[WXQMQFIr]

That's a good question. It's difficult for me to understand how you can be pro-life and pro-death penalty at the same time. My wife says that it's either pro-unborn human or pro-unconvicted potential republican voter.

Many of the same people who call themselves pro-life have no problem with the US having killed tens of thousands (100,000+?) of civilians in Iraq.

[GinaGomesz]

Ok, fair point. Although, I wasn't casting aside sexual abuse, it just didn't cross my mind.

[Nypbscao]

5 is a very badly worded option (which is why I didn't pick it).

"Homosexuality cannot be seen as immoral as it is inborn and not a matter of personal choice"

First of all it is assuming something which is far from known to be true. "Homosexuality is inborn."

There are enough studies to indicate a high prevalence of pre-birth reasons for homosexuality. Inborn does not necessarily mean genetic though, other factors can be the reason (or at least be involved): eg. hormone levels during pregnancy.

Human behaviour is complex & often has complex reasons. Homosexuality may very well be genetical. But maybe the involved genes only become active under special circumstances. Whether sexual abuse may be one of the factors, I don't know. There are scientists who say so (usually these seem to be psychologists or psychiatrists, hmmm...). Fact is, we still don't know for sure, how homosexuality originates. What we know pretty sure is that it is (in almost all cases) not a matter of choice.


Secondly it's a false linkage. Do things necessarily become moral if you have an inborn desire to do them? What of people who are born without the normal capacity to develop a conscience? Is a psychopath not immoral in his actions because they result from an inborn difference? (Obviously I am NOT suggesting homosexuality is psychopathic - I'm just pointing out a flaw in the logic). Good point, but do we need morals to judge? I judge on the danger someone poses to others. A psychopath doesn't necessarily pose a risk, neither does a homosexual. As soon as anyone harms somebody without consent (I have no problems with eg. SM) or endangers the well-being of others it becomes a case for the authorities.

As long as there is no harm, the authorities should give people as much freedom as possible & grant rights & priviledges equally.

[Adollobdeb]

Ummm...I picked the 5th and 8th ones.

[Boveosteors]

5 & 8.. because I live in Sweden.. the REAL land of the free.
except for the fact that you can't wear swastikas in public.. that's basically the only opression we have around here.

[Switiespils]

One could argue that gay marriage could provide an boost to the new economy as more marriages are planned, catered, locations rented, gifts purchased, new households created, new furniture purchased, etc. Of course the divorce rate would probably increase also, so that would mean new households are created, new furniture is purchased, etc, etc etc.

But let me ask this, why bother? The divorce rate in the States is rather high, and with gay marriage, that would undoubtly increase some, so why go through all that?

Buuuuuuut when I consider my personal opinion, so I suppose someone else should get married.

[Roferurse]

Yes - it generally requires the destruction of the non-viable embryo, which some people equate with the murder of a human being.

[grofvuri]

this is a bit off subject but:

The thing with stem cells is, as I remember it, that they can become any type of human cell. In that case, it's not defined that a baby will develop out of the cells, it could just as well become muscle or bone. I remember seeing one documentary where they injected stem cells into a man's heart who had somekind of a heart disease and the stem cells developed into healthy muscle and he didn't need an operation. Isn't it by far a more natural way of curing someone than taking drugs or having massive surgery?

Back to gays ^^;
At least I'm certainly more accepting of Japanese men, for instance, relaxing after a grueling day, who giggle and playfully touch each other than I would be for Americans.... That's really interesting I take it that you're not Japanese? In that sense it's maybe not very surprising but interesting nonetheless.

My ex-flatmate had a gay friend and he was the collest person you could ever think of Also one of the coolest clubs I've ever been to was a gay club - not because it would've been somehow really diffrent superficially, the athmosphere was just really relaxed. I went there to see a drag show with my friends (we're not gay) and also because we hadn't been to a gay club before and it was a really positive experience. Not to even mention the show, it was really great

Maybe the current trend through media is also getting more and more positive towards gays because after "Sex and the City" became such a hit, all the women's magazines have since featured a "gay best friend"

[Kausilwf]

i say more power to um

[TRASIAOREXOLA]

In all honesty, my stereotype of gays and lesbians is somewhat negative (self-involved, aggressive and emotional, demanding, tempermental, etc) but as long as allowing this right doesn't lead down the road to legalized polygamy and polyamory (group marriage, it is in the Bible after all....) I can't come up with any reasonable objection.

[resegooredo]

I agree with what you're saying Paul, but I still pick it as I think it is inborn and the statement is still pretty close. I suppose if you put in the word 'and' in lieu of the second 'as' it would fit my opinion better.

It does annoy me a bit when why people are gay is discussed; what does it matter? I don't see how it is relevant, but hey.

[IrrettelatWet]

I still dont understand that. It seems like there is nothing but positive medical outcomes to be acheived through working with those procedures. People dont like it just because they dont want to admit an embryo isnt a fully developed human or something?

[natahololll]

As a continuation of the threads about gay marriage, I'd like to survey where people stand on this issue, including those who haven't expressed themselves so far.

please read those posts to know my view on the issue :

Is homosexuality natural (genetical, inborn) ?

Can immoral sexual behaviours be criminalized ?

Gay marriage in other countries than the US

Please read this before voting, or you might not understand fully the issues at stake. View more random threads same category:

• Is McDonald's evil?
• Beautiful living
• It starts with 'P' and rhymes with 'corn'.
• Are funerals the ultimate act of human...
• What constituents make up the Anatolian...
• How do you feel about polygamous marriage?

[adolfadsermens]

Thanks Sabro. You just said pretty much what I would have said.

You mean Stem Cell research, Winter? Some people are against stem cell research because some interesting investigations require the use of embryonic stem cells which are harvested from non-viable embryonic cells. Some people do not wish to see a distinction between non-viable human embryonic cells and fully alive, out of the womb human beings.

[CIAFreeAgent]

That's why everybody loves jovi!! (Sorry for the bad rip-off... )

By the way, I love the sig, jovi!

[bestonline]

maybe some of you can explain this to me! (forgive my ignorance please)

Some people say that being gay is not a matter of choice...Does this mean that many gay people are saying that "I don't want to be gay, I would rather be straight, but I can't help it!"??? That concept doesn't make much sense to me...

anyone?

From M-W: " CHOICE suggests the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely ."

You can't choose your sexual orientation.
You can say "from now on I'm gay" & make love with your own sex (gender). That wouldn't make you homosexual in my eyes though, unless you already had the biological (&/or psychological) disposition of homosexuality, only suppressed for whatever reason (which means you were always homosexual, but didn't [want to] know). Maybe you would understand better, if you differentiate between sexual orientation & lifestyle (although that may not really fit for all cases, either).

[letmelogin]

Are we going to get scientific about this?

In the nature vs. nurture argument- I don't see convincing data either way- although why would I? since I don't as a vocation study human sexuality. Perhaps someone with actual background in behavioural sciences could enlighten us. Why does this matter anyway?

According to our High School text and 20 year old memories of Intro to Psych, our sexuality, including sexual preference is some combination of inherent trait and nurture. (Although I wouldn't swear by the veracity of this info.)

Morality however is not a scientific concept. What we value, what we hold good or evil, how we as a society define the parameters of normal human behavior through laws and rules and morals- this had little to do with science. All over this forum we continually explore the overlap of science and politics and religion: Homosexuality, Stem cell research, evolution, the existence of God, even the purpose of life.

I think we get into trouble when we believe our religion to be science or our science to be religion.

[textarchive]

I agree with you guys.
But polls are usually like that, you have to make small compromises, so I just accepted it
(I thought if Jovial can accept it then so can I)

[BWJfEkOB]

maybe some of you can explain this to me! (forgive my ignorance please)

Some people say that being gay is not a matter of choice...Does this mean that many gay people are saying that "I don't want to be gay, I would rather be straight, but I can't help it!"??? That concept doesn't make much sense to me...

anyone?

[layedgebiamma]

i generally dont care what people do as long as it doesnt hurt me. if someone feels they need the piece of paper, a legal agreement, to prove their love then thats fine, let them have it. who am i to tell them they cant? besides, why should i care? its really none of my business. Are you a Libertarian by chance?