|
Post by BertL on Jun 14, 2007 5:22:44 GMT -4
It's not nice to start comparing people to rocky.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 14, 2007 11:55:42 GMT -4
Verging on the Rocky-like even. Come now - I haven't accused any of you of being paid by the gay-rights lobby to act as shills.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 15, 2007 3:49:16 GMT -4
No. However, your "they could all be lying" skills are second to, well, David.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 15, 2007 11:44:09 GMT -4
You misunderstand me then. I don't think any of you are lying. And I don't think people who identify themselves as homosexuals are conciously lying either.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 15, 2007 16:03:55 GMT -4
You do, however, believe that the researchers who've found that it's not a choice are lying, apparently--that it's not environmental, either. The ones who've detected homosexual behaviour in quite a few species in the wild. Everyone who's ever said anything bad about your religion. Anyone who's ever shown duplicity in the current administration's war policy, including what led up to it. Apparently even those poor children who've left notes saying, on no uncertain terms, that bigots telling them they're flouting God's law are what's driven them to suicide.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 15, 2007 16:16:57 GMT -4
I have a friend who "came out" a couple years after high school and I could tell it was difficult for him to admit (even to himself at first) that he is gay. That doesn't sound like someone who is lying to himself about his homosexuality. If he had a choice he wouldn't have put himself through that ordeal. I haven't seen him in probably 10 years, but I've heard he's in a long term relationship and he's happy... I see no reason to force him to change that just because it's not the kind of relationship I would want for myself.
The people who are unconsciously lying to themselves are the ones who are in denial about being gay, or the ones who want to believe that homosexuality is a choice.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 15, 2007 17:07:31 GMT -4
You do, however, believe that the researchers who've found that it's not a choice are lying, apparently--that it's not environmental, either. I don't know offhand of any researcher who has stated they have postive proof that homosexual tendancies are inborn. In fact I've found a few that stated my own belief - that the statement that it's just genetics is too simplistic, and that it's more correct to attribute homosexual behavior to a combination of environment, genetic predisposition, and personal choice. Perhaps you should point me to a few who hold the position you're talking about. I'm sure many activists have stated homosexual behavior is purely genetic and in no way a choice, but I don't think they're lying - they likely honestly believe what they're saying. As an aside, Gillian: When it comes down to it, biology is a poor determinant of what society should consider moral behavior anyway. I've heard it often said that males are naturally polygamous, but I don't think you would argue that your boyfriend is therefore justified in cheating on you. Your own bipolar disorder is probably an inborn trait. Should you therefore accept it as the way you are and avoid therapy or medication that tries to correct it? Again, while it may well exist in the wild in some animal species, that says little about human beings. No animal has as much self awareness as your typical human being does. Not quite true, just most of the people Bill brought forward to criticize my religion. If Bill had picked his sources better I might have considered his case stronger. As it is he tends to gravitate towards the more sensational critics, who are also the least credible. No, just some specific people, such as Joe Wilson and Michael Moore . Not at all. Again, these kids probably are as sincere as they can be in their belief that it's all someone else's fault that they took their own life. Sorry, that sounds a bit harsh, doesn't it? What I mean is that a suicidal teenager is by definition not someone who is in their right mind. What they say is not necessarily the truth, though they may believe it when they wrote it.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 15, 2007 17:08:17 GMT -4
The people who are unconsciously lying to themselves are the ones who are in denial about being gay, or the ones who want to believe that homosexuality is a choice. I respectfully disagree.
|
|
reynoldbot
Jupiter
A paper-white mask of evil.
Posts: 790
|
Post by reynoldbot on Jun 15, 2007 18:14:22 GMT -4
No, they are demanding equal rights. They are asking to have the right to marry the ones they love. Does a person not have the right to marry who he or she loves? Are homosexuals not capable of love? If there is mutual love between two people and they want to get married, they should have the right to do so, regardless of gender.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 15, 2007 18:38:51 GMT -4
No, they are demanding equal rights. They are asking to have the right to marry the ones they love. Does a person not have the right to marry who he or she loves? While I agree that you should generally only marry someone you love, I disagree that you should have an absolute right to marry anyone you love. They might not return your love, or they may already be married to someone else, or you might already be married to someone else, or you may be underage, or they may be underage, or you may neither have the ability to support the other economically, or lastly you may both be the same gender. While I believe love should be the most important consideration for marriage it should not be the only consideration. And the gay marriage movement is primarily about greater social acceptance. If all that really matters is love then what do they care what other people think of their relationship?
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 15, 2007 19:17:58 GMT -4
No, they are demanding equal rights. They are asking to have the right to marry the ones they love. Does a person not have the right to marry who he or she loves? While I agree that you should generally only marry someone you love, I disagree that you should have an absolute right to marry anyone you love. They might not return your love, or they may already be married to someone else, or you might already be married to someone else, or you may be underage, or they may be underage, or you may neither have the ability to support the other economically, or lastly you may both be the same gender. Oh, for the love of the Goddess, Jason. Do you not see how fatuous this argument is? Seriously. Two consenting adults. Two consenting adults in love. To hell with supporting the other person; it's certainly not uncommon for both parties in a marriage to have jobs, and you know that. At least, you do if you're not actually living in a cave and only contacting the human world by posting here. You may not agree with it, but are you suggesting a law against it? And I wouldn't, if I were you, go about throwing stones about how one shouldn't be allowed to marry someone who's already married. Not unless you want another demonstration as to how religious values change over time. Edit: Oh, yeah--let's also not forget that you pretty much accused an entire criminal investigation team of lying because they turned up evidence that contradicted an official Church stance.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 15, 2007 23:36:43 GMT -4
The people who are unconsciously lying to themselves are the ones who are in denial about being gay, or the ones who want to believe that homosexuality is a choice. I respectfully disagree. You can disagree with me if you want, that's fine. But I'm going to take the word of gay people as to whether they have a choice because they know their inner thoughts better than you do.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 16, 2007 0:39:41 GMT -4
Oh, for the love of the Goddess, Jason. Do you not see how fatuous this argument is? Seriously. I'm simply pointing out that there are limits that most people agree are sensible to this absolute right that reynoldbolt is advocating. No. That was the weakest of my illustrations. The others are quite a bit stronger, however. I believe you've told me yourself, Gillian, that you are not married to your boyfriend primarily for economic reasons. The history of polygamy in the LDS church doesn't bother me at all, so demonstrate away if you wish. I am myself the descendent of at least three LDS polygamous ancestors, at least one of whom (my great great grandfather on my mother's side) did jail time for it when the supreme court denied the Church's case and the Fedral government started cracking down on Church members for practicing their faith. Every Christian admits that God can command different things at different times and in different circumstances; the Law of Moses and its fulfillment in Christ being the most obvious example. I believe that I said essentially that I was taking the Church at it's word until I saw strong evidence to the contrary. I have yet to hunt down some of the books you mentioned on the Hoffman murders. Frankly winning points on an internet debate has not been important enough to me to spend a lot of time (or money) looking for them, although I have looked in a few used bookstores without luck. If I have a little spare cash someday I may order one of them on Amazon.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jun 16, 2007 14:14:47 GMT -4
You can disagree with me if you want, that's fine. But I'm going to take the word of gay people as to whether they have a choice because they know their inner thoughts better than you do. A few quotes I found with a little googling: Dean Hamer, a homosexual researcher and rights activist who produced the twin studies I mentioned earlier: "In short, biology is amoral; it offers no help distinguishing between right and wrong. Only people, guided by their values and beliefs, can decide what is moral and what is not." - The Science of Desire p. 214 "The pedigree study failed to produce what we originally hoped to find: simple Mendalian inheritance. In fact, we never found a single family in which homosexuality was distributed in the obvious pattern that Mendel observed in his pea plants." - The Science of Desire p. 104 Hammer again: "We knew genes were only part of the answer. We assumed the environment also played a role in sexual orientation, as it does in most, if not all behaviors...Homosexuality is not purely genetic...environment plays a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay...I don't think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay." -N. Mitchell, "Genetics, sexuality linked study says," Standard Examiner April 30, 1995 When asked by Anastasia Toufexis, a Time reporter, whether his theory ruled out social and psychological influences, Hamer's response was "Absolutely not...from twin studies we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors, not to negate the psychosocial factors." -Anastasia Toufexis, "New evidence of a gay gene," Time 146 (November 13, 1995), 43. Hamer's study was replicated but they found the genetic markers indicated by Hamer to be nonsignificant: "It is unclear why our results are so discrepent from Hamer's original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer et al's, we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position XQ 28." -G.A. Rice, C. Anderson, N. Risch, and G. Ebers, "Male homosexuality: Absence of linkage to microsatellite markers at XQ28," Science 284 (1999), 665-667 Dr. Richard C. Friedman, M.D., clinical professor of psychiatry at Weill Medical College, Cornell University, and a lecturer at Colombia Univeristy's College of Physicians and Surgeons. Dr. Jennifer I. Downey, M.D., is clinical professor of psychiatry at the Columbia University College of Physciains and Surgeons. "Temperamental and personality traits interact with the familial and social milieu as the individual's sexuality emerges." - Friedman, Richard C. and Jennifer Downey. "Neurobiology and Sexual Orientation: Current Relationship." Journal of Neuropsychiatry 5, 2 (Spring, 1993)
"Human sexual orientation is complex and diversely experienced...a biopsychosocial model best fits the current state of knowledge in the field." -R. C. Friedman and J.I. Downey, Sexual Oreintation and Psychoanalysis: Sexual Science and Clinical Practice 2002, pg. 131
"At clinical conferences one often hears...that homosexual orientation is fixed and unmodifiable. Neither assertion is true...The assertion that homosexuality is genetic is so reductionistic that it must be dismissed out of hand as a general principle of psychology." -Friedman and Downey, Sexual Orientation and Psychoanalysis, 39
"Like most psychiatrists, I thought that homosexual behavior could be resisted, but sexual orientation could not be changed. I now believe that's untrue-some people can and do change." -Spitzer, Robert L. "Psychiatry and Homosexuality." Wall Street Journal, May 23, 2001. Dr. Spitzer is a self-identified secular humanist, atheist Jew, and was the psychiatrist who led the effort to remove homosexuality from the list of psychiatric disorders in 1973.
When asked in an interview "What would you do if your adolescent boy tells you he is homosexual?" Dr. Spitzer responded, "The honest answer would be, I guess, I would hope that they would be interested in changing. And if they would be, that they would get some help." -Vonholdt, Christl R., Spitzer Interview, February 29, 1999
Simon LeVay, who published a study finding a particular cluster of cells in the hypothalamus known as INAH-3 was significantly different in the brains of homosexual men: "It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality was genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the bain. INAH-3 is less likely to be the sole gay nucleus of the brain than a part of a chain of nuclei engaged in men and women's sexual behavior...Since I looked at adult brains we don't know if the differences I found were there at birth, or if they appeared later." -D. Nimmons, "Sex and the brain," Discover March 1994, pp. 64-71
Dr. Mark Breedlove, a scientist at the University of California at Berkeley: "These findings give us proof for what we theoretically know to be the case--that sexual experience can alter the structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain." -M. Breedlove, "Sex on the brain," Nature 389 (1997), 801
Dr. LeVay again: "Although there are significant differences between the attitudes of lesbians and gay men it is clear that both groups are far more inclined to consider their sexual orientation a biological given than is the general population...Should we take these assertions seriously? Not entirely, of course. No one even remembers being born, let alone being born gay or straight. When a gay man, for example, says he was born gay he generally means that he felt different from other boys at the earliest age he can remember. Sometimes the difference involved sexual feelings, but more commonly it involved some kind of gender noncomformist or sex atypical traits-disliking rough and tumble play for example, that were not explicitly sexual. These differences, which have been verified in a number of ways suggest that sexual orientation is influenced by factors operating very early in life, but these factors could still consist of environmental factors such as parental treatment in the early postnatal period." -LeVay, Queer Science pg. 6
Dr. Anne Fausto-Sterling, a self-identified lesbian developmental biologist from Brown University, referring to the "born that way" argument: "It provides a legal argument that is, at this moment, actually having some sway in court. For me, it's a very shaky place. It's bad science and bad politics. It seems to me the way we consider homosexuality in our culture is an ethical and moral question....It is true I call myself a lesbian now because of the life I am living, and I think it is something you should own up to. At the moment I am in a happy relationship and I don't imagine ever changing. Still, I don't think loving a man is unimaginable." -C. Dreifus, "Exploring what makes us male or female," New York Times January 2, 2001
Lesbian activist Camille Paglia: "Homosexuality is not 'normal.' On the contrary, it is a challenge to the norm. ... Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction. ...No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous...homosexuality is an adaption, not an inborn trait. Is the gay identity so fragile that it cannot bear the thought that some people may not wish to be gay? Sexuality is highly fluid, and reversals are theoretically possible. However, habit is refractory, once the sensory pathways have been blazed and deepened by repetition - a phenomenon obvious in the struggle with obesity, smoking, alcoholism or drug addiction...helping gays to learn how to function heterosexually, if they wish, is a perfectly worthy aim. We should be honest enough to consider whether homosexuality may not indeed be a pausing at the prepubescent stage where children anxsiously band together by gender...current gay cant insists that homosexuality is 'not a choice,' that no one would choose to be gay in a homophobic society. But there is an element of choice in all behavior, sexual or otherwise. It takes an effort to deal with the opposite sex; it is safer with your own kind. The issue is one of challenge versus comfort." -Paglia, Camille. Vamps and Tramps, 1994, pp. 67-92
Douglas Haldeman: "A corollary issue for many is a sense of religious or spiritual identity that is sometimes as deeply felt as is sexual orientation. For some, it is easier, and less emotionally disruptive, to contemplate changing sexual orientation, than to disengage from a religious way of life that is seen as completely central to the individual's sense of self and purpose...However we may view this choice or the pscyhological unerpinnings thereof, do we have the right to deny such an individual treatment that may help him adapt in the way he has decided is right for him? I would say that we do not." -Douglas Haldeman, "Gay rights, patient's rights: The implementation of sexual orientation conversion therapy." (Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., August 2000), 3
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 16, 2007 17:11:06 GMT -4
I'm simply pointing out that there are limits that most people agree are sensible to this absolute right that reynoldbolt is advocating. To marry someone you love who loves you back when you're both consenting adults? Yeah. That's an absolute right. True. However, I wouldn't suggest instituting a law against poor people marrying, and I doubt you would, either. I will also note that the specific financial reasons are imposed upon me by the government. I don't have a job, because I'm disabled. I would lose my medical coverage if we got married. He could afford to support me--he has in the past, Gods know, and he practically does now--but he cannot afford to pay for my medical care, and there's no way I can live without it. Unless I actually intend to kill myself sometime in the next five years. So why can't God now believe that gay people who are in love deserve to get married, too? Because there's no direct revelation? Ah, but your faith gets direct revelations even today, doesn't it? Hence black people now being allowed to hold the priesthood. You see, your own argument undermines your other point. Have you tried a library? Okay, let me go fetch my copy of Salamander and quote to you. This was shown in court to be a lie. Note that phone records now directly contradict the official claim that Mark Hofmann didn't have much direct contact with the upper echelons. This statement comes from President Hinckley, albeit not while he was President. In fact, he regularly sent copies of pages of his diary, which was meticulously kept, to people with whom he'd had meetings in order to keep the record straight; this would have been very helpful to investigators of Hofmann's connections with certain documents. I could go on. However, these are just a few examples of direct lies and impeding a criminal investigation.
|
|