Texas may ban gay foster parents

[Mike Windu]

just what they're DOING is wrong.

 

As far as I know, Mother Nature doesn't shun homosexuality. Only religion does.

[The Hidden One]

So if a person doesn't reproduce before they die, they're somehow inhuman or evil or something? WTF?

 

 

I DIDN"T say they were evil!!!!!

I just said people weren't created to be gay.

And people aren't born gay. They choose to be.

And if everyone was gay the human race coudn't go on.

[SkinWalker]

People weren't created to be sterile, either. But many are born that way, forever unable to reproduce. Would you deny their right to marry as well?

 

The inability for homosexuals to reproduce is the only actual logical argument against the practice, but it fails when you consider the contributions to the society that homosexuals can provide. Moreover, homosexuals can still reproduce, in fact, many do. They just aren't attracted to their own gender. There is absolutely no, reasoned argument that could prohibit same-sex marriage. None.

 

The benefits they provide to a society (not just human societies, but among other species as well) are foster/surrogate parenting to orphans, increased societal stability, increased productivity in the society, etc. The productivity to the society can be increased because combined households can provide more buying power; more consumer activity within an economy is generally looked at as a positive trait of an economy.

[TK-8252]

Originally posted by The Hidden One

And people aren't born gay. They choose to be.

 

You are very wrong. Why would anyone choose to be gay considering the bigotry and discrimation they'll face? And, like I said before, but you're not reading, there are gay ANIMALS for god's sake. Tell me how animals, let's say penguins, are going to "choose" to be gay or not? Animals are not capable of thinking like this.

 

Originally posted by The Hidden One

And if everyone was gay the human race coudn't go on.

 

Dude, think about what you're saying. Gays can reproduce just as well as heteros, and many do. Your argument has no point, since it would never be that the human race would be all gay anyway. You speak as if homosexuality is some kind of epidemic that could wipe out the population. Don't worry, it's not "contagious."

[Mike Windu]

I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you homosexuals do not.

 

You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Homosexual beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure.

 

[El Sitherino]

Originally posted by The Hidden One

people aren't born gay. They choose to be.

Except they don't.

 

Originally posted by The Hidden One

And if everyone was gay the human race coudn't go on.

... where the hell did this come from?

[Tyrion]

Originally posted by The Hidden One

 

Lets go have a look at your name....

 

Ah, you've got my point. Your name and my name are both weird to each other, yes? Now, let's apply it to what you said before. Daddy 1 and Daddy 2 is weird to you, but then let's say the kid of that couple believes your Dad and Mom is also weird. Do you think your parents should also split up just because someone else thinks it's weird?

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Let's go have a look at your name....

His point was that you can't ban something just because you don't like it. It's called "sarcasm":p.

 

Originally posted by The Hidden One

This law shoudn't be passed because homosexuality is wrong and it's wierd how kids would say "This is my daddy 1 and this my daddy 2!"

For the same reason, I could say inter-racial marriage should be banned. Not to mention all adoption! Poor kids, they've gotta suffer when they figure out these people aren't their real parents!

 

Seriously, though, thanks for coming. This thread was awfully one-sided until you showed up with an opposite view (now to shoot it down;)).

 

I agree with TK's response to this.

I want YOU to be a surpremacist!!!11:D

 

people aren't born gay.

Exactly. Kids are born asexual. Or have you ever seen a 2-year old with a hard-on?

 

As for whether or not they're born with a code saying "when you're old enough to fall in love, it'll be with a person of this gender", that's largelly unknown. It's part of a debate called "nature versus nurture" - what's part of our "manuscript" from birth, and what do we decide while we grow up? How much does the environment affect us?

 

They choose to be.

Typical belief, that, with no evidence whatsoever, and nothing to even suggest that's so. What about all those people who wished that they were the opposite orientation, but don't change?

 

And if everyone was gay the human race coudn't go on.

If everyone were monks the human race couldn't go on, as monks can't have sex. OMG ban monasteries or everyone will become monks!

 

There's no danger whatsoever that everyone will be gay, more than there's a risk of everyone in the whole world adopting a kid instead of having sex just because adoption is legel. Or everyone marrying someone of a different colour because inter-racial marriage is legal. Or all Africans wearing an Afro because that's legal.

 

See where I'm headed? Legalization doesn't create majorities.

 

I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you homosexuals do not.

 

You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Homosexual beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure.

Wow.. A joke? In the Chambers?

I saw almost the exact line on humans in general, in fact. So yup, Gays are as evil as us demonic heterosexuals. Better cleanse us all, God:p.

