OT: so this is what our soldiers are dying for in Afghanistan?

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1]
I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.[/quote]

It’s interesting when people try to put everything in terms of black and white, as if there is no other possibility. I think of sexuality (and most human behaviors) in terms of a spectrum, with most of us in the middle somewhere, and the extreme outliers being what we call “dysfunctions” or “disorders” because they are more rare. IMHO, most humans are somewhere “in the middle” of the sexuality spectrum, but because of religious, moral, and social pressures, people deny certain parts of their sexuality; the most extreme of this denial being found in examples of gay priests or other religious adherents (who preach against homosexuality), “anti-gay” politicians (who are gay), and other examples where people seem to overcompensate for their supposed “disorder.”

I think we are doing a disservice to our children and each other when we refuse to speak openly and honestly about sexuality and the many variations found in human nature. There is nothing wrong or abnormal about being gay, bisexual, or straight (or any variation). All are perfectly normal and have existed throughout human history. It’s odd that we have such a hang-up about it.

In other words…I agree with you, Brian. 🙂

[NotCranky]

[quote=CA renter][quote=briansd1]
I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.[/quote]

It’s interesting when people try to put everything in terms of black and white, as if there is no other possibility. I think of sexuality (and most human behaviors) in terms of a spectrum, with most of us in the middle somewhere, and the extreme outliers being what we call “dysfunctions” or “disorders” because they are more rare. IMHO, most humans are somewhere “in the middle” of the sexuality spectrum, but because of religious, moral, and social pressures, people deny certain parts of their sexuality; the most extreme of this denial being found in examples of gay priests or other religious adherents (who preach against homosexuality), “anti-gay” politicians (who are gay), and other examples where people seem to overcompensate for their supposed “disorder.”

I think we are doing a disservice to our children and each other when we refuse to speak openly and honestly about sexuality and the many variations found in human nature. There is nothing wrong or abnormal about being gay, bisexual, or straight (or any variation). All are perfectly normal and have existed throughout human history. It’s odd that we have such a hang-up about it.

In other words…I agree with you, Brian. :)[/quote]
Denying or accepting something that you are prone to doesn’t mean you were born that way. I am not equating homosexuals, or anyone “along the spectrum”, to thieves or pedophiles,but if a thief or pedophile denies they are those things does it mean they were born that way?

Maybe people who let non-scientific unproven opinions about something become dogma are doing so in response to finding excuses for someting in their make-up… instead of getting to the real root? I guess what I am trying to say is that, this discussion is not up to pigg standards of “bring data” from any angle.

Publically, the debate is contaminated from bias and agenda from all sides as well. Yes, the debate is muddled by religion,politics, homophobia(a dis-ease), academic grandiosity, bullying back by gay interest groups and myriad of other poor qualities that interfere with understanding.

I think we do a disservice, on a societal basis to our children, libs and righties, when we make political circus of the debate, in so doing, attempting to bury still open possibilities and even possibly spread lies.

It appears to me that, regardless of inclination, most are claiming to know and preach “truths’ which are a bunch of opinions of convenience. I remain open minded, agnostic and demanding of equal rights, acceptance and tolerance of people anywhere on the “spectrum”, no matter how they got there.

[NotCranky]

[quote=CA renter][quote=briansd1]
I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.[/quote]

It’s interesting when people try to put everything in terms of black and white, as if there is no other possibility. I think of sexuality (and most human behaviors) in terms of a spectrum, with most of us in the middle somewhere, and the extreme outliers being what we call “dysfunctions” or “disorders” because they are more rare. IMHO, most humans are somewhere “in the middle” of the sexuality spectrum, but because of religious, moral, and social pressures, people deny certain parts of their sexuality; the most extreme of this denial being found in examples of gay priests or other religious adherents (who preach against homosexuality), “anti-gay” politicians (who are gay), and other examples where people seem to overcompensate for their supposed “disorder.”

