The ethics of homosexuality.

[SpyMoose]

As to how I said an evasion of reality, I guess you are correct. But, I claim that man is to live by standards of reality and reason-and the reality of human anatomy is that you are not to do that, and it is immoral, as it contradicts the reality.

This seems like an awfully base appeal to the intelligent design of the Christian mythos for an Objectivist to make, JG. I'm sure Mystech has the sort of videos on his hard drive that could demonstrate to you the compatibility of the anatomy of two males. Its your own reluctance to think of such things, not the intent of some omnipotent creator, that makes you overlook such things.

If you still stand by the intelligent design model, then locate an anatomy chart that shows the position of the male prostate gland, and perhaps discusses its function in the male reproductive system. It's positioning seems perhaps a bit too fortuitous to be coincidence, if you are the sort to read more mystical things into evolutionary biology that is.

 

[SpyMoose]

the link is on Sciforums you lummy....go to cesspool.........lummy

That’s the sort of academic integrity that wins arguments! "I can't find my evidence against you! Do it for me!" Spectacular. I suppose the ball is in Tiassa's court! Ho ho! We were having a discussion about the shortcomings of the public school system over in another thread, maybe you could be of some help there?

 

[ReighnStorm]

ReighnStorm]the link is on Sciforums you lummy....go to cesspool.........lummy under offensive jokes lummy

www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=35969&page=1&pp=20

 

[Mystech]

Hmm. Psychology is a factor. Didn't look at that one, but I guess I originally intended it as part of the first category. But, isn't psychology, in a way, derived from genetics? And, why(I should ask how) on Earth would they be able to find something on a chromosome suggesting one to be gay, if it wasn't part of genetics?

Well in a way everything biological is derived from genetics, but people talk about such things as if it's a direct and unshakeable link, things are a bit more complicated than that. Remember, DNA doesn’t actually do anything but sit around and look pretty for the RNA transcribers, it's what happens after the RNA start's making proteins (which can be altered through other means) that really gets stuff done.

Also, no one has ever found a "gay gene" as of yet. Some research shows a possible link between a certain gene and homosexuality but no one is claiming that either you have this gene and you're gay or you don't and you're not.

As to how I said an evasion of reality, I guess you are correct. But, I claim that man is to live by standards of reality and reason-and the reality of human anatomy is that you are not to do that, and it is immoral, as it contradicts the reality.

What part of your anatomy distinctly tells you that two people of the same sex are not to sleep together? I know that there's a part of my anatomy that tells me I'm supposed to sleep with other men, it's called the prostate and you can feel it if you stick your finger into your rectum about up to the second knuckle and push down.

What reality are you talking about? We're talking about human social interaction, it's all abstracts and constructs, there are no concretes. Are you saying that if someone isn't genetically inclined to do something then it's wrong for them to do it? I really don't get that. You're treating nature like some sort of conscious deity who created us to do exactly what it wants us to do and gets pissed when we don't. I've got bad news for you, nature isn't perfect, evolution produces freaks and mistakes; it works on a "good enough" basis, that's why you have an appendix prone to inflammation and people's genes turn against them and become cancer all the time. There is no single objective design and code of conduct for human beings, not from God or Buddha or nature or even the force. If two guys or two girls happen to fall in love with one another, why should it matter what everyone else is doing? It's love, just live and let live.

However, my desires don't control another's life.

Time was that used to be called common sense. However in today's climate I feel obligated to congratulate you on having the maturity and forethought to say it.

 

[ReighnStorm]

Are you stress testing your keyboards period key for its manufacturers, or are you just and idiot?

This late in the thread I think ReighnStorm has sufficiently discredited herself and been discredited that I can get that off my chest. I could add some point about how she keeps contradicting herself and how her source of 'facts' was already debunked earlier in the threat without a peep out of her, if anyone thinks I'm bringing down the conversation.


DOTDOTDOTDOT FROWNYFACE I AM MAKING A POINT!

not really

 

[Mystech]

This seems like an awfully base appeal to the intelligent design of the Christian mythos for an Objectivist to make, JG.

Well that's what I was trying to get at. JG's argument really needs to rely on a premise of intelligent design to even begin to have some sort of foundation. For an act to go against "reality" as JG puts it, in this case meaning apparently some objective outline of objectively acceptable human behavior, then there must certainly be some sort of intelligent design of man toward some specific purpose.

 

[ReighnStorm]

ReighnStormthe link is on Sciforums you lummy....go to cesspool.........lummy In the whole of this argument I've never told a lie and would never make up such a horrific thing such as that maybe you don't remember but acting like a child by daring me to prove it.......it's there believe me and I reported it.....

For those of you followers who can't get there .....go to cesspool.....go to most offensive jokes ever etc......look thru page one and two....it's in two parts......on page one.......k....this is the person you side with....not that I would ever want people like you on my side of course...no offense......

 

[SpyMoose]

I'm actually on the side of the homosexual community as well as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, and the children who can be helped by being adopted by a homosexual family. I doubt Tiassa could come up with a joke racist enough to sour all of those sources. I also find it comical that Tiassa challenged you to provide proof, and you haven’t bothered to find the link. I don’t really care enough to go looking myself. I’m left mildly inclined to believe you are a liar.

 

[ReighnStorm]

http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=558&department=CFI&categoryid=cfreport

]http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/109/6/1193]
"Rather, the literature suggests that children who grow up with gay or lesbian parents fare just as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as children whose parents are heterosexual.
That being said, the AAP statement does not address gay adoption in general. It addresses the legislative status of children who have same-sex parents. This policy statement is not about lifestyle; it is about health insurance. This statement is not about homosexuality; it is about kids."
Joseph F. Hagan, Jr, MD, FAAP, Chair

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/110/2/419-a
AAP Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health

 

[ReighnStorm]

I'm actually on the side of the homosexual community as well as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, and the children who can be helped by being adopted by a homosexual family. I doubt Tiassa could come up with a joke racist enough to sour all of those sources. I also find it comical that Tiassa challenged you to provide proof, and you haven’t bothered to find the link. I don’t really care enough to go looking myself. I’m left mildly inclined to believe you are a liar.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=35969&page=1

it's in 2 parts on page 1 post 10/14.........you're entitled to your opinion

 

[ReighnStorm]

Do the research, from actual studies done by actual psychology and health experts and you'll find that the existing body of data goes quite against what NARTH claims

.

Last I checked in the U S.....we have freedom of speech and to give opinions on whatever topic chosen.....the question was asked.......does it not matter that my facts are based on people I actually know personnally? who have lived through this very argument.....does that not matter at all (since you want facts.......)

We've looked at NARTH at least a half dozen times in this forum alone, and I believe even considered banning posting resources from it in a serious attempt to substantiate an argument. It's not a scientific organization

So what exactly is the cesspool...????

" just a political one"

Ever hear of Political Science?????

bravo on changing your tune on the whole concrete rational argument vs. vaporous untethered opinion

Opinion's can never be restricted, vague maybe but not restricted

 

[Tiassa]

You do me honor, ReighnStorm. Over the years I have been paid many high complements by people nosy enough to ask after my ethnicity. Strangely, those who disparage me have considered me variously Puerto Rican, Mexican, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Arab, and yes, once or twice, "Nigger". (What am I, Homer Plessy's love child?) And there was the black guy that called me a honky, but yes, I'm part--mostly, I think--white, so whatever.

Of those who have addressed the issue intending respect, I have been variously characterized according to several midwestern indigenous tribes, in some cases by those who actually are of those tribes. And yes, there is something fascinating about having people walk up and speak to me in languages I don't know. Although that's only the indigenous. No Asian of any line has mistaken me for knowing the language, and only white people ever try to speak to me in Japanese.

The most unique inquiry I ever heard of was an author who wondered if I was of one or another line of Gypsy.

But the word is Lummi, and I share no significant blood with the families of that nation. Whatever common blood we share is at the primal level by which all humans appear to be connected through their mothers.

 

[Tiassa]

I doubt Tiassa could come up with a joke racist enough to sour all of those sources

I don't know about that. It is the ugliest joke I know. It cracks me up the same way the disparaging term "porch-monkey" cracks me up, which is the same way I used to crack up whenever I saw that beady-eyed, short, garden gnome-like Grand Wizard of the KKK touring the daytime talk shows. I actually have a television sketch squirreled away somewhere that, if I ever write enough of the show it's part of to sell, is intended to make me a target for assassination. You know, get the show canceled at the height of its popularity, get blackballed in LoCal, scuttle out of town in the middle of the night in a friend's car so nobody knows to throw bricks or burning trash at me. That sort of thing.

If that sketch ever hits the air, you'll know it's me.

Really. Jerry Falwell getting drunk and screwing his mother in an outhouse will pale by comparison.

So yeah, that's a bit uglier than the sandbox joke, but it requires a life-altering effort in order to bring its full power to bear. It's not exactly a joke, except, in the end, it is. Er ... um ... yeah.

But, you know, I end up trying not to wonder where some people's sense of humor are. It's often futile to wonder. The absurd must be damn near tangibly painful for those who are capable of laughing in its face.

To the other, though, one must imagine Sisyphus happy.

Perhaps it's some form of masochism.

 

[Mystech]

Last I checked in the U S.....we have freedom of speech and to give opinions on whatever topic chosen

Right, and people are free to tell lies and quite often to mislead others.

Ever hear of Political Science?????

Firstly, NARTH claims to be a psychological organization, and second if you open any high school level polisci book the first thing it says, usually in big bold letters is that politics isn't a science, and that it isn’t referred to as such outside the phrase “political science”.

 

[ReighnStorm]

Mystech : Right, and people are free to tell lies and quite often to mislead others

People can also be prosecuted for those lies, but not an opinion of a lie

If you open any high school level polisci book the first thing it says, usually in big bold letters is that politics isn't a science

Definition of Political Science.....was just saying it belongs on
Sciforum that's all.

An activity that appears to require study and method...
Knowledge, especially that is gained through experience....
The study of the processes, principles, and structure of government and of political institutions; politics

 

[ReighnStorm]

But the word is Lummi and I share no significant blood with the families of that nation.

Actually, Tiassa.....the word is Lummy.....something worse than a dummy....that's why it's spelled with a y instead of an i....it was a secret until now..... whether you are or not depends...........

 

[Buddha1]

And yet gays say that they want to "fit" into the same world/society as normal people!

And yet gays say that they want to be able to adopt children just like normal people!

Ye're different, dammit, and you shouldn't be treated otherwise. Baron Max

Well, and why should you own the society? or decide who is normal and who is not?

You have been undeservedly given a lot of power due to religion. But that is no reason why other people should remain oppressed. America has no right to call it open, free, fair or civilised unless it becomes civilised. And people like you need to be thrown right out of the society if US has to reach anywhere near civilisation.

Gays have every right to be different, and yet be respected for who they are, to raise their own children or those of adopted ones, be in the military and what have you. Why should heterosexuals and christians be allowed to brainwash generations after generations of children.

If women can be in the military why can't feminine men --- gay or not?

 

[Baron Max]

Well, and why should you own the society? or decide who is normal and who is not?

I don't "own" society ...soceity does! And that society also determines who or what is normal. And if we accept that gays and lesbians are normal, why can't we accept that, say, drunk drivers are normal? Or people who carry big handguns on their hips? Or people who drive bulldozers on the streets?

And people like you need to be thrown right out of the society if US has to reach anywhere near civilisation.

Ahh, see! When the gays and lesbians are given the power, they'll just "throw" us regular folks right out into the oceans!! And you wonder why we're against giving you any power? ...LOL!!

Gays have every right to be different, ...

I don't disagree with that. But you don't want to be different ....you want to be accepted as "normal" people in society ...AND YOU AIN'T!!! Different? Sure. The same? Fuck no!

If women can be in the military why can't feminine men --- gay or not?

I agree with you ...gays should be allowed in the military ...BUT NOT IN THE SAME SQUADS, COMPANIES, AS MEN! Again, you're fighting for your differences to be recognized, but in the same fuckin' breath, you want to be included in the same groups!! That's idiocy. We should have Pink Brigades, and Pink Paratroopers and Pink Tank Companies ....but NOT in the same groupings as men. You're different, right?

If gays are different and want to be recognized, fine. If gays are different, but want to be included as a "normal part" of society, then tough shit! You can't have it both ways.

Baron Max

 

[ReighnStorm]

Totally agree with BM

 

[heart]

I don't "own" society ...soceity does! And that society also determines who or what is normal. And if we accept that gays and lesbians are normal, why can't we accept that, say, drunk drivers are normal? Or people who carry big handguns on their hips? Or people who drive bulldozers on the streets?

Wake up to 2005, MB. Do you not remember the redneck mentality they had toward black people? (Pretty much the same mentality you are spewing about homosexuals) Slaves were freed and eventually allowed to vote and own property. Women were allowed to vote...so on and so on. Times change and so do the way people come to believe.

You're very big about what the majority says should be set in stone. I'd like to point out to you that it was the majority who once thought the world was flat. Did that make it so? Would you agree or not agree that- just because the majority thought one way- did not make it correct?

Ahh, see! When the gays and lesbians are given the power, they'll just "throw" us regular folks right out into the oceans!! And you wonder why we're against giving you any power? ...LOL!!

Is that what you really think or have you, yet once again, clung to outdated stereotypical crap? You can't lump all gays and lesbians together and state that's how we think. Would it hurt you too much to look at a person's heart and intentions instead of judging them based sexual preference? I mean why the hell does it matter to you if someone sleeps with a person of the same sex?

So what if homosexuality deviates from the norm? It's not "normal" to be a genius, should we mark them like you do homosexuals? You know- just incase their superhuman thinking rubs off on us? Oh, it can't? Guess what? Neither can hanging around a homosexual- so what is your fear?