• 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
Henrin said:
I'm sure the "designer" (what are we in a religious thread all of a sudden?) decided an action that does nothing to be done and desired and the action that does something to not be desired. Are you even listening to yourself here?




I'm sure I did that already.
Click to expand...

Can something not be designed for pleasure? Why "make" a part of the body pleasurable, especially in a sexual way, if it is not to used in a sexual way?
 
“For how you define the word 'abnormal', do you consider gays to be ‘abnormal’?” - Redress

According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, “abnormal” is defined as “deviating from the normal or average”. Since approximately only about 2% of the population is gay then it would seem that--by definition--gay people are “abnormal”.

However, this is not a value-judgment and should not be misinterpreted to say that gay folks are “bad people”, etc.
 
roguenuke said:
Can something not be designed for pleasure? Why "make" a part of the body pleasurable, especially in a sexual way, if it is not to used in a sexual way?
Click to expand...

The better question is what is the purpose of the pleasure. I have always thought that the pleasure was there to get you to partake in the act and nothing else. Though the pleasure is not triggered exactly as such, I still believe that is the only reason for its existence in the formula.
 
Jaaaman said:
That is a position that I find intolerable and to be a complete cop-out. There are clear 'right' and 'wrongs' in society and this progressive position that is being pushed by you and others is disgusting.

Much of what is being pushed by progressives is nothing more than the decay of morals and common sense.
Click to expand...

Nope. There are not "clear" rights and wrongs. For example, killing is not always wrong. Each situation must be evaluated individually. Morality is relative.
 
DaveFagan said:
This was a research paper I did on the genetics of homosexuality using identical twins for the database. Identical twins have identical DNA ergo if one is homosexual and it is genetic then the other must also be. The research indicates, fairly conclusively, that there is no genetic link to homosexuality.. There is plenty of data to indicate a nurture link to homosexuality but none to link nature to it.
Click to expand...

Any paper that cites Cameron as a source is completely invalid.
 
Henrin said:
I'm sure the "designer" (what are we in a religious thread all of a sudden?) decided an action that does nothing to be done and desired and the action that does something to not be desired. Are you even listening to yourself here?
Click to expand...

Please link me to the designer's website. I'd like some substantiation for your position.




I'm sure I did that already.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think you did. But if you did, feel free to repost it so we can discuss it.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Please link me to the designer's website. I'd like some substantiation for your position.
Click to expand...

Since I'm not religious, and since even if I was giving evidence that put out such a view it wouldn't be valued I hardly see how your request should be taken seriously. That is of course if you continue to want to frame it in such a way.

No, I don't think you did. But if you did, feel free to repost it so we can discuss it.
Click to expand...

I really did.
 
Henrin said:
Since I'm not religious, and since even if I was giving evidence that put out such a view it wouldn't be valued I hardly see how your request should be taken seriously. That is of course if you continue to want to frame it in such a way.
.
Click to expand...

The point is that you can't prove what a designer/if there is any wants.
 
Your Star said:
The point is that you can't prove what a designer/if there is any wants.
Click to expand...

If you can't understand purpose when its right there in your face what in the hell is the point of this. Its like trying to teach reading to person that is blind. I'm done with this nonsense.
 
Henrin said:
Kind of a dumb point. In order to figure out which is the normal route, you have to figure out which was designed into the system to have purpose. Frankly, this entire debate is dumb. Obviously there is nothing correct about having sex with your own gender or otherwise it would do something. I'm not saying it shouldn't be accepted or not, but damn, just shut up and admit what is what.

Oh and normal=/= natural. If you guys would realize that, it would be great. :cool:
Click to expand...

They will never admit it, instead they keep asking the question Define normal, Ive defined it twice, Ill do it a third.

Abnormal:

not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard: abnormal powers of concentration; an abnormal amount of snow; abnormal behavior.

1. not normal; deviating from the usual or typical; extraordinary
2. informal odd in behaviour or appearance; strange

I submit Homosexuality is neither, Average, typical or usual and it deviates from the standard of humanity and is abnormal behavior or an abnormal act.
 
Henrin said:
If you can't understand purpose when its right there in your face what in the hell is the point of this. Its like trying to teach reading to person that is blind. I'm done with this nonsense.
Click to expand...


Thats exactly why I pulled out of the threads...its pointless to continue. The supporters keep saying the same thing over and over and asking the same questions that youve already answered. They want to badger people into agreeing with them
 
There is nothing about homosexuality that is 'abnormal', because what constitutes 'normal' in sexual behavior cannot be clearly defined psychologically. Anyone who labels homosexuality as 'abnormal' ( or 'unnatural', or even 'wrong' for that matter) is clearly not a psychiatrist nor has any sort of extensive research experience working with sexuality. Folks who label being with the opposite sex as normal and being with the same gender as abnormal have simply generalized their argument to mean 'in the minority', and it can be easiy dismissed by pointing out comparisons to left-handed versus right-handed individuals. Left-handed individuals are in the minority, but there is nothing abnormal about them. The term 'abnormal' from a medical or psychological perspective indicates a disorder, and since homosexuality is clearly not a disorder, labelling homosexuality as 'abnormal' is done out of ignorance.
 
Homosexuality abnormal?

LOL!

Ask the people who are normal... (whoever they are)

It's ok

Fool yourself into thinking you're normal

(you're not)

No one really is

Begs the question, if I like to have sex in any other position except missionary for the sole purpose of birthing a child

am I a deviant?

IF so, guilty as charged

LOL!

Have fun, "normals".
 
You can infarct me for saying this, but you people are idiots. You not only missed my point, but made a total ass of yourself but showing how dumb you are by making the same point over and over again in ignorance.
 
Henrin said:
You can infarct me for saying this, but you people are idiots. You not only missed my point, but made a total ass of yourself but showing how dumb you are by making the same point over and over again in ignorance.
Click to expand...

I'd be happy to take your point into consideration

Throw me it

I'll bite

hard

LOL!
 
LOL!

Yes Clearly

The childish one isn't the one who just calls everybody an idiot and stupid

Must have missed that memo

LOL!

Stay up.
 
lpast said:
Thats exactly why I pulled out of the threads...its pointless to continue. The supporters keep saying the same thing over and over and asking the same questions that youve already answered. They want to badger people into agreeing with them
Click to expand...

That is for damn sure.
 
Jetboogieman said:
LOL!

Yes Clearly

The childish one isn't the one who just calls everybody an idiot and stupid

Must have missed that memo

LOL!

Stay up.
Click to expand...

Keep formating your posts like that. Hey, starting with LOL does you all kinds of favors.
 
Henrin said:
Keep formating your posts like that. Hey, starting with LOL does you all kinds of favors.
Click to expand...

I said i'd be quite happy to indulge your argument

But alas, I suppose you have better things to do right?

LOL!

Stay up
 
Jetboogieman said:
I said i'd be quite happy to indulge your argument

But alas, I suppose you have better things to do right?

LOL!

Stay up
Click to expand...

Since I already made arguments why don't you indulge those.
 
Meh, I was too lazy to look back through a 45 page thread to find them.

SO what is it then,

gay people ARE abnormal

You're normal?

What is it

i'll be here

hurry.
 
Normal is a range of behaviour Most of the "against" camp seem to think that they are sat in the middle of that range. The middle is average, the mean. Who aspires to be average and mean?
 
Based on percentage of a population, in regards to sexual preference I would consider gay people as "abnormal". I also would consider left handed people "abnormal" in relation to handedness. When it comes to birthing, I'd consider "multi-child births" to be "abnormal". In relation to hair color I'd say ginger-haired people are abnormal.

I wouldn't, as a generalized term for any of those groups consider them "abnormal" in the common sense of the word. A gay man is "abnormal" to me with regards to his sexual preference, but in a general sense is not an "abnormal" person. As a person, they're not more abnormal than a lefty, a twin, or a redhead. And due to how we use the term in common language in this day and age I would not use the term to describe homosexual tendancies, or the other traits, except for in a very specific discussion such as this due to the fact I think people by and large jump to conclussions of what you mean.

There is likely not a person in the world who in some category or classification is not "abnormal", so considering a person on the whole as "abnormal" due to their abnormality in a particular category seems foolish. However, I'm also not going to tow the line of political correctness and worry of what people will think of my views and sit here going that, in regards to sexual preference, homosexuality is a "normal" thing.

It is an abnormal trait that shows up in a relatively small amount of the population and at the most base of biological levels acts counter to the very purpose of life which is to allow its biological imprint to carry onwards into the fuutre. Because people now use the word "abnormal" to implicate bad, evil, wrong, sinful, or something to disdain isn't going to make me tippytoe around it in fear people will think I mean that. There isn't anything wrong with behing gay, but in terms of sexual preference it is not the norm.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom