This is sooo gay

[A Black Falcon]

SJ, a nice restatement (from a new point of view) of most of the things me and Nintendarse have been saying.

Of course, he'll listen to you just as much as he does us, but still... its nice to say it anyway. :) And you do expand on the issue of attraction quite well. I agree, it makes no logical or illogical sense to say that you can actually CONTROL who you are attracted to. As you say, that'd make things so much easier... but it just doesn't work that way, not even remotely. I see no possible way to think it does...

Oh, and I deleted his stupid bold tag. They do get very, very annoying.

They're not correct on that point, though I know the Catholic church is stupid like that. My mother had to tell her priest that she was going to raise me Catholic in order for her to get married, though she had no such intention.

I knew you'd say that because you have a unreasoned hate of Catholics too.

You don't know me. I may disapprove of homosexuality but I do tolerate it, and I don't hate people who choose to do so. I don't hate them anymore than you do, we simply differ in that I believe they do so by choice. There are people out there who disagree with homosexuality FAR more strenuously than myself. You know, people who taunt them, and even worse, those who attack them. I do not advocate either activity. I believe what happens in a person's bedroom is their business, as long as it stays in the bedroom.

Sure, there are people who are more violent, or say more, or whatever, than you seem to... but that doesn't change much about the fact that what you are saying would be the kind of thing that would mess someone up -- not "i'm going to beat you up", but "you are a morally corrupt person and I don't hate you but I hate your familys' lifestyle". Quite the thing to say to the people in the age group we're talking about in this case, you think?

Of course, because I don't believe morals are relative. But it's pointless to discuss morals with a liberal.

As Nintendarse said, they aren't relative... not within a society, for sure...

Mmmhmm. You didn't answer my question before, probably because you thought it was an insult, but are you gay or bisexual? I mean, you seem to have an innate knowledge about this sort of thing, you seem to think that even psychology cannot explain this. It's kinda funny that you would take such a question as an insult, but I was being serious.

I'm not. And I didn't answer because its incredibly stupid to say that "because you are a liberal and try to present a reasoned arguement for your position you are in that group that is the subject of the argument"...

And I note you ignored every word of my point.

I denied it? I believe my words were "Who knows why they do it? Why don't you ask one"? I can't tell how that could be misconstrued for denial, but whatever.

Because the cause has to be something other than personal choice, maybe?

Homosexuality is most definitely about sex, which is why the term appears in the word Homosexuality. But if it's not sexual, and it's not mental, than what is it? This is the loophole your theory keeps catching on.

I HAVE EXPLAINED THIS FIVE HUNDRED TIMES! :bang:

I'm not sure. Genes? Early experiences, slightly? Other factors? I really don't know how these things happen... but they happen. Genetics is the simplest answer, by far, but it well may be a combonation of various genetic, psychological, and experienced things... all that I know is that no one ever chooses any of these things. Your argument makes more sense now that you say that heterosexuals can choose who they are attracted to too... more sense in that "wow he is even more insane than even I suspected" kind of way...

You have such a hard time with real-life application.

Funny, that's what I've been saying about your positions since the beginning...

Er, if I remember correctly, your unproven hypotheses were supported by almost no factual proof whatsoever, and one of the two major studies on the topic was subject to investigation by a research ethics committee on grounds that data was left out to skew the results.

My opinions are not truly hypotheses at all. Besides being supported by psychology and biology, the burden of proof is not upon us to disprove a genetic link, it is upon you to prove the genetic link.

Ergo, there is no genetic link until one is found. That is how science works. And as of now there is no genetic link, and little chance of there being one.

As we've said many times, DISPROVING THAT ONE SPECIFIC GENE IS THE CARRIER ONLY PROVES THAT IT IS NOT ON THAT GENE! Not that it isn't partly genetic. Not that it is personal choice. Just that that isn't where it is and researchers don't know how homosexuality is caused. That is very different from supporting your position and does absolutely NOTHING to back the idea that it is personal choice.

Since as I've said already, there are plenty of ways to have it not be genetic and still have a zero percent element of personal choice, because that's how much there is.

Genetics control nothing behaviorial.

And you're so sure about this how?