DOMA & Prop 8 Topic

Posted by burnsy483 on 5/1/2013 9:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 8:18:00 AM (view original):
FWIW, I'm not saying that homosexuality is a choice.   I'm saying choice is a possibility which a handful of you have insisted that there's nofuckingwayinhell that it is(and one has insisted that it absofuckinglutely is).   As I said a few pages back, I think sexuality is more complicated than what anyone who has "known" their sexual preference for as long as they remember thinks it is. 
You're not paying attention.  ANYONE can make a choice on who they have a relationship/sleep with.  Your attraction is not a choice.

There is also an argument as to whether homosexuality is the preference of the same sex or the action of having a relationship/sleeping with someone of the same sex.
For ****'s sake, burnsyluck.    Don't forget the last two pages when you respond.

I submitted that, if people are born gay/straight/bisexual, that they could be born asexual.   After the initial "NOFUCKINGWAY!!!" response, BL conceded that it was possible.   I then suggested that said people could later develop a relationship and an attraction to a person of the same, or opposite, sex.   I asked if that would change their asexual status.    If it did, they made a choice.   Or, if nothing else, one isn't necessarily born gay/straight.
5/1/2013 9:36 AM
When you make a good argument, I'll be the first to admit it.

I disagree with that the reason you gave for the propaganda exists in the first place.  If people commit criminal acts, I understand being judged by society, because what they are doing is wrong. If I looked down on people who were into S&M, and someone told me "S&M looks fun, I'm into that" would you really think differently from someone who does it?  Is it really that different?   
5/1/2013 9:40 AM
When you make a good argument, I'll be the first to admit it.

It's been done MANY pages ago, and you haven't admitted to it once.

If you think it's not a good argument, I'd suggest that your inability to offer an effective counter-argument says otherwise.
If people commit criminal acts, I understand being judged by society, because what they are doing is wrong.

Society judges people for many decisions in which no criminal act is committed, and I gave you several examples of those, including a specific paragraph dedicated to poor people being judged for financial hardship in which I issued you a challenge if you did not believe the argument was valid. I see you haven't responded to that paragraph yet - how convenient.
5/1/2013 9:43 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 9:37:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/1/2013 9:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 8:18:00 AM (view original):
FWIW, I'm not saying that homosexuality is a choice.   I'm saying choice is a possibility which a handful of you have insisted that there's nofuckingwayinhell that it is(and one has insisted that it absofuckinglutely is).   As I said a few pages back, I think sexuality is more complicated than what anyone who has "known" their sexual preference for as long as they remember thinks it is. 
You're not paying attention.  ANYONE can make a choice on who they have a relationship/sleep with.  Your attraction is not a choice.

There is also an argument as to whether homosexuality is the preference of the same sex or the action of having a relationship/sleeping with someone of the same sex.
For ****'s sake, burnsyluck.    Don't forget the last two pages when you respond.

I submitted that, if people are born gay/straight/bisexual, that they could be born asexual.   After the initial "NOFUCKINGWAY!!!" response, BL conceded that it was possible.   I then suggested that said people could later develop a relationship and an attraction to a person of the same, or opposite, sex.   I asked if that would change their asexual status.    If it did, they made a choice.   Or, if nothing else, one isn't necessarily born gay/straight.
"...develop a relationship and an attraction to a person..."

This I missed if that's what you argued.  I would argue that's possible, but not a SEXUAL attraction. (You love the person, and are attracted in that way, etc) If you aren't sexually attracted to said person, I don't understand the idea of becoming sexually attracted later on.

Look, there are exceptions to every rule.  I don't know an asexual person, and I don't know an asexual person who eventually became sexually attracted to someone else.  Sure, 0.0001% of the population has a choice in their sexuality.  Is that better?
5/1/2013 9:44 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 8:11:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/30/2013 4:58:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/30/2013 4:41:00 PM (view original):
When your argument is blown to ****, run from your statements.

Got it.   
What exactly am I running from? Did the asexual person choose to be asexual? Of course not. Just like you didn't choose to be straight and gay person A didnt choose to be gay.

Anyone can make the choice to be in a certain kind of relationship, but I'd guess that there are very, very few non-gay people choosing to be in gay relationships. And again, it's really irrelevant to the marriage question.
So, to recap, you admit that there is a possibility that people can be born with no basic attraction to either sex.

And you agree that it's possible that said people could make a choice later in life based on any number of factors.

Yet, despite this, you insist that homosexuality cannot be a choice.

Got it.
That asexual person is just asexual. They can choose to have a sexual relationship but they're still asexual.
5/1/2013 9:48 AM
If you aren't sexually attracted to said person, I don't understand the idea of becoming sexually attracted later on.

I've done this myself so I know it's possible.

When I was younger, there was a girl who was interested in me, but I did not find her sexually attractive at all, as in ZERO attraction to her. However, I got to know here and we became friends, and I began to realize she had a lot of attractive qualities that were not physical and it actually made me re-evaluate how attractive she was overall. I began to see her as more attractive, and that was later enhanced when her physical qualities changed (she lost some weight) and that only added to my growing sexual attraction to her. We ended up being a couple for some time, even though I initially had no sexual attraction to her whatsoever.

It seems like this is once again a case of you not being able to see outside your own perspective.
5/1/2013 9:49 AM
Posted by bistiza on 5/1/2013 9:43:00 AM (view original):
When you make a good argument, I'll be the first to admit it.

It's been done MANY pages ago, and you haven't admitted to it once.

If you think it's not a good argument, I'd suggest that your inability to offer an effective counter-argument says otherwise.
If people commit criminal acts, I understand being judged by society, because what they are doing is wrong.

Society judges people for many decisions in which no criminal act is committed, and I gave you several examples of those, including a specific paragraph dedicated to poor people being judged for financial hardship in which I issued you a challenge if you did not believe the argument was valid. I see you haven't responded to that paragraph yet - how convenient.
I'm not responding to every ******* rambling thing you mention.  I didn't respond because it's not a good comparison to homosexuals.  The person who is a detriment to society because he's wasting the government's money is not the same as being a homosexual.  That person is judged for that reason.

If homosexuals are judged for having gay sex, they'd also be judged for having an innate attraction to the same sex.  Nothing changes.  There is no giant conspiracy to change the definition of a word for the homosexual benefit.
5/1/2013 9:50 AM
What burns said. It here are exceptions to every rule but for the vast majority of the population, there is no choice in sexuality.
5/1/2013 9:50 AM
 I didn't respond because it's not a good comparison to homosexuals.  The person who is a detriment to society because he's wasting the government's money is not the same as being a homosexual.  That person is judged for that reason.

No one is saying they are the same in every way. However, they are both judged by society for their personal choices, so in that sense it is an incredibly accurate comparison.
If homosexuals are judged for having gay sex, they'd also be judged for having an innate attraction to the same sex. 
No, they wouldn't, and they aren't, because people do not judge biological diversity the same way they do diversity of choice.

People are far more accepting and less judgmental when it comes to biological differences. Because of that, the agenda is to get people to think of sexuality on the same level as race or gender (being attributed to biology rather than choices).

The fact is that sexuality is a matter of choice and the campaign to convince people otherwise is based upon a lie.

5/1/2013 9:54 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/1/2013 9:44:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 9:37:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/1/2013 9:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 8:18:00 AM (view original):
FWIW, I'm not saying that homosexuality is a choice.   I'm saying choice is a possibility which a handful of you have insisted that there's nofuckingwayinhell that it is(and one has insisted that it absofuckinglutely is).   As I said a few pages back, I think sexuality is more complicated than what anyone who has "known" their sexual preference for as long as they remember thinks it is. 
You're not paying attention.  ANYONE can make a choice on who they have a relationship/sleep with.  Your attraction is not a choice.

There is also an argument as to whether homosexuality is the preference of the same sex or the action of having a relationship/sleeping with someone of the same sex.
For ****'s sake, burnsyluck.    Don't forget the last two pages when you respond.

I submitted that, if people are born gay/straight/bisexual, that they could be born asexual.   After the initial "NOFUCKINGWAY!!!" response, BL conceded that it was possible.   I then suggested that said people could later develop a relationship and an attraction to a person of the same, or opposite, sex.   I asked if that would change their asexual status.    If it did, they made a choice.   Or, if nothing else, one isn't necessarily born gay/straight.
"...develop a relationship and an attraction to a person..."

This I missed if that's what you argued.  I would argue that's possible, but not a SEXUAL attraction. (You love the person, and are attracted in that way, etc) If you aren't sexually attracted to said person, I don't understand the idea of becoming sexually attracted later on.

Look, there are exceptions to every rule.  I don't know an asexual person, and I don't know an asexual person who eventually became sexually attracted to someone else.  Sure, 0.0001% of the population has a choice in their sexuality.  Is that better?

So, at this point, you're claiming that SOME people have a choice in their sexuality?

Isn't that counter to what you've argued for about 100 pages?

5/1/2013 10:01 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/1/2013 9:50:00 AM (view original):
What burns said. It here are exceptions to every rule but for the vast majority of the population, there is no choice in sexuality.

So, at this point, you're claiming that SOME people have a choice in their sexuality?

Isn't that counter to what you've argued for about 100 pages?

5/1/2013 10:01 AM
All people have a choice in their sexuality. burnsyluck just doesn't want to admit it.
5/1/2013 10:08 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 10:01:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/1/2013 9:50:00 AM (view original):
What burns said. It here are exceptions to every rule but for the vast majority of the population, there is no choice in sexuality.

So, at this point, you're claiming that SOME people have a choice in their sexuality?

Isn't that counter to what you've argued for about 100 pages?

I'm claiming that, in your extreme example, if someone is born asexual and then decide they want to have sex with someone they weren't attracted to originally, then yes they chose to have a gay or straight relationship. But I'd also question whether they were actually asexual to begin with. I've never heard of anyone actually being asexual.
5/1/2013 10:09 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/1/2013 10:01:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/1/2013 9:50:00 AM (view original):
What burns said. It here are exceptions to every rule but for the vast majority of the population, there is no choice in sexuality.

So, at this point, you're claiming that SOME people have a choice in their sexuality?

Isn't that counter to what you've argued for about 100 pages?

Yes.  And some people are born with tails.  If I say "humans don't have tails" would you say "NO! SOME DO!"
5/1/2013 10:09 AM
Posted by bistiza on 5/1/2013 10:08:00 AM (view original):
All people have a choice in their sexuality. burnsyluck just doesn't want to admit it.
Your definition of sexuality is different from mine.  So in your definition, I agree with you.
5/1/2013 10:10 AM
◂ Prev 1...108|109|110|111|112...358 Next ▸
DOMA & Prop 8 Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.