 

All living organisms were created to pass on their genes

Indeed. But that doesn't make it wrong not to do so. It's like I wasn't made to live in Houston, with my pink-ish skin, blonde hair, blue eyes, and so on and so on. Is that grounds enough for me to be prohibited from leaving Norway? Nope, so I moved to Houston, stayed there for three years, went to school, volunteered at an animal shelter, a library, and a rotary club, made a lot of friends (most of which were not designed to live in Houston either), and went home with lots of good memories.

 

It's not the duty of a human being to reproduce. Not with "(...) 6 billion people in the world and the population growing by a quarter million every day."

 

--Dagobahn Eagle

[ShadowTemplar]

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Except for that one war you were involved in around 1776....you didn't seem very keen on the underdog winning at all then

 

And the one around '82... Kind of annoying when you think that you've attacked a defenceless 3rd world country and find out that they have NATO weapons :=)

[toms]

maybe the entire purpose of homosexuals is to give homes to those kids who need them.

 

Seems like a great idea by god/mother nature to build in a small amount of redundancy into the system.

[Spider AL]

I think it's a known fact that all sides have their evils. Some are just more pronounced than others. In this case, the neo-cons.

You'd hope so, wouldn't you. Sadly, humans are natural fanatics and they often lose their balance, splitting the world into black and white. They say, "If neocons are evil, homosexuals must always be goodness personified!" Sad.

 

Yeah, well they don't get into parliaments...

Of course they do! Why, our government in the UK is peppered with complete flamers, and I disagree with many of their actions and activist positions.

 

Maybe its cos i'm british and we always support the underdog

Speak for yourself. Being a minority does not equate to being worthy, and we British know it better than anyone.

 

You are very wrong. Why would anyone choose to be gay considering the bigotry and discrimation they'll face?

Actually he's not all that wrong. There's no conclusive evidence to show that people are "born" homosexual. Are furries "born" furries? What about sports-bag fetishists who leave their wives for holdalls? They weren't "born" sports-bag-fetishists, that wouldn't make any sense at all. There's no gene to recognise sports bags, as far as I'm aware.

 

Sexual perversion can be a genetic predisposition I would imagine, just like addictive personality disorders. But what form that perversion takes? That's nurture. Not nature.

 

Secondly, your argument that if they could choose to be straight, they would because of the "bigotry and discrimination" they face as homosexuals... it doesn't hold water.

 

Burglars are justifiably discriminated against. If that was a discouraging factor to the extent that you believe, they wouldn't steal. Yet they choose to. People make decisions that disadvantage them in society all the time.

 

I'm not saying that being homosexual is a conscious choice, though in some cases I'm sure it comes close. I'm not even saying that homosexuals must consciously WANT to be homosexual. I'm saying, they're not BORN homosexual, they're CONDITIONED to be homosexual. There's a slight difference between choice and conditioning, and that's what many people fail to articulate, in my view.

[SkinWalker]

There actually is some evidence to suggest that homosexuality has genetic roots. Homosexual males have been demonstrated to be more likely than you'd expect by chance to have homosexual brothers as well as homosexual maternal uncles and cousins on the mother's side (Hamer, et al, 1993). Near the tip of the Xq28 region of the sex chromosomes, researchers have found five identical markers shared by a high percentage of homosexual brothers. The evidence of a hereditary nature to homosexuality is clear, moreover, the pattern of incidence confirms this.

 

Now, having said that, one cannot simply say that because one has the "markers" for homosexuality, one will be homosexual upon maturation. These markers are more analogous to a recipe than a blueprint. Give an engineer a house and he can create a blueprint of it simply by close examination and perhaps by de-constructing it. A chef, however, cannot create a recipe simply by handing him a finished pastry. The parts cannot be closely examined enough or de-constructed to do it. This is what's involved in human maturation: a recipe of parts, instructions (DNA) and conditions. This is why twin studies don't readily show the homosexual trend.

 

 

reference

 

Hamer, D.H., et al (1993) A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science, 261, 321-327.

[TK-8252]

Originally posted by Spider AL

Secondly, your argument that if they could choose to be straight, they would because of the "bigotry and discrimination" they face as homosexuals... it doesn't hold water.

 

But there would be many less, probably so few that even the neo-cons wouldn't consider them a "problem" in society. It's been said before, there are gays who hate their homosexualty, and some even attempt suicide (supposedly 20%).

 

Originally posted by Spider AL

Burglars are justifiably discriminated against. If that was a discouraging factor to the extent that you believe, they wouldn't steal. Yet they choose to. People make decisions that disadvantage them in society all the time.

 

I'm not saying that being homosexual is a conscious choice, though in some cases I'm sure it comes close. I'm not even saying that homosexuals must consciously WANT to be homosexual. I'm saying, they're not BORN homosexual, they're CONDITIONED to be homosexual. There's a slight difference between choice and conditioning, and that's what many people fail to articulate, in my view.

 

Of course a good amount of gays have chosen the lifestyle. For example, bisexual girls seem to be considered "cool." But they're not really bi, they just do the girl-on-girl stuff for the attention from guys. But this is beside the point.

[The Hidden One]

there are gay ANIMALS for god's sake. Tell me how animals, let's say penguins, are going to "choose" to be gay or not? Animals are not capable of thinking like this.

 

Animals don't have enough intellectual thought to be straight or gay. But humans do and they do choose to be gay. The only factual event of any organism being gay in there genes is a study on pig fetus's and that sometimes when two males/females are next to each other in the uterus, they acquire homosexual traits. So no humans are born gay, at least not yet.

[TK-8252]

Originally posted by The Hidden One

Animals don't have enough intellectual thought to be straight or gay.

 

...Which proves that gay animals did not choose to be gay, but just are by nature. This is true with humans as well.

 

Originally posted by The Hidden One

But humans do and they do choose to be gay.

 

Dude, are you even reading our posts? Please, (re)read the posts in this thread, and understand them, then post. Because you're repeating an argument that has already been shot down.

 

Originally posted by The Hidden One

So no humans are born gay, at least not yet.

 

They're not born heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. They're born asexual. It's when the hormones (however you spell it) kick in is when a sexuality surfaces.

[SkinWalker]

I'm glad that Hidden One is posting, not simply for an opposing viewpoint (he really hasn't offered one), but for the demonstration on the fallacious reasoning that people are capable of. He apparently doesn't have a logical reason for disliking homosexuality beyond the "ickyness" factor that it presents to him.

 

But this is one of the two most prevailing predjudices against homosexuality and same-sex relationships: religious superstition and "yuck."

 

Ironically, the same was (and perhaps is) true of the predjudice that once existed toward blacks in the American south. Religion was used as an argument to continue their oppression and, once that stopped being valid, "yuck" took over. Blacks were referred to as "dirty," "lazy," "inferior," "diseased," etc. Popular depictions in movies and illustrated books showed big-lipped, pudgy, and dark individuals with bare feet and nappy hair. Rarely was the black person portrayed as clean, well-groomed, well-dressed, and "civilized."

 

Fascinating.

[The Hidden One]

asexual

 

Asexuality is where you reproduce by budding, fusion, etc....

 

 

Ironically, the same was (and perhaps is) true of the predjudice that once existed toward blacks in the American south. Religion was used as an argument to continue their oppression and, once that stopped being valid, "yuck" took over. Blacks were referred to as "dirty," "lazy," "inferior," "diseased," etc. Popular depictions in movies and illustrated books showed big-lipped, pudgy, and dark individuals with bare feet and nappy hair. Rarely was the black person portrayed as clean, well-groomed, well-dressed, and "civilized."

 

 

I live in the heart of the south and there still is racisim like that in rural areas. And I extremely duslike racisim of any kind.

 

 

But I know how I was raised is a big part of my arguments and I appreciate everyone dicussing this. But I still dislike homosexuality of any kind and my stand on this is it's wrong. I hope we can continue this discussion orderly.

 

 

 

Thank You.

[TK-8252]

Originally posted by The Hidden One

Asexuality is where you reproduce by budding, fusion, etc....

 

From dictionary.com for asexual:

 

Lacking interest in or desire for sex.

 

Originally posted by The Hidden One

But I still dislike homosexuality of any kind and my stand on this is it's wrong.

 

Which proves that your only reasoning for considering homosexuality "wrong" is because you consider some elements of the sexuality "icky," because all your other arguments have been disproven. This is not a logical reasoning for considering something wrong.

[The Hidden One]

Then what would be a logical reason?

[TK-8252]

Originally posted by The Hidden One

Then what would be a logical reason?

 

There isn't one.

[The Hidden One]

This is issue is a very tough topic.

TK-8252 I applaud your arguments.

 

 

From dictionary.com for asexual:

 

Lacking interest in or desire for sex.

 

 

The second definiton says:

 

# Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction that occurs without the union of male and female gametes, as in binary fission or budding.

[Spider AL]

Skinwalker:

There actually is some evidence to suggest that homosexuality has genetic roots. Homosexual males have been demonstrated to be more likely than you'd expect by chance to have homosexual brothers as well as homosexual maternal uncles and cousins on the mother's side (Hamer, et al, 1993).

Heh. A followup of Hamer's own study on the X chromesome was performed in 1999 (Rice et al., 1999) which notably failed to achieve the same finding as Hamer.

 

Also another, comparable study done in the same year (Macke, J. P., N. Hu, et al. (1993). "Sequence Variation in the Androgen Receptor Gene is Not a Common Determinant of Male Sexual Orientation." American Journal of Human Genetics 53: 844-852.) "demonstrated" the lack of a genetic linkage to homosexual tendencies.

 

Therefore the study you cite is not what I'd call anything CLOSE to compelling evidence.

 

God, I hate scientists and their infernal bickering over trivia. Because the real point of this matter - as I've said time and time again - is that it's all an irrelevance to the real point: That abberant, perverse sexuality is being glorified and publicised by the mad liberals, and it's being villified and EQUALLY publicised by the bible-thumpers... and it's SO not important. At all. I wish they'd all shut up.

 

TK-8252:

There isn't [a logical reason to deem homosexuality wrong] one

Oh yes there is. Homosexual practices give rise to a greater vulnerability to sexually transmitted diseases, because - not to put too fine a point on it - the places these folks put their genitals... ain't meant for genitals. They're full of masses of bacteria and soft areas more vulnerable to infection than complementary genitalia are.

 

That's what I call a compelling reason not to engage in homosexual humping.

 

As for platonic love between two members of the same sex... that's what we call friendship.

 

But there would be many less

You didn't qualify your blanket statement with the proviso "there would be many less" to begin with.

[TK-8252]

Originally posted by Spider AL

TK-8252:Oh yes there is. Homosexual practices give rise to a greater vulnerability to sexually transmitted diseases, because - not to put too fine a point on it - the places these folks put their genitals... ain't meant for genitals. They're full of masses of bacteria and soft areas more vulnerable to infection than complementary genitalia are.

 

That's what I call a compelling reason not to engage in homosexual humping.

 

As for platonic love between two members of the same sex... that's what we call friendship.

 

There's plenty of STD's to get through "traditional" sex, so I don't see why homosexuals are to blame here. Not to mention that some heterosexual couples engage in anal sex as well. Homosexuals are no more to blame than heterosexuals.

 

Originally posted by Spider AL

You didn't qualify your blanket statement with the proviso "there would be many less" to begin with.

 

And god knows I'm not allowed to add to my argument.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

And god knows I'm not allowed to add to my argument.

Exactly. The Bible says "Nor do we allow TK-8252 to open his mouth":cool: .

 

God, I hate scientists and their infernal bickering over trivia. Because the real point of this matter - as I've said time and time again - is that it's all an irrelevance to the real point: That abberant, perverse sexuality is being glorified and publicised by the mad liberals, and it's being villified and EQUALLY publicised by the bible-thumpers... and it's SO not important. At all. I wish they'd all shut up.

They will when they have the rights they should have had all along:).

[Spider AL]

There's plenty of STD's to get through "traditional" sex, so I don't see why homosexuals are to blame here.

At at ATT! Don't start making things up, man. That's not good sportsmanship. I never said anything about "blame", nor anything about homosexuals as people. I never said that there were no STDs transmitted by hetero-standard intercourse, of course there are a plethora. I never made references to morals at all.

 

What I said before, I will say again: homosexual practices (note the word) can make one more at risk of infection of the genitals, and the areas into which the genitals are placed.

 

Areas, conspicuously not designed for genitals. QED.

 

And god knows I'm not allowed to add to my argument.

You didn't really add to your argument so much as change it altogether mate, that was my point.

 

---

 

They will when they have the rights they should have had all along

Ha! Marriage isn't a moral social right, it's a stupid and outmoded religious trapping. Religions can marry whoever they want, whatever couple fits in with their ridiculous dogma. That's their prerogative.

 

The idea that homosexuals want to be involved with such an outmoded institution as religiously-stemmed marriage at all, is good evidence of the fact that many homosexuals are just as wierdly unfocussed and gullible as the bible-thumpers they oppose.

 

NOBODY should be "married". It means nothing.

 

And frankly, I've had quite enough of homosexual activists warbling on about how their "human rights are being trampled" every five minutes.

 

These activists have the right to shag each other however they want. Now it's time they stopped defining themselves by such a trivial thing as their sexual preference, and grew up. It's about time they started becoming as "enlightened" as they want everyone else to become.