Page 126 of 159 FirstFirst ... 2676116124125126127128136 ... LastLast
Results 1,251 to 1,260 of 1585

Thread: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

  1. #1251
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,711

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    They are asexual. You cannot be identified as a homosexual without behavior that identifies you as homosexual. You can say you are, but there is no real difference between you and anyone else until you act on sexual desires for the same sex.
    No, they are homosexual because that's where their attraction lays. If you have two people, one who is attracted to people of the opposite sex, one who is attracted to people of the same sex, and neither act on these behaviors, they are different because of their attraction. You cannot alter the meanings of words and concepts because the actual meanings sink your argument. Orientation and behavior are different... as has been shown to you and proven time and time again.

    I don't think it is right to say that a youth is a homosexual because he has feelings for someone of the same sex. That may pass. It may not. Only the behavior ultimately determines whether a person is a homosexual.
    Wrong. Even if they have sex with someone of the same sex they may not be homosexual. This happens in prisons all the time, is well documented and researched. Most of these people who have sexual contact with folks of the same sex are heterosexual

    You are wrong, yet again.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #1252
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    No, they are homosexual because that's where their attraction lays. If you have two people, one who is attracted to people of the opposite sex, one who is attracted to people of the same sex, and neither act on these behaviors, they are different because of their attraction. You cannot alter the meanings of words and concepts because the actual meanings sink your argument. Orientation and behavior are different... as has been shown to you and proven time and time again.



    Wrong. Even if they have sex with someone of the same sex they may not be homosexual. This happens in prisons all the time, is well documented and researched. Most of these people who have sexual contact with folks of the same sex are heterosexual

    You are wrong, yet again.
    You would be more correct to say you disagree than "you are wrong". There are plenty of people in the psychiatric field that have and even still do take my view on it even if not all do.

    Stedman's Medical Dictionary (1982) defined homosexuality as "sexual behavior, including sexual congress, between individuals of the same sex, especially past puberty." Here the psychological component does not seem to hold much if any importance for the assessment of sexual orientation. Beach (1950) is emphatic about only including sexual behavior in the definition of sexual orientation in his critique of the first English language translation of Gide's defense of homosexuality, Corydon. Beach (1930) states that "the term (homosexuality) means different things to different people . . . it is preferable to set forth the significance of the term as used in this discussion. Homosexuality refers exclusively to overt behavior between two individuals of the same sex. The behavior must be patently sexual, involving e! ! rotic arousal and, in most instances at least, resulting in the satisfaction of the sexual urge." According to Diamond (1993), it is this type of definition that is favored by researchers determining the size of the "homosexual" population in various countries. In the studies reviewed by Diamond, while all used some assessment of sexual behavior to determine the prevalence of sexual orientations, none used any assessment of a psychological state (such as sexual attraction).
    Full article with both pro and con is taken from Who's Gay? What's Straight? - How Do You Define Sexual Orientation? | Assault On Gay America | FRONTLINE | PBS

  3. #1253
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,563
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Thank you for being honest about the behavior being the difference. My point is that the equal rights argument doesn't fly for groups defined entirely by their behavior and that governments can, in fact, discriminate against behavior. This is an argument that homosexuals need to win by winning the hearts of people not by speciously arguing that it's an "equal rights" issue and that anyone that opposes them is a hate-filled bigot. Unfortunately that seems to be the tack, though.

    I think Americans want to be sympathetic. I think if you fall in love with someone from another country, you should be able to go through proper channels to get them here and be with them even if you are a homosexual. I think you should be able to visit a lover in the hospital even if you are a homosexual. I think if your lover dies, you should have normal inheritance that any spouse would have. Civil Unions with all the rights of marriage would have solved that problem and given those that consider marriage a fundamental and basic building block of society some respect to their beliefs. Instead it's "eff-you" and "you are a hating bigot" and "you must have wanted blacks to drink from separate water fountains".

    Which brings me back to the opinion that they can kiss my ass and I'd rather eat dirt than throw my support toward gay marriage or even civil unions because when all is said and done, the gay activist community has proven that it's not about civil rights at all. That was just the angle they agreed to take.
    Well first please note I modified My original post that you have quoted once I realized there was a dispute about behavior being accepted.

