An interesting take on a debate question..

[Widewing]

This was in my e-mail this evening. It's certainly a different approach to the issue, and it's funny besides.

_____________________________ _______________________

During the Presidential Debate on Wednesday evening, the question was asked of the candidates, "Do you believe homosexuality is a choice?"

Bush responded with, "I just don't know."

Kerry answered with, 'I think if you talk to anybody, it's not choice.  I've met people who struggled with this for years, people who were in a marriage because they were living a sort of convention, and they struggled with it.

And I've met wives who are supportive of their husbands or vice versa when they finally sort of broke out and allowed themselves to live who they were, who they felt God had made them."  

Bush's answer seemed honest. Maybe Kerry's was honest too. However, if you accept that homosexuality is not a choice, but biological, then you must face the reality of what that implies.

Can anyone say with confidence that homosexuality is natural? I can't imagine that as being normal to nature as the driving instinct of the natural world is to reproduce. Therefore, if homosexuality is not normal within nature, it must be defined as a defect, probably genetic in origin.

Is this not a conclusion based upon solid reasoning?

Now, the medical community has classified many genetic defects as diseases. Could being gay be a disease, and if so, could medicine not develop treatments? Perhaps genetic engineering could someday provide a "cure"?

Does this mean that gay Americans should be classified as being disabled? Maybe, but I'll be damned if we're going give them handicapped parking permits!

Before you dismiss my thoughts due to your own personal prejudices, stop and think about this: If being a homosexual was classified as a disablement, then would gays find any protection under the American's With Disabilities Act? This law makes discrimination based upon a disability a crime.

As rediculous as this may appear on the surface, it may be worth investigating.
_____________________________ _______________________



Widewing

[Torque]

Have you been living under a religious rock?

Watch more PBS or Discover Channel.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Torque
Have you been living under a religious rock?

Watch more PBS or Discover Channel.

Torque, if you exchanged places with Bill Gates, I'm convinced you still couldn't buy a clue....

Read the lead line again... The one I wrote.

My regards,

Widewing

[Lazerus]

They say alcoholism is genetic. But you can not drink. Maybe they need something like AA.


BFA??


Either way, do what ya want with yourself, just don't tell me I am obligated to approve of it or "accept" it.


And no, I don't have a fear of homosexuals. It's always bothered me that the homophobic label is applied to anyone that doesn't agree with that particular lifestyle.

[Ripper29]

Originally posted by Lazerus
They say alcoholism is genetic. But you can not drink. Maybe they need something like AA.


BFA??


Either way, do what ya want with yourself, just don't tell me I am obligated to approve of it or "accept" it.


And no, I don't have a fear of homosexuals. It's always bothered me that the homophobic label is applied to anyone that doesn't agree with that particular lifestyle.

Ya, don't ya just hate it when some one applies a label to you just because you don't agree with a particular lifestyle  

[Sandman]

I think you're mixing up your standards.

Normal vs. Abnormal

and

Natural vs. Unnatural


I believe homosexuality is natural, but abnormal. Homosexuality has been an observed behavior with animals. Why not people?


Granted... Some "normal" people engage in homosexual behavior. They aren't homosexual. They are deviant.

[Thrawn]

" I can't imagine that as being normal to nature as the driving instinct of the natural world is to reproduce."


BS reasoning, it's for survival of the species, not for procreation of the individual.

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Widewing
This was in my e-mail this evening. It's certainly a different approach to the issue, and it's funny besides.

_____________________________ _______________________



Kerry answered with, 'I think if you talk to anybody, it's not choice.  I've met people who struggled with this for years, people who were in a marriage because they were living a sort of convention, and they struggled with it.

And I've met wives who are supportive of their husbands or vice versa when they finally sort of broke out and allowed themselves to live who they were, who they felt God had made them."  

 

   I was Cracking my 16 year old son up when Kerry was making these statements about people he "met"

I couldnt resist saynig over and over "Jim McGreevey"
"Mrs Jim McGreevey"

Its just too bad for Bush the scandals involving our NJ governor werent covered more nationally.
that comment would have went down as the most comical of the debate

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Thrawn
" I can't imagine that as being normal to nature as the driving instinct of the natural world is to reproduce."


BS reasoning, it's for survival of the species, not for procreation of the individual.

Which is exactly the point the writer was making...

What's with you Canuck guys tonight?

My regards,

Widewing

[Thrawn]

Sorry dude, jumped the gun.  

[myelo]

Originally posted by Widewing
Can anyone say with confidence that homosexuality is natural? I can't imagine that as being normal to nature as the driving instinct of the natural world is to reproduce. Therefore, if homosexuality is not normal within nature, it must be defined as a defect, probably genetic in origin.

Is this not a conclusion based upon solid reasoning?

It is not.

First, there is no clear evidence that homosexuality is heritable. Even if it were, there is no barrier to homosexuals being able to reproduce. Many homosexuals have children. And many heterosexuals don’t. Don’t confuse sexual activity with reproduction -- most of the time the former has nothing to do with the latter.

Homsexuality is “natural” in that it occurs in nature. Homosexuality is  present in many species, including species of apes, such as bonobos, in which homosexuality is an ordinary component of sexual behavior.

As Sandman points out, homosexuality is usually abnormal in that it is not the typical norm. Like being left handed is abnormal.

And one more thing...

BS reasoning, it's for survival of the species, not for procreation of the individual.

Nope, individuals are selected. Organisms do not behave for the good of their species. In fact, an individual organism competes primarily with others of it own species for reproductive success.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by myelo
Nope, individuals are selected. Organisms do not behave for the good of their species. In fact, an individual organism competes primarily with others of it own species for reproductive success.

Not necessarily.  Perhaps not for the good of the species but perhaps for the good of the common genetic heritage.  

Homosexuals for example don't compete for reproduction.  There's a theory that homosexuals exist to limit competion within a family group.  I read somewhere that the chances of a given child being a homosexual increases with the number of children you have.  For example with the first two child you have say the chance is 1 in 10, then it increase to 1 in 9, or what have you.

So you have some kids, the more you have the higher the chance of homosexuality.  The homosexual child will not be competion for their syblings, but because of instintual desire to protect the family or common genes they are a valuable member of the family group.

[JB73]

Originally posted by Lazerus
Either way, do what ya want with yourself, just don't tell me I am obligated to approve of it or "accept" it.


And no, I don't have a fear of homosexuals. It's always bothered me that the homophobic label is applied to anyone that doesn't agree with that particular lifestyle.

well said...

i am not afraid of them, i dont like them and they go against my religion

Torque, dont throw your aithest evolutionist stuff this way, i wont bother responding.


if it is genetic, how dows it proliferate? how is it "passed on" when true homo's dont reproduce?

like any inherited trait according  to you evolutionists it would slowly dissapate, NOT proliferate and expand like is it. there seems to be a vertible boom in gayness,  and that goes against every "law" of evolution. any trait that is undesirable, or impeding to the advance of the species should not proliferate.

either way saying you are "born gay" is just another excuse for a deviant lifestyle. you ever want to squash a cricket even though there was no reason to? it was just not right, you were told not to do it, but you wanted to the the "bad" thing?

well now you have an excuse, you were born to do it genetically.

[rpm]

All I know is I have seen more than one "queer" bull run thru the sale barn.

[Torque]

Originally posted by Widewing


Can anyone say with confidence that homosexuality is natural?

It occurs throughout nature, so by definition it is natural.