• 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!

Are Gay People "Abnormal"?

Are gay people "abnormal"?

  • Total voters
    91
Temporal said:
I checked no, but it's a bit strange to isolate one aspect of a person in order to describe their normality as a whole.

In other words, which gay people are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Everyone has varied aspects to them. Some do not display all of them.

If you see a dr pilot or leader of a country you do not know, you would not attribute that aspect, which is a major factor of who they are, to them. Along with any persons placed in their charge, or most notably in the case of a leader, decisions they make which will impact all subject to them.

Some gays care less about what ppl think and go about thier lives unoticed in general.

Others have to let everyone know they are gay.

Some have decided to insist what they desire onto everyone.

Gay is an abberation, relating gay sexual activities to rare events of animals to justify a sexual act that is repeatedly practiced is an excuse used to justify thier actions.

It may well be justifiable to relate cannabalism in a defense against thier relativity stance.

Shall we legalize cannabalism? I believe it is still practiced in parts of the world.

It is a battle between one side trying to preserve thier way of life, and another side with an abberation in sexual desire trying to deminish (though they do not see or will not accept that) values of the other's side. Values held as thier's for eons. It attempts to detract from one side and the other does not understand that. The crux of the question is where does it end? How much is one side willing to surrender to the other? Why does one side have to surrender anything?
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
:shrug: it seemed to me the question was specifically aimed at their identity as gay people.
Click to expand...

The question didn't say anything about identity. It said, "are gay people abnormal?" Nonetheless, how does this change the question? We're still talking about one characteristic, identity.
 
as if said:
Exactly, if not it could be worded are happy/jovial people abnormal?
Click to expand...

Still, we're talking about people, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is abnormal because it is an abnormal sexuality. Are gay people abnormal because everything about them as people is abnormal relative to all other whole individuals? How does one trait make them completely abnormal?
 
theplaydrive said:
The question didn't say anything about identity. It said, "are gay people abnormal?" Nonetheless, how does this change the question? We're still talking about one characteristic, identity.
Click to expand...

I think we are beating a dead horse with a symantics stick.

Then again the original poster seemed to agree somewhere back in the thread that symantics were used to pose the question.
 
Last edited:
theplaydrive said:
Still, we're talking about people, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is abnormal because it is an abnormal sexuality. Are gay people abnormal because everything about them as people is abnormal relative to all other whole individuals? How does one trait make them completely abnormal?
Click to expand...

That's a very good point. Personally I don't feel they are abnormal as individual persons, I feel that their sexuality is abnormal. I think I would have to answer no to the poll question. Thank you for making that distinction.
 
theplaydrive said:
Still, we're talking about people, not homosexuality. Homosexuality is abnormal because it is an abnormal sexuality. Are gay people abnormal because everything about them as people is abnormal relative to all other whole individuals? How does one trait make them completely abnormal?
Click to expand...

You cannot seperate the two. Gays use the word as thier identity due to thier sexual identity/preferences.

Unless now it means something else.

This is one of the problems that occur when the meaning of words are changed.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
That's a very good point. Personally I don't feel they are abnormal as individual persons, I feel that their sexuality is abnormal. I think I would have to answer no to the poll question. Thank you for making that distinction.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way.
 
as if said:
You cannot seperate the two. Gays use the word as thier identity due to thier sexual identity/preferences.

Unless now it means something else.
Click to expand...

Technically, it depends on the gay person you're talking to. I know some gay/bisexual people who don't consider their sexuality as part of their identity anymore than they consider their left arm a part of their identity.

Nonetheless, I think you can separate the two. Let's say you have an Native American (they make up 1% of the population). Is he, as a whole person, abnormal because of his race and identity?
 
as if said:
You cannot seperate the two. Gays use the word as thier identity due to thier sexual identity/preferences.

Unless now it means something else.

This is one of the problems that occur when the meaning of words are changed.
Click to expand...

That's only because it is their homosexuality that makes them abnormal, so it stands out. Are they homosexual and nothing else?

If you asked a homosexual firefighter what he does, do you think his answer would be "I s**k c**k" or would it be "I'm a firefighter"?
 
theplaydrive said:
Technically, it depends on the gay person you're talking to. I know some gay/bisexual people who don't consider their sexuality as part of their identity anymore than they consider their left arm a part of their identity.
Click to expand...

I cannot agree. We know the word means happy. It was taken by the gay movement to refer to themselves at some time in the 70's. There is anohter word used with has been argued to not mean or refer to or even have a definition, homosexual.

This is what happens when not all in a group behave in the same manner.

The vocal ones attribute mannerisms to the rest.

