• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

disneydude said:
The difference is that we aren't the ones claiming to be "conservative"
Click to expand...

Nor am I, as I'm not. What I am is an independent that sees issue for what they are and support the ones I feel strongly about despite which side of the line the fall on.
 
theplaydrive said:
The only reason that the law would exclude same-sex relationships would be because of certain interpretations of the Bible. Interpretations of the Bible are a not a reasonable foundation for deciding law in such a secular society.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is the only reason. I think there are others the courts will take into account.
 
Tucker Case said:
How do you reconcile the anatomical reality of the prostate with your views?
Click to expand...

As an analogy I would think of it as hot wiring a car. Because it's possible to get it started this way doesn't mean it's the right way to go. It's not secret what that part of the body is for, and as such has a high level of bacteria. This alone makes other activity in the area unnatural, despite the outcome.
 
mac said:
As an analogy I would think of it as hot wiring a car. Because it's possible to get it started this way doesn't mean it's the right way to go. It's not secret what that part of the body is for, and as such has a high level of bacteria. This alone makes other activity in the area unnatural, despite the outcome.
Click to expand...

That is an argument against anal sex, not an argument against homosexuality. Generally speaking, 10% of men report having had anal sex and 9% of women also report having had anal sex. It's by far not a behavior limited to homosexuals. In fact, anal sex is practiced by fewer than half of gay men. As the result of the threat of HIV, gay and bisexual men have come to prefer mutual masturbation, oral sex, and frotting. It is safe to say that more heterosexuals perform anal sex than homosexuals.

SexualBehaviorPIc.jpg


So a few questions...is homosexuality fine for those men who do not engage in anal sex? Is lesbian sex fine in that most lesbians do not engage in anal sex? Is heterosexual sex bad if men and women engage in anal sex? Do you see the problem of trying to associate a sexual behavior with a sexual orientation?
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
That is an argument against anal sex, not an argument against homosexuality.
Click to expand...

Taken out of context of the conversation I'm having with CC, sure you are right. In context of the converstation, it is being used to illustrate behaviors that would push someone towards heterosexuality if indeed heterosexuality is a learned behavior.

So a few questions...is homosexuality fine for those men who do not engage in anal sex? Is lesbian sex fine in that most lesbians do not engage in anal sex? Is heterosexual sex bad if men and women engage in anal sex? Do you see the problem of trying to associate a sexual behavior with a sexual orientation?
Click to expand...

It's not the deciding factor, like I said, it is but one piece of an overall thought process.
 
Tucker Case said:
You are aware that this is true of the vagina as well, right?
Click to expand...

Are you really going to equate the conditions inside the average anus to the conditions inside the average vagina? Are you going to ignore the normal lubrication and skin compositions of the vagina that facilitates intercourse while ruling out the relative fragility of the skin of the anus and lack of lubrication?

The presence of feces alone is enough to refute your statement.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
Are you really going to equate the conditions inside the average anus to the conditions inside the average vagina? Are you going to ignore the normal lubrication and skin compositions of the vagina that facilitates intercourse while ruling out the relative fragility of the skin of the anus and lack of lubrication?
Click to expand...

I'm going to state the fact that both areas have high levels of bacteria and both areas have the potential for sexual pleasure. :shrug:
 
Tucker Case said:
I'm going to state the fact that both areas have high levels of bacteria and both areas have the potential for sexual pleasure. :shrug:
Click to expand...

You would be wrong to equate the two for many reasons.
 
mac said:
It's not the deciding factor, like I said, it is but one piece of an overall thought process.
Click to expand...

Are you familiar with the concept of confirmation bias? Because that is what your "thought process" seems like to me.

Confirmation bias is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true. As a result, people gather evidence and recall information from memory selectively, and interpret it in a biased way. The biases appear in particular for emotionally significant issues and for established beliefs.
Click to expand...

Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Tucker Case said:
Are you claiming that the facts I have just stated are not true?
Click to expand...

I'm "claiming" the conditions in the average vagina are nothing like the conditions in the average anus/sphincter/rectum area.
 
CriticalThought said:
Are you familiar with the concept of confirmation bias? Because that is what your "thought process" seems like to me.

Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

I'm familiar. The point of this particular conversation with CC is why I think heterosexuality may or may not be learned behavior. (This is the second time I'm pointing that out to you) The snippets of that conversation you are taking out of context either don't make a lot of sense on their own, or could appear as a confirmation bias.

I spoke with Your Star about confirmation bias just yesterday, or the day before, by the way.
 
Last edited:
Tucker Case said:
Are you saying that vaginas do not have high levels of bacteria?
Click to expand...

Nothing close to the average Anus/sphincter/rectum. I imagine you are now going to find a description of a particularly nasty vagina to illustrate your point.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
The point of this particular conversation with CC is why I think heterosexuality may or may not be learned behavior.
Click to expand...

What if it is, for some people, a learned behavior? Not every individual has the same degree of neuro-plasticity, which means while some people who have learned to be homosexual may be able to "unlearn" the behavior, other individuals would not be able to do so.

Furthermore, why do you wish to generalize it? What makes you so certain that if it is learned for some people, that it is learned for every individual? And if it is learned for some people but not others, how do you distinguish those who learn it from those who acquired the behavior due to inborn biological characteristics?

Finally, what is the harm if it is a learned behavior? Can everyone learn it? Can you?
 
Last edited:
mac said:
Nothing close to the average Anus/sphincter/rectum. I imagine you are now going to find a description of a particularly nasty vagina to illustrate your point.
Click to expand...

Vaginas have natural protobacteria that keep them clean.
 
CriticalThought said:
What if it is, for some people, a learned behavior? Not every individual has the same degree of neuro-plasticity, which means while some people who have learned to be homosexual may be able to "unlearn" the behavior, other individuals would not be able to do so.
Click to expand...

What if it's not? The what if part is why I;m not so willing to dump my upbringing and values in favor of the opinion that homosexuality is perfectly normal.

Furthermore, why do you wish to generalize it? What makes you so certain that if it is learned for some people, that it is learned for every individual? And if it is learned for some people but not others, how do you distinguish those who learn it from those who acquired the behavior due to inborn biological characteristics?
Click to expand...

I'm generalizing it like this because I was asked to explore the idea of heterosexuality being a learned behavior. To be honest, I think it's instinct while homosexuality is a choice influenced by certain learned personality traits.

Finally, what is the harm if it is a learned behavior? Can everyone learn it? Can you?
Click to expand...

You're asking this from the wrong direction. If it's an unconsciously learned behavior, that's pretty damn close to being "born gay" and would (for me) overturn my position on the issue.
 
mac said:
Nor am I, as I'm not. What I am is an independent that sees issue for what they are and support the ones I feel strongly about despite which side of the line the fall on.
Click to expand...

Its not moderate/independents that are the ones screaming for small government while advocating for big government.
 
theplaydrive said:
The only reason that the law would exclude same-sex relationships would be because of certain interpretations of the Bible. Interpretations of the Bible are a not a reasonable foundation for deciding law in such a secular society.
Click to expand...

Way to leave out Muslims :2razz:
 
disneydude said:
Its not moderate/independents that are the ones screaming for small government while advocating for big government.
Click to expand...

Well it's not conservatives either, so I guess that means no one's really doing that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom