View Poll Results: Is homosexuality "normak" and "natural"?

Voters
144. You may not vote on this poll
  • Homosexuality is normal

    68 47.22%
  • Homosexuality is not normal

    46 31.94%
  • Homosexuality is natural

    92 63.89%
  • Homosexuality is not natural

    19 13.19%
  • Other/unsure

    12 8.33%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 8 of 58 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 574

Thread: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    28,659

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by the_recruit View Post
    Are they harmful? It depends on the "condition". You'd have to ask those who have experienced them. I suspect most dwarves might tell you they wish they had been born "normal", though I bet some wouldn't. Then again I can't say I've ever known a dwarf.

    Unfortunately, I doubt those with down syndrome are capable of truly understanding the meaning of the question. Probably the same for autism spectrum.

    For homosexuality I think it's even less clear that it's harmful. I know many gays are content with their sexuality. Others might regret their orientation, but I would wager that's mostly a result of living in a society that, to some degree, isn't fully accepting of it. But if that's the case the solution isn't necessarily to prevent homosexuality but perhaps for society to become more accepting.
    To be fair here, one can rationalize just about anything to themselves after the fact, especially if there's nothing they can do to really change it.

    What else is a person going to do? Wallowing in self pity simply isn't a productive way to live one's life.

    That's the beauty of the human spirit. We can overcome such forms of adversity, and even adapt to them.

    However, that being said, I think it's kind of hard to argue that "adversity" of this sort is intrinsically valuable or useful to either individuals or society as a whole. It simply makes things more complicated than they have to be and causes unnecessary problems.

    If everyone could be born "normal," I'd say that it'd be better if they were.

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    28,659

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    It has been proven that some drugs given to pregnant women did cause certain physical birth defects - thalidomide as an example. Who can say with certainty that none of them might have also caused random genetic mutations to the way that the brain operates and processes information? There has to be an underlying cause for the increased number, because I believe we were hardwired to look at the opposite sex as potential lifemates.

    If nature is stepping in now, because of the sheer numbers of people being born, which could soon be greater than what the planet can absorb, then what could or should be done about it? The earth has produced viruses and bacteria in the past which has killed millions of people - think Black Plague - so is this an attempt by nature to even the playing field to allow Earth to survive?

    Greetings, Gathomas88.
    Nature doesn't have much of an aim in the matter one way or another, IMO.

    Diseases pop up at random. It simply happens to be the case that circumstances sometimes collude in such a manner as to make certain pathogens more virulent or deadly than most.

    I also don't think that homosexuality really is becoming any more common on an objective basis. I simply think we're paying more attention to it.

    Arguably, modern social attitudes are also leading a slightly larger number of people who aren't actually homosexual to experiment in behaviors which it wouldn't have occurred to them to try otherwise.

  3. #73
    Guru
    Zinthaniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    09-19-17 @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,705

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Logicman View Post
    Gay sex is unnatural and immoral.
    No, it's not. Glad we had this conversation.
    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    In my own experience here, people seem to ignore a posters professional experience or training if the app pro holds a view that is disagreed with.

  4. #74
    Sage
    opendebate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 01:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    7,315

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    ......................:
    Homosexuals, on an instinctual level, are driven to seek out sexual activity which is contrary to (and, in at least half of all cases, even somewhat dangerous and unsanitary to the design of) human biology, and human sexuality's evolutionary goal.
    -being inclined to seek out sexual activity for nothing more than pleasure is not exclusive to homosexuals
    -how is it contrary to human "biology". do you mean reproductive biology. if so, lot's of sexual actions are so I really don't understand the relevance of this
    -there is no "goal" in evolution only outcomes


    As I have already pointed out, this is certainly an "abnormality" which can be shown to not serve any readily apparent or useful purpose. Whether it is "harmful" or not, however, is something of a matter of perspective.
    -lot's of human behaviors are abnormal but you are indifferent to them. it nor being the norm is irrelevant in and of itself
    -it does indeed serve a "useful" purpose. It can even be called utilitarian.

    The "sex is always awesome, and it'd be great if we could all live in a 24/7 orgy like human Bonobos" crowd think it's just fine, and even argue that the rest of us shouldn't be afraid to get in on the action every now and then. The more practical among us think it is a bit of a waste of time and resources at best
    -are you equating me with this crowd
    -did you just call sex a waste of time and resources

    However, one could argue much the same about many other anomalous conditions.
    it's sad that you see every behavior that strays from your meticulously penned list of "acceptable" behaviors is considered a "condition" by you

    Other than stunted physiques and poor social skills, can dwarfism or autism really be said to cause all that much immediately pressing "harm?"
    Would you seek to "cure" or prevent them anyway if you had the power? I would
    I'd say they are the best judge of that.
    "Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers" - Voltaire
    "There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow men. True nobility lies in being superior to your former self" -Hemingway

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    28,659

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by opendebate View Post
    -being inclined to seek out sexual activity for nothing more than pleasure is not exclusive to homosexuals
    -how is it contrary to human "biology". do you mean reproductive biology. if so, lot's of sexual actions are so I really don't understand the relevance of this
    It doesn't matter "why" a person may or may not seek out sexual activity in a heterosexual context. It still results in reproductive outcomes in the vast majority of circumstances, regardless of whether a person intends for it to do so or not, simply because that is the nature of the act.

    Homosexuality subverts this to no productive end.

    -there is no "goal" in evolution only outcomes
    The "goal" is the survival and propagation of one's species. Individuals with adaptations which are best suited to that goal survive, thrive, reproduce, and therefore pass such adaptations on to the next generation.

    At best, homosexuality would appear to be a recessive trait, which essentially "piggy backs" onto some combination of genes possessed by the homosexual individual's parents. At worst, it might very well be a birth defect caused by something going wrong during gestation (a fetus of one developmental sex being exposed to an overabundance of opposite sex hormones while still in the womb, for instance).

    Either way, describing it as being a "useful" adaptation is a bit of a stretch.

    -lot's of human behaviors are abnormal but you are indifferent to them. it nor being the norm is irrelevant in and of itself
    That depends. What kind of behaviors are we talking about here?

    -it does indeed serve a "useful" purpose. It can even be called utilitarian.
    Which is?

    are you equating me with this crowd
    Yes.

    it's sad that you see every behavior that strays from your meticulously penned list of "acceptable" behaviors is considered a "condition" by you
    I see no intrinsic value in "diversity" which cannot be shown to serve a useful purpose. In this case, it only causes unnecessary problems and personal hardship.

    I'd say they are the best judge of that.
    How are you going to "judge" the way you were born after the fact?

    It's a bit late in the game for complaint at that point.
    Last edited by Gathomas88; 07-12-14 at 07:42 PM.

  6. #76
    Guru
    the_recruit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,178

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    To be fair here, one can rationalize just about anything to themselves after the fact, especially if there's nothing they can do to really change it.

    What else is a person going to do? Wallowing in self pity simply isn't productive way to live one's life.

    That's the beauty of the human spirit. We can overcome and adapt to such forms of adversity.

    However, that being said, I think it's kind of hard to argue that "adversity" of this sort is intrinsically valuable or useful. It simply makes things more complicated than they have to be and causes unnecessary problems.
    But I think that perspective is begging the question; it's assuming these conditions are undesirable. I'll grant there are some conditions for which this is true - let's say, cerebral palsy. People who were just dealt a ****ty hand and are trying to make the most of it. If such a person says that they're perfectly happy with their life and don't regret being born the way they were, while I commend the positive attitude I don't think they're being truly honest with themselves (perhaps as a psychological defense mechanism).

    But there are also "conditions" for which that's not necessarily true. For example, I wouldn't want to have been born a woman instead. I don't think there's anything wrong with being a woman, it's just that I am content with my gender and wouldn't want to be different in that regard. That doesn't mean I view women who say they are happy with being women as people who are just lying to themselves and just "making the best of a ****ty hand". I believe they are legitimately content with who they are, even if it's not the way I would want to be.

