First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
The Old Homosexuality/Bisexuality as Choice debate..
33362 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Floating by.....s...
Offline
Posted 3/21/12
Had this discussion before and its fun no doubt lol but to me its a choice. For someone to be born gay ior have a gay gene within them....ok
say that was true and is proven (to my knowledge so far it isnt but if is let me know shoot me a link) that still doesnt make someone a homosexual. By sexually interacting with another of the same sex makes a person homosexual. Ill even go as far as saying liking it makes one that. Even if you are born that way and never interact with the same sex your still not homosexual. Saying that people dont choose to be homosexual is saying theres no free will. You can always choose to take a different course of action
1056 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 3/21/12

IkkiTheFang wrote:

Had this discussion before and its fun no doubt lol but to me its a choice. For someone to be born gay ior have a gay gene within them....ok
say that was true and is proven (to my knowledge so far it isnt but if is let me know shoot me a link) that still doesnt make someone a homosexual. By sexually interacting with another of the same sex makes a person homosexual. Ill even go as far as saying liking it makes one that. Even if you are born that way and never interact with the same sex your still not homosexual. Saying that people dont choose to be homosexual is saying theres no free will. You can always choose to take a different course of action


By that logic if man hasn't interacted with a female, he's not a heterosexual? When did you decide to be heterosexual? Saying that people don't choose to be heterosexual is saying there's no free will. You can always choose to take a different course of action.

You say even if they are born that way (born gay) you still deny that they are not, in fact, gay, because they have to interact with another same sex to be one. You just simply don't understand how attraction works, when you compare to to heterosexual for example then you can see the fallacy.

There's no such thing as a free will - as most people understand free will but that's a discussion for another topic. Someone should start that one .
33362 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Floating by.....s...
Offline
Posted 3/21/12

Traiano wrote:


IkkiTheFang wrote:

Had this discussion before and its fun no doubt lol but to me its a choice. For someone to be born gay ior have a gay gene within them....ok
say that was true and is proven (to my knowledge so far it isnt but if is let me know shoot me a link) that still doesnt make someone a homosexual. By sexually interacting with another of the same sex makes a person homosexual. Ill even go as far as saying liking it makes one that. Even if you are born that way and never interact with the same sex your still not homosexual. Saying that people dont choose to be homosexual is saying theres no free will. You can always choose to take a different course of action


By that logic if man hasn't interacted with a female, he's not a heterosexual? When did you decide to be heterosexual? Saying that people don't choose to be heterosexual is saying there's no free will. You can always choose to take a different course of action.

You say even if they are born that way (born gay) you still deny that they are not, in fact, gay, because they have to interact with another same sex to be one. You just simply don't understand how attraction works, when you compare to to heterosexual for example then you can see the fallacy.

There's no such thing as a free will - as most people understand free will but that's a discussion for another topic. Someone should start that one .


Ok sounds good to me
as far as this post goes i think that one has to physically interact sexually with the same sex to be gay. And to do that you make a choice to go do what it is that gay people do with each other. If there is a gay man placed in a room with a man and a woman he is going to choose the guy. He makes that choice correct or is choosing to do so? He can easily choose the girl but doesnt..if you have evidence that it is not a choice PM me a link i would like tio check it out! As far as attraction goes enlighten me a little because you seem to base your stand point off of that I am assuming?
33362 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Floating by.....s...
Offline
Posted 3/22/12
Your A-sexual until you have sex with the gender of your choose. Homosexuality isnt natural and is an unatural act. So in my eyes that would be a perversion. Just like having sex with animals is a perversion act same sex is a perversion act as well.


Perversion is a concept describing those types of human behavior that are excessive or deviated from what is considered to be orthodox or normal


131 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / NJ, US
Offline
Posted 3/22/12
I feel like some people can choose and for some it is just in their DNA. It actually has been found that there is a genetic association with being gay, but I don't know how deep it actually goes. I don't think that I ever decided to be straight; that's just the way it was. I think that suggesting that someone, a gay man, for instance, chooses his own sexuality when he himself insists to you that he hasn't chosen it, is cruel and outlandishly arrogant.
31 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/19/12
I feel like I've never even understood this debate as a debate. To me the real question shouldn't be whether it's a choice or not and that's what makes gay people acceptable. But regardless of whether it's a choice or natural attraction why should that even matter? Whether someone is "born" gay or "chooses" to be gay should that really be the deciding factor as to whether this person should be accepted as a homosexual or as a legitimate human being? NO. Choice or not it is up to the individual as to what they do with their body, emotions and actions.
Posted 6/28/12

Syndicaidramon wrote:

Homesxuality is a choice. In the same way that heterosexuality is a choice.
Being sexually active is a choice, since you can also choose to NOT be sexually active. It's not something that's mandatory.


We cannot choose who we are attracted to. All we can choose is our behavior. That said, I do not believe being of gay orientation is a choice. The choice part comes when a person decides whether or not to be sexually active with that attraction.

25322 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 6/28/12
I didn't watch the video because I have to go in a few minutes, but as for the topic I think the point is moot. It doesn't matter if one chooses to be attracted to the same or both sexes or not (one does not, however), because as some others have already said in the thread one's behavior is a choice. One doesn't have to enter into sexual relationships with either sex. But for whatever reason this simple fact is always left out of the discussion it seems. I think that bisexuals like myself at least, can, effectively if not literally, choose their sexual orientation, in that they can simply live out their lives peacefully and happily in a straight monogamous marriage. Homosexuals would appear to have a more difficult path if they shared any of my views.
3430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 6/30/12 , edited 6/30/12

Else-ee wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:

Homesxuality is a choice. In the same way that heterosexuality is a choice.
Being sexually active is a choice, since you can also choose to NOT be sexually active. It's not something that's mandatory.


We cannot choose who we are attracted to. All we can choose is our behavior. That said, I do not believe being of gay orientation is a choice. The choice part comes when a person decides whether or not to be sexually active with that attraction.



Why does everyone assume that when I say "homosexuality", I mean "being gay"? I don't.
I thought "homosexual" was a term about people who were sexually active with others of the same gender, not people who are simply attracted to the same gender.

As you say.
Posted 6/30/12

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Else-ee wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:

Homesxuality is a choice. In the same way that heterosexuality is a choice.
Being sexually active is a choice, since you can also choose to NOT be sexually active. It's not something that's mandatory.


We cannot choose who we are attracted to. All we can choose is our behavior. That said, I do not believe being of gay orientation is a choice. The choice part comes when a person decides whether or not to be sexually active with that attraction.



Why does everyone assume that when I say "homosexuality", I mean "being gay"? I don't.
I thought "homosexual" was a term about people who were sexually active with others of the same gender, not people who are simply attracted to the same gender.

As you say.


It does seem that different peoples understanding of what various words mean in this discussion can really mess up understanding. For example, I now realize (& didn't before this discussion) that some people who say "homosexuality is a choice" mean "being sexually active as a homosexual is a choice." They're lumping two concepts together into one when they can & should be separate. My understanding of the term "homosexual" or "gay" means *attraction*, not necessarily activity. That's why I'm insistent that "Homosexuality is not a choice."

When the fights break out as to whether homosexuality is a choice or not, it's quite possible that people shouting, "It's not a choice!" mean "Being attracted to the same sex isn't a choice," while those who shout, "It IS a choice!" mean choosing to be *sexually active* as a gay person is a choice. Both are right, but they've attached different meanings to what exactly "homosexuality" is.

3430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 7/1/12

Else-ee wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:


Else-ee wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:

Homesxuality is a choice. In the same way that heterosexuality is a choice.
Being sexually active is a choice, since you can also choose to NOT be sexually active. It's not something that's mandatory.


We cannot choose who we are attracted to. All we can choose is our behavior. That said, I do not believe being of gay orientation is a choice. The choice part comes when a person decides whether or not to be sexually active with that attraction.



Why does everyone assume that when I say "homosexuality", I mean "being gay"? I don't.
I thought "homosexual" was a term about people who were sexually active with others of the same gender, not people who are simply attracted to the same gender.

As you say.


It does seem that different peoples understanding of what various words mean in this discussion can really mess up understanding. For example, I now realize (& didn't before this discussion) that some people who say "homosexuality is a choice" mean "being sexually active as a homosexual is a choice." They're lumping two concepts together into one when they can & should be separate. My understanding of the term "homosexual" or "gay" means *attraction*, not necessarily activity. That's why I'm insistent that "Homosexuality is not a choice."


I don't get this. Why would we have two words that mean the exact same thing?
Doesn't "homoSEXUAL" imply that there's sexual conduct involved?
Posted 7/1/12 , edited 7/1/12

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Else-ee wrote:



It does seem that different peoples understanding of what various words mean in this discussion can really mess up understanding. For example, I now realize (& didn't before this discussion) that some people who say "homosexuality is a choice" mean "being sexually active as a homosexual is a choice." They're lumping two concepts together into one when they can & should be separate. My understanding of the term "homosexual" or "gay" means *attraction*, not necessarily activity. That's why I'm insistent that "Homosexuality is not a choice."


I don't get this. Why would we have two words that mean the exact same thing?
Doesn't "homoSEXUAL" imply that there's sexual conduct involved?
No and no, it's one word that has more than one meaning. Not the other way around.

sex·u·al
Adjective:
1. Relating to the instincts, physiology, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate contact between individuals.
2. Of or relating to the two sexes or to gender.(citation)
Furthermore, the word "sexual" itself is an adjective, not a verb. Thus it's not automatically mean an action, unless it's used to describe the kind of action, when the action itself was identified by a noun. Case in point, the action phrase "sexual intercourse" is made up by the adjective "sexual" meaning "the instincts, physiology, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate contact between individuals", and the noun "intercourse" meaning:

in·ter·course
Noun:
Communication or dealings between individuals or groups.(citation)

And I remember that you've excused yourself in the past several times, how English isn't your first language. But guess what, neither was mine. However, you own it to yourself to figure out how to debate with another language. And you have only yourself to blame with your lack of understanding. That's why this excuse of yours isn't working in your favor anymore, when you simply took the whole debate for granted with your attitude.
3430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 7/1/12 , edited 7/1/12

DomFortress wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:


Else-ee wrote:



It does seem that different peoples understanding of what various words mean in this discussion can really mess up understanding. For example, I now realize (& didn't before this discussion) that some people who say "homosexuality is a choice" mean "being sexually active as a homosexual is a choice." They're lumping two concepts together into one when they can & should be separate. My understanding of the term "homosexual" or "gay" means *attraction*, not necessarily activity. That's why I'm insistent that "Homosexuality is not a choice."


I don't get this. Why would we have two words that mean the exact same thing?
Doesn't "homoSEXUAL" imply that there's sexual conduct involved?
No and no, it's one word that has more than one meaning. Not the other way around.

sex·u·al
Adjective:
1. Relating to the instincts, physiology, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate contact between individuals.
2. Of or relating to the two sexes or to gender.(citation)
Furthermore, the word "sexual" itself is an adjective, not a verb. Thus it's not automatically mean an action, unless it's used to describe the kind of action, when the action itself was identified by a noun. Case in point, the action phrase "sexual intercourse" is made up by the adjective "sexual" meaning "the instincts, physiology, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate contact between individuals", and the noun "intercourse" meaning:

in·ter·course
Noun:
Communication or dealings between individuals or groups.(citation)

And I remember that you've excused yourself in the past several times, how English isn't your first language. But guess what, neither was mine. However, you own it to yourself to figure out how to debate with another language. And you have only yourself to blame with your lack of understanding. That's why this excuse of yours isn't working in your favor anymore, when you simply took the whole debate for granted with your attitude.


Unlike chinese, Norwegian and English are both germanic languages, and therefore relatively similar in the way expressions are used, for lack of a better phrasing.
Therefore, one tends to forget that often times, that is not the case, as it apparently is here.

In Norwegian, the word "homosexual" is synonymous with "someone who has sexual relations with someone of their own gender, while "gay" one means "being attracted to someone of the same sex".

It's still just an excuse for my lazyness, but at least it's a somewhat understandable excuse.
It's really hard to bother to double check when it is only necessary in a few cases.
And I wasn't really debating now. More like trying to clear up a misconception.
And i concluded that the English way of doing it is really dumb and unnecessarily convoluted.
There is no practical reason why both "gay" and "homosexual" should mean the same thing.
25322 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 7/1/12
I have to kind of agree with the dude above. The English language is pretty stupid. Darn you, ancestors.
Posted 7/1/12

Syndicaidramon wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

No and no, it's one word that has more than one meaning. Not the other way around.

sex·u·al
Adjective:
1. Relating to the instincts, physiology, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate contact between individuals.
2. Of or relating to the two sexes or to gender.(citation)
Furthermore, the word "sexual" itself is an adjective, not a verb. Thus it's not automatically mean an action, unless it's used to describe the kind of action, when the action itself was identified by a noun. Case in point, the action phrase "sexual intercourse" is made up by the adjective "sexual" meaning "the instincts, physiology, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate contact between individuals", and the noun "intercourse" meaning:

in·ter·course
Noun:
Communication or dealings between individuals or groups.(citation)

And I remember that you've excused yourself in the past several times, how English isn't your first language. But guess what, neither was mine. However, you own it to yourself to figure out how to debate with another language. And you have only yourself to blame with your lack of understanding. That's why this excuse of yours isn't working in your favor anymore, when you simply took the whole debate for granted with your attitude.


Unlike chinese, Norwegian and English are both germanic languages, and therefore relatively similar in the way expressions are used, for lack of a better phrasing.
Therefore, one tends to forget that often times, that is not the case, as it apparently is here.

In Norwegian, the word "homosexual" is synonymous with "someone who has sexual relations with someone of their own gender, while "gay" one means "being attracted to someone of the same sex".

It's still just an excuse for my lazyness, but at least it's a somewhat understandable excuse.
It's really hard to bother to double check when it is only necessary in a few cases.
And I wasn't really debating now. More like trying to clear up a misconception.
And i concluded that the English way of doing it is really dumb and unnecessarily convoluted.
There is no practical reason why both "gay" and "homosexual" should mean the same thing.

i_love_u_jesus wrote:

I have to kind of agree with the dude above. The English language is pretty stupid. Darn you, ancestors.
And you think that sorta shallow attitude can help preventing homosexuals from being oppressed by unjust discrimination, prejudice, and ignorance, how? You'll simply bash anything, so long as you don't have to take any responsibility for your shallow expression.

And when both of you ended up depending on the same excuse, while either of you are from the opposite side of the same debate, both of you had rendered your own opinions on the subject pointless.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.