Total Posts:203|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Let's Talk Sexuality

ANON_TacTiX
Posts: 460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 3:41:52 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU POST ON THE THREAD

First, I would like to welcome everyone to this thread. I hope that you find the discussion interesting and stimulating. I would ask that all that post in this thread are respectful and polite to others in the forum. No insults or name calling please. I ask this because I have seen many an interesting debate be ruined by insults, and I do not want that to happen to this forum. I want this to be a place where people can come to exchange ideas and opinions freely. Thank you.

Now, on to the topic at hand. I would like to discuss sexuality. I am bisexual, and I find the topic of sexuality to be very interesting, and I would love to discuss it. I talk about it a lot with my friends. I love learning more about this subject, and I just think that it is fun to talk about. I invite anyone to join in on the debate. Whether you are gay, straight, bi, or none of the above, I would love to hear what you have to say. I would also like to mention that I am male, anatomically and mentally since birth. I wasn't planning on talking about gender, but we could dabble in there a little if anyone would like.

Since this is a sensitive subject, and there are a lot of people that hate on other sexualities, I would like to say again. NO INSULTS. Please. You can believe what you want, just please try to be polite, and don't shove it down our throats. Also, it would be nice if people would leave religion out of this for the most part. I get that it isn't easy, but this was left out of the Religion forum for a reason. Thank you (again).
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning. - Albert Einstein
Fatihah
Posts: 7,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 10:41:54 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 3:41:52 AM, ANON_TacTiX wrote:
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU POST ON THE THREAD

First, I would like to welcome everyone to this thread. I hope that you find the discussion interesting and stimulating. I would ask that all that post in this thread are respectful and polite to others in the forum. No insults or name calling please. I ask this because I have seen many an interesting debate be ruined by insults, and I do not want that to happen to this forum. I want this to be a place where people can come to exchange ideas and opinions freely. Thank you.

Now, on to the topic at hand. I would like to discuss sexuality. I am bisexual, and I find the topic of sexuality to be very interesting, and I would love to discuss it. I talk about it a lot with my friends. I love learning more about this subject, and I just think that it is fun to talk about. I invite anyone to join in on the debate. Whether you are gay, straight, bi, or none of the above, I would love to hear what you have to say. I would also like to mention that I am male, anatomically and mentally since birth. I wasn't planning on talking about gender, but we could dabble in there a little if anyone would like.

Since this is a sensitive subject, and there are a lot of people that hate on other sexualities, I would like to say again. NO INSULTS. Please. You can believe what you want, just please try to be polite, and don't shove it down our throats. Also, it would be nice if people would leave religion out of this for the most part. I get that it isn't easy, but this was left out of the Religion forum for a reason. Thank you (again).

Response: Sex with the same gender is unjust and damaging to society, as it is based on lust. Not love. By lust and love, I mean:

Love-a feeling of appreciation from being cared for by someone or being the care giver to someone. Thus a loving relationship is achieved by putting the needs and wants of others before you own, with the purposeful aim to make joy by making others happy at all times. The desire to give always supersedes the desire to receive. This is the greatest behavior in Islam and the best method of establishing peace.

Lust- The crave for attention and affection and self-interest. Thus a lustful relationship may involve the act of making others happy, but the desire to receive always supersedes the desire to give. This is the worst behavior in Islam, and the underline root of all evil and bad relations.

Many will argue and suggest that Sex with the same gender is or can be based on love as defined above, yet if you ask "what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same gender sexually but not the opposite sex"?
The answer provided by Homosexual themselves is proof that it is based on lust and not love.

The same applies for those who say they are bisexual. If you ask, "What is the natural difference between a bisexual male (or female) and a heterosexual male (or female) that makes only bisexuals males or females love both genders sexually, while heterosexual males and females cannot"?

No one can answer either question without it being based on lust as defined above. For this reason, sex with the same gender is wrong, as it is based on lust as defined above and not love as defined above.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 11:08:30 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 3:41:52 AM, ANON_TacTiX wrote:
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU POST ON THE THREAD

First, I would like to welcome everyone to this thread. I hope that you find the discussion interesting and stimulating. I would ask that all that post in this thread are respectful and polite to others in the forum. No insults or name calling please. I ask this because I have seen many an interesting debate be ruined by insults, and I do not want that to happen to this forum. I want this to be a place where people can come to exchange ideas and opinions freely. Thank you.

Now, on to the topic at hand. I would like to discuss sexuality. I am bisexual, and I find the topic of sexuality to be very interesting, and I would love to discuss it. I talk about it a lot with my friends. I love learning more about this subject, and I just think that it is fun to talk about. I invite anyone to join in on the debate. Whether you are gay, straight, bi, or none of the above, I would love to hear what you have to say. I would also like to mention that I am male, anatomically and mentally since birth. I wasn't planning on talking about gender, but we could dabble in there a little if anyone would like.

Since this is a sensitive subject, and there are a lot of people that hate on other sexualities, I would like to say again. NO INSULTS. Please. You can believe what you want, just please try to be polite, and don't shove it down our throats. Also, it would be nice if people would leave religion out of this for the most part. I get that it isn't easy, but this was left out of the Religion forum for a reason. Thank you (again).

So, with regards to sexuality, what about each gender attracts you to them?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 12:58:41 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 3:41:52 AM, ANON_TacTiX wrote:
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU POST ON THE THREAD

First, I would like to welcome everyone to this thread. I hope that you find the discussion interesting and stimulating. I would ask that all that post in this thread are respectful and polite to others in the forum. No insults or name calling please. I ask this because I have seen many an interesting debate be ruined by insults, and I do not want that to happen to this forum. I want this to be a place where people can come to exchange ideas and opinions freely. Thank you.

Now, on to the topic at hand. I would like to discuss sexuality. I am bisexual, and I find the topic of sexuality to be very interesting, and I would love to discuss it. I talk about it a lot with my friends. I love learning more about this subject, and I just think that it is fun to talk about. I invite anyone to join in on the debate. Whether you are gay, straight, bi, or none of the above, I would love to hear what you have to say. I would also like to mention that I am male, anatomically and mentally since birth. I wasn't planning on talking about gender, but we could dabble in there a little if anyone would like.

Since this is a sensitive subject, and there are a lot of people that hate on other sexualities, I would like to say again. NO INSULTS. Please. You can believe what you want, just please try to be polite, and don't shove it down our throats. Also, it would be nice if people would leave religion out of this for the most part. I get that it isn't easy, but this was left out of the Religion forum for a reason. Thank you (again).

Happy you know who you are. Personally, I could care less about another's gender preference as none of it affects me in any way.

Do what ya like... Just be safe and honest with both genders so there's no surprises on their end.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 1:43:59 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 10:41:54 AM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: Sex with the same gender is unjust and damaging to society, as it is based on lust. Not love. By lust and love, I mean:

Love-a feeling of appreciation from being cared for by someone or being the care giver to someone. Thus a loving relationship is achieved by putting the needs and wants of others before you own, with the purposeful aim to make joy by making others happy at all times. The desire to give always supersedes the desire to receive. This is the greatest behavior in Islam and the best method of establishing peace.

Lust- The crave for attention and affection and self-interest. Thus a lustful relationship may involve the act of making others happy, but the desire to receive always supersedes the desire to give. This is the worst behavior in Islam, and the underline root of all evil and bad relations.

Many will argue and suggest that Sex with the same gender is or can be based on love as defined above, yet if you ask "what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same gender sexually but not the opposite sex"?
The answer provided by Homosexual themselves is proof that it is based on lust and not love.

The same applies for those who say they are bisexual. If you ask, "What is the natural difference between a bisexual male (or female) and a heterosexual male (or female) that makes only bisexuals males or females love both genders sexually, while heterosexual males and females cannot"?

No one can answer either question without it being based on lust as defined above. For this reason, sex with the same gender is wrong, as it is based on lust as defined above and not love as defined above.

I don't understand how your conclusion follows from the premises. You are asserting that only heterosexuals are able to love without any good reason to make that assertion. In fact, the only pure conclusion you are actually rendering here is that it SHOULDNT matter what is in between your legs; if you are going to give love to somebody without selfish reasons, putting conditions on it would be illogical. Your argument is one of the finest reasons to draw the very opposite conclusion that you reached.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 1:46:10 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 1:43:59 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 9/24/2016 10:41:54 AM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: Sex with the same gender is unjust and damaging to society, as it is based on lust. Not love. By lust and love, I mean:

Love-a feeling of appreciation from being cared for by someone or being the care giver to someone. Thus a loving relationship is achieved by putting the needs and wants of others before you own, with the purposeful aim to make joy by making others happy at all times. The desire to give always supersedes the desire to receive. This is the greatest behavior in Islam and the best method of establishing peace.

Lust- The crave for attention and affection and self-interest. Thus a lustful relationship may involve the act of making others happy, but the desire to receive always supersedes the desire to give. This is the worst behavior in Islam, and the underline root of all evil and bad relations.

Many will argue and suggest that Sex with the same gender is or can be based on love as defined above, yet if you ask "what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same gender sexually but not the opposite sex"?
The answer provided by Homosexual themselves is proof that it is based on lust and not love.

The same applies for those who say they are bisexual. If you ask, "What is the natural difference between a bisexual male (or female) and a heterosexual male (or female) that makes only bisexuals males or females love both genders sexually, while heterosexual males and females cannot"?

No one can answer either question without it being based on lust as defined above. For this reason, sex with the same gender is wrong, as it is based on lust as defined above and not love as defined above.

I don't understand how your conclusion follows from the premises. You are asserting that only heterosexuals are able to love without any good reason to make that assertion. In fact, the only pure conclusion you are actually rendering here is that it SHOULDNT matter what is in between your legs; if you are going to give love to somebody without selfish reasons, putting conditions on it would be illogical. Your argument is one of the finest reasons to draw the very opposite conclusion that you reached.

You have to understand, you see, that because he has anecdotal evidence of one homosexual stating they aren't in love with anyone, but still seek sex, homosexual relationships revolving around love can't exist.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 2:05:49 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Some serious 'bi-phobia' going on here.

So what about cuckholds? Lol (no I'm not the one that likes to be humiliated... I am the humiliator)
Fatihah
Posts: 7,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 7:59:02 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 1:43:59 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:

I don't understand how your conclusion follows from the premises. You are asserting that only heterosexuals are able to love without any good reason to make that assertion. In fact, the only pure conclusion you are actually rendering here is that it SHOULDNT matter what is in between your legs; if you are going to give love to somebody without selfish reasons, putting conditions on it would be illogical. Your argument is one of the finest reasons to draw the very opposite conclusion that you reached.

Response: The answer to your ponder is in your failure to answer the questions I stated. Again:

What is the difference in nature between men and women that makes the homosexuals love the same sex sexually, but not the opposite sex?

What is the difference in nature between bisexuals males (females) and heterosexual males (females) that makes them love the both genders sexually but heterosexuals cannot?

The fact that you cannot provide no other difference than lust proves it is lust.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 9:12:11 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 7:59:02 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 9/24/2016 1:43:59 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:

I don't understand how your conclusion follows from the premises. You are asserting that only heterosexuals are able to love without any good reason to make that assertion. In fact, the only pure conclusion you are actually rendering here is that it SHOULDNT matter what is in between your legs; if you are going to give love to somebody without selfish reasons, putting conditions on it would be illogical. Your argument is one of the finest reasons to draw the very opposite conclusion that you reached.

Response: The answer to your ponder is in your failure to answer the questions I stated. Again:

What is the difference in nature between men and women that makes the homosexuals love the same sex sexually, but not the opposite sex?

What is the difference in nature between bisexuals males (females) and heterosexual males (females) that makes them love the both genders sexually but heterosexuals cannot?

The fact that you cannot provide no other difference than lust proves it is lust.

Ok so obviously you are referring to the biological attraction between opposite sexes. You qualify that as "natural," and then say that since homosexuality is not natural that it therefore must be based on vice (lust). I appreciate this logic, my morality is similarly constructed. But human love is open to interpretation, we aren't lower life forms which operate on pure instinct. You will never be able to reasonably show that homosexual love is not pure, if only because love will always be a purely philosophical construct. We don't operate on instinct, we operate on feelings. Yes, some of those feelings are impure - I am not a moral relativist. But there's a difference between lust, a desire based on selfishness, and what could philosophically be legitimate homosexual love. Your reasoning must fail, if even a single homosexual has the capacity to love another in a selfless way.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 9:22:04 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 9:12:11 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:

Ok so obviously you are referring to the biological attraction between opposite sexes. You qualify that as "natural," and then say that since homosexuality is not natural that it therefore must be based on vice (lust). I appreciate this logic, my morality is similarly constructed. But human love is open to interpretation, we aren't lower life forms which operate on pure instinct. You will never be able to reasonably show that homosexual love is not pure, if only because love will always be a purely philosophical construct. We don't operate on instinct, we operate on feelings. Yes, some of those feelings are impure - I am not a moral relativist. But there's a difference between lust, a desire based on selfishness, and what could philosophically be legitimate homosexual love. Your reasoning must fail, if even a single homosexual has the capacity to love another in a selfless way.

Response: Yet the fact that neither you, nor any homosexual can answer the questions I asked without referring to lust supports the fact that homosexual sex is based on lust as I defined it above.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2016 10:19:04 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 9:22:04 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 9/24/2016 9:12:11 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:

Ok so obviously you are referring to the biological attraction between opposite sexes. You qualify that as "natural," and then say that since homosexuality is not natural that it therefore must be based on vice (lust). I appreciate this logic, my morality is similarly constructed. But human love is open to interpretation, we aren't lower life forms which operate on pure instinct. You will never be able to reasonably show that homosexual love is not pure, if only because love will always be a purely philosophical construct. We don't operate on instinct, we operate on feelings. Yes, some of those feelings are impure - I am not a moral relativist. But there's a difference between lust, a desire based on selfishness, and what could philosophically be legitimate homosexual love. Your reasoning must fail, if even a single homosexual has the capacity to love another in a selfless way.

Response: Yet the fact that neither you, nor any homosexual can answer the questions I asked without referring to lust supports the fact that homosexual sex is based on lust as I defined it above.

I can't imagine any person would accept that logic as sound.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 12:40:54 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
There are two genders: male and female. Intersex people are the exception here, not the rule. "Gender" and "sex" mean the same thing, and there is no real-world basis for creating a distinction.

There are three sexual orientations: straight, gay, and bi. There is no such thing as "pansexual", since there are only two genders, and "bisexual" already covers attraction to both genders. "Asexual" is not an orientation, since most asexuals are still straight, gay, or bi despite their lack of interest in having sex.

Being transgender is a legitimate thing, but being "genderqueer", etc. is not. Most of those people are not actually transgender and do not suffer from gender dysphoria; they just hate the fact that humans are a sexually dimorphic species.
Hiu
Posts: 978
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 12:40:54 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
There are two genders: male and female. Intersex people are the exception here, not the rule. "Gender" and "sex" mean the same thing, and there is no real-world basis for creating a distinction.

There are three sexual orientations: straight, gay, and bi. There is no such thing as "pansexual", since there are only two genders, and "bisexual" already covers attraction to both genders. "Asexual" is not an orientation, since most asexuals are still straight, gay, or bi despite their lack of interest in having sex.

Being transgender is a legitimate thing, but being "genderqueer", etc. is not. Most of those people are not actually transgender and do not suffer from gender dysphoria; they just hate the fact that humans are a sexually dimorphic species.

Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.
Hiu
Posts: 978
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 1:12:14 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.

This has nothing to do with Social Justice Warriors (which is a stupid reference concerning this subject)

Here is clear definition:

Gender Definition: "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)."

Sex: "Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 1:24:51 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 1:12:14 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.

This has nothing to do with Social Justice Warriors (which is a stupid reference concerning this subject)

Here is clear definition:

Gender Definition: "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)."

Sex: "Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

I'd ask for a source, but it doesn't matter. Firstly, your two definitions mean basically the same thing once the bracketed parts are deleted (which they should be). Secondly, word definitions are defined by how the speakers of the language use them; since the majority of English-speakers use the terms "sex" and "gender" interchangeably, they mean the same thing in the English language. This may not be true in fifty years, if the terms become more distinguished, but it is true right now.
Hiu
Posts: 978
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 1:26:41 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 1:24:51 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:12:14 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.

This has nothing to do with Social Justice Warriors (which is a stupid reference concerning this subject)

Here is clear definition:

Gender Definition: "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)."

Sex: "Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

I'd ask for a source, but it doesn't matter. Firstly, your two definitions mean basically the same thing once the bracketed parts are deleted (which they should be). Secondly, word definitions are defined by how the speakers of the language use them; since the majority of English-speakers use the terms "sex" and "gender" interchangeably, they mean the same thing in the English language. This may not be true in fifty years, if the terms become more distinguished, but it is true right now.

Both terms come from:

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 2:53:29 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 1:26:41 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:24:51 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:12:14 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.

This has nothing to do with Social Justice Warriors (which is a stupid reference concerning this subject)

Here is clear definition:

Gender Definition: "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)."

Sex: "Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

I'd ask for a source, but it doesn't matter. Firstly, your two definitions mean basically the same thing once the bracketed parts are deleted (which they should be). Secondly, word definitions are defined by how the speakers of the language use them; since the majority of English-speakers use the terms "sex" and "gender" interchangeably, they mean the same thing in the English language. This may not be true in fifty years, if the terms become more distinguished, but it is true right now.

Both terms come from:

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

They could come from God himself, but I'm not accepting them as dogma. Refute my argument or else I won't bother replying.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 3:13:34 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 1:12:14 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.

This has nothing to do with Social Justice Warriors (which is a stupid reference concerning this subject)

Here is clear definition:

Gender Definition: "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)."

How does one have a "state" of a cultural difference?

Sex: "Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

These 2 definitions are functionally identical.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Hiu
Posts: 978
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 4:12:54 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 2:53:29 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:26:41 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:24:51 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:12:14 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.

This has nothing to do with Social Justice Warriors (which is a stupid reference concerning this subject)

Here is clear definition:

Gender Definition: "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)."

Sex: "Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

I'd ask for a source, but it doesn't matter. Firstly, your two definitions mean basically the same thing once the bracketed parts are deleted (which they should be). Secondly, word definitions are defined by how the speakers of the language use them; since the majority of English-speakers use the terms "sex" and "gender" interchangeably, they mean the same thing in the English language. This may not be true in fifty years, if the terms become more distinguished, but it is true right now.

Both terms come from:

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

They could come from God himself, but I'm not accepting them as dogma. Refute my argument or else I won't bother replying.

Firstly, we are not debating the English language here, and yes in some instances in discussion, the syntax of gender and Sex may be used interchangeably. However if Gender meant Sex then Gender wouldn"t be a different word (unless we use gender as colloquialism). With respect to gender, the reason that there is a differing definition from sex is because the idea of gender encompasses the social-cultural in attachment with one"s sex. However, given the reality of those who consider themselves transgender, the definition of gender is more broad. According to the American Psychological Association, gender is:

"Gender refers to the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates with a person"s biological sex. Behavior that is compatible with cultural expectations is referred to as gender-normative; behaviors that are viewed as incompatible with these expectations constitute gender non-conformity."

In addition to the APA"s understanding of gender, there is also the expression of gender identity:

"
Gender identity refers to "one"s sense of oneself as male, female, or transgender" (American Psychological Association, 2006). When one"s gender identity and biological sex are not congruent, the individual may identify as transsexual or as another transgender category (cf.
Gainor, 2000).

As you can see there are varying definitions regarding gender, gender identity and sex. For the American Psychological Association, sex is:

Sex refers to a person"s biological status and is typically categorized as male, female, or intersex (i.e., atypical combinations of features that usually distinguish male from female). There are a number of indicators of biological sex, including sex chromosomes, gonads, internal reproductive organs, and external genitalia.

So how are these two terms the same? They"re not.
Hiu
Posts: 978
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 4:32:25 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 3:13:34 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:12:14 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:04:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 1:02:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Gender and sex do not mean the same thing SMH

Yes they do. SJWs pretend they don't, but they do.

This has nothing to do with Social Justice Warriors (which is a stupid reference concerning this subject)

Here is clear definition:

Gender Definition: "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)."


How does one have a "state" of a cultural difference?

Sex: "Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

These 2 definitions are functionally identical.

identical, but not the same....Again one refers to the socio-cultural identity in association with one's sex, but it does not mean that gender and sex are synonymous. As said in my previous post, sex according to the American Psychological Association, refers to the "person"s biological status and is typically categorized as male, female, or intersex (i.e., atypical combinations of features that usually distinguish male from female). There are a number of indicators of biological sex, including sex chromosomes, gonads, internal reproductive organs, and external genitalia."

One refers to one's biological makeup, the other refers to the feelings and behaviors of one's given biological makeup. As we've seen in transgender humans, those feelings such as their neurochemistry does not match their sex. Alas, gender refers to the socio-cultural expectations of one's given sex, however this is the gender-normative view. This is a different definition than sex.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 7:12:31 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 4:12:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Firstly, we are not debating the English language here,

That is exactly what we're doing here.

and yes in some instances in discussion, the syntax of gender and Sex may be used interchangeably. However if Gender meant Sex then Gender wouldn"t be a different word (unless we use gender as colloquialism).

Not true. Many words mean that same thing as each other. We call these words "synonyms".

With respect to gender, the reason that there is a differing definition from sex is because the idea of gender encompasses the social-cultural in attachment with one"s sex.

This distinction is recent and thus not universal. There's nothing wrong with words taking on new meanings or nuances, but that's not what's happening here; SJWs invented the new meaning out of their asses and are now trying to force it into everybody else's vocabulary. I find this coercion offensive and thus refuse to accept the artificial distinction.

However, given the reality of those who consider themselves transgender, the definition of gender is more broad.

No, it's still just male and female. Trannies merely identify as the other one. Intersex people are a different story entirely.

According to the American Psychological Association, gender is:

"Gender refers to the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates with a person"s biological sex. Behavior that is compatible with cultural expectations is referred to as gender-normative; behaviors that are viewed as incompatible with these expectations constitute gender non-conformity."

I'm not accepting their definition, because it's crap.

In addition to the APA"s understanding of gender, there is also the expression of gender identity:

"
Gender identity refers to "one"s sense of oneself as male, female, or transgender" (American Psychological Association, 2006). When one"s gender identity and biological sex are not congruent, the individual may identify as transsexual or as another transgender category (cf.
Gainor, 2000).

The clinical term for this incongruity is Gender Dysphoria. Real transgenderism is a medical condition and should be understood in that context. The people preaching for additional genders are not actually trans (most of the time).

As you can see there are varying definitions regarding gender, gender identity and sex. For the American Psychological Association, sex is:


Sex refers to a person"s biological status and is typically categorized as male, female, or intersex (i.e., atypical combinations of features that usually distinguish male from female). There are a number of indicators of biological sex, including sex chromosomes, gonads, internal reproductive organs, and external genitalia.

Intersex is also a medical condition(s) whereby sex/gender has not developed normally. It is not a third gender.

So how are these two terms the same? They"re not.

Your entire post is an argument from authority that doesn't address my point.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 7:39:22 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Do not forget, in this argument, that Fatihah is a proponent of middle-aged men having sex with six year old children. As long as they are girls.
Hiu
Posts: 978
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 10:10:45 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 7:12:31 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 4:12:54 AM, Hiu wrote:
Firstly, we are not debating the English language here,

That is exactly what we're doing here.

and yes in some instances in discussion, the syntax of gender and Sex may be used interchangeably. However if Gender meant Sex then Gender wouldn"t be a different word (unless we use gender as colloquialism).

Not true. Many words mean that same thing as each other. We call these words "synonyms".

With respect to gender, the reason that there is a differing definition from sex is because the idea of gender encompasses the social-cultural in attachment with one"s sex.

This distinction is recent and thus not universal. There's nothing wrong with words taking on new meanings or nuances, but that's not what's happening here; SJWs invented the new meaning out of their asses and are now trying to force it into everybody else's vocabulary. I find this coercion offensive and thus refuse to accept the artificial distinction.

However, given the reality of those who consider themselves transgender, the definition of gender is more broad.

No, it's still just male and female. Trannies merely identify as the other one. Intersex people are a different story entirely.

According to the American Psychological Association, gender is:

"Gender refers to the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates with a person"s biological sex. Behavior that is compatible with cultural expectations is referred to as gender-normative; behaviors that are viewed as incompatible with these expectations constitute gender non-conformity."

I'm not accepting their definition, because it's crap.

In addition to the APA"s understanding of gender, there is also the expression of gender identity:

"
Gender identity refers to "one"s sense of oneself as male, female, or transgender" (American Psychological Association, 2006). When one"s gender identity and biological sex are not congruent, the individual may identify as transsexual or as another transgender category (cf.
Gainor, 2000).

The clinical term for this incongruity is Gender Dysphoria. Real transgenderism is a medical condition and should be understood in that context. The people preaching for additional genders are not actually trans (most of the time).

As you can see there are varying definitions regarding gender, gender identity and sex. For the American Psychological Association, sex is:


Sex refers to a person"s biological status and is typically categorized as male, female, or intersex (i.e., atypical combinations of features that usually distinguish male from female). There are a number of indicators of biological sex, including sex chromosomes, gonads, internal reproductive organs, and external genitalia.

Intersex is also a medical condition(s) whereby sex/gender has not developed normally. It is not a third gender.

So how are these two terms the same? They"re not.

Your entire post is an argument from authority that doesn't address my point.

Before you respond, can you please tell me what political lean you identify as?

You said:

"That is exactly what we're doing here."

No. The OP clearly wants to discuss sexuality. You want to argue semantics which is moot point considering I've given you clinical definitions.

You said:

"Not true. Many words mean that same thing as each other. We call these words "synonyms".

True. However in the case of defining gender and sex, there is clearly a distinction in terminology. I've given two definitons of both. One from Merriam Webster's Dictionary, and the other from the American Psychological Association.

You said:

"This distinction is recent and thus not universal. There's nothing wrong with words taking on new meanings or nuances, but that's not what's happening here; SJWs invented the new meaning out of their asses and are now trying to force it into everybody else's vocabulary. I find this coercion offensive and thus refuse to accept the artificial distinction."

First off, can you please cut it with the SJW crap, it is really irritating in these discussions. There happens to be people who have doctorates that have done tremendous amount of research regarding this subject and I highly doubt you are qualified to change clinical terminologies. Now, in challenging your statement "SJW invented a new meaning," can you kindly tell me where and when did so-called SJW created meaning? Can you specify what SJW group created this new meaning and when? My best guess is you can't (considering you using juevenile words like crap and a**). So please tell me where these clinicians were pulling things out of their a** and kindly tell me where in history did gender and sex mean the same thing.

You said:

"No, it's still just male and female. Trannies merely identify as the other one. Intersex people are a different story entirely."

Do you know the difference between a transsexual and someone who is transgender? Transgender being an umbrella term for transsexual both have varying definitions. Yes, someone who is transsexual has a disconnect with their biological sex, but again going back to gender, whatever their biological sex is, their gender meaning their psychological foundation as THAT person, does not align with their sex. Whether you consider this or that person a male or female, it is THAT person who may identify as who they want to identify as.

You said:

"I'm not accepting their definition, because it's crap."

Right. Very scientific answer.

You said:

"The clinical term for this incongruity is Gender Dysphoria. Real transgenderism is a medical condition and should be understood in that context. The people preaching for additional genders are not actually trans (most of the time)."

Wrong. Being transgender does not mean you have Gender Dysphoria and in fact the key symptoms for those suffering from Gender Dysphoria are: stress, anxiety, and depression. As one website puts it:

"Gender dysphoria is not homosexuality. Your internal sense of your gender is not the same as your sexual orientation." See: http://www.webmd.com...

You stated: "true transgenderism is a medical condition"

Can you tell me the medical condition of "true transgenderism?" Apparently the DSM 5 missed that.

You said:

"Intersex is also a medical condition(s) whereby sex/gender has not developed normally. It is not a third gender."

You mean a hermaphrodite

You said:

"Your entire post is an argument from authority that doesn't address my point."

You've never had a point. I've clearly address these definitions at length. You've already been refuted twice and I've used different sources to prove the same thing.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 11:28:15 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 10:10:45 AM, Hiu wrote:
Before you respond, can you please tell me what political lean you identify as?

It's not relevant to our discussion.

You said:

"That is exactly what we're doing here."

No. The OP clearly wants to discuss sexuality. You want to argue semantics which is moot point considering I've given you clinical definitions.

You replied to me. You're also the one quibbling semantics. I've already made it very clear that I don't give a f*ck about the semantics.

You said:

"Not true. Many words mean that same thing as each other. We call these words "synonyms".

True. However in the case of defining gender and sex, there is clearly a distinction in terminology. I've given two definitons of both. One from Merriam Webster's Dictionary, and the other from the American Psychological Association.

I've already explained this point.

You said:

"This distinction is recent and thus not universal. There's nothing wrong with words taking on new meanings or nuances, but that's not what's happening here; SJWs invented the new meaning out of their asses and are now trying to force it into everybody else's vocabulary. I find this coercion offensive and thus refuse to accept the artificial distinction."

First off, can you please cut it with the SJW crap, it is really irritating in these discussions.

I could, but I'm not going to, because the SJWs are literally the only reason the distinction exists.

There happens to be people who have doctorates that have done tremendous amount of research regarding this subject and I highly doubt you are qualified to change clinical terminologies.

Source on the research.

Now, in challenging your statement "SJW invented a new meaning," can you kindly tell me where and when did so-called SJW created meaning? Can you specify what SJW group created this new meaning and when?

No, and such details are immaterial to the discussion.

and kindly tell me where in history did gender and sex mean the same thing.

Present day; the majority of people use the terms interchangeably.

If you're looking for a source to cherry-pick, read this: https://en.wikipedia.org...

You said:

"No, it's still just male and female. Trannies merely identify as the other one. Intersex people are a different story entirely."

Do you know the difference between a transsexual and someone who is transgender?

Yes.

Transgender being an umbrella term for transsexual both have varying definitions. Yes, someone who is transsexual has a disconnect with their biological sex,

A transsexual is actually in the process of swapping from one to t'other.

but again going back to gender, whatever their biological sex is, their gender meaning their psychological foundation as THAT person, does not align with their sex. Whether you consider this or that person a male or female, it is THAT person who may identify as who they want to identify as.

I understand how transgenderism works, thank you. Most people do, so assigning different meanings to "sex" and "gender" doesn't clarify anything. Those just learning will only get confused, since the subject is more complex than that.

You said:

"I'm not accepting their definition, because it's crap."

Right. Very scientific answer.

I make no secret of my disdain for the field of psychology. It barely qualifies as science.

You said:

"The clinical term for this incongruity is Gender Dysphoria. Real transgenderism is a medical condition and should be understood in that context. The people preaching for additional genders are not actually trans (most of the time)."

Wrong. Being transgender does not mean you have Gender Dysphoria and in fact the key symptoms for those suffering from Gender Dysphoria are: stress, anxiety, and depression. As one website puts it:

"Gender dysphoria is not homosexuality. Your internal sense of your gender is not the same as your sexual orientation." See: http://www.webmd.com...

I didn't say anything about sexual orientation, so I don't know why you singled out that paragraph.

It's also very clear that you didn't read the article, since it contradicts you.

You said:

"Intersex is also a medical condition(s) whereby sex/gender has not developed normally. It is not a third gender."

You mean a hermaphrodite

A hermaphrodite has both sets of genitals. Most intersex people don't. The former is a subset of the latter.

You said:

"Your entire post is an argument from authority that doesn't address my point."

You've never had a point. I've clearly address these definitions at length. You've already been refuted twice and I've used different sources to prove the same thing.

Buddy, I've seen a five-year-old make more intelligent arguments than you did, and she didn't need to cherry-pick.

Your perpetual ignorance makes the baby Jesus cry.
Hiu
Posts: 978
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 12:05:49 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 11:28:15 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 9/25/2016 10:10:45 AM, Hiu wrote:
Before you respond, can you please tell me what political lean you identify as?

It's not relevant to our discussion.

You said:

"That is exactly what we're doing here."

No. The OP clearly wants to discuss sexuality. You want to argue semantics which is moot point considering I've given you clinical definitions.

You replied to me. You're also the one quibbling semantics. I've already made it very clear that I don't give a f*ck about the semantics.

You said:

"Not true. Many words mean that same thing as each other. We call these words "synonyms".

True. However in the case of defining gender and sex, there is clearly a distinction in terminology. I've given two definitons of both. One from Merriam Webster's Dictionary, and the other from the American Psychological Association.

I've already explained this point.

You said:

"This distinction is recent and thus not universal. There's nothing wrong with words taking on new meanings or nuances, but that's not what's happening here; SJWs invented the new meaning out of their asses and are now trying to force it into everybody else's vocabulary. I find this coercion offensive and thus refuse to accept the artificial distinction."

First off, can you please cut it with the SJW crap, it is really irritating in these discussions.

I could, but I'm not going to, because the SJWs are literally the only reason the distinction exists.

There happens to be people who have doctorates that have done tremendous amount of research regarding this subject and I highly doubt you are qualified to change clinical terminologies.

Source on the research.

Now, in challenging your statement "SJW invented a new meaning," can you kindly tell me where and when did so-called SJW created meaning? Can you specify what SJW group created this new meaning and when?

No, and such details are immaterial to the discussion.

and kindly tell me where in history did gender and sex mean the same thing.

Present day; the majority of people use the terms interchangeably.

If you're looking for a source to cherry-pick, read this: https://en.wikipedia.org...

You said:

"No, it's still just male and female. Trannies merely identify as the other one. Intersex people are a different story entirely."

Do you know the difference between a transsexual and someone who is transgender?

Yes.

Transgender being an umbrella term for transsexual both have varying definitions. Yes, someone who is transsexual has a disconnect with their biological sex,

A transsexual is actually in the process of swapping from one to t'other.

but again going back to gender, whatever their biological sex is, their gender meaning their psychological foundation as THAT person, does not align with their sex. Whether you consider this or that person a male or female, it is THAT person who may identify as who they want to identify as.

I understand how transgenderism works, thank you. Most people do, so assigning different meanings to "sex" and "gender" doesn't clarify anything. Those just learning will only get confused, since the subject is more complex than that.

You said:

"I'm not accepting their definition, because it's crap."

Right. Very scientific answer.

I make no secret of my disdain for the field of psychology. It barely qualifies as science.

You said:

"The clinical term for this incongruity is Gender Dysphoria. Real transgenderism is a medical condition and should be understood in that context. The people preaching for additional genders are not actually trans (most of the time)."

Wrong. Being transgender does not mean you have Gender Dysphoria and in fact the key symptoms for those suffering from Gender Dysphoria are: stress, anxiety, and depression. As one website puts it:

"Gender dysphoria is not homosexuality. Your internal sense of your gender is not the same as your sexual orientation." See: http://www.webmd.com...

I didn't say anything about sexual orientation, so I don't know why you singled out that paragraph.

It's also very clear that you didn't read the article, since it contradicts you.

You said:

"Intersex is also a medical condition(s) whereby sex/gender has not developed normally. It is not a third gender."

You mean a hermaphrodite

A hermaphrodite has both sets of genitals. Most intersex people don't. The former is a subset of the latter.

You said:

"Your entire post is an argument from authority that doesn't address my point."

You've never had a point. I've clearly address these definitions at length. You've already been refuted twice and I've used different sources to prove the same thing.

Buddy, I've seen a five-year-old make more intelligent arguments than you did, and she didn't need to cherry-pick.

Your perpetual ignorance makes the baby Jesus cry.

Again your political lean is relevant because your quibbling about SJW echos the same sentiments as conservatives. Your lack of respect in dialogue has the similitude of half-witted trump supporters so yes, your political lean is relevant. Considering that this is a pointless discussion I think I'll end it here. I'm willing to stake the claim you're not even a graduate student.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 2:12:53 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 10:19:04 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:

I can't imagine any person would accept that logic as sound.

Response: The fact that no one can answer the questions supports that the logic is sound, whether they acknowledge it or not.
keithprosser
Posts: 1,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 4:27:38 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
It's crushingly obvious any species without an instinct to reproduce will soon cease to exist. That means 'programming' individuals with a desire to mate and form pair-bonds. If nothing went wrong then mating and pair bonding would occur between a male and a female, but once in a while the programming controlling mate choice gies wrong, just as sometimes the programming that controls the structure of the heart or kidneys goes wrong.
That matters only as much as people are considered to be baby making machines.

In primitive.ancient cultures a high birth rate was important for growth and to compensate for high infant mortality. Societies needed a constant supply of labour and to an extent soldiers. Non-reprodictive mating would be discouraged. Religions fossilise the social conditions of their origin, which is why abramic religions continue to discourage non-reprodictive mating(even in heterosexual pairings) even today.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 6:36:55 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 2:12:53 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 9/24/2016 10:19:04 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:

I can't imagine any person would accept that logic as sound.

Response: The fact that no one can answer the questions supports that the logic is sound, whether they acknowledge it or not.

Your question was illogical. If a question doesn't use sound logic, it is inappropriate to answer it directly, because any attempt to answer it would lead further down a path of faulty reasoning.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
ANON_TacTiX
Posts: 460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 8:24:01 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 10:41:54 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 9/24/2016 3:41:52 AM, ANON_TacTiX wrote:
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU POST ON THE THREAD

First, I would like to welcome everyone to this thread. I hope that you find the discussion interesting and stimulating. I would ask that all that post in this thread are respectful and polite to others in the forum. No insults or name calling please. I ask this because I have seen many an interesting debate be ruined by insults, and I do not want that to happen to this forum. I want this to be a place where people can come to exchange ideas and opinions freely. Thank you.

Now, on to the topic at hand. I would like to discuss sexuality. I am bisexual, and I find the topic of sexuality to be very interesting, and I would love to discuss it. I talk about it a lot with my friends. I love learning more about this subject, and I just think that it is fun to talk about. I invite anyone to join in on the debate. Whether you are gay, straight, bi, or none of the above, I would love to hear what you have to say. I would also like to mention that I am male, anatomically and mentally since birth. I wasn't planning on talking about gender, but we could dabble in there a little if anyone would like.

Since this is a sensitive subject, and there are a lot of people that hate on other sexualities, I would like to say again. NO INSULTS. Please. You can believe what you want, just please try to be polite, and don't shove it down our throats. Also, it would be nice if people would leave religion out of this for the most part. I get that it isn't easy, but this was left out of the Religion forum for a reason. Thank you (again).

Response: Sex with the same gender is unjust and damaging to society, as it is based on lust. Not love. By lust and love, I mean:

Love-a feeling of appreciation from being cared for by someone or being the care giver to someone. Thus a loving relationship is achieved by putting the needs and wants of others before you own, with the purposeful aim to make joy by making others happy at all times. The desire to give always supersedes the desire to receive. This is the greatest behavior in Islam and the best method of establishing peace.
There are people of the same gender that I love.
Lust- The crave for attention and affection and self-interest. Thus a lustful relationship may involve the act of making others happy, but the desire to receive always supersedes the desire to give. This is the worst behavior in Islam, and the underline root of all evil and bad relations.
I experience lust, too.
Many will argue and suggest that Sex with the same gender is or can be based on love as defined above, yet if you ask "what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same gender sexually but not the opposite sex"?
The answer provided by Homosexual themselves is proof that it is based on lust and not love.
How?
The same applies for those who say they are bisexual. If you ask, "What is the natural difference between a bisexual male (or female) and a heterosexual male (or female) that makes only bisexuals males or females love both genders sexually, while heterosexual males and females cannot"?

No one can answer either question without it being based on lust as defined above. For this reason, sex with the same gender is wrong, as it is based on lust as defined above and not love as defined above.
Again, I love people of the same gender, and I love people of the opposite gender. I also feel lust for people of both genders. (When I say people, i don't mean all people. Just a select few that I have feelings for.)

Also, you claim that homosexual sex is wrong because it is based on lust, and in Islam, lust is wrong. Even if that were true, I asked that religion be kept out of this. Please don't base your argument on religion. Again, this is in the Society forum and not the religion forum. I did that for a reason.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning. - Albert Einstein