Homosexuality Thread (Serious Debate Please)

Originally posted by Astner
That depends on the study. I've always been a convert on all fronts.

From what I've experienced in the academic elite the contrary is more likely to hold true. While someone with a Ph.D in economical statistics might not treat a waiter like shit, there's definitely a sense of entitlement and elitism present.

Then we have people like David Hilbert—who developed the mathematics foe special- and general relativity for Einstein—and Karl Schwarzschild—child prodigy and one of the most outstanding physicists who've ever lived—who even treated their fellow mathematicians and physicists like dirt for not being on their level.

Since referring the academic elite represents a generic view point, right? Or any elite for that matter. Not to mention that you don't even need to be part of any reputable academia in order to have a high IQ.

I can easily cite people like Ramanujam and Noether who both made massive strides in mathematics during an era when racism(what Ramanujam faced) and sexism(Noether's bane) were officially sanctioned, and neither of whom(to my knowledge at least) were ever the egotistical brats that you describe Hilbert and Schwartzschild to be. But what would be the point? Selectively choosing specific examples to highlight your point while countering someone else's is a disingenuous method of debate. But you already knew that, didn't you?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I totally agree with the sentiment, my only issue is that I can never remember whether dark haired or light haired people are the ones that are different.

Originally posted by Bentley
Your sheer hate for asians and irish people shows 👇

Asians and Irish don't count.

Especially the Irish.

Originally posted by Epicurus
...have a high IQ.

That's a strawman.

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's a strawman.

Originally posted by Epicurus
http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

That said, don't confuse intolerance for prejudice. Racists are prejudice because they believe that people of certain races are less capable than others. Homophobes, on the other hand, don't.

Originally posted by Epicurus
Since referring the academic elite represents a generic view point, right? Or any elite for that matter. Not to mention that you don't even need to be part of any reputable academia in order to have a high IQ.

Originally posted by Epicurus
I can easily cite people like Ramanujam and Noether who both made massive strides in mathematics during an era when racism (what Ramanujam faced) and sexism (Noether's bane) were officially sanctioned, and neither of whom (to my knowledge at least) were ever the egotistical brats that you describe Hilbert and Schwartzschild to be. But what would be the point? Selectively choosing specific examples to highlight your point while countering someone else's is a disingenuous method of debate. But you already knew that, didn't you?

Originally posted by Epicurus
Do point out how exactly it is so.

I don't need to because I was capable of understanding Astner's points and you clearly were not.

Look, this is the first time Astner directly addresses your strawman attempt:

Originally posted by Astner
The thing about IQ is that it's nothing more than a test score, and not a qualifying factor of any merit. In fact, the largest study ever conducted in the field of neurochemistry directly refuted it's validity.

Do you notice how much it has little to do with his points you are trying to strawman?

Here's what you missed:

Intelligence and IQ are not the same thing. You're confusing the two (on purpose?).

I Hate "Studys"

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
I Hate "Studys"

And formal education, from the looks of it.

YouTube video

I agree. The IQ is not an accurate measurement of intelligence. The degree to which a person accepts homosexuality is not proportionate to their intelligence. I've heard of some brilliant people who are homophobic. Rick Santorum for example 😆 jk. But still...

Originally posted by Astner
Livescience certainly has a colorful way of interpreting a study that's based off of mediation models on sheltered right-wing people. Here's the article. I'd also like to point out that IQ wasn't mentioned a single time in this entire article.

That said, don't confuse intolerance for prejudice. Racists are prejudice because they believe that people of certain races are less capable than others. Homophobes, on the other hand, don't.

The thing about IQ is that it's nothing more than a test score, and not a qualifying factor of any merit. In fact, the largest study ever conducted in the field of neurochemistry directly refuted it's validity.

I think you missed the point here. Just because there are intelligent and academically accomplished people that don't openly mistreat others doesn't mean that they're humble.

That's what I would call a colorful way of discriminating between 2 forms of bigotry.

Don't start deflecting now. My original post addressing you focused on IQ specifically, and while it is true that it is an insufficient indicator of intelligence from a purely scientific point of view, it is still a fairly reliable and more or less universally accepted method of "measuring" human intelligence in current times.

Not sure how. Just because there are intelligent and academically accomplished people that openly mistreat their own peers for not being on their level, doesn't mean that they're bigots. See what I did there?

Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't need to because I was capable of understanding Astner's points and you clearly were not.

Look, this is the first time Astner directly addresses your strawman attempt:

Do you notice how much it has little to do with his points you are trying to strawman?

Here's what you missed:

Intelligence and IQ are not the same thing. You're confusing the two (on purpose?).

If you actually bothered to read my original comments, it was me asking him what conclusions would he draw from a study which drew negative/positive correlations surrounding IQ of certain types of people. You butting in with your baseless allegations of strawmanning is just you demonstrating that you love to barge into discussions without even understanding the context surrounding said discussions.

I don't see what you did there 😕

Originally posted by Firefly218
I don't see what you did there 😕

From the likes of it, you didn't, so you probably won't.

Originally posted by Epicurus
Did you read his comments regarding Hilbert/Schwartzschild and me countering them with examples of Ramanujam/Noether? If you did, you would get it.

From the likes of it, you didn't, so you probably won't.

To be fair you have a history of deforming people's arguments in order to make them fit into the discussion you think you're having awesr

How's France? Je m'appelle Chris

I absolutely despise taking French , but I would still love to visit.

Prob after college 😬

Great weather now.

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
1. Why are homophobic people hated so much
2. Why are homosexuals hated so much

Yes im homophobic but back on topic

Why did Hitler hate the Jews? Why do people hate murders? Why do people hate?

There's a lot of opinions that can be passed off as answers for both of the original questions. But there isn't really a definite one because everyone has a varying outlook on it.

If you are a homophobe, why do you care why people hate you? That isn't going to change you views and opinions, is it?

And as a homophobic person, shouldn't you be able to tell us non-homophobic people why you hate homosexuals?

Those are the real questions.

I think Epicurus has the better grounds in the "strawman" argument.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think Epicurus has the better grounds in the "strawman" argument.

Could you develop?