The mere fact that there has been no defined word/s in any language (I know of... *I know english bad english and really bad english*) is a significant factor when considering gays and history. Even though many argue against the case of no society that practiced homosexual acts and supported or ignored (whatever) it lasted throughout history.

theplaydrive said:
Nonetheless, I think you can separate the two. Let's say you have an Native American (they make up 1% of the population). Is he, as a whole person, abnormal because of his race and identity?
Click to expand...

This makes me think of another word used in the past for gays, different. Definately different in both cases. Most notably is an native american lives most or all of his or her life on a reservation. There is also the skin tone and facial bone structure.

All that aside. who ppl are is a sum of all of thier attributes whether positive or negative.

Gay denotes a sexual preference, it has since the seveties. I know, I was there, and perhaps earlier. Back then ppl didnt talk about it much. It is an definite identifer.

Unless they or someone notes another word existing or not, to identify them, gay has, and now denotes thier sexuality. They chose the word from all that I know and it was and is widely accepted as it is. I find myself wondering what the lastest hard print dictionaries define gay as now, and how long if it notes homosexuality.

In short it is thier sexuality that caused them to chose the word gay.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
That's only because it is their homosexuality that makes them abnormal, so it stands out. Are they homosexual and nothing else?

If you asked a homosexual firefighter what he does, do you think his answer would be "I s**k c**k" or would it be "I'm a firefighter"?
Click to expand...

LOL no, but some do have to note to others that they are gay... when they note they are gay why do they if not to signify sexuality?

This is the reason I detest at times having to refer to me or most people, the term straight. From what I hear they are a small minority though one would not know it.

I'm digging for my 1970's hard copy dictionary now... I find I need to see if straight means anything in regard to sexuality... along with gay.
 
as if said:
I cannot agree. We know the word means happy. It was taken by the gay movement to refer to themselves at some time in the 70's. There is anohter word used with has been argued to not mean or refer to or even have a definition, homosexual.

The mere fact that there has been no defined word/s in any language (I know of... *I know english bad english and really bad english*) is a significant factor when considering gays and history. Even though many argue against the case of no society that practiced homosexual acts and supported or ignored (whatever) it lasted throughout history.
Click to expand...

That's not how the word came to refer to homosexuality. See Gay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for more information.

Also, what I said is not a matter to be "disagreed" upon. Some gay people don't consider their sexuality a part of their identity. It's a fact.

This makes me think of another word used in the past for gays, different. Definately different in both cases. Most notably is an native american lives most or all of his or her life on a reservation. There is also the skin tone and facial bone structure.

All that aside. who ppl are is a sum of all of thier attributes whether positive or negative.

Gay denotes a sexual preference, it has since the seveties. I know, I was there, and perhaps earlier. Back then ppl didnt talk about it much. It is an definite identifer.

Unless they or someone notes another word existing or not, to identify them, gay has, and now denotes thier sexuality. They chose the word from all that I know and it was and is widely accepted as it is. I find myself wondering what the lastest hard print dictionaries define gay as now, and how long if it notes homosexuality.

In short it is thier sexuality that caused them to chose the word gay.
Click to expand...

Okay, but this doesn't address the central problem. How does a single characteristic make an entire person abnormal?
 
theplaydrive said:
That's not how the word came to refer to homosexuality. See Gay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for more information.

Also, what I said is not a matter to be "disagreed" upon. Some gay people don't consider their sexuality a part of their identity. It's a fact.
Click to expand...

Here is the crux of even trying to describe with one word the sexuality aspect. --->The word had started to acquire associations of immorality by 1637[1] and was used in the late 17th century with the meaning "addicted to pleasures and dissipations." Gay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That is the first line under the title of sexualization... pleasure, the sexual aspect. Hard to escape.

I wont disagree that some intend no cannotations of thier sexuality, but the word even in wiki has a sexual vein, and has contiued in that path.

theplaydrive said:
Okay, but this doesn't address the central problem. How does a single characteristic make an entire person abnormal?
Click to expand...

I have enumerated them with various words and terms as to not offend anyone, most notably them. I used the word normal and at some point definitions for all words were asked for including the word facts. ~sigh~

From now on I plan, hope, and intent to use the word abberation for the sexual aspect.
 
Last edited:
as if said:
I have enumerated them with various words and terms as to not offend anyone, most notably them. I used the word normal and at some point definitions for all words were asked for including the word facts. ~sigh~

From now on I plan, hope, and intent to use the word abberation for the sexual aspect.
Click to expand...

Okay, but do you think gay people are abnormal or not? If you do think they are abnormal, please explain how a single abnormal trait makes an entire person abnormal.
 
theplaydrive said:
Okay, but do you think gay people are abnormal or not? If you do think they are abnormal, please explain how a single abnormal trait makes an entire person abnormal.
Click to expand...

If you have another manner in which you would like me to examine it ... fire :D

Abnormal denoting not normal by means of action or thought. Most do not consider sex with a same sex person normal. Hence abnormal

Do I care? yes, Do I shun them? no, Do I agree with them? they are, and no, Does it matter to me if someone is gay? ONLY if that person decides or feels for some reason or reasons that I should know.

It is not my fault, nor many who are homosexuals, that some are so vocal and demanding, and we cannot escape even by cannotation that gay is a word refering to sexual proclivity.

The whole person is defined by his or her parts. The whole person in an abnormal sense may not at least appear to even be human. Wheter in the physical or psychological sense.

Gays do not have to lisp and wrist flap as it is called, be so annimated and speak in such an overly emphatic manner which is attributed to only gays. <-- abnormal by sight and sound.
 
Last edited:
as if said:
If you have another manner in which you would like me to examine it ... fire :D

Abnormal denoting not normal by means of action or thought. Most do not consider sex with a same sex person normal. Hence abnormal
Click to expand...
I agree, homosexuality and same-sex intercourse are abnormal.

Do I care? yes, Do I shun them? no, Do I agree with them? they are, and no, Does it matter to me if someone is gay? ONLY if that person decides or feels for some reason or reasons that I should know.

It is not my fault, nor many who are homosexuals, that some are so vocal and demanding, and we cannot escape even by cannotation that gay is a word refering to sexual proclivity.
Click to expand...
This is not relevant to the question of whether or not gay people are abnormal.

The whole person is defined by his or her parts. The whole person in an abnormal sense may not at least appear to even be human. Wheter in the physical or psychological sense.
Click to expand...
The whole person is defined by the TOTALITY of his or her parts.

Gays do not have to lisp and wrist flap as it is called, be so annimated and speak in such an overly emphatic manner which is attributed to only gays. <-- abnormal by sight and sound.
Click to expand...
Most gay people do not do this. But you have not answered my question. How does a single abnormal trait make a person abnormal?
 
theplaydrive said:
This is not relevant to the question of whether or not gay people are abnormal.
Click to expand...


I took aim and fired to save time on possible further questions.

theplaydrive said:
The whole person is defined by the TOTALITY of his or her parts.
Click to expand...


If the totality of a person is the fact that they are gay/homosexual, that is who they are.

There is no way to escape one who is gay who feels compeled for any reason to pronouce it.

You overlooked the fact I stated sexuality.

If not for sexuality why would someone say they are or show they are gay?

Those who do not hide something procliam/prostilitize it.

theplaydrive said:
Most gay people do not do this. But you have not answered my question. How does a single abnormal trait make a person abnormal?
Click to expand...

Again it is inescapable that they are gay. Someone who in dress, speach, and motor function insists, along with any and all other discernable (piercings tattoos) means of expression, insists on everyone knowing has a reason. To show by no uncertain terms he is. This extends to some women.
 
Last edited:
as if said:
If the totality of a person is the fact that they are gay/homosexual, that is who they are.
Click to expand...
It's impossible for the totality of a person to be that they are gay/homosexual. Please explain how a person's skin tone is gay or homosexual.
 
theplaydrive said:
It's impossible for the totality of a person to be that they are gay/homosexual. Please explain how a person's skin tone is gay or homosexual.
Click to expand...

That is one mere charaterisic of a person.

I gave an example of totality.
 
theplaydrive said:
It's impossible for the totality of a person to be that they are gay/homosexual. Please explain how a person's skin tone is gay or homosexual.
Click to expand...

To decide race or skin tone of a race or mixed race is irrelevant in this. Does size of foot, color of hair matter?

I believe we are finish in this matter.
 
as if said:
To decide race or skin tone of a race or mixed race is irrelevant in this. Does size of foot, color of hair matter?

I believe we are finish in this matter.
Click to expand...

It does matter because the totality of a person cannot be gay or homosexuality because skin tone does not have a sexuality.

You can't explain why a single trait, homosexuality, makes an entire person abnormal.
 
theplaydrive said:
It does matter because the totality of a person cannot be gay or homosexuality because skin tone does not have a sexuality.

You can't explain why a single trait, homosexuality, makes an entire person abnormal.
Click to expand...

I will give you race and skin tone in this matter. One which does not matter since the planet is full of various races and mixed races.

HOMOSEXULITY IS THE REASON THEY CALL THEMSELVES GAY

You cannot deny this.

I do not buy, agree with, or condone relativism.

Do not waste my time and patience.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom