* more comfortable.

The 1st Amendment allows people to express unpopular opinions. People have the right to say that the Holocaust was justified and that all the Jews should be killed. That doesn't mean there is an actual "debate" about the issue.

By respect, I meant tolerate. That is how things are. The US Amendment ensures high tolerance for freedom of speech. Of course, there are some exceptions (encouraging a crime, inciting a violent reaction, lying in court, copyright violation, false advertisement, etc...). Also, the time, manner, and place that speech was given can be considered. However, it is extremely doubtful the law would do anything against "We should legalize racial segregation".

However, there is less tolerance toward behaviors compared to opinions.

Also, do black people "act" black skin tone? You are treating orientation, a subjective and potentially changeable state of mind, as if it is something objective. The closest thing to objectivity about sexuality are biological genders, which happens to be heterosexual in nature.
Assuming mental sanity, doing homosexual behavior is as much of a choice as a pedophile hunting a child (Although obviously not equal morally).
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 12:46:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 5:22:24 PM, Dragonfang wrote:

Care to defend your bigoted and archaic views in a debate? If so, lemme know.
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...
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 9:53:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 2:56:23 PM, drhead wrote:
I think the statistics speak for themselves on this one. A study on identical twins separated at birth found that in pairs with one homosexual twin, the other twin was also homosexual over 50% of the time. This shows that homosexuality is definitely tied to biology, and does not exist purely as a learned behavior. This accounts for the failures of organizations such as Exodus International, which treated homosexuality as a learned behavior.

Obviously, it's probably possible to change someone's sexual orientation, but this raises a few ethical issues. Would changing someone's sexual orientation also change other portions of their personality? Would it feel strange for the patient? The best course of action is probably the one which results in the lowest chance of the patient harming themselves or others. In this case, it currently seems to be the best course of action for people to stop assuming that homosexuals are broken, and to acknowledge that homosexuality is just a difference that doesn't harm anyone.

Does this mean that 50% of homosexuals are unaccounted for in the genetic theory? Identical twins are assumed to have the exact same genes, right?
Can you find a replication of the homosexual twin study that shows any result close to 50% or higher?

My position isn't "Turn all gayz into heterosexuals!". Simply, it is that "Gay rights" make no sense as it assumes they don't have the same rights as the rest of citizens.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 9:57:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/8/2014 12:46:47 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 4/7/2014 5:22:24 PM, Dragonfang wrote:

Care to defend your bigoted and archaic views in a debate? If so, lemme know.

Such aggression and condescension. That means you are hypocritically more bigoted than me.
Also, you base the validity and soundness of opinions based on novelty? Interesting.

As for your question, sure thing. Throw me a reasonable resolution.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 10:00:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/8/2014 9:57:22 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 4/8/2014 12:46:47 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 4/7/2014 5:22:24 PM, Dragonfang wrote:

Care to defend your bigoted and archaic views in a debate? If so, lemme know.

Such aggression and condescension. That means you are hypocritically more bigoted than me.

Perhaps it is good to be intolerant of intolerance. But that is a separate philosophical issue altogether.

Also, you base the validity and soundness of opinions based on novelty? Interesting.

No, I base them on reason, experience, and consideration.

As for your question, sure thing. Throw me a reasonable resolution.

My pleasure...
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...
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 5:23:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/8/2014 9:53:45 AM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 4/7/2014 2:56:23 PM, drhead wrote:
I think the statistics speak for themselves on this one. A study on identical twins separated at birth found that in pairs with one homosexual twin, the other twin was also homosexual over 50% of the time. This shows that homosexuality is definitely tied to biology, and does not exist purely as a learned behavior. This accounts for the failures of organizations such as Exodus International, which treated homosexuality as a learned behavior.

Obviously, it's probably possible to change someone's sexual orientation, but this raises a few ethical issues. Would changing someone's sexual orientation also change other portions of their personality? Would it feel strange for the patient? The best course of action is probably the one which results in the lowest chance of the patient harming themselves or others. In this case, it currently seems to be the best course of action for people to stop assuming that homosexuals are broken, and to acknowledge that homosexuality is just a difference that doesn't harm anyone.

Does this mean that 50% of homosexuals are unaccounted for in the genetic theory? Identical twins are assumed to have the exact same genes, right?
Can you find a replication of the homosexual twin study that shows any result close to 50% or higher?

The cause does not have to be purely genetic in order to demonstrate homosexuality being naturally caused. There are a variety of other factors, including epigenetics and fetal hormonal influences, that can influence brain development in such a way that could cause homosexuality. In other words, there doesn't have to be a literal gay gene for there to be a natural cause of homosexuality, and you still have no explanation of why the concordance exists if homosexuality is a choice, as you believe.

My position isn't "Turn all gayz into heterosexuals!". Simply, it is that "Gay rights" make no sense as it assumes they don't have the same rights as the rest of citizens.

I don't care what your position is. If you actually looked at the context of the post, I was providing information about my opinion for someone at their request. I justified my opinion with research on the subject, while yours is justified by a "guilty until proven innocent" stance on the issue that you most likely picked up from your parents or from religious leaders when you were too young to question it, which has led to a weird persecution complex on your part where you feel as if you are actually being harmed by homosexuals.

Even if I showed you a study that absolutely proved a biological cause for homosexuality, you would still probably not care, given how you seem to learn nothing from any rebuttal to any argument you make. I even see you using STDs as an argument for not allowing same-sex marriage in one of your ongoing debates. You do realize that actually having legally recognized monogamous unions would reduce the spread of STDs, right? I've explained this to plenty of other people, it has been consistently ignored, and the point always seems to make its way into their next thread. If you're going to simply ignore everything that someone says that isn't reaffirming your own views and continue to make the same errors in reasoning, there is no point in having any dialogue about this.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 6:40:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Well ain't this just a joyful thread.
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2014 12:24:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Fun fact of the day:

As most historians will remind you, up until the the Christian Dark Ages (Circa 400 C.E.) Homosexuality was actually commonly observed throughout humanity itsself. In the era of ancient empires such as the Roman and Greek empires, people were not expected to follow any one kind of sexual archetype, rather, they were expected only to do whatever they wanted (which kind of makes sense if you ask me).

There is a great story to give my point some context. The fourth emperor of Rome, Emperor Claudius I, was considered extremely strange by the people because of his sexual orientation.
What was strange about him?
Well the thing that made people view his sexual preference as strange was that he only had sex with women.
Occasional homosexual acts were so common in those days that refusing to at least occasionally swing the other direction was seen as incredibly strange.
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2014 12:20:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/9/2014 12:24:48 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Fun fact of the day:

As most historians will remind you, up until the the Christian Dark Ages (Circa 400 C.E.) Homosexuality was actually commonly observed throughout humanity itsself. In the era of ancient empires such as the Roman and Greek empires, people were not expected to follow any one kind of sexual archetype, rather, they were expected only to do whatever they wanted (which kind of makes sense if you ask me).

There is a great story to give my point some context. The fourth emperor of Rome, Emperor Claudius I, was considered extremely strange by the people because of his sexual orientation.
What was strange about him?
Well the thing that made people view his sexual preference as strange was that he only had sex with women.
Occasional homosexual acts were so common in those days that refusing to at least occasionally swing the other direction was seen as incredibly strange.

This.
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...
Solidify
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 12:18:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I don't think a homosexual can be "cured", but there are experimental prenatal treatments that may be effective at preventing homosexuality.

I would condone and even use such a treatment, not because I'm a bigot, but because I'm well aware of how gays are mistreated and I wouldn't want to subject my child to that if I could help it.
YYW
Posts: 36,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 8:57:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 12:18:19 AM, Solidify wrote:
I don't think a homosexual can be "cured", but there are experimental prenatal treatments that may be effective at preventing homosexuality.

Is that so? Do enlighten us all.

I would condone and even use such a treatment, not because I'm a bigot, but because I'm well aware of how gays are mistreated and I wouldn't want to subject my child to that if I could help it.

It's always interesting to me whenever people who make bigoted claims feel the need to include the caveat that they are not, themselves, bigots. I think it's probably fair to assume that you, whoever you are, think you're not a bigot -but I'd suggest you take an inventory of your values and reflect on whether or not what you said here actually is, in fact, bigoted.

To be willing to subject your child to any kind of gay conversion therapy, even if both that treatment would absolutely be effective and if your intent behind doing so was only out of what you perceived to be your child's best interest is to indicate that you value sociocultural acceptance over allowing your child to be who s/he is -which, if sexual identity is the aspect of your child that you would be willing to change, indicates that you, in fact, are bigoted to the extent that you want to change your kid.

But, the bigger issue is that there is no such thing as a "cure" for homosexuality. Sexual identity is immutable; it cannot be changed. If your kid was gay and s/he knew you felt that way, moreover, you would severely undermine your child's capacity to trust you and have any kind of a meaningful relationship with you.

Furthermore, indicating to your child that you think his/er sexual identity should be changed (especially for the reason your indicated) is going to teach your kid a couple of things: (1) other people can and should dictate who we are, (2) popular opinion is the arbiter of right and wrong and (3) we ought to conform to what people think we ought to be. Unless the people your kid is surrounded by are angels, you'd be setting your kid up to lead a pretty dismal life -and to no avail, whatsoever. So, given that sexual identity cannot be changed and wanting to change your child's sexual identity will both hurt you, your kid, and your relationship with your kid both in the present and future.
Tsar of DDO
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 9:25:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
To be willing to subject your child to any kind of gay conversion therapy, even if both that treatment would absolutely be effective and if your intent behind doing so was only out of what you perceived to be your child's best interest is to indicate that you value sociocultural acceptance over allowing your child to be who s/he is -which, if sexual identity is the aspect of your child that you would be willing to change, indicates that you, in fact, are bigoted to the extent that you want to change your kid.

Sexuality is a positive influence of one's biology, hetero, homo or whatever. Therefore it seems reasonable to view artificially changing one's sexuality in the same light as changing your appearance via plastic surgery, etc. I would agree that subjecting one's children to such is a bad thing, but I don't see an objection of having the option available. Alternatively having a treatment that changes a heterosexual's sexual preference to whatever is also similarly acceptable a priori, and paedophilia too.

But, the bigger issue is that there is no such thing as a "cure" for homosexuality. Sexual identity is immutable; it cannot be changed. If your kid was gay and s/he knew you felt that way, moreover, you would severely undermine your child's capacity to trust you and have any kind of a meaningful relationship with you.

Sexual orientation is largely genetic/epigenetic etc. And as you partially alluded to, it's essentially involuntary. That's not to say a "cure" is not possible, a therapy to affect it can in principle be approached the same way one approaches any other psychological phenomenoa, such as depression/anxiety.

So, given that sexual identity cannot be changed and wanting to change your child's sexual identity will both hurt you, your kid, and your relationship with your kid both in the present and future.

I agree with the moral/society implications, but not the factual ones.
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 9:29:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 9:25:41 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
To be willing to subject your child to any kind of gay conversion therapy, even if both that treatment would absolutely be effective and if your intent behind doing so was only out of what you perceived to be your child's best interest is to indicate that you value sociocultural acceptance over allowing your child to be who s/he is -which, if sexual identity is the aspect of your child that you would be willing to change, indicates that you, in fact, are bigoted to the extent that you want to change your kid.

Sexuality is a positive influence of one's biology, hetero, homo or whatever.

Explain what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology." That phrase doesn't make a lot of sense.

Therefore it seems reasonable to view artificially changing one's sexuality in the same light as changing your appearance via plastic surgery, etc.

I'm inclined not believe this, but I want to know what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology" first.

I would agree that subjecting one's children to such is a bad thing, but I don't see an objection of having the option available. Alternatively having a treatment that changes a heterosexual's sexual preference to whatever is also similarly acceptable a priori, and paedophilia too.

I think you probably are going to need to explain that too.

But, the bigger issue is that there is no such thing as a "cure" for homosexuality. Sexual identity is immutable; it cannot be changed. If your kid was gay and s/he knew you felt that way, moreover, you would severely undermine your child's capacity to trust you and have any kind of a meaningful relationship with you.

Sexual orientation is largely genetic/epigenetic etc. And as you partially alluded to, it's essentially involuntary. That's not to say a "cure" is not possible, a therapy to affect it can in principle be approached the same way one approaches any other psychological phenomenoa, such as depression/anxiety.

Sexual identity is in no way comparable to depression or anxiety.

So, given that sexual identity cannot be changed and wanting to change your child's sexual identity will both hurt you, your kid, and your relationship with your kid both in the present and future.

I agree with the moral/society implications, but not the factual ones.

I think you've got some things you need to clarify...
Tsar of DDO
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 9:40:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 9:29:23 AM, YYW wrote:
At 4/16/2014 9:25:41 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
To be willing to subject your child to any kind of gay conversion therapy, even if both that treatment would absolutely be effective and if your intent behind doing so was only out of what you perceived to be your child's best interest is to indicate that you value sociocultural acceptance over allowing your child to be who s/he is -which, if sexual identity is the aspect of your child that you would be willing to change, indicates that you, in fact, are bigoted to the extent that you want to change your kid.

Sexuality is a positive influence of one's biology, hetero, homo or whatever.

Explain what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology." That phrase doesn't make a lot of sense.

The default position is assexuality. I.e. having no sexual attraction whatsoever. It is our biological response via various hormones to experiencing whatever it is you wired up to find attractive that produces the affects of sexual attraction. It's obviously much more complicated than this as a whole but that's what is basically comes down to.

Therefore it seems reasonable to view artificially changing one's sexuality in the same light as changing your appearance via plastic surgery, etc.

I'm inclined not believe this, but I want to know what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology" first.

I would agree that subjecting one's children to such is a bad thing, but I don't see an objection of having the option available. Alternatively having a treatment that changes a heterosexual's sexual preference to whatever is also similarly acceptable a priori, and paedophilia too.

I think you probably are going to need to explain that too.

Homosexuality, heterosexuality, Pedophiliality (does that word exist?), Bestiality etc etc are all positive biological influences. When I say positive I don't mean good, I just mean it promotes some sort of action/desire/whatever.

But, the bigger issue is that there is no such thing as a "cure" for homosexuality. Sexual identity is immutable; it cannot be changed. If your kid was gay and s/he knew you felt that way, moreover, you would severely undermine your child's capacity to trust you and have any kind of a meaningful relationship with you.

Sexual orientation is largely genetic/epigenetic etc. And as you partially alluded to, it's essentially involuntary. That's not to say a "cure" is not possible, a therapy to affect it can in principle be approached the same way one approaches any other psychological phenomenoa, such as depression/anxiety.

Sexual identity is in no way comparable to depression or anxiety.

The mechanisms are all entirely biological which produces, large, psychological effects. They fall in the same category. Admittedly depression is probably not the best example as it's the opposite.

So, given that sexual identity cannot be changed and wanting to change your child's sexual identity will both hurt you, your kid, and your relationship with your kid both in the present and future.

I agree with the moral/society implications, but not the factual ones.

I think you've got some things you need to clarify...

I'm not convinced I have done it but I have tried, lol.
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,305
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 9:54:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 9:40:01 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 4/16/2014 9:29:23 AM, YYW wrote:
At 4/16/2014 9:25:41 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
To be willing to subject your child to any kind of gay conversion therapy, even if both that treatment would absolutely be effective and if your intent behind doing so was only out of what you perceived to be your child's best interest is to indicate that you value sociocultural acceptance over allowing your child to be who s/he is -which, if sexual identity is the aspect of your child that you would be willing to change, indicates that you, in fact, are bigoted to the extent that you want to change your kid.

Sexuality is a positive influence of one's biology, hetero, homo or whatever.

Explain what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology." That phrase doesn't make a lot of sense.

The default position is asexuality.

There is no such thing as a "default" sexuality. There are normative conceptions of default sexual attractions defined by heteronormative constructs in many Western cultures which presuppose heterosexuality as being "the default" or "norm" and define deviation from the norm on the basis of incongruence with that norm. But, again, to say that there even could be a "default" sexuality is to make a claim that cannot be objectively proven -and there is no published literature whatsoever that even remotely backs up your claim, if you were wondering.

I.e. having no sexual attraction whatsoever. It is our biological response via various hormones to experiencing whatever it is you wired up to find attractive that produces the affects of sexual attraction.

Sure, but that does't mean that asexuality is a default position, or that there could be a default sexual identity.

It's obviously much more complicated than this as a whole but that's what is basically comes down to.

No, it's not. And you're making baseless claims as much as you're demonstrating that you don't really grasp the concept of sexual identity/orientation.

Therefore it seems reasonable to view artificially changing one's sexuality in the same light as changing your appearance via plastic surgery, etc.

I'm inclined not believe this, but I want to know what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology" first.

I would agree that subjecting one's children to such is a bad thing, but I don't see an objection of having the option available. Alternatively having a treatment that changes a heterosexual's sexual preference to whatever is also similarly acceptable a priori, and paedophilia too.

I think you probably are going to need to explain that too.

Homosexuality, heterosexuality, Pedophiliality (does that word exist?), Bestiality etc etc are all positive biological influences. When I say positive I don't mean good, I just mean it promotes some sort of action/desire/whatever.

Realize that there is no evidence, in the history of psychology, that sexual orientation can be changed. Realize further that pedophilia is not an orientation, nor is an inclination to have sex with animals. This is because orientations and paraphilias are not, unlike what you seem to suggest, the same thing. However, that biological factors affect level of sexual desire (like libido) I won't contest -but the claim that biological factor's being modified may affect the nature of sexual attraction is without merit.

But, the bigger issue is that there is no such thing as a "cure" for homosexuality. Sexual identity is immutable; it cannot be changed. If your kid was gay and s/he knew you felt that way, moreover, you would severely undermine your child's capacity to trust you and have any kind of a meaningful relationship with you.

Sexual orientation is largely genetic/epigenetic etc. And as you partially alluded to, it's essentially involuntary. That's not to say a "cure" is not possible, a therapy to affect it can in principle be approached the same way one approaches any other psychological phenomenoa, such as depression/anxiety.

Sexual identity is in no way comparable to depression or anxiety.

The mechanisms are all entirely biological which produces, large, psychological effects. They fall in the same category. Admittedly depression is probably not the best example as it's the opposite.

So, you realize that the reasons that you're giving don't actually support the claim you're making?

So, given that sexual identity cannot be changed and wanting to change your child's sexual identity will both hurt you, your kid, and your relationship with your kid both in the present and future.

I agree with the moral/society implications, but not the factual ones.

I think you've got some things you need to clarify...

I'm not convinced I have done it but I have tried, lol.

Yep.
Tsar of DDO
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 10:13:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 9:54:10 AM, YYW wrote:
At 4/16/2014 9:40:01 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 4/16/2014 9:29:23 AM, YYW wrote:
At 4/16/2014 9:25:41 AM, Sswdwm wrote:
To be willing to subject your child to any kind of gay conversion therapy, even if both that treatment would absolutely be effective and if your intent behind doing so was only out of what you perceived to be your child's best interest is to indicate that you value sociocultural acceptance over allowing your child to be who s/he is -which, if sexual identity is the aspect of your child that you would be willing to change, indicates that you, in fact, are bigoted to the extent that you want to change your kid.

Sexuality is a positive influence of one's biology, hetero, homo or whatever.

Explain what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology." That phrase doesn't make a lot of sense.

The default position is asexuality.

There is no such thing as a "default" sexuality. There are normative conceptions of default sexual attractions defined by heteronormative constructs in many Western cultures which presuppose heterosexuality as being "the default" or "norm" and define deviation from the norm on the basis of incongruence with that norm. But, again, to say that there even could be a "default" sexuality is to make a claim that cannot be objectively proven -and there is no published literature whatsoever that even remotely backs up your claim, if you were wondering.

Exactly my point. There is no intrinsic reason why we should have a sexuality. Therefore having no sexuality, or assexuality, is default. Any other position requires a positive biological influence.

I.e. having no sexual attraction whatsoever. It is our biological response via various hormones to experiencing whatever it is you wired up to find attractive that produces the affects of sexual attraction.

Sure, but that does't mean that asexuality is a default position, or that there could be a default sexual identity.

It's obviously much more complicated than this as a whole but that's what is basically comes down to.

No, it's not. And you're making baseless claims as much as you're demonstrating that you don't really grasp the concept of sexual identity/orientation.

It's just a logical deduction. There is no inherent reason why anyone would lust after anyone at all., cause and effect.

Therefore it seems reasonable to view artificially changing one's sexuality in the same light as changing your appearance via plastic surgery, etc.

I'm inclined not believe this, but I want to know what you mean by "positive influence of one's biology" first.

I would agree that subjecting one's children to such is a bad thing, but I don't see an objection of having the option available. Alternatively having a treatment that changes a heterosexual's sexual preference to whatever is also similarly acceptable a priori, and paedophilia too.

I think you probably are going to need to explain that too.

Homosexuality, heterosexuality, Pedophiliality (does that word exist?), Bestiality etc etc are all positive biological influences. When I say positive I don't mean good, I just mean it promotes some sort of action/desire/whatever.

Realize that there is no evidence, in the history of psychology, that sexual orientation can be changed.

Agreed, the research I have seen is weak at best. In fact the way the brains are structures are physically (slightly) different as far as I know.

We do, however, know that orientation does change in some individuals as they progress through life, so in principle it seems plausible. Our capability to do stuff with the brain is rather limited though even in this day and age.

Realize further that pedophilia is not an orientation, nor is an inclination to have sex with animals. This is because orientations and paraphilias are not, unlike what you seem to suggest, the same thing.

I stand corrected on the terminology. Do also note that the 'treatments' for paraphillias are in pretty much the same standing right now as 'treatments' for sexual orientation.

However, that biological factors affect level of sexual desire (like libido) I won't contest -but the claim that biological factor's being modified may affect the nature of sexual attraction is without merit.

You might find this TED talk interesting:
http://www.ted.com...

But, the bigger issue is that there is no such thing as a "cure" for homosexuality. Sexual identity is immutable; it cannot be changed. If your kid was gay and s/he knew you felt that way, moreover, you would severely undermine your child's capacity to trust you and have any kind of a meaningful relationship with you.

Sexual orientation is largely genetic/epigenetic etc. And as you partially alluded to, it's essentially involuntary. That's not to say a "cure" is not possible, a therapy to affect it can in principle be approached the same way one approaches any other psychological phenomenoa, such as depression/anxiety.

Sexual identity is in no way comparable to depression or anxiety.

The mechanisms are all entirely biological which produces, large, psychological effects. They fall in the same category. Admittedly depression is probably not the best example as it's the opposite.

So, you realize that the reasons that you're giving don't actually support the claim you're making?

Mm, you can have this one.

So, given that sexual identity cannot be changed and wanting to change your child's sexual identity will both hurt you, your kid, and your relationship with your kid both in the present and future.

I agree with the moral/society implications, but not the factual ones.

I think you've got some things you need to clarify...

I'm not convinced I have done it but I have tried, lol.

Yep.
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...