I think we are doing a disservice to our children and each other when we refuse to speak openly and honestly about sexuality and the many variations found in human nature. There is nothing wrong or abnormal about being gay, bisexual, or straight (or any variation). All are perfectly normal and have existed throughout human history. It’s odd that we have such a hang-up about it.

In other words…I agree with you, Brian. :)[/quote]
Denying or accepting something that you are prone to doesn’t mean you were born that way. I am not equating homosexuals, or anyone “along the spectrum”, to thieves or pedophiles,but if a thief or pedophile denies they are those things does it mean they were born that way?

Maybe people who let non-scientific unproven opinions about something become dogma are doing so in response to finding excuses for someting in their make-up… instead of getting to the real root? I guess what I am trying to say is that, this discussion is not up to pigg standards of “bring data” from any angle.

Publically, the debate is contaminated from bias and agenda from all sides as well. Yes, the debate is muddled by religion,politics, homophobia(a dis-ease), academic grandiosity, bullying back by gay interest groups and myriad of other poor qualities that interfere with understanding.

I think we do a disservice, on a societal basis to our children, libs and righties, when we make political circus of the debate, in so doing, attempting to bury still open possibilities and even possibly spread lies.

It appears to me that, regardless of inclination, most are claiming to know and preach “truths’ which are a bunch of opinions of convenience. I remain open minded, agnostic and demanding of equal rights, acceptance and tolerance of people anywhere on the “spectrum”, no matter how they got there.

[NotCranky]

[quote=CA renter][quote=briansd1]
I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.[/quote]

It’s interesting when people try to put everything in terms of black and white, as if there is no other possibility. I think of sexuality (and most human behaviors) in terms of a spectrum, with most of us in the middle somewhere, and the extreme outliers being what we call “dysfunctions” or “disorders” because they are more rare. IMHO, most humans are somewhere “in the middle” of the sexuality spectrum, but because of religious, moral, and social pressures, people deny certain parts of their sexuality; the most extreme of this denial being found in examples of gay priests or other religious adherents (who preach against homosexuality), “anti-gay” politicians (who are gay), and other examples where people seem to overcompensate for their supposed “disorder.”

I think we are doing a disservice to our children and each other when we refuse to speak openly and honestly about sexuality and the many variations found in human nature. There is nothing wrong or abnormal about being gay, bisexual, or straight (or any variation). All are perfectly normal and have existed throughout human history. It’s odd that we have such a hang-up about it.

In other words…I agree with you, Brian. :)[/quote]
Denying or accepting something that you are prone to doesn’t mean you were born that way. I am not equating homosexuals, or anyone “along the spectrum”, to thieves or pedophiles,but if a thief or pedophile denies they are those things does it mean they were born that way?

Maybe people who let non-scientific unproven opinions about something become dogma are doing so in response to finding excuses for someting in their make-up… instead of getting to the real root? I guess what I am trying to say is that, this discussion is not up to pigg standards of “bring data” from any angle.

Publically, the debate is contaminated from bias and agenda from all sides as well. Yes, the debate is muddled by religion,politics, homophobia(a dis-ease), academic grandiosity, bullying back by gay interest groups and myriad of other poor qualities that interfere with understanding.

I think we do a disservice, on a societal basis to our children, libs and righties, when we make political circus of the debate, in so doing, attempting to bury still open possibilities and even possibly spread lies.

It appears to me that, regardless of inclination, most are claiming to know and preach “truths’ which are a bunch of opinions of convenience. I remain open minded, agnostic and demanding of equal rights, acceptance and tolerance of people anywhere on the “spectrum”, no matter how they got there.

[NotCranky]

[quote=CA renter][quote=briansd1]
I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.[/quote]

It’s interesting when people try to put everything in terms of black and white, as if there is no other possibility. I think of sexuality (and most human behaviors) in terms of a spectrum, with most of us in the middle somewhere, and the extreme outliers being what we call “dysfunctions” or “disorders” because they are more rare. IMHO, most humans are somewhere “in the middle” of the sexuality spectrum, but because of religious, moral, and social pressures, people deny certain parts of their sexuality; the most extreme of this denial being found in examples of gay priests or other religious adherents (who preach against homosexuality), “anti-gay” politicians (who are gay), and other examples where people seem to overcompensate for their supposed “disorder.”

