Based on the threads you’ve started today, I’m going to have to say that I think…you’re a fucking psycho.
Three words: Seek Professional Help.
So, can we take that as a check in the YES box for homosexuality?
this is a remarkable discussion…i cannot, for the life of me, understand why anyone would want to debate over the use of another’s use of their private parts. I say, if person is gay let them be gay. At some point the whole “chicken or the egg” argument seems a little silly. Why do Italians like pasta and Mexicans like tortillas? Let’s just make sure they get fed eh?
dt
That’s it . . . you’re outta here.
Cajun Man ~ SDMB Moderator
Well, but I bet you can. The extreme examples are rape, frightening the horses by doing it in public, etc. Now, obviously you don’t buy that homosexual sex (I’m guessing you’d want to qualify it as “consensual, uncoerced, safe, private . . .”) is in the category of uses of private parts that people ought to want to or be allowed to debate/criticize. But the presence of the universally-recognized extreme exceptions from the rule of “do what thou wilt with thy privates,” and the caveats that are necessary even for a homosexuality-tolerant person to state that tolerance, make it look like a bit of what some commentators call ‘moral narcissism’ to profess shock, shock I tell you, that someone else could ever reach a different conclusion on where to draw the line on which uses of private parts are subject to debate and which are absolute rights.
YMMV.
Sorry, but rape is a profoundly lousy example. Rape can be just as easily performed without private parts: it’s and act of violation, not an act requiring any particular anatomy.
If it’s moral narcisism to say that if one can’t come up with a rationale for barring people to toss around their johnsons and clitori with other consenting adults, or why two same sex people can’t form a lasting partnership that deserves recognition by the state then their objection falls under the category of “bullblop,” then call me a narcissist all you please, but don’t try to pretend that you’ve got a leg to stand on.
I’m sorry, I can’t. Your head is in the way.
Nope, it’s not moral narcissism to say you’ve done the math and you don’t see any impediment that justifies, in your eyes [behavior you’ve determined does not pose any risks rising to the level that would justify the state mucking about with people’s preferences/‘orientations’].
The only point I was tweaking him on was characterizing it as a “remarkable discussion” and expressing disbelief that people would want to debate the subject. I’d say this was a bit of a pose because (no matter how firmly he believes in homosexual rights) it’s simply not realistic to be shocked in Western Civ. that some people do (factually) disapprove homosexuality. It would be “remarkable” if they were arguing that gravity didn’t apply, or that monkeys invented television, or that Medicare ought to cover phrenology – because mainstream people one meets really don’t make those arguments anymore, whereas they do make (sometimes-reasoned) arguments against accepting homosexuality.
If willie was really just saying some variant of “Gay=okay,” I apologize to the extent I implied that he was posturing by purporting head-scratching bewilderment and shock to learn that “Gay=okay” has not, in fact, been universally accepted as an axiom by his fellow citizens.
Without having read through this complete discussion, I feel that I must say something of vital importance.
This question isn’t posed by homosexuals, who have the only valid claim to wanting an answer.
And who, frequently, will respond that they don’t want to know.
The implications of this question are immense. What if we knew the answer? What if someone discovered a hormone which, if present at a certain time during pregnancy, would effect the sexuality of the developing child? What would be the next step? A pill to “cure” the homosexual fetus?
Or if it was found that certain situations had a tremendous effect on a young child’s developing sexuality? Would parents decide to shield or protect their children from these experiences?
A recurring theme in these discussions, wether or not it is the stated purpose or hidden under rhetoric, is the real question of wether or not homosexuality can be cured. By identifying a norm and categorizing differences from this norm as mutations or bastardizations, we’re no better than people who discriminate against other social groups, and in many ways worse because of the underhanded nature of the discussion and the formation of the question.
And who’s to decide that a parent should be able to determine the sexuality of their child? Some might say it would be for their protection. I don’t feel that I need to be protected from my own sexuality, and while, as a gay male, I’m a member of an often-targetted group for discrimination, I would go so far as to call this an enriching experience for a person who, as a white male age 18-35, could in almost no other way experience the things that I’ve been fortunate enough to see.
And, by extension, the APA is not biased. :rolleyes:
from your link
This is evidence?
APA Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Concerns Program
750 First Street, NE. Washington, DC 20002
Email: LGBC
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
2320 17th St. Washington, DC 20009 (202) 332-6483
Email: NGLTF
Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays
1726 M Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20036 (202) 467-8180
Email:PFLAG
Not a fan of curiosity, are we?
A lot of what you say next is probably not implausible, since what determines sexual orientation - like hundreds of other facets of human behavior - is being examined. The little I’ve heard on the subject, mostly from posts on the SDMB, DOES indicate that there are biological factors that make homosexuality more likely. Regardless, it would lead to GIANT ethical questions, but all science does, I guess.
False. There are many who think of homosexuality as a disease to be cured, no doubt. But searching for the cause of something does not mean one seeks to undo it. I don’t think calling heterosexuality the norm is unfair or incorrect. That’s stating the obvious. The bigotry comes in when you make value judgments, i.e. “most people don’t do this, so it’s abnormal, wrong, etc.” The two are not synonymous even though some fools do make that leap.
A dilemma not unlike the one about deaf culture in another thread. I don’t think any parent should make such a judgment. One of the results of science is that we become conscious of what we do and why we do it. This invariably changes the behavior being observed. In other words, life gets more complicated.
The one thing I can say is this: it’s clearly a heredity + environment thing. While genes can be manipulated, manipulating life is much tougher. I doubt anybody could eliminate homosexuality even if people decided they wanted to.
But I’m sure you can’t stand in the way of science on this one because you’re worried about the moral implications. The science is going to keep moving forward no matter what, we may as well adjust to that and deal with the realities instead.
Humans always seem to be at war with their biology, we don’t like to think even our brains influence our opinions. Interesting.
I don’t care what I am or am not supposed to be surprised about. My expectations are not that people do or do not suprise me, but rather that they do the right things by each other.
I wish I was gay. I prefer male company.
Well, the APA is regarded as the leading authority of mental health in the United States, if not the world. Its conclusions are based on over 35 years of research. After reaching those conclusions, and recognizing that discrimination is the sickness that must be treated, it associates itself with reputable organizations (such as NGLTF) that have similar goals.
This is bias? Sounds like good public health policy to me.
And is there a better authority you can name? Or do you accept no authority?
Esprix
aesth,
Welcome to the boards. 
I disagree that homosexuals have the only valid claim to wanting an answer. Wouldn’t you say that parents have a right to know this answer? Many parents feel a great deal of guilt over a gay child, feeling that they did something wrong in the raising of the child. If some parents could know definitively that they did nothing wrong, that it was out of their hands, perhaps they would find it easier to accept a gay child without blaming themselves.
I still haven’t told my father that I am gay. The main reason is that I fear that no matter how hard I tried, he would still feel responsible. He has had a very rough life in the past few years and I just don’t feel, at the moment at least, that I want to give him more things to feel bad about, no matter how irrational his feelings might be. I know he would love and accept me without question, but he would beat himself up about not spending more time with me as a child, working so many hours, that kind of thing. I knew that I was gay well before he became as busy as he was, but I don’t think I could convince him that it wasn’t his fault. If in fact, being gay is biological and that could be proven, it would be a much easier discussion with him.
YourOldBuddy hopefully not trolling, has made the point what if someone wants to be Gay or Hetero but currently is the other way sexually? This isn’t a question purely for those who self recognize as Gay. For instance I am approx. 80% Hetero, I can understand sexiness in both males and females, but find the female form on average far sexier (meaning more sexually attractive to me). From this position it would be very important to me to know if Gay sexuality could be learnt, if I found myself the focus of attraction of a Man that I found interesting and very compatible with socially and intellectually. Could I become Gay for the reasons of love, or would such an attempt be ultimately foolish and damaging, because such learning of sexuality is impossible.
Frankly, I’m on the “what difference does it make?” side. Yeah I speculate, but only in the sense that every person is curious about the world around and inside them. To my mind, I am me. I am a good guy. Perfect? No, never perfect. But I could be worse. I’d like to think, and I truly do believe, that I’ve made my parents proud to call me their son. Certainly I try.
The way to truly get a parent to absolve themselves of blame isn’t to place the blame on some(thing/one) else, but rather to show that there’s nothing anyone should be blamed for about being gay. Only then can wounds heal correctly. The only time a parent will ever feel OK is when they can look at their child and say to themselves “I don’t know what I did right, and I don’t know what I did wrong, but thanks to and in spite of all that, I have a wonderful child.” In such a thought, nature or nurture has no relevance. Only love. Always love.
Cite for ‘discrimination’ as “sickness that must be treated?”
Suggestions for what that treatment might include? Re-education camps? Hey, it worked for the Soviets for decades for attacking thought crimes, er, mental illnesses, and I don’t remember the “leading authorities on mental health” (including the World Psychiatric Association, or even the APA) taking much of a stand against it till (in the era of the refuseniks) people at large began to demand that something be done.
See portions of:
My Lord, people!
Lets not get melodramatic here with Soviet re-education camps and discrimination as sickness. The APA, in 1973, removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders after pressure from many groups, both for and against the removal. However, it did so on the basis of decent, peer reviewed, scientific study. The issue at the time was not whether or not psychology could cure homosexuality, but rather if it was a trait that needed to be cured.
To use a metaphor which is extremely flawed, I have moles on my chest. Doctors could remove them, but why should they so long as they do not become cancerous and malignant? Multiple studies, not least the work by Dr. Evelyn Hooker, showed that multiple homosexual people pulled out of the general population evidenced no more psychological abnormality than one would expect to find in a random pool of heterosexuals. Thus, the trait of homosexuality, just like my moles, was deemed to be, in and of itself, benign. Cause doesn’t factor into that thought process anywhere.
Q: Pyromania - Learned behavior or born with it?
A: Who cares, as long as you don’t burn stuff you’re not supposed to burn!