Page 9 of 20 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131419 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 398
  1. #161  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    It's definitely not, as you say.
    Can you say that, unequivocably, for every case? Or even for most cases?

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    We're a long way yet from it being socially acceptable, but thats just learned behavior.
    Then who's to say that we need to "learn" to accept aberrent behavior? Indeed, if you look at the number of homosexuals compared to the population, it is undoubtedly aberrent.
  2. #162  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    I wasn't comparing them. Shopharim made a point about laws and process. I was simply saying that not all laws are moral and just, and used the slaverly laws as an example. The two types of laws are totally unrelated.
    Understood.
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #163  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Can you say that, unequivocably, for every case? Or even for most cases?
    Huh? I was agreeing with aairman's assertion that homosexuality is currently socially unacceptable. What do you mean?
    Then who's to say that we need to "learn" to accept aberrent behavior? Indeed, if you look at the number of homosexuals compared to the population, it is undoubtedly aberrent.
    So we need laws to keep people .... like other people. Gotcha.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #164  
    btw, aberrant puts quite a negative spin on someone who is simply 'outside the norm'. It's usually associated with crime, evil, etc. So no, I don't agree that homosexuals are aberrant. Different from most, certainly.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  5. #165  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Huh? I was agreeing with aairman's assertion that homosexuality is currently socially unacceptable. What do you mean?
    Okay, I thought you were saying its "definitely not" a choice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    So we need laws to keep people .... like other people. Gotcha.
    That's not what I said. But do we need laws to make people accept other people?
  6. #166  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    btw, aberrant puts quite a negative spin on someone who is simply 'outside the norm'. It's usually associated with crime, evil, etc. So no, I don't agree that homosexuals are aberrant. Different from most, certainly.
    "Different than most" is, by definition, aberrent. I'm sorry if that puts a negative spin on things but it doesn't negate the facts. And, while I don't compare it with a crime, I still don't think its something we should change an institution for. That's really the point, isn't it? There's an institution that's stood for one thing for the vast majority of people throughout history. Now we're supposed to change the definition of that institution--I might add, to a definition that is completely offensive to over half the population--so that 2% of the population can do something they're already allowed to do anyway.
  7. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #167  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Are they? so being gay is a choice?
    There is lots of debate on that..

    Acting out on your sexuality may be a choice, but I tend to believe the theory that your sexuality isnt a one..

    And on that basis one could equate sexuality and race fairly IMHO..
    But; if you believe that one's sexuality is not a choice but you are born with a sexuality trait towards homosexuality and you subscribe to the theory of evolution, would that not mean that those born homosexual have not evolved to the point of being able to reproduce and along those same lines, the survival of the fittest and natural order would then weed out those who have not evolved to the point of reproduction?
    I do not subscribe to that theory, but I do not see how anyone who believes in born sexuality traits and evolution can bridge that gap.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  8. #168  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    ...Following your logic, slavery wasn't unacceptable or immoral until society deemed it as such. Really. Looks like we're back to 'might makes right' and 'the majority rules'. Niether has the least bit to do with "morality". Your moral compass may follow status quo, mine does not.
    ...
    I appreciate you for engaging on this.

    What makes something "unacceptable" is a function of the collective moral compass of the people involved. And yes, what made slavery unacceptable is that society deemed it as such. You will notice that for quite some time the practice was accepted (not by all, but by a sufficient number as to maintain its viability). When the practice became unacceptable to a sufficient number of people, change begin to occur. As those "abolitionists" became more effective at swaying public opinion, laws soon followed suit.

    Where we agree (I think) is on this point: slavery was always immoral. Even while it was socially and legislatively acceptable.

    Slavery was never "right" in an absolute sense.

    Even though some rationalized that the Africans were less than human, their humanity remained. And as members of the human family, they were equally entitled to that which all of us are entitled; that from which we can not be alienated by neither law or behavior. There are inalienable rights bestowed on us all--most notably life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
  9. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #169  
    Where are the gays to discuss their side of the story/debate, something besides us hetros deciding for them. It kind of reminds me of the abortion debate, not often do I see a female rallying against abortion, it is usually a male making all the noise. Just my observation.
  10. #170  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Where are the gays to discuss their side of the story/debate, something besides us hetros deciding for them. It kind of reminds me of the abortion debate, not often do I see a female rallying against abortion, it is usually a male making all the noise. Just my observation.
    A very good observation I may add
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  11. #171  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    But; if you believe that one's sexuality is not a choice but you are born with a sexuality trait towards homosexuality and you subscribe to the theory of evolution, would that not mean that those born homosexual have not evolved to the point of being able to reproduce and along those same lines, the survival of the fittest and natural order would then weed out those who have not evolved to the point of reproduction?
    I do not subscribe to that theory, but I do not see how anyone who believes in born sexuality traits and evolution can bridge that gap.
    It probably is some kind of mutation. Mutations are the key to evolution.

    Now before things get taken out of contest: gay people are not mutants, they may have a mutation on the sexual orientation.

    All I know is that all the gay people I have met claim that their sexual orientation. so either they are all lying or it is some kind of condition one is born with.. (for the record: with condition I am not comparing it to a decease)

    Thats about all the time I have for this, just wanted to know what you meant with it, not join the whole discussion..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #172  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    "Different than most" is, by definition, aberrent. I'm sorry if that puts a negative spin on things but it doesn't negate the facts. And, while I don't compare it with a crime, I still don't think its something we should change an institution for. That's really the point, isn't it? There's an institution that's stood for one thing for the vast majority of people throughout history. Now we're supposed to change the definition of that institution--I might add, to a definition that is completely offensive to over half the population--so that 2% of the population can do something they're already allowed to do anyway.
    What does that mean, changing the definition of an institution. Bottomline, how does it affect you? I doubt it changes anything at all.... Many people already agree that gays should be able to enter civil contracts with each other. What are we talking about, otherwise? Ceremony?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #173  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    I appreciate you for engaging on this.

    What makes something "unacceptable" is a function of the collective moral compass of the people involved. And yes, what made slavery unacceptable is that society deemed it as such. You will notice that for quite some time the practice was accepted (not by all, but by a sufficient number as to maintain its viability). When the practice became unacceptable to a sufficient number of people, change begin to occur. As those "abolitionists" became more effective at swaying public opinion, laws soon followed suit.

    Where we agree (I think) is on this point: slavery was always immoral. Even while it was socially and legislatively acceptable.

    Slavery was never "right" in an absolute sense.

    Even though some rationalized that the Africans were less than human, their humanity remained. And as members of the human family, they were equally entitled to that which all of us are entitled; that from which we can not be alienated by neither law or behavior. There are inalienable rights bestowed on us all--most notably life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
    Wow. You just summed up my whole argument. You're close, shop... I feel you knocking on the door. (Pardon me for making this comparison now, Hoovs - I can't help myself) Just replace "slavery" with "Banning gay marriage" and replace the term "Africans" with "Gays", and you'll be there.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  14. #174  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Wow. You just summed up my whole argument. You're close, shop... I feel you knocking on the door. (Pardon me for making this comparison now, Hoovs - I can't help myself) Just replace "slavery" with "Banning gay marriage" and replace the term "Africans" with "Gays", and you'll be there.
    That logic can only go so far. Does it work, for example, if you replace "slavery" with "Banning polygamy" and replace the term "Africans" with "polygamists"?

    By the way, I know a lot of people more hard core than myself and none say that Gays are sub-human.
  15. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #175  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    It probably is some kind of mutation. Mutations are the key to evolution.

    Now before things get taken out of contest: gay people are not mutants, they may have a mutation on the sexual orientation.

    All I know is that all the gay people I have met claim that their sexual orientation. so either they are all lying or it is some kind of condition one is born with.. (for the record: with condition I am not comparing it to a decease)

    Thats about all the time I have for this, just wanted to know what you meant with it, not join the whole discussion..
    Mutations are not known to stay the same, they continue to mutate. The homosexual mutation (for lack of better term) seems to have evolved to that point and then became stable. Normally that would be classified as a new species if I remember correctly (which I may not it is late on a Fri afternoon and the sun is shining bright).
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  16. #176  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Mutations are not known to stay the same, they continue to mutate. The homosexual mutation (for lack of better term) seems to have evolved to that point and then became stable. Normally that would be classified as a new species if I remember correctly (which I may not it is late on a Fri afternoon and the sun is shining bright).
    I'm concerned with the whole "mutation" talk in light of the fact that we have, to date, no specific genetic marker that determines sexual orientation. So its basically speculation. And I think we've seen recently that its not wise to make policy decisions based on speculation.
  17. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #177  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    I'm concerned with the whole "mutation" talk in light of the fact that we have, to date, no specific genetic marker that determines sexual orientation. So its basically speculation. And I think we've seen recently that its not wise to make policy decisions based on speculation.
    I agree, like I said in my first post about the eveolution process, I do not agree that there is a sexuality trait that we are born with that would make some homosexuals, but if so and you believe in evolution, then what happened to the survival of the fittest, this inability to reproduce would seem to stop the evolution.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  18. #178  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    I agree, like I said in my first post about the eveolution process, I do not agree that there is a sexuality trait that we are born with that would make some homosexuals, but if so and you believe in evolution, then what happened to the survival of the fittest, this inability to reproduce would seem to stop the evolution.
    My evolutionary bio teacher "claims" that this argument is not valid since society "scares" homosexuals into heterosexual relationships in which they pass on their "supposed" "gay-trait" to their children........... They probably then go on to cheat on their wives with other men and destroy both their spouse and childs life. Honestly, I don't really think this makes sense, but I thought I might play devils advocate for a bit
  19. #179  
    Quote Originally Posted by aairman23
    My evolutionary bio teacher "claims" that this argument is not valid since society "scares" homosexuals into heterosexual relationships in which they pass on their "supposed" "gay-trait" to their children........... They probably then go on to cheat on their wives with other men and destroy both their spouse and childs life. Honestly, I don't really think this makes sense, but I thought I might play devils advocate for a bit
    Ironic, then that according to your teacher's model, the more accepting a society is of homosexuality the faster it will die out.
  20. #180  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Ironic, then that according to your teacher's model, the more accepting a society is of homosexuality the faster it will die out.
    Absolutely!

    By the way for the fourth time.........can anyone please explain to me the difference between legalizing polygamy and gay marriage? I mean how is a man who has a loving consensual relationship with another man any different then three people who all love each other consensually?

    Gay activists continually deny the FACT that the only natural sexual relationship on this planet is between one man and one woman. ANY deviation from this model is NOT natural. Once you start encouraging ANY type of unnatural relationship (reguardless of the emotional appeal it has), every other person involved in a "consensual" unnatural relationship will expect inclusion as well...and who are you to stand in their way!!!!
    Last edited by aairman23; 07/08/2006 at 11:02 AM.
Page 9 of 20 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131419 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions