So gay!!!

[Beantown]

Nothing, but it's the only argument BeanClown can use that won't directly implicate him for his personal prejudices.

I believe heterosexual relations have important biological importance that should be respected and recognized. By saying homosexual relations are "the same" or "equal" to heterosexual relations just further disrespects the process of reproduction and the importance it plays in human evolution.

These views go along with my views on abortion as well as how the government acts with rewarding people with tax credits that have too many children that they cannot provide for. It should be the reverse. People who want to have children should have to pay extra to encourage responsible reproduction.

 

[billyshelby]

I think its odd first cousins can marry and I think a person should be of legal age to get married.

A question back at you:

Do you disagree or agree that heterosexual relations have more biological importance than homosexual relations? Please explain your answer.

I think you should probably answer honestly if you think homosexuality even exists in the first place. People are arguing with you on the presumption you acknowledge homosexuality as a baseline, but then have your own ideas about how it pertains to the institution of marriage. But if you don't believe homosexuality is real, that sort of changes the argument. Then you're simply preventing sick or confused people from making a mistake, not deciding whether healthy people with alternative lifestyles have the same rights as those with more mainstream lifestyles.

 

[Beantown]

I think you should probably answer honestly if you think homosexuality even exists in the first place. People are arguing with you on the presumption you acknowledge homosexuality as a baseline, but then have your own ideas about how it pertains to the institution of marriage. But if you don't believe homosexuality is real, that sort of changes the argument. Then you're simply preventing sick or confused people from making a mistake, not deciding whether healthy people with alternative lifestyles have the same rights as those with more mainstream lifestyles.

I believe homosexuality is real but I believe it comes from gender disorders and enviromental factors. Heterosexuality is brought by biological factors and natural selection. Heterosexuality is backed through male and female anatomy. Their bodies are designed for eachother. Nature has not created a way for homosexuals to have intercourse directly though genital to genital contact. The homosexual relation has no biological importance or physical evidence for existence.

 

[billyshelby]

I believe homosexuality is real but I believe it comes from gender disorders and enviromental factors. Heterosexuality is brought by biological factors and natural selection. Heterosexuality is backed through male and female anatomy. Their bodies are designed for eachother. Nature has not created a way for homosexuals to have intercourse directly though genital to genital contact. The homosexual relation has no biological importance or physical evidence for existence.

I don't quite see how you can think it's real, then. In others words, you're saying it's real because people are deluded slash damaged, right? You don't believe that a person exists who is genuinely attracted to the same sex, right? And by genuine, I mean that they were born with that same sex attraction hard wired into their being, whether it's god, biology, genetics, or something else that made that happen? The type of homosexuality which, I assume, is the same type of heterosexuality you feel--absolute, unwavering, who you are?

 

[Hopper]

.And by genuine, I mean that they were born with that same sex attraction hard wired into their being, whether it's god, biology, genetics, or something else that made that happen?

Any belief on this question, one way or the other, seems to be largely a matter of choice. It is hardly a circumtance which has been scientifically proven.

 

[billyshelby]

Any belief on this question, one way or the other, seems to be largely a matter of choice. It is hardly a circumtance which has been scientifically proven.

Well, the same lack of evidence relates to heterosexuals, right? I haven't seen any "evidence" that heterosexual love is any more verifiable than homosexual love.

 

[Beantown]

I don't quite see how you can think it's real, then. In others words, you're saying it's real because people are deluded slash damaged, right? You don't believe that a person exists who is genuinely attracted to the same sex, right? And by genuine, I mean that they were born with that same sex attraction hard wired into their being, whether it's god, biology, genetics, or something else that made that happen? The type of homosexuality which, I assume, is the same type of heterosexuality you feel--absolute, unwavering, who you are?

Homosexuality is a result from nature with biological importance, homosexuality is a result of environmental factors with no biological factors.

 

[Hopper]

Well, the same lack of evidence relates to heterosexuals, right? I haven't seen any "evidence" that heterosexual love is any more verifiable than homosexual love.

Yeah, same, either way.

 

[Beantown]

Well, the same lack of evidence relates to heterosexuals, right? I haven't seen any "evidence" that heterosexual love is any more verifiable than homosexual love.

If love is the only factor which is a prerequisite for having marriage and validity in socioty then your going to have soem crazy weddings. I love my dog but that doesnt mean I should force socioty to recognize it as a relationship on par with a heterosexual relationship.

 

[moevillini]

Bean - who's to say what role homosexual relationships play? Just because homosexual contact does not result directly in procreation, how can you deny with certainty that it plays absolutely no role whatsoever in the realm of sexual behavior? Personally, I think that if it weren't for the cultural taboos associated with it, there would probably be far more homosexual behavior in our culture. I have no way to prove that one way or the other, but by looking back through history and "pre-history" and looking at behavior of other species in the animal kingdom, I definitely see that homosexual behaviors play a role.

Seriously, Bean, please explain to me why it's such a turn-on for guys to watch two girls getting it on? Or even two guys? Trust me, it's not women buying the stuff.

and it's not just strictly "homosexuals" buying it either.

 

[Hopper]

Yeah, Bean, it's quite possible that evolutionary factors cause weak-***, limp-wristed males to go homo just so they don't perpetuate their kind. Ever think of that?

 

[billyshelby]

Yeah, same, either way.

Right. That's the pinpoint science of sexual identity. We don't actually know the microscopic physiology to explain this. So technically, I might not even be straight. And yet, for as long as I can remember, I've never felt any sexual feelings toward men. Not in dreams, not in fantasy, not in actuality. I work in an industry that has a significant gay component. I have many gay friends. They tell me they have the same experience. They knew they were gay at a young age, they're only sexually attracted to their own sex. Of course, there are people in the middle to some degree, I've heard stories that way, and I believe there are people who are genuinely attracted to both sexes at varying points of their life, or perpetually.

The larger point is it's hard to imagine that a significant part of the population is running around confused about their sexual identity when they're all straight. The anecdotal evidence is overwhelming. We have countless stories of gay people who have lived their whole lives happily gay who have no doubts as to the fact they are same sex attracted, always were, always will be. When that happens, you're left with the choice of thinking that they're confused/troubled/sick, or you start trying to figure out the genetic marker/scientific underpinning of why they're real. Ultimately, falling back on the logic that we 'don't know' if gays exist only because there isn't indisputable scientific proof seems pretty silly to me.

 

[moevillini]

 

[Hopper]

Yeah, Mo, and what good is "love" if they don't go all the way, I ax ya? I mean, like, how could that even be love, know what I'm sayin?

 

[Beantown]

Bean - who's to say what role homosexual relationships play? Just because homosexual contact does not result directly in procreation, how can you deny with certainty that it plays absolutely no role whatsoever in the realm of sexual behavior? Personally, I think that if it weren't for the cultural taboos associated with it, there would probably be far more homosexual behavior in our culture. I have no way to prove that one way or the other, but by looking back through history and "pre-history" and looking at behavior of other species in the animal kingdom, I definitely see that homosexual behaviors play a role.

Seriously, Bean, please explain to me why it's such a turn-on for guys to watch two girls getting it on? Or even two guys? Trust me, it's not women buying the stuff.

and it's not just strictly "homosexuals" buying it either.

Homosexuality definitly exists, but I dont believe it is by evolutionary means because it would show physically within their anatomy. As well as they dont participate in genetic diversity.

But they should have their right through a type of civil union. I just dont like the push for them to be viewed as equal to or the same as heterosexual relationships. Our socioty already disrespects the power of reproduction that this will just push it to another level. That is what I am most worried about.

 

[billyshelby]

Homosexuality definitly exists, but I dont believe it is by evolutionary means because it would show physically within their anatomy. As well as they dont participate in genetic diversity.

But they should have their right through a type of civil union. I just dont like the push for them to be viewed as equal to or the same as heterosexual relationships. Our socioty already disrespects the power of reproduction that this will just push it to another level. That is what I am most worried about.

If homosexuality exists, how would it show 'physically within their anatomy?' I feel like you're ducking this. Are there people, at all, who from the first moment of sexual feelings, are attracted to their same sex until their last moments of sexual feelings, in the same way you feel about your wife?

 

[moevillini]

How do you KNOW with certainty that homosexual behavior does not play some role in sexual arousal in the animal kingdom?

There is plenty of evidence of homosexual behaviors in many different species. It certainly plays some role in the spectrum of sexual behavior. Behavior which may lead to heteroxexual contact and procreation, but not necessarily.

Tell me this Bean, what would it be like if every sexual behavior by every animal that reached sexual maturity resulted in procreation? There is a very wide range of behavior which falls under the umbrella of "sexual behavior" and most of it has nothing to do with procreation in a direct sense.

 

[Beantown]

If homosexuality exists, how would it show 'physically within their anatomy?' I feel like you're ducking this. Are there people, at all, who from the first moment of sexual feelings, are attracted to their same sex until their last moments of sexual feelings, in the same way you feel about your wife?

Heterosexuality is seen through male and female bodies. The male sexual organ is designed for the women and the women sexual organ for the man. Both anatomically and physiologically. Why would it be any different if homosexuals were selected through evolution?

 

[Beantown]

Tell me this Bean, what would it be like if every sexual behavior by every animal that reached sexual maturity resulted in procreation? There is a very wide range of behavior which falls under the umbrella of "sexual behavior" and most of it has nothing to do with procreation in a direct sense.

This is true but that doesnt change the fact that ONLY the heterosexual relationship controls the reproductive process in our species, and in my opinion that relationship needs to be acknowledged and respected as a socioty.

 

[billyshelby]

Heterosexuality is seen through male and female bodies. The male sexual organ is designed for the women and the women sexual organ for the man. Both anatomically and physiologically. Why would it be any different if homosexuals were selected through evolution?

You're still not answering the question: Has a male, or a female, ever been born onto this earth with sexual feelings that were only same sex till death? Not confused. Not damaged. But in the same pure way you discovered your own heterosexual feelings, they discovered their own homosexual feelings which were pure to their being?

There's really not a right or wrong answer. If it makes you feel better, I won't even get on your case about it. I won't agree. But it would help me to understand where you come from. Because people who believe there are truly gay people are more likely to have some inherent concern for their feelings vis a vis Gay Marriage as one extension. If you don't actually believe they're real, then it would explain better why you couldn't understand, or support, their desire to get married. In that context, the state/government would be sanctioning the marriage between people who couldn't effectively be giving informed consent to their choices.