• 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
lpast said:
Does it make a difference whether its genetic or a choice really, the end result is the same. I can only go by my stepdaughter who says she was not born that way.
Click to expand...

TO me it does and it doesn't. I recognize that people are gay and are going to stay that way. They should be treated with dignity and fairness, however...my religious beliefs say it's wrong and opposes SSM. What that means to me is that I oppose SSM. I've split on issues with my religion before, so when, if ever, it is proven not to be a choice, I will switch my support in favor (or at the very least abstain) of SSM. Answer your question?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, I am saying what researchers say... from doing research. There is no "glossing over". You don't like the words I've chosen, though they are similar.

But tell us mac, what is the difference between saying "I assume" and "it may be"? Neither gives a definitive... but why don't you tell us the difference since you seem to be stuck on this.
Click to expand...

The point is you don't even say "assume" unless pressed. This isn't a personal attack on you, CC, I hope you don't feel it is. From your "tone" I'm guessing that you are.

What I am saying is that in general, you included: people say that...Researchers say that it is a compbination of several factors including etc, etc.....rather than saying.....Researchers say that it may be a combination of several factors including etc, etc. In most cases, you don't even include the "it is assumed" part. I've called you on this before for saying it this way (twice I think) and both times your response to me was...."oh, ok...it may be"....

This leads people to base their opinions on innacurate information. But, I recognize the quibble of symantics in this particular case between you and I. May question would be, why don't you use the wording most of these studies use...and that it is usually "it may be a combination of"?
 
Last edited:
mac said:
TO me it does and it doesn't. I recognize that people are gay and are going to stay that way. They should be treated with dignity and fairness, however...my religious beliefs say it's wrong and opposes SSM. What that means to me is that I oppose SSM. I've split on issues with my religion before, so when, if ever, it is proven not to be a choice, I will switch my support in favor (or at the very least abstain) of SSM. Answer your question?
Click to expand...


Heh I absolutley totally agree with you, except my opposition is not based on religious beliefs. I believe its both a choice for some and some are genetically predisposed. Do i know that? hell no, I think that.
 
mac said:
The point is you don't even say "assume" unless pressed. This isn't a personal attack on you, CC, I hope you don't feel it is. From your "tone" I'm guessing that you are.

What I am saying is that in general, you included: people say that...Researchers say that it is a compbination of several factors including etc, etc.....rather than saying.....Researchers say that it may be a combination of several factors including etc, etc. In most cases, you don't even include the "it is assumed" part. I've called you on this before for saying it this way (twice I think) and both times your response to me was...."oh, ok...it may be"....

This leads people to base their opinions on innacurate information. But, I recognize the quibble of symantics in this particular case between you and I. May question would be, why don't you use the wording most of these studies use...and that it is usually "it may be a combination of"?
Click to expand...

No, you are quibbling over semantics. You know my position on this... it's been clear from as long as you've discussed this with me.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, you are quibbling over semantics. You know my position on this... it's been clear from as long as you've discussed this with me.
Click to expand...

I know it, since I've asked you to clarify it to me. However, I've seen you omit it in postings that are not repsonses to me.
 
mac said:
I know it, since I've asked you to clarify it to me. However, I've seen you omit it in postings that are not repsonses to me.
Click to expand...

I pretty much always say the same thing when I write the theory on sexual orientation. If I alter words it's due to paraphrasing myself. I am saying the same thing.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Just an FYI. Some of you may have noticed that the poll numbers have been changing. This happens quite frequently in any thread concerning gay marriage, gay rights, or homosexuality. SOMEONE comes on and skews the poll by voting MANY times for whatever the anti- position is. I have been tracking this jerk for quite sometime... and I laid down quite an effective trap in this thread for him. I now have his IP address logged and know precisely who he is. I advise him to cease doing this as his ISP may be getting notified of his spamming behavior... amongst other consequences.
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
Just an FYI. Some of you may have noticed that the poll numbers have been changing. This happens quite frequently in any thread concerning gay marriage, gay rights, or homosexuality. SOMEONE comes on and skews the poll by voting MANY times for whatever the anti- position is. I have been tracking this jerk for quite sometime... and I laid down quite an effective trap in this thread for him. I now have his IP address logged and know precisely who he is. I advise him to cease doing this as his ISP may be getting notified of his spamming behavior... amongst other consequences.
Click to expand...

I've been awake for 33 minutes, and you just made my day. /cheers
 
Blackdog said:
You really have to ask that? With very few exceptions we are the only animals that kill for sport etc.

Yes we are very different.
Click to expand...

Not so much. We aren't the only animals that kill for sport.Chimpanzees have been known to kill for reasons other than pure instinct, for example.


Blackdog said:
Rape, murder and incest are not examples of bad animal behavior. They are examples of bad human behavior as animals cannot rape etc because they don't know any better, they don't have morals and we do.
Click to expand...

Most people who rape and murder are sociopaths and lack any sence of morality. Morals develop with culture and how one is raised. There is no universal standard of behavior, and many people justify absolutely horrifying behavior.

Blackdog said:
The rest is just violence when animals in 99.9% of the time are doing it to eat. We are doing it to eat as well but also for sport.



According to science the answer for the most is that no evidence to date shows homosexuality is physical in DNA etc. No evidence of it at all, and we have looked for the last what? 20 to 30 years?
Click to expand...

There is not likely a single gene responsible but rather many genes which predispose certain individuals towards homosexuality. When deciding what causes certain characteristics in people, it is unwise to limit those reasons to either nature or nurture because likely, it is a mixture of both.

Blackdog said:
Most of the brain research I saw was transgendered people or men who thought they were female etc. This is not truly homosexuality as it is not 2 males as one feels they are female and goes to great lengths to be just that. So I don't agree.
Click to expand...

It depends on the individual. As a society, we often try to stick certain groups of people in a category so they can be labeled. People are homosexual for a variety of reasons. Some men, for example may be gay but by looking at them, no one can even tell. Others dress the part. Of course, I can't say for sure what the specific causes are, but many of them have always felt that way.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
TO me it does and it doesn't. I recognize that people are gay and are going to stay that way. They should be treated with dignity and fairness, however...my religious beliefs say it's wrong and opposes SSM. What that means to me is that I oppose SSM. I've split on issues with my religion before, so when, if ever, it is proven not to be a choice, I will switch my support in favor (or at the very least abstain) of SSM. Answer your question?
Click to expand...

So then, do you agree with all other marriages or even just things that people are allowed to legally do even if they are completely a choice when those things conflict with your religious beliefs? Why or why not?

Those that you don't agree with, would you vote on laws to ban them just because a person could choose to abstain from that particular activity/behavior?

If you didn't vote for those things, would you think it okay for others to vote to ban those things based on those things being against their religious beliefs or just personal beliefs and it being a choice?
 
evanescence said:
Not so much. We aren't the only animals that kill for sport.Chimpanzees have been known to kill for reasons other than pure instinct, for example.
Click to expand...

You keep trying to use the exception rather than the rule to support a position that scientifically is not true. Humans are more than just animals.

evanescence said:
Most people who rape and murder are sociopaths and lack any sence of morality. Morals develop with culture and how one is raised. There is no universal standard of behavior, and many people justify absolutely horrifying behavior.
Click to expand...

No most are not "sociopaths" as they only make up 1 to 4 percent of the population. The crime statistics on murder and violent crimes alone show that your assumption "that most" is false. Just because someone justifies or tries to justify bad behavior, this does not make someone a sociopath.


evanescence said:
There is not likely a single gene responsible but rather many genes which predispose certain individuals towards homosexuality. When deciding what causes certain characteristics in people, it is unwise to limit those reasons to either nature or nurture because likely, it is a mixture of both.
Click to expand...

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles. ..." - American Psychological Association - American Psychological Association (APA)

There is no biological pathway to any kind of gay gene or group of gay gene's.

evanescence said:
It depends on the individual. As a society, we often try to stick certain groups of people in a category so they can be labeled. People are homosexual for a variety of reasons. Some men, for example may be gay but by looking at them, no one can even tell. Others dress the part. Of course, I can't say for sure what the specific causes are, but many of them have always felt that way.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Just an FYI. Some of you may have noticed that the poll numbers have been changing. This happens quite frequently in any thread concerning gay marriage, gay rights, or homosexuality. SOMEONE comes on and skews the poll by voting MANY times for whatever the anti- position is. I have been tracking this jerk for quite sometime... and I laid down quite an effective trap in this thread for him. I now have his IP address logged and know precisely who he is. I advise him to cease doing this as his ISP may be getting notified of his spamming behavior... amongst other consequences.
Click to expand...

That is just too awsome.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Just an FYI. Some of you may have noticed that the poll numbers have been changing. This happens quite frequently in any thread concerning gay marriage, gay rights, or homosexuality. SOMEONE comes on and skews the poll by voting MANY times for whatever the anti- position is. I have been tracking this jerk for quite sometime... and I laid down quite an effective trap in this thread for him. I now have his IP address logged and know precisely who he is. I advise him to cease doing this as his ISP may be getting notified of his spamming behavior... amongst other consequences.
Click to expand...

Can't guests (nonregistered members) also do such a thing?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Just an FYI. Some of you may have noticed that the poll numbers have been changing. This happens quite frequently in any thread concerning gay marriage, gay rights, or homosexuality. SOMEONE comes on and skews the poll by voting MANY times for whatever the anti- position is. I have been tracking this jerk for quite sometime... and I laid down quite an effective trap in this thread for him. I now have his IP address logged and know precisely who he is. I advise him to cease doing this as his ISP may be getting notified of his spamming behavior... amongst other consequences.
Click to expand...

Good, that kind of thing just sucks...I like forum polls it gives you an idea how everyone else is thinking but if you have a jerk skewing it for your side or not...what value has that...
 
Last edited:
roguenuke said:
So then, do you agree with all other marriages or even just things that people are allowed to legally do even if they are completely a choice when those things conflict with your religious beliefs? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

I agree with all marriages between a man and a woman and I also agree with civil unions between any consenting adults.

Those that you don't agree with, would you vote on laws to ban them just because a person could choose to abstain from that particular activity/behavior?
Click to expand...

Those what...marriages? Yes, I would vote against them under the present circumstances.

If you didn't vote for those things, would you think it okay for others to vote to ban those things based on those things being against their religious beliefs or just personal beliefs and it being a choice?
Click to expand...

Yes. I believe it perfectly normal and acceptable for every citizen to vote his/her conscience. I also believe every citizen has a right to have their beliefs represented in law and governance.
 
Blackdog said:
You keep trying to use the exception rather than the rule to support a position that scientifically is not true. Humans are more than just animals.
Click to expand...

What else are we?



Blackdog said:
No most are not "sociopaths" as they only make up 1 to 4 percent of the population. The crime statistics on murder and violent crimes alone show that your assumption "that most" is false. Just because someone justifies or tries to justify bad behavior, this does not make someone a sociopath.
Click to expand...

That depends. I doubt that much more than 5% of the population has committed violent crimes, but such a fact is unknowable. I do know that the US has the highest incarceration rate of any other industrialized nation, but nearly half of those people are in prison for non violent crimes.

i do stand by my conviction that the majority of rapists and murders (particularly repeat offenders) are sociopaths.


Blackdog said:
"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles. ..." - American Psychological Association - American Psychological Association (APA)
Click to expand...

That is generally what I've been saying unless I haven't been clear enough. I did say that there is no specific gene that causes homosexuality, but that genetics may play a role in someone's predisposition in becoming homosexual as well as environmental factors.

Blackdog said:
There is no biological pathway to any kind of gay gene or group of gay gene's.



I agree.
Click to expand...

Not that scientists have specifically isolated, correct.
 
lpast said:
Good, that kind of thing just sucks...I like forum polls it gives you an idea how everyone else is thinking but if you have a jerk skewing it for your side or not...what value has that...
Click to expand...

Yup. It's weak and pathetic. The individual knows that they have no ability to debate their position, so in a feeble attempt to make themselves feel better, they do this.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Yup. It's weak and pathetic. The individual knows that they have no ability to debate their position, so in a feeble attempt to make themselves feel better, they do this.
Click to expand...

Hey! I only voted once!!
 
mac said:
Hey! I only voted once!!
Click to expand...

I know it wasn't you. I may disagree with you, and I may find some of your arguments not necessarily sound, but you are by no means "weak", nor are your arguments pathetic.
 
evanescence said:
What else are we?
Click to expand...

Human.

What separates us is our ability to reason and understand abstract concepts. Animals adapt to their surroundings, humans change the surroundings good or bad. We (animals as well) are all biological machines, this does not make us the same thing.

evanescence said:
That depends. I doubt that much more than 5% of the population has committed violent crimes, but such a fact is unknowable. I do know that the US has the highest incarceration rate of any other industrialized nation, but nearly half of those people are in prison for non violent crimes.
Click to expand...

It is not impossible to know, we have statistics at the Department of Justice and FBI.

Table 1 - Crime in the United States 2009

You are also leaving out very important variables like gang crime etc.

evanescence said:
i do stand by my conviction that the majority of rapists and murders (particularly repeat offenders) are sociopaths.
Click to expand...

You can stand by an unsubstantiated claim all you like, even if incorrect. It does not change the truth of the situation.

This is getting off topic anyway. So I will agree to disagree.

evanescence said:
That is generally what I've been saying unless I haven't been clear enough. I did say that there is no specific gene that causes homosexuality, but that genetics may play a role in someone's predisposition in becoming homosexual as well as environmental factors.
Click to expand...

I agree.

evanescence said:
Not that scientists have specifically isolated, correct.
Click to expand...

Correct.
 
Last edited:
Out of 307,006,550, 1,318,398 committed violent crimes according to your source. I'm by no means a math genius, but I don't think that exceeds 5% and if it does, not by much. *searches for calculator*
 
evanescence said:
Out of 307,006,550, 1,318,398 committed violent crimes according to your source. I'm by no means a math genius, but I don't think that exceeds 5% and if it does, not by much. *searches for calculator*
Click to expand...

sociopaths only make up 1 to 4 percent of the population, most think it is 1%. I have no idea where you got 5%?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I know it wasn't you. I may disagree with you, and I may find some of your arguments not necessarily sound, but you are by no means "weak", nor are your arguments pathetic.
Click to expand...

See, I feel the same way about you....if you weren't such a lib....I think we could get a regularly scheduled beer. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom