Can sexuality be influenced?

I think the question is worded wrong, a common problem is people think homosexuality=depravity. They MIGHT be different, but there's clearly some sort of connection. Homosexuals exhibit all the behaviors of a clinical sociopath. If I had the post count to link to it, I'd show you some websites of symptoms of a sociopath, homosexuals fit most if not all of them.

So to say whether or not sexuality can be influenced, is like saying do all sociopaths become serial killers? Of course not. Most just become abusive spouses, liars, cheats, backstabbers, and bad people. However, the more we reward their bad personalities, the more it's going to happen. Therefore, by continuing to keep our head in the sand about homosexuality, and it's effects on EVERYONE, not just them... we're shooting ourselves in the foot. Because we need to look at this objectively. Homosexuality defines itself as the freedom to destroy lives, period. Look at the plot of brokeback mountain. Two gay men, cheating on their wives, sinking them into a deep depression and paranoia, all so they can go up in a mountain and fondle with each other. Where's the positive message? At what point is betraying people who love and trust you ever a positive? For what? A little lust? A compulsion? Why does homosexuality have to reward the likes of Jerry Springer and Lady Gaga? Because that's what the gay culture has become. And gays can deny it all they want too. "Oh, not all gays are like that", yeah... and not all cobras would bite me, but you know what? I wouldn't let them have the chance too. That's just self preservation.

So while I think people can IN THEORY be gay, and still be decent, productive, people. There's no evidence to suggest that. The culture we've created around them is just too warped and divorced from any moral responsibility. It's all about selfish hedonism, sex addiction, and a total lack of respect for themselves and other people.

Of course, no gay person, or white knight apologist would ever admit this. Thats why they change their story. If being gay is wholly a "lifestyle choice", and has all the burdens carried with a social choice they are not entitled to making, then we as a society have a right, and an obligation to stomp it out.

However... if it's genetic trait. Then gays have to admit they're inferior, they're damaged, either mentally, or physically, because they're going against our nature to reproduce and carry on the species. They're bad for the species, and they're obviously bad for themselves if they cannot control their sexual urges enough to leave children alone or stay loyal to one person. They're psychologically demented, and I'm not one to believe in rehabilitation both because I don't think it really works, and I don't want it to work. I don't want to change people's minds, I think that's sick, I don't want them to be a slave to my whims. I just see a clear distinction between good, and evil, and we should catch homosexuality while it's still a non-threat, and least immoral time to do something about it, and abort them. If that cannot be done, then they need to be castrated, so that they no longer can act on those psychotic urges, or at least not to nearly the same extent.

How do gays do anything that they are not entitled to doing? Why in the world can't people be promiscuous and hedonistic if they don't infringe on the rights of others?

Originally posted by JimProfit
I think the question is worded wrong, a common problem is people think homosexuality=depravity. They MIGHT be different, but there's clearly some sort of connection. Homosexuals exhibit all the behaviors of a clinical sociopath. If I had the post count to link to it, I'd show you some websites of symptoms of a sociopath, homosexuals fit most if not all of them.

So to say whether or not sexuality can be influenced, is like saying do all sociopaths become serial killers? Of course not. Most just become abusive spouses, liars, cheats, backstabbers, and bad people. However, the more we reward their bad personalities, the more it's going to happen. Therefore, by continuing to keep our head in the sand about homosexuality, and it's effects on EVERYONE, not just them... we're shooting ourselves in the foot. Because we need to look at this objectively. Homosexuality defines itself as the freedom to destroy lives, period. Look at the plot of brokeback mountain. Two gay men, cheating on their wives, sinking them into a deep depression and paranoia, all so they can go up in a mountain and fondle with each other. Where's the positive message? At what point is betraying people who love and trust you ever a positive? For what? A little lust? A compulsion? Why does homosexuality have to reward the likes of Jerry Springer and Lady Gaga? Because that's what the gay culture has become. And gays can deny it all they want too. "Oh, not all gays are like that", yeah... and not all cobras would bite me, but you know what? I wouldn't let them have the chance too. That's just self preservation.

So while I think people can IN THEORY be gay, and still be decent, productive, people. There's no evidence to suggest that. The culture we've created around them is just too warped and divorced from any moral responsibility. It's all about selfish hedonism, sex addiction, and a total lack of respect for themselves and other people.

Of course, no gay person, or white knight apologist would ever admit this. Thats why they change their story. If being gay is wholly a "lifestyle choice", and has all the burdens carried with a social choice they are not entitled to making, then we as a society have a right, and an obligation to stomp it out.

However... if it's genetic trait. Then gays have to admit they're inferior, they're damaged, either mentally, or physically, because they're going against our nature to reproduce and carry on the species. They're bad for the species, and they're obviously bad for themselves if they cannot control their sexual urges enough to leave children alone or stay loyal to one person. They're psychologically demented, and I'm not one to believe in rehabilitation both because I don't think it really works, and I don't want it to work. I don't want to change people's minds, I think that's sick, I don't want them to be a slave to my whims. I just see a clear distinction between good, and evil, and we should catch homosexuality while it's still a non-threat, and least immoral time to do something about it, and abort them. If that cannot be done, then they need to be castrated, so that they no longer can act on those psychotic urges, or at least not to nearly the same extent.

Well, you're simply wrong. You have a naive, jaded, perspective on homosexuals.

I've known literally hundreds of homosexuals in my life and you can't "cookie cut" them into one group, like you've done. I've known several of the "sociopath" types you describe. I've also known some to be the kindest most positive contributors to society (the exact opposite of what you describe.)

There's much more to a person than his or her sexuality.

What two consenting adults do behind closed doors is really none of mine or your business. The fact that you think you have to infringe upon those natural rights (rights that a person deserves regardless of what the law or other people say) makes you the sick person and sociopath, especially because you've even mentioned the word "castrated."

You're probably just a troll and I fell for some trolling. Oh well.

I think you are correct about the trolling, perhaps a new wave of Whirly, but I make a habit of answering the points at face value, regardless, if I feel compelled.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think you are correct about the trolling, perhaps a new wave of Whirly, but I make a habit of answering the points at face value, regardless, if I feel compelled.

He's got a youtube vid and he sounds between 19-26. It can't be Whirly unless Whirly is using someone else as a platform to troll people.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Well, you're simply wrong. You have a naive, jaded, perspective on homosexuals.

I've known literally hundreds of homosexuals in my life and you can't "cookie cut" them into one group, like you've done. I've known several of the "sociopath" types you describe. I've also known some to be the kindest most positive contributors to society (the exact opposite of what you describe.)

Originally posted by JimProfit
I think the question is worded wrong, a common problem is people think homosexuality=depravity. They MIGHT be different, but there's clearly some sort of connection. Homosexuals exhibit all the behaviors of a clinical sociopath. If I had the post count to link to it, I'd show you some websites of symptoms of a sociopath, homosexuals fit most if not all of them.

So to say whether or not sexuality can be influenced, is like saying do all sociopaths become serial killers? Of course not. Most just become abusive spouses, liars, cheats, backstabbers, and bad people. However, the more we reward their bad personalities, the more it's going to happen. Therefore, by continuing to keep our head in the sand about homosexuality, and it's effects on EVERYONE, not just them... we're shooting ourselves in the foot. Because we need to look at this objectively. Homosexuality defines itself as the freedom to destroy lives, period. Look at the plot of brokeback mountain. Two gay men, cheating on their wives, sinking them into a deep depression and paranoia, all so they can go up in a mountain and fondle with each other. Where's the positive message? At what point is betraying people who love and trust you ever a positive? For what? A little lust? A compulsion? Why does homosexuality have to reward the likes of Jerry Springer and Lady Gaga? Because that's what the gay culture has become. And gays can deny it all they want too. "Oh, not all gays are like that", yeah... and not all cobras would bite me, but you know what? I wouldn't let them have the chance too. That's just self preservation.

So while I think people can IN THEORY be gay, and still be decent, productive, people. There's no evidence to suggest that. The culture we've created around them is just too warped and divorced from any moral responsibility. It's all about selfish hedonism, sex addiction, and a total lack of respect for themselves and other people.

Of course, no gay person, or white knight apologist would ever admit this. Thats why they change their story. If being gay is wholly a "lifestyle choice", and has all the burdens carried with a social choice they are not entitled to making, then we as a society have a right, and an obligation to stomp it out.

However... if it's genetic trait. Then gays have to admit they're inferior, they're damaged, either mentally, or physically, because they're going against our nature to reproduce and carry on the species. They're bad for the species, and they're obviously bad for themselves if they cannot control their sexual urges enough to leave children alone or stay loyal to one person. They're psychologically demented, and I'm not one to believe in rehabilitation both because I don't think it really works, and I don't want it to work. I don't want to change people's minds, I think that's sick, I don't want them to be a slave to my whims. I just see a clear distinction between good, and evil, and we should catch homosexuality while it's still a non-threat, and least immoral time to do something about it, and abort them. If that cannot be done, then they need to be castrated, so that they no longer can act on those psychotic urges, or at least not to nearly the same extent.

Yes. There are natural remedies to if you have a boy or girl, and the woman's womb feminizes the fetus as an attack if you will of boys within the female body. 🙂

Originally posted by calvs
I don't think where I put my dick should be anybody else's concern unless they are sitting in my lap.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
I think the jury is still out on whether or not someone is born gay. Every mammal species has members that exhibit homosexual behavior but only humans have members that are exclusively homosexual.

From an evolutionary and reproductive standpoint homosexuality makes no sense.

So I'll be politically incorrect and say that my belief is yes, human sexuality and sexual prefrence can be influenced.

I'm in agreement with this opinion.