• 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!

Is Homosexuality A Choice?

Is Homosexuality A Choice?

  • Yes

    Votes: 33 15.9%

  • No

    Votes: 136 65.7%

  • Maybe/Don't Know

    Votes: 38 18.4%
  • Total voters
    207
RabidAlpaca said:
Seriously? You postulated that gays CAN choose to be gay or not, then when I stated they can't choose who they're attracted to, you replied with "Isn't exploration, by definition, a choice?"

That means you think they're only gay if they choose to explore it, it doesn't matter who they're attracted to.

Please try to keep up, I'm tired of you getting lost, especially on your own statements.
Click to expand...

No.

What you said was:

RabidAlpaca said:
So they're exploring a new area of their life.
Click to expand...

Then I replied:

Dapper Andy said:
Isn't exploration, by definition, a choice?
Click to expand...

You're obviously getting lost, especially on your own statements, but not to worry! All you have to do is click the little blue arrow next to our names, you'll be taken to the quotes, and you can follow along with your own conversation.
 
johndylan1 said:
If you are a social scientist you are familiar with the studies on attraction, otherwise google it. Note: I am refering to studies on attraction as a general principal, not specific to sexual preference.
Click to expand...

I am familiar. That is why I am skeptical of your claims.

Do you really use Google for your research?
 
CriticalThought said:
I am familiar. That is why I am skeptical of your claims.

Do you really use Google for your research?
Click to expand...

Dear Mr. Familiar,
Do you deny that there are conclusive studies on attraction that point to learned behavior as being the major factor?

Your friend,
googleboy
 
johndylan1 said:
Dear Mr. Familiar,
Do you deny that there are conclusive studies on attraction that point to learned behavior as being the major factor?

Your friend,
googleboy
Click to expand...

I absolutely do but I would love to see your evidence.
 
Dapper Andy said:
No.

What you said was:



Then I replied:



You're obviously getting lost, especially on your own statements, but not to worry! All you have to do is click the little blue arrow next to our names, you'll be taken to the quotes, and you can follow along with your own conversation.
Click to expand...
Seeing as how you're having a hard tome expressing yourself, I'll ask you three simple questions:

1) Can gays choose to be gay?
2) Is it enough to be attracted to the same sex or do you have to act on it to be gay?
3) Can humans choose who they are attracted to and who they're not?
 
Empirica said:
Considering the extreme dopamine rush during orgasm, it's no surprise that the motivation for sex is more often for the physical pleasure than for actually making a baby, especially since the introduction of birth control_

But Mother Nature doesn't care why we do it, as long as we're doing it_

Regardless, we are all products of evolution and any variation from the design is considered a mistake of nature_

Including those who are sexually attracted to anything other than the opposite sex of reproductive age and same species_
Click to expand...

"[ . . . ] is considered a mistake of nature_". You're forgetting that it's only you who consider it a mistake of nature. Well, some others, as well, but that doesn't make it a de facto truth. I've shown you earlier that it's more likely a byproduct of nature doing what it does: selecting beneficial traits.


Empirica said:
Genetic mistakes are evolution's way of improving the species by allowing a beneficial mistake to contribute to the gene pool_

And inconsequential mistakes die off making no genetic contribution to the species, which is what homosexuals do by design_

So regardless of what triggers homosexuality or any other paraphilia, it is not natural to biological or psychological human evolution_
Click to expand...

But the evidence suggests that it is, because, while it carries with it an evolutionary cost, it's the byproduct of something that carries a greater evolutionary advantage. As long as it keeps being selected for, you can't presume that it's making no genetic contribution.
 
johndylan1 said:
It's not fear, It is simply advocacy that is in its wrong place. As a governmental institution, indoctrinating sexual preferences is institutional discrimination against those who religiously disagree.
Click to expand...

It's fear at some level. Either afraid the kid will turn gay (for the extremists), the kid doesn't have the mental capacity to disagree, or the kid will look at the two "indoctrination" attempts and not side with the parents. You'll have to excuse my flippant dismissal of claims to 'discrimination,' when in this same state only a few decades ago, it very nearly became law that all gay teachers or even those who support gays must be fired from public schools. *That's* discrimination and that's the religious agenda.

Anyway there are private religious schools all over, as well as home schooling, so let's not act like the government is coming into the home and carrying the kid off to public school, where this is waiting for them:

Tomboy - It's OK to be gay - YouTube
 
Last edited:
johndylan1 said:
We agree. I'd much rather stygmatize a biggoted Idiot than someone who has a sexual preference that is different than my own, let's just keep the fight in an open and free civil society and out of public institutions.
Click to expand...

I would like it out of public institutions, but frankly since we did such a piss poor job of managing the bigots within the public institutions we had to enact silly laws and rules to protect them.
 
chromium said:
It's fear at some level. Either afraid the kid will turn gay (for the extremists), the kid doesn't have the mental capacity to disagree, or the kid will look at the two "indoctrination" attempts and not side with the parents. You'll have to excuse my flippant dismissal of claims to 'discrimination,' when in this same state only a few decades ago, it very nearly became law that all gay teachers or even those who support gays must be fired from public schools. *That's* discrimination and that's the religious agenda.

Anyway there are private religious schools all over, as well as home schooling, so let's not act like the government is coming into the home and carrying the kid off to public school, where this is waiting for them:

Tomboy - It's OK to be gay - YouTube
Click to expand...

How about we agree, and allow school choice vouchers then?
 
Last edited:
Grendel said:
You can't indoctrinate sexual preference. You can't teach people to be gay.
Click to expand...

Wrong, There is anicdotial evidence that the numbers of homosexual experiences, especially among college women, has risen in those groups that are involved with gender studies and advocacy groups. Also any behaviorial trait can be learned.
 
CriticalThought said:
I absolutely do but I would love to see your evidence.
Click to expand...

Ok. Before we have even discussed one such study let me point out the inconsistency that you have displayed. You are a social scientist who is familiar with studies on attraction as a learned behaviour, who absolutely deny that they exist. nice.

I am hesitant to cite a particular because I anticipate that you will say it doesn't apply to sexual preference, and I'd agree that you'd have a valid argument to make as I didn't claim that specific of an argument either. You could also anticipate that I'd say with regard to sexual preference we just don't know for certain, but some principals of attraction are universally agreed on.

So what do you make of studies on proximity and reciprocity, learned attraction??
 
Last edited:
johndylan1 said:
Wrong, There is anicdotial evidence that the numbers of homosexual experiences, especially among college women, has risen in those groups that are involved with gender studies and advocacy groups. Also any behaviorial trait can be learned.
Click to expand...
That is not accurate at all. Those studies indicate that human sexuality is rarely 100% straight or 100% gay. Which considering orientation is attraction to another person it can mean a lot of different things.
 
Nynaeve Meara said:
That is not accurate at all. Those studies indicate that human sexuality is rarely 100% straight or 100% gay. Which considering orientation is attraction to another person it can mean a lot of different things.
Click to expand...

OK. let's just go with this: Any behavior can be learned.
 
johndylan1 said:
Wrong, There is anicdotial evidence that the numbers of homosexual experiences, especially among college women, has risen in those groups that are involved with gender studies and advocacy groups. Also any behaviorial trait can be learned.
Click to expand...

That is so cool,john.

Now,all you have to do is go out and learn ya some homosexuality and problem solved!

Now you won't have to repeat all those flimsy rationalizations you use against gay people any more.
 
johndylan1 said:
Wrong, There is anicdotial evidence that the numbers of homosexual experiences, especially among college women, has risen in those groups that are involved with gender studies and advocacy groups.
Click to expand...

That probably just means that women who would have otherwise repressed their desires felt comfortable acting on them.

johndylan1 said:
Also any behaviorial trait can be learned.
Click to expand...

Getting horny when you see a buff guy with his shirt off isn't a behavioral trait that get's learned. I'm comfortable with homosexuality, but I don't get hot for shirtless guys -- no matter how buff. My lack of animosity towards homosexuality doesn't make me suddenly star getting a bulge in my shorts when I see a male body. If you get a little short in breath when you see a buff guy, then you're already gay -- or at least bi; you're just suppressing it.
 
johndylan1 said:
How about we agree, and allow school choice vouchers then?
Click to expand...

You are referring to private school vouchers? Have you heard of separation of church and state? I'm for public funds to buy economics textbooks or something if you want to home school. In fact, i think public middle/high schools are so lousy and inefficient at educating and career training, I'd almost rather shut them all down. But unconstitutional public funding of religious schools that can still discriminate (thanks to the 1st amendment, no less) California Court Rules Religious Schools May Expel Gay Students

No, I'm not going to agree to that. If you think you know best how to raise your kids, with no 'gay agenda', do it on your own.

The religious extremist agenda, on the other hand, is real and a real threat to kids:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...-kids-for-being-gay-or-not-hating-gays-enough

I'm sure the SC will get around to doing its job and stopping them in 17 years.
 
Last edited:
johndylan1 said:
Ok. Before we have even discussed one such study let me point out the inconsistency that you have displayed. You are a social scientist who is familiar with studies on attraction as a learned behaviour, who absolutely deny that they exist. nice.

I am hesitant to cite a particular because I anticipate that you will say it doesn't apply to sexual preference, and I'd agree that you'd have a valid argument to make as I didn't claim that specific of an argument either. You could also anticipate that I'd say with regard to sexual preference we just don't know for certain, but some principals of attraction are universally agreed on.

So what do you make of studies on proximity and reciprocity, learned attraction??
Click to expand...

Universal traits are evidence of biological origins. How many cultures do you know where proximity and reciprocity are not attractive qualities? People have evolved to find traits that would promote offspring and their survival to be particularly attractive. How might proximity and reciprocity play a role in increasing offspring and their survival?
 
johndylan1 said:
Wrong, There is anicdotial evidence that the numbers of homosexual experiences, especially among college women, has risen in those groups that are involved with gender studies and advocacy groups. Also any behaviorial trait can be learned.
Click to expand...

Behavior yes, attraction no. Try it yourself. Try to condition yourself to find something unattractive to be attractive.
 
johndylan1 said:
Wrong, There is anicdotial evidence that the numbers of homosexual experiences, especially among college women, has risen in those groups that are involved with gender studies and advocacy groups. Also any behaviorial trait can be learned.
Click to expand...

This could simply be because the taboos have been lifted.

Homosexual experimentation is nothing new, it's been occurring for millennia it's just that now it isn't criminalized do people are capable of being honest without repercussion.

it's not necessarily indoctrination, in fact it's likely liberation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom