Posted by bad_luck on 4/12/2013 3:16:00 PM (view original):
What factors?

If you argue hair color and sex of someone are similar "choices" made to rate attractiveness, then you probably speak for about 0.01% of the population.  I feel I'm being very generous there.

170 words to say - "I'd argue that when people call me names, they don't have much of an argument.  Otherwise they'd be supporting their argument instead."

I'd say that someone who is overly wordy and constantly feels the need to share that they're a "master debater" and "winning" an argument is generally someone who is trying to mask the fact that they have no evidence or "meat" on their particular argument.

Posted by bistiza on 4/12/2013 3:40:00 PM (view original):

If you argue hair color and sex of someone are similar "choices" made to rate attractiveness, then you probably speak for about 0.01% of the population.  I feel I'm being very generous there.

The point is they are both factors that can be considered in making a CHOICE through a decision-making process. What arbitrary weight any individual person gives to each relative to one another is irrelevant.

170 words to say - "I'd argue that when people call me names, they don't have much of an argument.  Otherwise they'd be supporting their argument instead."

Sure, I could have been more succinct, but it's fun to point out that particular fallacy, so I made sure to get my fill.

I'd say that someone who is overly wordy and constantly feels the need to share that they're a "master debater" and "winning" an argument is generally someone who is trying to mask the fact that they have no evidence or "meat" on their particular argument.

Your classification of me as "overly wordy" is mostly nonsense, with very few exceptions.

As for "master debater" and "winning" - yes, I'm very confident in my position.  There's no reason I shouldn't be. Pitting someone with my skills in logic and debate against people who delight in using fallacies like namecalling is like putting a hungry lion in a cage with several antelope and watching the carnage ensue. Except in this case, the lion isn't really causing carnage so much as batting around all the antelope for his personal amusement and entertainment just because he can.

That's not to say I'm being disingenuous - no, not at all. I only defend the opinions I truly hold as my own. I just happen to be somewhat of an "against the grain" thinker in certain respects.

Bottom line: I'm using my skills and abilities to defend my opinions logically, then having fun pointing out how the arguments you think you've made so well are not logical at all and don't lead to the conclusion you think they do. Your response is predictable: Ever increasing frustration which in turn causes you to use even LESS logic. The circle repeats itself until, like a mouse that has been batted around by a cat too much, you simply keel over and give up, often with a shout of defiance and denial even as you lay there at the proverbial cat's feet ready to be consumed.

Now you'll deny all of that is happening and probably attempt to insult me again. A predictable reaction, but it will nontheless be entertaining for me when you do it since I knew it was coming.

That's what I would think too, but then the entire argument that being gay is a choice kinda sorta completely falls the **** apart.

The percentage of people who use the sex of an individual in determining if they're attractive is very small.  It's not an arbitrary number. 

Posted by bistiza on 4/12/2013 3:51:00 PM (view original):

The percentage of people who use the sex of an individual in determining if they're attractive is very small.  It's not an arbitrary number. 

You're missing the point again.

Both are potential decision-making factors. How many people actually use either of them - whether you measure by aggregate or percentage - is irrelevant to that point.

I'd say that someone who is overly wordy and constantly feels the need to share that they're a "master debater" and "winning" an argument is generally someone who is trying to mask the fact that they have no evidence or "meat" on their particular argument.

I can say with almost absolute certainty that this is not true.  THIS is the point.  It's not a choice, the decision is already made in your DNA.

Posted by bistiza on 4/12/2013 3:55:00 PM (view original):

I can say with almost absolute certainty that this is not true.  THIS is the point.  It's not a choice, the decision is already made in your DNA.

I can say with almost absolute certainty that it IS true.

Being "straight" or "gay" is NOT hard-wired into your DNA or mine, no matter how much propaganda people put out there to try to convince others that it is.

And really, that's what it's always been about - a bunch of propaganda in order to justify a choice by trying to convince people it isn't actually a choice.