Obama vs. Beantown

[C l u t c H 385]

theres two people who are just WRONG on this topic.

I hate people with wrong opinions.

 

[Gameface]

I hate people with wrong opinions.

Haters gonna hate.

 

[Hopper]

what I have read would make me think that homosexuality is due more to nature than nurture.

Well, Chem, ya also gotta keep in mind that the "homosexuality is genetically determined" position was an absolute "article of faith" (not that they actually believed it, but it was an essential component of their political platform) of gay activists for decades. And nobuddy, and I does mean NOBUDDY, spent more time, energy, and money in a more dedicated way than gay activists groups when it came to "educating" the public about homosexuality.

 

[NAOS]

As with many things, I am sure homosexuality's emergence into humanity is multivariate. Honestly I don't know that I am in a position to agree/disagree with the APA's claim, however what I have read would make me think that homosexuality is due more to nature than nurture. I would be curious to know what the APA defines as "nurture" though. Studies have been conducted - extensive ones too - that show that children adopted into homosexual relationships are not necessarily more likely to engage in homosexual relationships themselves.

The distinction between "nature" and "nurture" is only a heuristic. If you take it too seriously -- filing one "effect" on this side, a second "effect" on the other -- then you are missing the point. Nature implies nurture, one cannot exist without the other; they are both present in the other. Your caution and thinking is mostly fine, but don't stick so dogmatically to these categories.

 

[chemdude1232]

The distinction between "nature" and "nurture" is only a heuristic. If you take it too seriously -- filing one "effect" on this side, a second "effect" on the other -- then you are missing the point. Nature implies nurture, one cannot exist without the other; they are both present in the other. Your caution is thinking is mostly fine, but don't stick to these categories.

And that's a great point to make. I was considering them separately only as a surface-level glance. Of course a more thorough inspection (which, frankly I don't have time for nowadays) would/could produce a more fundamental explanation of nature's forces.

 

[Beantown]

It's not enough to just have a reason, the reason actually has to make sense.

Heterosexual and homosexual are very different relationships. So why is it wrong to say they are different and not equal?

Homosexuals dont engage in sexual intercourse or prodcue children or add to genetic diversity. Why is it wrong to acknowledge that they are different? I think it is worse for socioty to look blindly at the differencs. We should embrace our differences.

 

[Beantown]

You are ignorant of all the statistics on this issue. What you write here is purely a formal truth. The statistics show pretty clearly that most homosexual people actually participate themselves in reproduction during their lifetime. You are wrong again. I get the sense that the worst thing about you is that you don't realize when you don't know something. That is an awful trait.

The strong reading of Darwin's "survival of the fittest" is now totally out of fashion in theoretical biology. In fact, once you historicize Darwin's legacy you can see that this emphasis was overblown by the changing landscape of the 19th and 20th centuries. I'd suggest you educate yourself before you run roughshod over these things. Or, maybe you can just acknowledge what you don't know and focus on things that make you happier. I, for one, wouldn't mind if you stayed inside more, watching your television, and forgot to vote.

Plain and simple, homosexuals HAVE TO RELY on heterosexual relations for the continued presence of our species, as well as our genetic diversity and continued evolution. A 100% homosexual population=end of the world.

 

[NAOS]

Heterosexual and homosexual are very different relationships. So why is it wrong to say they are different and not equal?

Homosexuals dont engage in sexual intercourse or prodcue children or add to genetic diversity. Why is it wrong to acknowledge that they are different. I think its a worse for socioty to look blindly at the difference. We should embrace our differences.

Why aren't you responding to my provocations?

Here's two more: please show me two EQUAL heterosexual relationships. Please show me a healthy woman, capable of becoming pregnant, who cannot find a willing male to donate his seed in some fashion. This second one speaks directly to the "importance" you feel your argument has.

 

[NAOS]

Plain and simple, homosexuals HAVE TO RELY on heterosexual relations for the continued presence of our species, as well as our genetic diversity and continued evolution. A 100% homosexual population=end of the world.

From above (please keep up): You are ignorant of all the statistics on this issue. What you write here is purely a formal truth. The statistics show pretty clearly that most homosexual people actually participate themselves in reproduction during their lifetime. You are wrong again. I get the sense that the worst thing about you is that you don't realize when you don't know something. That is an awful trait.

The strong reading of Darwin's "survival of the fittest" is now totally out of fashion in theoretical biology. In fact, once you historicize Darwin's legacy you can see that this emphasis was overblown by the changing landscape of the 19th and 20th centuries. I'd suggest you educate yourself before you run roughshod over these things. Or, maybe you can just acknowledge what you don't know and focus on things that make you happier. I, for one, wouldn't mind if you stayed inside more, watching your television, and forgot to vote.

 

[cowhide]

Does anyone know the reasoning for Obama not approving of gay marriage? Atleast I give reasoning for mine.

I do not know but I can make a guess. Obama is more moderate than most GOP think. He is a Christian where homosexuality is damned and he is part black. Most polls show Blacks against homosexuality.

I think Obama has been pretty open about his stance. I do not agree with it but I see no correlation between what you have expressed on this subject and what Obama has expressed. Nice try though.

 

[Gameface]

Heterosexual and homosexual are very different relationships. So why is it wrong to say they are different and not equal?

Homosexuals dont engage in sexual intercourse or prodcue children or add to genetic diversity. Why is it wrong to acknowledge that they are different? I think it is worse for socioty to look blindly at the differencs. We should embrace our differences.

The thing about it is that our laws do not exist to protect the interests of biology, evolution, genetic diversity, etc. Our laws exist to keep people from hurting one another. Homosexual relations between two people able to consent hurt no one, therefore these relations are none of the business of society or our government. For me that's the end of the story, all the rest of the crap you guys can argue about for 20+ pages is irrelevant in my opinion.

 

[sirkickyass]

Does anyone know the reasoning for Obama not approving of gay marriage? Atleast I give reasoning for mine.

His stated reason is religious.

Although Barack Obama has said that he supports civil unions, he is against gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."