Is homosexuality a choice

[thewake]

Wolfeh Wrote:

dogman32 Wrote:But you can make a choice to not be looking at the same sex and look at the opposite sex.

And that would only be trying to fool yourself into liking something you don't really like, and trying to shield your mind from what you really like. Life is too short to live how other people (entities) want you to. You should do what makes you happy, regardless of what anyone (visible or not) has to say about it. Life isn't about conforming in any manner, it's about finding your happiness.

I see what you are saying, but there's a lot more to life than sex. A lot more.

Quote:

dogman32 Wrote:Homosexuality may or may not be a choice, but people's actions are, and gay sex isn't exactly something I would call a commendable choice.

I would like to know your reasoning behind why homosexual sex is not a "commendable choice," and heterosexual sex is an "expression of love between two soulmates."

Heterosexual sex can be just as bad as homosexual sex, if you commit adultery while doing it.(lol, pun)

And you know why I think that way, you don't have to ask.

[randyhart]

Gay People are often treated very badly here on this mudball...It's all to do with hyper manly men who get off on "Bangin' chicks and male soap opera WWF". Even the Fukken Nazis had gay people in their party(which they later tried to hide)

These type of people are the ones that create fear and downright disgusting portraits of Gay People as Perverted and disgusting people, when in reality they are just like you or I...(except in bed)

Media Does not do much on a grand scale to make Gay people seem normal people, but they are only showing the flamboyant side of Gay people...which Straight people also have(The good ones)

So...

SEXUAL FREEDOM FOR ALL

[thewake]

OMG! GAYS ARE THE RESULT OF NAZI EUGENIC EXPERIMENTS!?!
I CAN'T BELIEVE IT! YOU OPENED MY EYES TO THE CONSPIRACY!



So anyway, I have no desire to restrict people to only having heterosexual sex. That's just stupid. I do believe it is probably immoral, but you never know. The Bible was written by humans.
So, if gays have the right to get jiggy with it, I have the right to publicize my abhorrence.

Everyone's happy.

[youvebeenthunderstruck]

My issue with the entire homosexuality debate is that the people arguing against it, even if they slip in "I think it's immoral but hey whatever works"... are all Christians. No, not all or even most Christians think that it is but it absolutely justifies the stereotype. Why is this important? Because when I see an opinion like that (and especially if I know the person) I can safely say "ah, right, Leviticus". And those opinions have been bashed and defeated so many times that... you know, I just don't feel like responding to it any more, because the people saying those things should learn from the counter-opinions and stop saying it. Granted that it's better than "gays should be burned at the stake", but still.

[Dragon4Anarchy]

Ok the threads too long for me to read through entirely atm so I'll just put my 2 cents in. I do not think homosexuality is immoral, I do think sometimes it is a choice and sometimes it is hardwired. Do I disagree with gays being allowed to do what they do? Absolutely not, hell I'm related to some gays and they are not bad people for it. However, marriage is a step that I aknowledge people o not want to see taken, there is nothing wrong with this. Nor is there something wrong with a couple, even a gay one wanting to marry. It is simply an unfairness in which both sides are valid, and honestly no I don't think judgment of gays is going to or even necessarily shouldgo away. You choose to be that different you will suffer for it, it is the way of the world and things are cruel and unfair, and though I wish things were not this way I don't see it stopping and I don't see it as all bad for people to not be comfortable with homosexuality, after all if we accept everything that goes against nature, eventually we will lose the root of humanity, picking and choosing whats acceptable and not doesn't work, ppl will react to what they want to react to how they want to. As for gay marriage, no one has the right to stop gays from being together, we do have the right not to acknowledge it with a state sanction, you can be gay but you have no right to force it down our throats or put it in our faces and you certainly cannot demand the rights of a married couple when you cannot biologically produce children and start a family (a main reason for marriage) And I know gays don't like this and it is harsh, but seriously, you don't really think you can go against nature completely and still get things as good, use some common sense. Some things in the world are just unfair and cruel, you can't really point fingers, ppl prejudice against homosexuality (excluding the ones who go overboard about it or are violent about it) have a valid point or are at least reacting to valid reasonings based on their upbrinings. And gays are going with what feels right to them, and doing no harm to anyone by choosing how they live. Two sides and neither can be called entirely wrong, though both do and say wrong things.