    I view homosexuality as closer to the latter. I wouldn't want to be homosexual, but I think that homosexuals who are content with their orientation are genuinely so. That they aren't just "making the best out of a ****ty hand". In which case I don't view homosexuality as something that ought to be prevented any more than being a woman ought to be prevented.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    If everyone could be born "normal," I'd say that it'd be better if they were.
    I think the determining factor is not whether a condition is "normal" but whether it's a condition that's inherently bad. I agree that homosexuality is not "normal", but I don't agree that the experience of being homosexual necessarily be bad, even though it's not the way I would want to be.

  7. #77
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,009

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Did this about normal a few years ago, and decided it was time to try again. Was a fun and interesting thread at the time, so hopefully this will be as well. Two simple questions. Is Homosexuality "normal", and is homosexuality "natural"? If you would, please include your reasoning.

    Poll will allow multiple choices, pick a choice for the "normal" question and for the "natural" question. Poll will be up in a couple minutes.
    Define the context of normal and natural. In a statistical context homosexuality and bi sexuality are far from normal. Same for left handed-ness and many other things that we consider "normal" outside of statistical context.
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    28,659

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by the_recruit View Post
    I view homosexuality as closer to the latter. I wouldn't want to be homosexual, but I think that homosexuals who are content with their orientation are genuinely so. That they aren't just "making the best out of a ****ty hand". In which case I don't view homosexuality as something that ought to be prevented any more than being a woman ought to be prevented.

    I think the determining factor is not whether a condition is "normal" but whether it's a condition that's inherently bad. I agree that homosexuality is not "normal", but I don't agree that the experience of being homosexual necessarily be bad, even though it's not the way I would want to be.
    Fair enough. As I said to Opendebate, there is a certain element to this discussion which is open to interpretation where questions of "harm" and "value" are concerned.

    The only issue I'd raise here is that being born as either a woman or a man is the natural order of our species. Conditions like homosexuality don't express themselves in that manner.

    It's basically like the individual in question was meant to be a man or a woman like any other, but something (either involving the wrong combination of genes at conception or the wrong balance of hormones being introduced at the wrong time during gestation) wound up getting confused along the way, and so they developed many of the brain structures, sexual appetites, and inclinations of the opposite sex instead. The end result of this process is essentially a voluntary eunuch, who has been cut out of the gene pool under most normal circumstances.

    If there was a method to ensure that such deviations from the normal process could not take place, would there really be any harm in making use of it?
    Last edited by Gathomas88; 07-12-14 at 07:45 PM.

  9. #79
    Imposition of miscellany
    NoC_T's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    11-25-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,193

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Did this about normal a few years ago, and decided it was time to try again. Was a fun and interesting thread at the time, so hopefully this will be as well. Two simple questions. Is Homosexuality "normal", and is homosexuality "natural"? If you would, please include your reasoning.

    Poll will allow multiple choices, pick a choice for the "normal" question and for the "natural" question. Poll will be up in a couple minutes.
    Should statistical frequency alone warrant any insinuation of something untoward, where there is no conscious intent, malice or adverse effect, we must condemn congenital disability for being similarly infrequent. As to nature, you'd be hard-pressed to conclude that orientation could be anomalous, in the face of what amounts to a culturally and historically ubiquitous feature of sexuality. Had sexuality been defined less by imperatives than a vacuum of ideals, morality might have been relevant, and it could have been merely a preference, pursued on a whim.

  10. #80
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,009

    Re: Is Homosexuality "Normal" and "Natural"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    The only issue I'd raise here is that being born as either a woman or a man is the natural order of our species. Conditions like homosexuality don't express themselves in that manner.
    This may not be exactly along the line of what you were saying but it made me think. Maybe, given all that we are learning about internal and external genders and such, maybe we don't have hetero and homosexuality per se'. We are male attracted or female attracted and that attraction is based off of how we view others. So regardless of whether "jenny" who was born physically male is or feels female, if a female attracted person can't see them as female then they won't be attracted. Sorry, not trying to derail, but maybe this is fodder for another thread?
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

Page 8 of 58 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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