I think we are doing a disservice to our children and each other when we refuse to speak openly and honestly about sexuality and the many variations found in human nature. There is nothing wrong or abnormal about being gay, bisexual, or straight (or any variation). All are perfectly normal and have existed throughout human history. It’s odd that we have such a hang-up about it.

In other words…I agree with you, Brian. :)[/quote]
Denying or accepting something that you are prone to doesn’t mean you were born that way. I am not equating homosexuals, or anyone “along the spectrum”, to thieves or pedophiles,but if a thief or pedophile denies they are those things does it mean they were born that way?

Maybe people who let non-scientific unproven opinions about something become dogma are doing so in response to finding excuses for someting in their make-up… instead of getting to the real root? I guess what I am trying to say is that, this discussion is not up to pigg standards of “bring data” from any angle.

Publically, the debate is contaminated from bias and agenda from all sides as well. Yes, the debate is muddled by religion,politics, homophobia(a dis-ease), academic grandiosity, bullying back by gay interest groups and myriad of other poor qualities that interfere with understanding.

I think we do a disservice, on a societal basis to our children, libs and righties, when we make political circus of the debate, in so doing, attempting to bury still open possibilities and even possibly spread lies.

It appears to me that, regardless of inclination, most are claiming to know and preach “truths’ which are a bunch of opinions of convenience. I remain open minded, agnostic and demanding of equal rights, acceptance and tolerance of people anywhere on the “spectrum”, no matter how they got there.

[NotCranky]

[quote=CA renter][quote=briansd1]
I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.[/quote]

It’s interesting when people try to put everything in terms of black and white, as if there is no other possibility. I think of sexuality (and most human behaviors) in terms of a spectrum, with most of us in the middle somewhere, and the extreme outliers being what we call “dysfunctions” or “disorders” because they are more rare. IMHO, most humans are somewhere “in the middle” of the sexuality spectrum, but because of religious, moral, and social pressures, people deny certain parts of their sexuality; the most extreme of this denial being found in examples of gay priests or other religious adherents (who preach against homosexuality), “anti-gay” politicians (who are gay), and other examples where people seem to overcompensate for their supposed “disorder.”

I think we are doing a disservice to our children and each other when we refuse to speak openly and honestly about sexuality and the many variations found in human nature. There is nothing wrong or abnormal about being gay, bisexual, or straight (or any variation). All are perfectly normal and have existed throughout human history. It’s odd that we have such a hang-up about it.

In other words…I agree with you, Brian. :)[/quote]
Denying or accepting something that you are prone to doesn’t mean you were born that way. I am not equating homosexuals, or anyone “along the spectrum”, to thieves or pedophiles,but if a thief or pedophile denies they are those things does it mean they were born that way?

Maybe people who let non-scientific unproven opinions about something become dogma are doing so in response to finding excuses for someting in their make-up… instead of getting to the real root? I guess what I am trying to say is that, this discussion is not up to pigg standards of “bring data” from any angle.

Publically, the debate is contaminated from bias and agenda from all sides as well. Yes, the debate is muddled by religion,politics, homophobia(a dis-ease), academic grandiosity, bullying back by gay interest groups and myriad of other poor qualities that interfere with understanding.

I think we do a disservice, on a societal basis to our children, libs and righties, when we make political circus of the debate, in so doing, attempting to bury still open possibilities and even possibly spread lies.

It appears to me that, regardless of inclination, most are claiming to know and preach “truths’ which are a bunch of opinions of convenience. I remain open minded, agnostic and demanding of equal rights, acceptance and tolerance of people anywhere on the “spectrum”, no matter how they got there.

[KSMountain]

[quote=Eugene][quote]Cognitive dissonance at its finest- just to be clear, I have nothing against homosexuality, it’s the pedophilia and the treatment of women as sub-human there that irks me.[/quote]

It’s just a different culture and different morale. We think that it’s perverse for old men to have close relations with boys. They think that it’s perverse for women to go to bars or to wear revealing clothes. There’s no biological or any other reason for either of those beliefs.[/quote]
“Just”? So you think it’s just “different” but equally valid?

I think you’re stretching the moral equivalency argument quite far.

Do you think honor killings and throwing acid into classrooms are just a different but equally valid way of treating women?

Would you want folks to be able to adopt Sharia in certain communities in the US?

“or any other reason”…
You’re saying there’s no good reason why many societies oppose child abuse? Why *do* we have laws against it? Are we just being silly?

[KSMountain]

[quote=Eugene][quote]Cognitive dissonance at its finest- just to be clear, I have nothing against homosexuality, it’s the pedophilia and the treatment of women as sub-human there that irks me.[/quote]

It’s just a different culture and different morale. We think that it’s perverse for old men to have close relations with boys. They think that it’s perverse for women to go to bars or to wear revealing clothes. There’s no biological or any other reason for either of those beliefs.[/quote]
“Just”? So you think it’s just “different” but equally valid?

I think you’re stretching the moral equivalency argument quite far.

Do you think honor killings and throwing acid into classrooms are just a different but equally valid way of treating women?

Would you want folks to be able to adopt Sharia in certain communities in the US?

“or any other reason”…
You’re saying there’s no good reason why many societies oppose child abuse? Why *do* we have laws against it? Are we just being silly?

[KSMountain]

[quote=Eugene][quote]Cognitive dissonance at its finest- just to be clear, I have nothing against homosexuality, it’s the pedophilia and the treatment of women as sub-human there that irks me.[/quote]

It’s just a different culture and different morale. We think that it’s perverse for old men to have close relations with boys. They think that it’s perverse for women to go to bars or to wear revealing clothes. There’s no biological or any other reason for either of those beliefs.[/quote]
“Just”? So you think it’s just “different” but equally valid?

I think you’re stretching the moral equivalency argument quite far.

Do you think honor killings and throwing acid into classrooms are just a different but equally valid way of treating women?

Would you want folks to be able to adopt Sharia in certain communities in the US?

“or any other reason”…
You’re saying there’s no good reason why many societies oppose child abuse? Why *do* we have laws against it? Are we just being silly?

[KSMountain]

[quote=Eugene][quote]Cognitive dissonance at its finest- just to be clear, I have nothing against homosexuality, it’s the pedophilia and the treatment of women as sub-human there that irks me.[/quote]

It’s just a different culture and different morale. We think that it’s perverse for old men to have close relations with boys. They think that it’s perverse for women to go to bars or to wear revealing clothes. There’s no biological or any other reason for either of those beliefs.[/quote]
“Just”? So you think it’s just “different” but equally valid?

I think you’re stretching the moral equivalency argument quite far.

Do you think honor killings and throwing acid into classrooms are just a different but equally valid way of treating women?

Would you want folks to be able to adopt Sharia in certain communities in the US?

“or any other reason”…
You’re saying there’s no good reason why many societies oppose child abuse? Why *do* we have laws against it? Are we just being silly?

[KSMountain]

[quote=Eugene][quote]Cognitive dissonance at its finest- just to be clear, I have nothing against homosexuality, it’s the pedophilia and the treatment of women as sub-human there that irks me.[/quote]

It’s just a different culture and different morale. We think that it’s perverse for old men to have close relations with boys. They think that it’s perverse for women to go to bars or to wear revealing clothes. There’s no biological or any other reason for either of those beliefs.[/quote]
“Just”? So you think it’s just “different” but equally valid?

I think you’re stretching the moral equivalency argument quite far.

Do you think honor killings and throwing acid into classrooms are just a different but equally valid way of treating women?

Would you want folks to be able to adopt Sharia in certain communities in the US?

“or any other reason”…
You’re saying there’s no good reason why many societies oppose child abuse? Why *do* we have laws against it? Are we just being silly?

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]

just saying that paradoxically, advances in science will help homosexuals in their argument that it is biological and therefore they should have equal rights, but the same science may lead to their eventual decline in number.[/quote]

I doubt that parents will take such drastic steps.

Acceptance means that more gays will come out of the closet and more parents will accept their children just the way they are (parents no longer try to make their left handed children right handed).

I believe that certain traits such as homosexuality, creatively, intelligence, etc.. result from a combination of genes. There are no single genes that can be manipulated. And in utero manipulation will result in unintended consequences, especially in the early stages of technology.

I’m a social liberal so my opinion hardly reflects general consensus. But CA renter and Russell’s posts show that societal attitudes are changing. Being gay should be a non-issue. People with hang ups have their own demons to deal with.

Of course, societal pressures are formidable. I have a gay Jewish friend who is determined to have a baby with an Ashkenazi Jewish woman just to make his parents happy. And this guy is a doctor!

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]

just saying that paradoxically, advances in science will help homosexuals in their argument that it is biological and therefore they should have equal rights, but the same science may lead to their eventual decline in number.[/quote]

I doubt that parents will take such drastic steps.

Acceptance means that more gays will come out of the closet and more parents will accept their children just the way they are (parents no longer try to make their left handed children right handed).

I believe that certain traits such as homosexuality, creatively, intelligence, etc.. result from a combination of genes. There are no single genes that can be manipulated. And in utero manipulation will result in unintended consequences, especially in the early stages of technology.

I’m a social liberal so my opinion hardly reflects general consensus. But CA renter and Russell’s posts show that societal attitudes are changing. Being gay should be a non-issue. People with hang ups have their own demons to deal with.

Of course, societal pressures are formidable. I have a gay Jewish friend who is determined to have a baby with an Ashkenazi Jewish woman just to make his parents happy. And this guy is a doctor!

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]

just saying that paradoxically, advances in science will help homosexuals in their argument that it is biological and therefore they should have equal rights, but the same science may lead to their eventual decline in number.[/quote]

I doubt that parents will take such drastic steps.

Acceptance means that more gays will come out of the closet and more parents will accept their children just the way they are (parents no longer try to make their left handed children right handed).

I believe that certain traits such as homosexuality, creatively, intelligence, etc.. result from a combination of genes. There are no single genes that can be manipulated. And in utero manipulation will result in unintended consequences, especially in the early stages of technology.

I’m a social liberal so my opinion hardly reflects general consensus. But CA renter and Russell’s posts show that societal attitudes are changing. Being gay should be a non-issue. People with hang ups have their own demons to deal with.

Of course, societal pressures are formidable. I have a gay Jewish friend who is determined to have a baby with an Ashkenazi Jewish woman just to make his parents happy. And this guy is a doctor!

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]

just saying that paradoxically, advances in science will help homosexuals in their argument that it is biological and therefore they should have equal rights, but the same science may lead to their eventual decline in number.[/quote]

I doubt that parents will take such drastic steps.

Acceptance means that more gays will come out of the closet and more parents will accept their children just the way they are (parents no longer try to make their left handed children right handed).

I believe that certain traits such as homosexuality, creatively, intelligence, etc.. result from a combination of genes. There are no single genes that can be manipulated. And in utero manipulation will result in unintended consequences, especially in the early stages of technology.

I’m a social liberal so my opinion hardly reflects general consensus. But CA renter and Russell’s posts show that societal attitudes are changing. Being gay should be a non-issue. People with hang ups have their own demons to deal with.

Of course, societal pressures are formidable. I have a gay Jewish friend who is determined to have a baby with an Ashkenazi Jewish woman just to make his parents happy. And this guy is a doctor!

[Author]

Posts