But one that misses the actual issue.
And you may consider right or wrong to be unprovable, but whether a society SEES something as right or wrong is a very solid and relevant thing to consider, and there is a worthwhile and important fight involved to ensure that it is seen as right, in accordance with values of tolerance and freedom of expression, that is far more important than your dry scientific point or denial of the importance of morals.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
But one that misses the actual issue.And you may consider right or wrong to be unprovable, but whether a society SEES something as right or wrong is a very solid and relevant thing to consider, and there is a worthwhile and important fight involved to ensure that it is seen as right, in accordance with values of tolerance and freedom of expression, that is far more important than your dry scientific point or denial of the importance of morals.
Well, I am not saying that "Right or Wrong" debate is pointless. Just not actually provable. And why won'T you open a "Homosexuality: Right or Wrong" Thread then. I will surely take part.
I believe that the point of this thread is right or wrong, it's just trying to go about it in the wrong way. Not many people are really interested in the simple genetic behaviour involved with sexual orientation. Nearly everyone wants to use the matter as a weapon in making homosexuality acceptable or otherwise.
I also feel I should point out the other massively inherent danger in hiding behind the 'shield' of homosexuality being something you have no choice over.
If you think Religious types trying to 'cure' homosexuals is bad... you don't want to think abut what will happen when it would become possible to genetically set sexual orientation.
And at this point, if all that has happened with the gay movement is that it has said it has the right to exist purely because there is no choice in the matter, and gotten others to accept it for that reason... then there is doom ahead, because genetic engineering will remove that inevitability, and religious types will say "But don't you see? We don't HAVE to put up with it any more? Isn't that great for everyone? All these poor people that has no choice before can now live normal lives like everyone else!"
Genetic or chosen, you are JUST as doomed from those who are enemies of homosexual rights. The argument must be won on moral grounds, not scientific ones, or it is not won at all.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I believe that the point of this thread is right or wrong, it's just trying to go about it in the wrong way. Not many people are really interested in the simple genetic behaviour involved with sexual orientation. Nearly everyone wants to use the matter as a weapon in making homosexuality acceptable or otherwise.
Dunno. I just think there's not much choice involved, to be honest.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I also feel I should point out the other massively inherent danger in hiding behind the 'shield' of homosexuality being something you have no choice over.If you think Religious types trying to 'cure' homosexuals is bad... you don't want to think abut what will happen when it would become possible to genetically set sexual orientation.
And at this point, if all that has happened with the gay movement is that it has said it has the right to exist purely because there is no choice in the matter, and gotten others to accept it for that reason... then there is doom ahead, because genetic engineering will remove that inevitability, and religious types will say "But don't you see? We don't HAVE to put up with it any more? Isn't that great for everyone? All these poor people that has no choice before can now live normal lives like everyone else!"
Genetic or chosen, you are JUST as doomed from those who are enemies of homosexual rights. The argument must be won on moral grounds, not scientific ones, or it is not won at all.
Well I guess you got a point. But this Thread's topic is not part of this Epic Battle. Or only in disguise.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Well, I think there is (choice), which is pretty much my personal experience, but then the experiences of others differ, so I think it is simply too complex to put down to purely genetic grounds.
It might be some sort of "choice" involved , although I doubt it. It may not be totally genetic but it is mostly brought about by things the individual has no power over.
Cause if you compare it to Heterosexuality, I personally am not attracted to men. i couldn't jsut choose to like men suddenly. I don't see why it should be different with Homosexuals.
Originally posted by xyz revolution
Gay's are gay because they want to be/are afraid of the other sex/have some psychological problem. In all of nature it's been man on woman. It's natural. So it's obviously it's a psychological thing. Or maybe civilised if there are no gay animals.
But since there are...you lost.
Originally posted by Bardock42
It might be some sort of "choice" involved , although I doubt it. It may not be totally genetic but it is mostly brought about by things the individual has no power over.Cause if you compare it to Heterosexuality, I personally am not attracted to men. i couldn't jsut choose to like men suddenly. I don't see why it should be different with Homosexuals.
Well, like I said before, saying it is a choice is not saying that you just suddenly decide to like or not like something, just like that.
In fact, the thread's basic question isn't very good, because it is possible for something to be not genetic and also not chosen in any meaningful sense.
But despite that... I think people's personal beliefs and choices contributes heavily to their sexuality.
I'll leave other people to deal with what xyz just said.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Well, like I said before, saying it is a choice is not saying that you just suddenly decide to like or not like something, just like that.In fact, the thread's basic question isn't very good, because it is possible for something to be not genetic and also not chosen in any meaningful sense.
But despite that... I think people's personal beliefs and choices contributes heavily to their sexuality.
I'll leave other people to deal with what xyz just said.
Hmm, how do you think it is chosen though? I can't quite follow your reasoning.
For a start, because I think people choose to be who they are. I believe the quote goes:
"We cannot choose who we are, yet who are we, other than the sum of our choices?"
So it's not 'choose to be who you are' in just spontaneously deciding to be one thing, but that a person has a personal responsibility for all the life choices and decisions that led to him being who he is today.
And I think sexuality is part of that very, very complicated make up. I think it is likely that some people have a greater genetic disposition to be homosexual, but only in the same way that some people have a disposition to be good at music; it still doesn't define who you are and what you do. The way you live your life does that, and your upbringing, and your reactions to that, and your general outlook on life- that is most certainly a choice- are all part of a complicated web of conscious decisions you make.
Sexuality comes out of this. Personally I cannot accept that it is simply something set at birth that cannot change.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I also feel I should point out the other massively inherent danger in hiding behind the 'shield' of homosexuality being something you have no choice over.If you think Religious types trying to 'cure' homosexuals is bad... you don't want to think abut what will happen when it would become possible to genetically set sexual orientation.
And at this point, if all that has happened with the gay movement is that it has said it has the right to exist purely because there is no choice in the matter, and gotten others to accept it for that reason... then there is doom ahead, because genetic engineering will remove that inevitability, and religious types will say "But don't you see? We don't HAVE to put up with it any more? Isn't that great for everyone? All these poor people that has no choice before can now live normal lives like everyone else!"
Genetic or chosen, you are JUST as doomed from those who are enemies of homosexual rights. The argument must be won on moral grounds, not scientific ones, or it is not won at all.
Let us presume that the technology exists to screen for sexual orientation.
[list=1][*]The use of the technology is elective. Most will choose not to use the technology.
[*]The technology is expensive. Most will be unable to afford the technology.
[*]The technology is neutral. Some will use the technology to elimminate homosexuals while others will use the technology to produce homosexuals.[/list]
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Let us presume that the technology exists to screen for sexual orientation.[list=1][*][b]The use of the technology is elective.
Most will choose not to use the technology.[*]The technology is expensive. Most will be unable to afford the technology.
[*]The technology is neutral. Some will use the technology to elimminate homosexuals while others will use the technology to produce homosexuals.[/list] [/B]
Although chances are that most parents will (as it stands now) would probably choose straight children. For whatever reason ever.
Originally posted by xyz revolution
Gay's are gay because they want to be/are afraid of the other sex/have some psychological problem. In all of nature it's been man on woman. It's natural. So it's obviously it's a psychological thing. Or maybe civilised if there are no gay animals.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
For a start, because I think people choose to be who they are. I believe the quote goes:"We cannot choose who we are, yet who are we, other than the sum of our choices?"
So it's not 'choose to be who you are' in just spontaneously deciding to be one thing, but that a person has a personal responsibility for all the life choices and decisions that led to him being who he is today.
And I think sexuality is part of that very, very complicated make up. I think it is likely that some people have a greater genetic disposition to be homosexual, but only in the same way that some people have a disposition to be good at music; it still doesn't define who you are and what you do. The way you live your life does that, and your upbringing, and your reactions to that, and your general outlook on life- that is most certainly a choice- are all part of a complicated web of conscious decisions you make.
Sexuality comes out of this. Personally I cannot accept that it is simply something set at birth that cannot change.
👆 ✅
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Let us presume that the technology exists to screen for sexual orientation.[list=1][*][b]The use of the technology is elective.
Most will choose not to use the technology.[*]The technology is expensive. Most will be unable to afford the technology.
[*]The technology is neutral. Some will use the technology to elimminate homosexuals while others will use the technology to produce homosexuals.[/list] [/B]
Spectacularly missing the point of what I was saying, all that.