    Next, you need to understand that it is exactly your point about behavior I find circular in your argument. You refuse to admit that BOTH heterosexuals and homosexuals are exhibiting the behavior of "Lust" for the object of the sexual orientations.

    You state:

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Yes. Unlike homosexuals, we don't define our very existence and being by our sexual preference. We don't state heterosexual pride parades to draw attention to the wonderfulness that is us. We don't walk around with gay pride shirts on. We don't feel the need to make sure every person we run into knows we go for the opposite sex whether they like it or not.

    To heterosexuals, it's not a "state of being". We just engage the opposite sex and that's that. Homosexuals lust after people of the same sex. Heterosexuals don't. The difference is behavior.
    Yet your argument is BASED upon the fact that you "define our very existence and our being by our sexual preference" when you admit the only difference is "We just engage the opposite sex and that's that." By your own statement THAT is a sexual preference.

    Focusing on "lust" doesn't change much, because you "lust" for particular members of the opposite sex, but you don't lust for ALL members of the opposite sex. Homosexuals "just engage the" same sex" and that's that." They then express selections of members from that set of same-sex options through the exercise of "lust."

    Even accepting "lust" as a behavior, it does nothing to negate inherent sexual orientation, as you seem to think it does.

    You are arguing from a purely ethnocentric view that heterosexuality is both natural and universally shared by homosexuals, and therefore they MUST be displaying an odd behavior pattern we do not have to accept.

    That is a curcular argument and therefore illogical.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 06-28-13 at 10:29 AM.

  4. #1254
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Well first please note I modified My original post that you have quoted once I realized there was a dispute about behavior being accepted.

    Next, you need to understand that it is exactly your point about behavior I find circular in your argument. You refuse to admit that BOTH heterosexuals and homosexuals are exhibiting the behavior of "Lust" for the orientation of the sexual drives.

    You state:



    Yet your argument is BASED upon the fact that you "define our very existence and our being by our sexual preference" when you admit the only difference is "We just engage the opposite sex and that's that." By your own statement THAT is a sexual preference.

    Focusing it "lust" doesn't change much, because you "lust" for particular members of the opposite sex, but you don't lust for ALL members of the opposite sex. Homosexuals "just engage the" same sex" and that's that." They then express selections of members from that set of same-sex options through the exercise of "lust."

    Even accepting "lust" as a behavior, it does nothing to negate inherent sexual orientation, as you seem to think it does.

    You are arguing from a purely ethnocentric view that heterosexuality is both natural and universally shared by homosexuals, and therefore they MUST be displaying an odd behavior pattern we do not have to accept.

    That is a curcular argument and therefore illogical.
    I disagree and find the argument that homosexuality is defined by behavior to be compelling. It is concrete and while more abstract definitions might be better suited to a political agenda that doesn't want to get pinned down on anything, logically speaking, the defining characteristic of homosexuality is behavior. Just like heterosexuality is.

    You can't call a teenager "straight" any more than you can call him "gay". Until they have exhibited sexual behavior, there is no way to determine sexuality.

  5. #1255
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,563
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Thank you for being honest about the behavior being the difference. My point is that the equal rights argument doesn't fly for groups defined entirely by their behavior and that governments can, in fact, discriminate against behavior. This is an argument that homosexuals need to win by winning the hearts of people not by speciously arguing that it's an "equal rights" issue and that anyone that opposes them is a hate-filled bigot. Unfortunately that seems to be the tack, though.

    I think Americans want to be sympathetic. I think if you fall in love with someone from another country, you should be able to go through proper channels to get them here and be with them even if you are a homosexual. I think you should be able to visit a lover in the hospital even if you are a homosexual. I think if your lover dies, you should have normal inheritance that any spouse would have. Civil Unions with all the rights of marriage would have solved that problem and given those that consider marriage a fundamental and basic building block of society some respect to their beliefs. Instead it's "eff-you" and "you are a hating bigot" and "you must have wanted blacks to drink from separate water fountains".

    Which brings me back to the opinion that they can kiss my ass and I'd rather eat dirt than throw my support toward gay marriage or even civil unions because when all is said and done, the gay activist community has proven that it's not about civil rights at all. That was just the angle they agreed to take.
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I disagree and find the argument that homosexuality is defined by behavior to be compelling. It is concrete and while more abstract definitions might be better suited to a political agenda that doesn't want to get pinned down on anything, logically speaking, the defining characteristic of homosexuality is behavior. Just like heterosexuality is.

    You can't call a teenager "straight" any more than you can call him "gay". Until they have exhibited sexual behavior, there is no way to determine sexuality.
    So now you are changing your position from simple "lust" to the need for actual sexual activity? I.e. acting on lust?

    The basic premise is illogical. You have NO foundation other than personal belief that Heterosexuality is a basic state of nature universally shared by all humans, and that since it is shared by Homosexuals they must be deliberately choosing to exercise unnatual behaviors. Without that foundation, your entire argument has no merit.

    There is ample evidence that other species in the Animal Kingdom demonstrate homosexual "behavior" pattens. Are you saying they possess free will and are thereby CHOOSING to do this? Please, say you do because then we no longer have a special place in "God's plan" and we have been commiting genocide on our fellow creatures who must thereby share souls with us.

  6. #1256
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,711

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    You would be more correct to say you disagree than "you are wrong". There are plenty of people in the psychiatric field that have and even still do take my view on it even if not all do.



    Full article with both pro and con is taken from Who's Gay? What's Straight? - How Do You Define Sexual Orientation? | Assault On Gay America | FRONTLINE | PBS
    Most of those citations are at least 30 years old. Firstly, I'd like to see the current Stedman's definition. Both Beech citations are from over 60 years ago, when the lack of understanding of the nature of homosexuality was in full force, with most research being biased. The final study cited, Diamond's is actually not a study, but a meta-analysis of many other studies. What Diamond said is that many researchers use the reporting of behavior rather than the reporting of attraction as a determinant. Since we have more information on the difference between sexual activity and sexual orientation, nowadays, especially around prison behavior and sexual surrogacy, this would no longer be accurate. So, no, you are wrong. The research presented is both outdated and not entirely relevant to the conclusions reached.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  7. #1257
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Interestingly enough, all of the stupidity and bigotry that has been spewed from the extreme RIGHT on this issue has helped me to be pushed closer and close to supporting SSM as fully as possible over the years. I never used to really be disgusted by positions on the extreme right, but when I see posts like the above, those that present a lack of logic and/or distortion or ignoring of facts just to present a biased, moralistic, attacking agenda, makes me realize that extremists on the right really need to be defeated. They tyranny that they present, ESPECIALLY when based on ignorance of issues is quite possibly the most dangerous thing to our country.
    And I think the progressive movement is the gravest threat this country faces. So we are at opposite perspectives. But we already knew that, didn't we?
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  8. #1258
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Most of those citations are at least 30 years old. Firstly, I'd like to see the current Stedman's definition. Both Beech citations are from over 60 years ago, when the lack of understanding of the nature of homosexuality was in full force, with most research being biased. The final study cited, Diamond's is actually not a study, but a meta-analysis of many other studies. What Diamond said is that many researchers use the reporting of behavior rather than the reporting of attraction as a determinant. Since we have more information on the difference between sexual activity and sexual orientation, nowadays, especially around prison behavior and sexual surrogacy, this would no longer be accurate. So, no, you are wrong. The research presented is both outdated and not entirely relevant to the conclusions reached.
    Yep. Most predate the homosexual marriage agenda. Funny how the facts have changed to support an agenda. And how fast it happened.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  9. #1259
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,711

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    And I think the progressive movement is the gravest threat this country faces. So we are at opposite perspectives. But we already knew that, didn't we?
    Yup. You think the above, I believe that the extreme conservatives will destroy this country unless they are stopped. Then again, I think the same about extreme liberals. Do you denounce extremism on both sides of the coin, or is it just me?
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  10. #1260
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,711

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Yep. Most predate the homosexual marriage agenda. Funny how the facts have changed to support an agenda. And how fast it happened.
    Actually, most predate unbiased and reliable/credible research into homosexuality and sexual orientation in general. Funny how results change when a biased agenda is not attached to them and research is actually done in a credible way. If you'd like, I have several posts prepared that demonstrate quite neatly how biased and inaccurate research into homosexuality has been until fairly recently.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •