5/16/2013 1:38 PM
Because I believe that sexual orientation is something that you are inherently born with.  It is not a conscious choice.
You can choose to be with people counter to your ideal attraction (and some people do).  So how do you establish their sexuality when attraction (part biological, which is your argument) and action run counter to one another?You're left with two choices.

You can say you establish sexuality by observing who the person chooses to be with and making logical inferences. This is what we do with virtually all terms we apply to people, as I've already given several examples to demonstrate.

Or you can try to go by what the person says they are. By that reasoning, I'm clearly a billionaire batpope based upon the fact that I said I am.

So either sexuality is a choice or I'm not only a billionaire, but I'm batman and the pope too. That's all based upon the logical application of the reasoning being used, not my opinion.
are you saying that the APA and all the other groups that endordsed the publication I linked earlier today are all wrong because their research and analysis have arrived at the same conclusion?

You didn't really provide a reason, but I'll indulge you anyway just to shut you up about this.

Clearly they are misguided to say the least. It's possible they are part of the agenda to convince people sexuality isn't a choice, but it's also possible they have simply fallen victim to the propaganda.

It's actually better for them if they're part of the agenda - at least then they're just liars and not idiots who can't see past propaganda.
His intention seems to be to be to sidetrack the discussion to somewhere he thinks he can better try to control it. 

No, that's YOUR intention - I've been asking you for a reason for your belief on the central topic of debate, not a sidetrack. You have basically refused to answer and have attempted to sidetrack this into whether the group of people with the same beliefs as you is right or wrong.
By taking this question on directly, he knows how foolish he'll come off as.
One person thinks for themselves and avoids the trap of propaganda. Another person believes the lies the propaganda tells. The fool is the second one, and that fool is you.

Unless you want to tell me that you know the propaganda is full of lies but support it anyway, which makes you a liar, but at least then you wouldn't be a fool.

So you're either knowingly a liar or you are a fool yourself. Pick one.
5/16/2013 2:00 PM
You can choose to be with people counter to your ideal attraction (and some people do).  So how do you establish their sexuality when attraction (part biological, which is your argument) and action run counter to one another?

If your inherent sexual orientation is to the opposite sex, then you are heterosexual.  If your inherent sexual orientation is to the same sex as yourself, then you are homosexual.  It doesn't matter what you believe or proclaim yourself to be, or how others see you.  It's what you are.

If you're inherently homosexual but "choose" to live a heterosexual lifestyle, it's most likely because you are repressing your sexuality to conform to the norms of society.  It's not because your orientation has changed.

Everybody seems to understand this in this thread except for you, who stubbornly refuses to accept any argument counter to your own misguided opinions.

Going to your example . . . you can call yourself the "billionairre batpope" all you want, but I regret to inform you that you're not.  You're just an idiot troll on the internet.

Clearly they are misguided to say the least. It's possible they are part of the agenda to convince people sexuality isn't a choice, but it's also possible they have simply fallen victim to the propaganda.

It's actually better for them if they're part of the agenda - at least then they're just liars and not idiots who can't see past propaganda.

Thank you for pointing out that highly trained and educated people in their fields of expertise are misguided idiot liars because they don't see the world as you do.  That really clears things up.

One person thinks for themselves and avoids the trap of propaganda. Another person believes the lies the propaganda tells.

By the way, exactly who is setting this mysterious agenda that is creating all this insidious propaganda that the rest of us mindless sheep are following?  What's in it for them?  What's their end game?

5/16/2013 2:04 PM
bistiza = Fox Mulder
5/16/2013 2:05 PM
bistiza's friends:

5/16/2013 2:46 PM
If your inherent sexual orientation is to the opposite sex, then you are heterosexual.  If your inherent sexual orientation is to the same sex as yourself, then you are homosexual.
 
What is this supposed "inherent sexual attraction" based upon? Attraction?

If so, again it begs the question: What about those instances when attraction and action run contrary to one another?
It doesn't matter what you believe or proclaim yourself to be, or how others see you.  It's what you are.
So this is your way of saying "because I say so". Got it.
If you're inherently homosexual but "choose" to live a heterosexual lifestyle, it's most likely because you are repressing your sexuality to conform to the norms of society.  It's not because your orientation has changed.
What if someone is attracted to the same gender but chooses to be with someone of the opposite gender and it's NOT because they are "repressing their sexuality"? Maybe they tried being with someone of the opposite gender and found it made them happy and decided to stick with it. Maybe they even grow to become more attracted to the person of the opposite gender even though they didn't find them attractive initially - that happens, because what people find attractive can and sometimes does change over time.

Then what? Do you go on insisting they are still homosexual even though they haven't been with someone of the same gender for years, have no desire to do so, and are in fact with someone of the opposite gender and happy with that decision?

Quite a spot you're in here. I'm really interested in how you'd reason your way out of this, because I'm sure it's going to be quite a comical disaster.


Everybody seems to understand this in this thread except for you, who stubbornly refuses to accept any argument counter to your own misguided opinions.
Really with more of the "people agree with me" flawed reasoning?

I'll accept that you have a counter argument as soon as you actually make one.

Right now you seem to be bouncing between two flawed arguments ("because I say so" and "people agree with me") and trying to explain how your supposed concept of "inherent sexual orientation" works since I'm poking more holes in it than swiss cheese.

Going to your example . . . you can call yourself the "billionairre batpope" all you want, but I regret to inform you that you're not.
And you can say we define sexuality based upon "inherent sexual orientation" all you want, but I regret to inform you that this idea is full of holes you haven't even attempted to explain.
You're just an idiot troll on the internet.
You seem to have missed Page 102 where I established that I'm not a troll and suggested those who keep calling me one are only doing so to try to distract from the fact they can't articulate an effective argument against me.

My only question now is this: Do you call everyone who uses logical reasoning to shred your arguments to pieces a troll, or is that only when you get REALLY frustrated? Either way it's hilarious.
Thank you for pointing out that highly trained and educated people in their fields of expertise are misguided idiot liars because they don't see the world as you do.  That really clears things up.
It has nothing to do with seeing anything as I do.

I've used logical reasoning to back up my argument that sexuality IS a choice. I've also explained that there is clearly an agenda designed to convince people sexuality isn't a choice through the use of lies and propaganda. This is done to attempt to justify the choices in sexuality so that they will be more accepted by a public that is ready to accept inherent biological differences but not so much those based upon choice.

I think anyone who wants to and possesses sufficient critical thinking skills and intelligence can get past the propaganda and realize that sexuality is a choice. Therefore, if you think sexuality isn't a choice, it is my view that you're either a knowing liar who purports those lies in a deliberate effort to forward the agenda, or you are a fool who can't think critically enough to see past the propaganda's lies.

By the way, exactly who is setting this mysterious agenda that is creating all this insidious propaganda that the rest of us mindless sheep are following?  What's in it for them?  What's their end game?
I already explained this once, but I'll give you a nutshell:

As I already said, most people are willing to accept differences which are biological, but they are not nearly as accepting of differences caused by choices people make. For example, most people accept those of different races (biological), but may be highly judgmental of those who use their welfare money to buy beer (choices).

Homosexuals, and those who support them, are very well aware of this fact. They know that the REASON the public has long been against the homosexual lifestyle is because it is a choice the public doesn't agree with. But the homosexuals and their supporters want to change that perception.

Eventually they figured out that since people are more accepting of biological differences than choices, the best route to convince society to accept homosexuality would be to sell them on the idea that is somehow not a choice at all.

The campaign to convince everyone sexuality isn't a choice stems from that desire to justify that choice and to get society to accept the homosexual lifestyle.

So in case you somehow couldn't follow that even though I explained it clearly, I'll answer your questions directly:

The agenda is clear, not mysterious, and it is set up by homosexuals and those who support them. What's in it for them is acceptance by the majority of society so that they can live the way they want and demand "rights", as they are presently doing. Their end game is to force everyone to accept their lifestyle choices whether they like it or not.




5/16/2013 3:27 PM
What is this supposed "inherent sexual attraction" based upon? Attraction?

Yes.

If so, again it begs the question: What about those instances when attraction and action run contrary to one another?

Sexual repression and/or curiousity/experimentation.

What if someone is attracted to the same gender but chooses to be with someone of the opposite gender and it's NOT because they are "repressing their sexuality"? Maybe they tried being with someone of the opposite gender and found it made them happy and decided to stick with it. Maybe they even grow to become more attracted to the person of the opposite gender even though they didn't find them attractive initially - that happens, because what people find attractive can and sometimes does change over time.

Then they were born with a predisposition towards bisexuality, i.e. they can go "either way".

Right now you seem to be bouncing between two flawed arguments ("because I say so" and "people agree with me") and trying to explain how your supposed concept of "inherent sexual orientation" works since I'm poking more holes in it than swiss cheese.

And you can say we define sexuality based upon "inherent sexual orientation" all you want, but I regret to inform you that this idea is full of holes you haven't even attempted to explain.

What are the holes?

I've also explained that there is clearly an agenda designed to convince people sexuality isn't a choice through the use of lies and propaganda. This is done to attempt to justify the choices in sexuality so that they will be more accepted by a public that is ready to accept inherent biological differences but not so much those based upon choice.

You haven't explained jackshit.  Unsubstantiated accusations of "agenda" and "propaganda" are not explanations.  Your tin-foil hat doesn't give you any credibility.

I think anyone who wants to and possesses sufficient critical thinking skills and intelligence can get past the propaganda and realize that sexuality is a choice. Therefore, if you think sexuality isn't a choice, it is my view that you're either a knowing liar who purports those lies in a deliberate effort to forward the agenda, or you are a fool who can't think critically enough to see past the propaganda's lies.

Just to be clear: highly educated and trained experts in their field are all liars and fools who are all just part of the propaganda machine.  Got it.  I think you've already made that clear.

The agenda is clear, not mysterious, and it is set up by homosexuals and those who support them. What's in it for them is acceptance by the majority of society so that they can live the way they want and demand "rights", as they are presently doing. Their end game is to force everyone to accept their lifestyle choices whether they like it or not.

Oh, OK.  It's the insidious "Queer Agenda" which has infiltrated all aspects of life.  Particularly science and politics.

Tell me, please.  Do you wear special glasses to be able to tell who's part of the Queer Agenda movement and who's not?  Do the rebels such as yourself have secret codewords or secret handshakes to be able to identify each other?  Do you have meetings in somebody's mom's basement to come up with a strategy to fight the Queers?  Are the walls lined with tin foil during your meetings to keep the Queer lovers from spying?
5/16/2013 3:29 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 5/16/2013 2:05:00 PM (view original):
bistiza's friends:

Is that dude on the left Garth, all grown up?

5/17/2013 8:38 AM
Sexual repression and/or curiousity/experimentation.

Okay, we'll say even if I agreed that's true (although I don't agree that all instances are among the things you list here, for the sake of argument I'll even follow you down this particular rabbit hole).

These instances where people "pretend" to be of a sexuality you say they are not, or are curious, or experiment - do you then at your discretion treat those instances as if they count for nothing regarding sexuality?

If yes, you get yourself into another conundrum of logical reasoning, as such: By applying your same exact logical reasoning, one could  at their discretion treat criminal actions as if they count for nothing with regard to someone's criminal history. So when someone with a felony, say, applies for a job, they could argue they ignored listing their felony conviction because it doesn't count since that's what they've decided. Again, this is based upon the same reasoning you're using and applying it to another instance.  
Then they were born with a predisposition towards bisexuality, i.e. they can go "either way".
Maybe they were only attracted to someone of the same gender, but decided to try being with someone of the opposite gender and discovered they were happier with that.

So now you're contradicting yourself within your own definition of sexuality, to wit: You say you base sexuality only on attraction, meaning they should be considered homosexual by your definition, not bisexual.  So which is it?

Of course if you were simply going by the logical definition I've explained, you don't run into any such issues. The person is clearly heterosexual in that case.


What are the holes?

I've listed several instances where the way you want to attempt to define sexuality runs into problems, while the logical way doesn't. Please explain.
You haven't explained jackshit.  Unsubstantiated accusations of "agenda" and "propaganda" are not explanations.  Your tin-foil hat doesn't give you any credibility.
No, I did explain it.

Stop trying to cover up your own misunderstandings of a simple concept my five year old nephew could understand by insisting it's somehow a crazy conspiracy theory when it's clearly not. Many people see past the propaganda campaign, or have you never met anyone other than me who disagrees with the homosexual lifestyle? If so, you need to get out more (or peruse the internet more, perhaps), because there are plenty of people who believe that way.
Just to be clear: highly educated and trained experts in their field are all liars and fools who are all just part of the propaganda machine.  Got it.  I think you've already made that clear.
No.

I'll make it clear: Some people who may or may not be "highly educated and trained experts" are EITHER liars OR fools. I explained that before. You are also either a liar or a fool. Again, this was all explained to you. A lack of understanding of simple concepts on your part doesn't constitute flawed logic on my part.
Tell me, please.  Do you wear special glasses to be able to tell who's part of the Queer Agenda movement and who's not?  Do the rebels such as yourself have secret codewords or secret handshakes to be able to identify each other?  Do you have meetings in somebody's mom's basement to come up with a strategy to fight the Queers?  Are the walls lined with tin foil during your meetings to keep the Queer lovers from spying?
Tell me, please.  Do you want to remain ignorant of critical thinking skills? Do you enjoy being laughed at by people who actually get the way things really work with regard to the propaganda? Is it fun to pretend those people are all part of a conspiracy theory in order to defend your own foolish ignorance?
5/17/2013 9:00 AM
Mom must have left for work, because biz is back online.

There's only one person being laughed at in this thread.  Can you guess who it is?  I'll give you a hint . . . it ain't me.
5/17/2013 9:05 AM
Well, I'm not sure that's correct.    I've laughed at pretty much everyone in this thread. 
5/17/2013 9:09 AM
Arguing with biz is like spending three days with a five year old trying to explain why water is wet.  It's an exercise in total futility.
5/17/2013 9:20 AM
That's why I blocked him 6-7 months ago.    I don't want to get sucked into his dumbassery.   Mostly because I know he's just trolling.
5/17/2013 9:38 AM
These instances where people "pretend" to be of a sexuality you say they are not, or are curious, or experiment - do you then at your discretion treat those instances as if they count for nothing regarding sexuality?

If you fill out your own tax form in April, are you now a tax accountant?
If you pump your own gas at the gas station, are you now a gas station attendant?
If you put a band-aid on your child's knee, are you now a medical professional?

So now you're contradicting yourself within your own definition of sexuality, to wit: You say you base sexuality only on attraction, meaning they should be considered homosexual by your definition, not bisexual.  So which is it?

It's not an "either/or" situation.  One can be born with a natural tendency towards one end of the spectrum or the other (**** or hetero).  If they are strongly aligned to one extreme end, then that is what they are.  If they tend to move towards the middle, and are comfortable going either way, then they are bisexual.

Stop trying to cover up your own misunderstandings of a simple concept my five year old nephew could understand by insisting it's somehow a crazy conspiracy theory when it's clearly not. Many people see past the propaganda campaign, or have you never met anyone other than me who disagrees with the homosexual lifestyle? If so, you need to get out more (or peruse the internet more, perhaps), because there are plenty of people who believe that way.

You're a conspiracy theory crackpot.  Maybe you should spend LESS time on the internet.

I'll make it clear: Some people who may or may not be "highly educated and trained experts" are EITHER liars OR fools. I explained that before. You are also either a liar or a fool. Again, this was all explained to you. A lack of understanding of simple concepts on your part doesn't constitute flawed logic on my part.

I'll agree that SOME people who are highly educated and trained experts can be liars and fools.  It takes an educated understanding of the subject matter plus critical thinking skills to make that determiniation about one of those people (or groups of people).

Your critical thinking and analysis seems to boil down to: do they agree with my view of the world?  No?  Then they are LIARS or FOOLS, and are part of the conspiracy!!

Most of us have been able to develop our critical thinking skills beyond that of a five year old child.  Yours seem to have stopped developing around there.

5/17/2013 10:12 AM
There's only one person being laughed at in this thread.  Can you guess who it is?  I'll give you a hint . . . it ain't me.

Several people have been laughed at in this thread, and you are certainly among them.

The difference between you and I is that I realize what's going on while you do not.

You laugh because you're like a stubborn playground bully who thinks he's somehow smarter than the adult supervising the playground. Like that adult, I shake my head and laugh because of how clueless you actually are as to the real situation. I may try to educate you, but after a bit I just give up and laugh at your ignorance because - like that stubborn playground bully - your ideas are insignificant except in your own mind.
Arguing with biz is like spending three days with a five year old trying to explain why water is wet.  It's an exercise in total futility.
Yes, and you're the five year old.
If you fill out your own tax form in April, are you now a tax accountant?
If you pump your own gas at the gas station, are you now a gas station attendant?
If you put a band-aid on your child's knee, are you now a medical professional?
 
No to all three, because those things all require more than what you have listed in terms of actions.

Sexuality, on the other hand, doesn't require anything further than a choice of sexual and/or romantic partners.
It's not an "either/or" situation.  One can be born with a natural tendency towards one end of the spectrum or the other (**** or hetero).  If they are strongly aligned to one extreme end, then that is what they are.  If they tend to move towards the middle, and are comfortable going either way, then they are bisexual.
So where are the cutoff points in your spectrum? How much of a tendency do people need to have to give them an appropriate label? How do you know they have that much tendency? Again, you can't rely on what they say, because people could say anything - you know, with me being the batpope and all.

You admit  it's not an either/or situation. That's a start, because I've been holding that logical position all along as others argue with me. The next logical step is to admit that people can choose any potential partner, and therefore have a choice in their sexuality, but you won't do that because it's beyond your propaganda-based emotional opinion and you can't admit you could be wrong.
You're a conspiracy theory crackpot.  Maybe you should spend LESS time on the internet.
No. You'd love to paint it that way since what I'm saying makes you a liar or a fool, but there are plenty of people who believe just as I do - more than enough that it's not a conspiracy theory.  So keep living in denial and claiming that everyone who thinks you're a liar or a fool must be a crackpot.  I think it's absolutely hilarious THAT'S your only defense to being a liar or a fool.
I'll agree that SOME people who are highly educated and trained experts can be liars and fools.  It takes an educated understanding of the subject matter plus critical thinking skills to make that determiniation about one of those people (or groups of people).
Well you've shown you don't have critical thinking skills, so it's probably best you consult with others who might.
Your critical thinking and analysis seems to boil down to: do they agree with my view of the world?  No?  Then they are LIARS or FOOLS, and are part of the conspiracy!!
Wrong. My critical thinking goes incredibly deep, and I've shown some of the logical reasoning that is behind it in this thread. That reasoning has thus far completely flummoxed your opposite point of view such that your only defense is that I must somehow be a conspiracy theory crackpot, which is patently absurd.
Most of us have been able to develop our critical thinking skills beyond that of a five year old child.  Yours seem to have stopped developing around there.
If that were true, you're being owned by someone with the critical thinking skills of a five year old. You must feel really terrible now - a liar or a fool, and on top of that,continually having your *** handed to you in debate by the equivalent of a five year old. Things are just getting worse for you all the time.
5/17/2013 10:52 AM
Yeah.

I'm just feeling totally PWN3D and humiliated.

Jackass.
of 358

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 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.