[Avenger]

Dragon4Anarchy Wrote:As for gay marriage, no one has the right to stop gays from being together, we do have the right not to acknowledge it with a state sanction, you can be gay but you have no right to force it down our throats or put it in our faces and you certainly cannot demand the rights of a married couple when you cannot biologically produce children and start a family (a main reason for marriage)

but the only thing is they could adopt a child so basicly ur saying if a couple gay or straight can't marry because they are incapable of having children.yes there are couples who are straight who can't biologicaly reproduce,rare but there are ones like that.so they should have the right to marry.marriage should be reconized even if they can't have children and marriage isn't always to produce children,it's also to help finacialy.and anybody can demand the rights of another person.

[Dragon4Anarchy]

Avenger Wrote:

Dragon4Anarchy Wrote:As for gay marriage, no one has the right to stop gays from being together, we do have the right not to acknowledge it with a state sanction, you can be gay but you have no right to force it down our throats or put it in our faces and you certainly cannot demand the rights of a married couple when you cannot biologically produce children and start a family (a main reason for marriage)

but the only thing is they could adopt a child so basicly ur saying if a couple gay or straight can't marry because they are incapable of having children.yes there are couples who are straight who can't biologicaly reproduce,rare but there are ones like that.so they should have the right to marry.marriage should be reconized even if they can't have children and marriage isn't always to produce children,it's also to help finacialy.and anybody can demand the rights of another person.

I'm not sure we should give same sex couples the right to raise children, there's a male-female balance to it and I can only imagine the damage that could be done to the childs psycy. Like I said, the main issue is people don't have to acknowledge such a thing as homosexuality if they don't want to, and seeing as it is against nature and the majority we have the right to refuse them a state sanctioning, harsh and cruel but that's the world and that's people, and they aren't wrong for feeling it's unnatural and being uncomfortable with it any more than gays are wrong for being who they are. In all fairness, there's no side you can take on this issue without being ignorant of one side or the other and disregarding valid points, I just hate how many people say we have no understanding if we're uncomfortable about gays yet show no understanding themselves for why.

[Dragon4Anarchy]

Wolfeh Wrote:First, marriage is not some primitive ceremony that will bind two people so they have moral obligations not to fuck around anymore. Over the years, it has become a much more complex commitment, encompassing a lot more than merely the ability to have kids. I think that would make the whole marriage idea very shallow if that were true.

Second, same sex couples should have every right to raise kids if they want to. The main reason for same sex couples to not be able to raise kids is that stupid "Homosexual Agenda." Trust me, gays don't have an agenda to "convert" anyone, so they're definitely not going to be messing with a kid's mind, who they are supposed to love and care for. The only thing I'm sure they would teach that kid is tolerance. The kid would even learn tolerance on his own after living a life with a gay couple raising him. To say that being raised by a same sex couple would fuck with a kid's psyche, in my opinion, is bullshit.

People have the right to not acknowledge homosexual relationships if they want to, sure, we have no place in controlling someone's thoughts. They can think whatever they want to think, no matter how ignorant someone else thinks it is. There's a distinct difference when those thoughts are personal beliefs, and when those thoughts are actually having an impact on someone's life who doesn't share those thoughts, however. Whether or not it's "against nature" (which to me, is a total fallacy, but is still the leading argument against gays), or if people don't like it, gay couples are still being deprived of benefits and rights that straight couples receive. I find this to be entirely unjust, because it's an obvious discrimination towards gays.

I don't even agree with the church having the choice to do it or not. The only way that I would think the church choosing not to marry gays would be fair is if the church got absolutely no benefits or funding from the state, and that straight couples got absolutely no benefits from the state. In other words, the state and marriage would have to be completely separate, not a single intervention in either of them. And since I don't believe that will happen (straight couples would be pretty pissed if it did, I'm sure), I think it would be fair for gay couples to gain the same rights and benefits as straight couples.

I have to disagree, they are not on the same level and straight couples get priority in my opinion, and a state sanctioned marriage license is something gays should not recieve, hell I'm not even sure if it's right for straight couples. A child raised by a gay couple will recieve only the male or female influence, kids need both. But I'm not going to argue the point past this because said discussions get ugly, the point is it's more ridiculous to have intolerance to people not agreeing with gays than it is for people to have intolerance for gays themselves, and both are stupid in the first place. Marriages are in the hands of the church and state, and those are in the hands of people, and if the individuals don't want to sanctify the relationship with marriage that is THEIR CHOICE not to allow it.

[VampyrMagick]

bah , u dont need both a mother and father figure, i only had a mother ...i grew up with just me my mum n my sister....(though it was annoying sumtime sbeing the only boy in the house)
but im fine and well adjusted *does a zombie dance*
but nah gays are fine they deserve the same rights as any other person, plus it isnt a choice really...like you cant chooose who you are attracted to?
so why should they get less rights and be punished or picked on because of something they cant choose, like saying gay people choose to be homo and could be straight if they want is like saying that a person born with Tourette's (says things without meaning to) could just choose to not blurt out random words when ever they want, but they want to keep saying things.

[Avenger]

Dragon4Anarchy Wrote:I have to disagree, they are not on the same level and straight couples get priority in my opinion, and a state sanctioned marriage license is something gays should not recieve, hell I'm not even sure if it's right for straight couples. A child raised by a gay couple will recieve only the male or female influence, kids need both. But I'm not going to argue the point past this because said discussions get ugly, the point is it's more ridiculous to have intolerance to people not agreeing with gays than it is for people to have intolerance for gays themselves, and both are stupid in the first place. Marriages are in the hands of the church and state, and those are in the hands of people, and if the individuals don't want to sanctify the relationship with marriage that is THEIR CHOICE not to allow it.

you don't need both a mom and a dad look how many kids are raised and they have only one parent.In nature most animals have only the mother to raise them the father leaves.Marriages aren't always done by churches they can also be done by judges.

[cooltoonist]

I don't think you need a mum and dad to raise a child. I remember reading some case studies that gay couples raise healthy children equally to straight couples.

Personally, I think gay couples would probably use the privilege of marriage a lot better than straights by the looks of those divorce rates. >_>

[nrtitus14]

Being homosexual is natural, but having a high pitched voice and caring about fashion and "gay" stuff is not.
Imo if you can't tell somebody is gay until you see them having sex with a guy, they tell you, or they hit on you, then that is fine (assuming you and the person in question are both guys)

[returnal]

I've never thought of it as immoral or "curable", but I won't say you're born gay. I think it's something you discover about yourself.

[cryptevah72]

being "born" some way is hard to interpret. if you were born some way, then are you that way as a baby? as a young child? or does it later develoup when the part of your mind and body mature enough to be able to even fathom such a thing? (because im pretty sure 4 year olds dont actually have a concept of "partner" love, i mean, love for a parent, sibling, other person, its kinda differant, but theres a differance between loving someone, and being IN love with them...)

did i confuse anyone?

[Tls321]

I dont think so, you cant control your thoughts or desires

[Squittle]

nrtitus14 Wrote:Being homosexual is natural, but having a high pitched voice and caring about fashion and "gay" stuff is not.
Imo if you can't tell somebody is gay until you see them having sex with a guy, they tell you, or they hit on you, then that is fine (assuming you and the person in question are both guys)

So girls, who also often care about those things, are unnatural?

[Milk2Go]

Dragon4Anarchy Wrote:I have to disagree, they are not on the same level and straight couples get priority in my opinion, and a state sanctioned marriage license is something gays should not recieve, hell I'm not even sure if it's right for straight couples. A child raised by a gay couple will recieve only the male or female influence, kids need both. But I'm not going to argue the point past this because said discussions get ugly, the point is it's more ridiculous to have intolerance to people not agreeing with gays than it is for people to have intolerance for gays themselves, and both are stupid in the first place. Marriages are in the hands of the church and state, and those are in the hands of people, and if the individuals don't want to sanctify the relationship with marriage that is THEIR CHOICE not to allow it.

I read this post at least five times through, but the only thing I felt like I was reading was, "I'm an intolerant asshole who thinks homosexuality is evil."
P.S. Marriages aren't in the hands of the church and state. Marriages are only in the hands of the people who are getting married.

[Squittle]

--monkey666-- Wrote:If some one wants to be gay thats there choice,

you cant just deny some ones personal choice about there sexual status.

Did you choose to be straight?

[Squittle]

Dragon4Anarchy Wrote:A child raised by a gay couple will recieve only the male or female influence, kids need both.

Which is why the US has strict policies against single - parent families, amirite?

[Squittle]

cryptevah72 Wrote:being "born" some way is hard to interpret. if you were born some way, then are you that way as a baby? as a young child? or does it later develoup when the part of your mind and body mature enough to be able to even fathom such a thing? (because im pretty sure 4 year olds dont actually have a concept of "partner" love, i mean, love for a parent, sibling, other person, its kinda differant, but theres a differance between loving someone, and being IN love with them...)

did i confuse anyone?

I think homosexuality develops in a sense based on your environment, say, your upbringing, and perhaps even just preset neurological differences that I'll never begin to understand; factors of that nature. Everyone's different, so I doubt we'll ever be able to encode certain people to be gay. That said, its still not a choice; as the homosexuality develops during puberty and such, you are powerless to control whether or not you turn out that way.

[Darthmat]

cryptevah72 Wrote:being "born" some way is hard to interpret. if you were born some way, then are you that way as a baby? as a young child? or does it later develoup when the part of your mind and body mature enough to be able to even fathom such a thing? (because im pretty sure 4 year olds dont actually have a concept of "partner" love, i mean, love for a parent, sibling, other person, its kinda differant, but theres a differance between loving someone, and being IN love with them...)

Whether or not you're born homo/heterosexual or you somehow become one later on in life is irrelevant. You still don't have a choice.

[Lonehwolf]

Uhh... i have a bi friend on the net, he's pretty cool and gives me the good laughing hour when talking bout games, everyone has a right to live, if you put humans aside that is.

Regarding to that early post from thunder, "Chocolate is moral to eat unless we find out it's inanimate" is a little bit flawed for a theory =p

Aka: "A cow. MILK IT. KILL IT. yummy "

Pigs spend all day eating, we take them to the butcher and we eat the shit outta them (puns aside ofc).

Final note: Gay? Immoral? Yes of course it is I mean, look at them, they're walking and talking to each other and hold their hands and occasionaly *this area has been censored due to various reasons*

So really, if you're gay: enjoy, if you ain't lynch the gay ones?

[.xstrike-anywherex.]

My sexual orientation (heterosexual) was not a choice and I can only infer that all people's orientations are not choices.

Even if homosexuality were a choice (it's not), there'd be nothing wrong with it.

[Milk2Go]

Lonehwolf Wrote:Final note: Gay? Immoral? Yes of course it is I mean, look at them, they're walking and talking to each other and hold their hands and occasionaly *this area has been censored due to various reasons*

I can't tell if you were being serious or not.

[thewake]

I feel like giving my updated take on this:
I don't care. I really don't. Marry up, do gay things, have your choice. If you are gay it is your business. I'm not gay, so I have no experience or right to judge.

Strange thing is, what finally got me to accept it was when Bill O'Reily said he didn't care if people are gay.

[Bri]

W-Dog32 Wrote:I feel like giving my updated take on this:
I don't care. I really don't. Marry up, do gay things, have your choice. If you are gay it is your business. I'm not gay, so I have no experience or right to judge.

Strange thing is, what finally got me to accept it was when Bill O'Reilly said he didn't care if people are gay.

Yeah, that is strange. Bill O'Reilly doesn't care if people are gay? That's funny. Just take a look at some of the things he has said about gay people.

And on the thread topic, "Is homosexuality a choice?"
I'm going to answer that question with a question I've seen in this thread before.

WhywouldanyoneCHOOSEtobegay?

[returnal]

.xstrike-anywherex. Wrote:Even if homosexuality were a choice (it's not), there'd be nothing wrong with it.

This.

[random_name]

Newtown Wrote:

.xstrike-anywherex. Wrote:Even if homosexuality were a choice (it's not), there'd be nothing wrong with it.

This.

this.

[thewake]

Bri Wrote:

W-Dog32 Wrote:I feel like giving my updated take on this:
I don't care. I really don't. Marry up, do gay things, have your choice. If you are gay it is your business. I'm not gay, so I have no experience or right to judge.

Strange thing is, what finally got me to accept it was when Bill O'Reilly said he didn't care if people are gay.

Yeah, that is strange. Bill O'Reilly doesn't care if people are gay? That's funny. Just take a look at some of the things he has said about gay people.

I've heard him, via my parent's listening to him and watching him, that he doesn't care if people are gay and that it is none of his business. In his book for kids it says that it's bigoted for gay couples not to be able to adopt kids.

Just recap: I could care less if you are gay. I'm not so I don't know hat it's like and I don't know if it is wrong.

[liq3]

Bri Wrote:WhywouldanyoneCHOOSEtobegay?

Why would anyone be scared of bananas? How does someone enjoy murdering and torturing someone?

Dude, there are stranger things then choosing to be gay.