Homosexuality as a mental illness

[Porkulus Hummer]

What I've not seen a lot of people saying, is the possibility of homosexuality being a sort of mental illness.
I've seen a lot of people say that homosexuality is a choice, which I don't agree with.
I've seen a lot of people say that there are mental conditions associated with homosexuality (like depression, etc) which is understandable because gays have been persecuted for decades if not centuries, so I could understand depressional in a gay guy or girl.

While I don't view homosexuality as a ''sin'' or oppose it on any biblical grounds (because I don't believe in the Bible), I do oppose it on I suppose what can be called scientific grounds. What purpose does homosexuality have biologically? What biological benefits are gained or what is needed about homosexuality? Homosexuality doesn't result in the continuation of the human species, so right there it's biologically unsound.

I don't think one could choice to be gay, why would someone choose to be discriminated against or hated? I know I sure as hell can't make myself like someone that I don't or be attracted to someone I'm not, and I'm sure it's the same for a gay person.

But seeing as homosexuality has no biological purpose, it leads me to believe that maybe it's some kind of mental disorder, similar to say Autism, which we don't really know the cause of, there's a bunch of possible causes, but is present usually from birth. I don't think gays are ''insane''in the common meaning of the word. I don't think we've found any ''gay gene'', because if it was genetic, than that would be an argument as for it being ''normal''--But even still, a lot of scientists believe alcoholism and drug addiction are genetic, and they aren't positive.

I'm not saying gays are bad people, actually I have tons of gay friends, and I don't hate them or anything, but it just seems to me that homosexuality can really only be a sort of mental disorder or illness. I do believe they should get married,not a church wedding of course but a civil wedding, because I don't see any problem with any sort of relationship between two consenting adults, hell, if we can let drug addicts marry why not gays?

What do you think is the cause or role of homosexuality in biology? Do you feel it's a mental disorder, why or why not?

[ModerateVoice]

Oh man, the savaging you are going to take on this OP!

....I'm off to make some popcorn.

[mrclean]

What I've not seen a lot of people saying, is the possibility of homosexuality being a sort of mental illness.
I've seen a lot of people say that homosexuality is a choice, which I don't agree with.
I've seen a lot of people say that there are mental conditions associated with homosexuality (like depression, etc) which is understandable because gays have been persecuted for decades if not centuries, so I could understand depressional in a gay guy or girl.

While I don't view homosexuality as a ''sin'' or oppose it on any biblical grounds (because I don't believe in the Bible), I do oppose it on I suppose what can be called scientific grounds. What purpose does homosexuality have biologically? What biological benefits are gained or what is needed about homosexuality? Homosexuality doesn't result in the continuation of the human species, so right there it's biologically unsound.

I don't think one could choice to be gay, why would someone choose to be discriminated against or hated? I know I sure as hell can't make myself like someone that I don't or be attracted to someone I'm not, and I'm sure it's the same for a gay person.

But seeing as homosexuality has no biological purpose, it leads me to believe that maybe it's some kind of mental disorder, similar to say Autism, which we don't really know the cause of, there's a bunch of possible causes, but is present usually from birth. I don't think gays are ''insane''in the common meaning of the word. I don't think we've found any ''gay gene'', because if it was genetic, than that would be an argument as for it being ''normal''--But even still, a lot of scientists believe alcoholism and drug addiction are genetic, and they aren't positive.

I'm not saying gays are bad people, actually I have tons of gay friends, and I don't hate them or anything, but it just seems to me that homosexuality can really only be a sort of mental disorder or illness. I do believe they should get married,not a church wedding of course but a civil wedding, because I don't see any problem with any sort of relationship between two consenting adults, hell, if we can let drug addicts marry why not gays?

What do you think is the cause or role of homosexuality in biology? Do you feel it's a mental disorder, why or why not?


Population control.

[brouski]

Population control.

If population control is a evolutionary benefit, wouldn't it be more parsimonious to make the organism sterile?

This question made more sense in my head.

[BillBrown]

Population control.

I think you're right.

[stereo]

It has no biological purpose. It is purely self serving. There is absolutely no benefit to the human race.

[Sinister Rouge]

There are numerous sexual actions that serve no biological purpose.
I've known gays who were perfectly adjusted people, and some that were total tools. ...In about the same proportion to that of my straight friends.

[Mobulis]

It has no biological purpose. It is purely self serving. There is absolutely no benefit to the human race.


That you know of.

[Lima India Bravo]

What I've not seen a lot of people saying, is the possibility of homosexuality being a sort of mental illness.
I've seen a lot of people say that homosexuality is a choice, which I don't agree with.
I've seen a lot of people say that there are mental conditions associated with homosexuality (like depression, etc) which is understandable because gays have been persecuted for decades if not centuries, so I could understand depressional in a gay guy or girl.

While I don't view homosexuality as a ''sin'' or oppose it on any biblical grounds (because I don't believe in the Bible), I do oppose it on I suppose what can be called scientific grounds. What purpose does homosexuality have biologically? What biological benefits are gained or what is needed about homosexuality? Homosexuality doesn't result in the continuation of the human species, so right there it's biologically unsound.

I don't think one could choice to be gay, why would someone choose to be discriminated against or hated? I know I sure as hell can't make myself like someone that I don't or be attracted to someone I'm not, and I'm sure it's the same for a gay person.

But seeing as homosexuality has no biological purpose, it leads me to believe that maybe it's some kind of mental disorder, similar to say Autism, which we don't really know the cause of, there's a bunch of possible causes, but is present usually from birth. I don't think gays are ''insane''in the common meaning of the word. I don't think we've found any ''gay gene'', because if it was genetic, than that would be an argument as for it being ''normal''--But even still, a lot of scientists believe alcoholism and drug addiction are genetic, and they aren't positive.

I'm not saying gays are bad people, actually I have tons of gay friends, and I don't hate them or anything, but it just seems to me that homosexuality can really only be a sort of mental disorder or illness. I do believe they should get married,not a church wedding of course but a civil wedding, because I don't see any problem with any sort of relationship between two consenting adults, hell, if we can let drug addicts marry why not gays?

What do you think is the cause or role of homosexuality in biology? Do you feel it's a mental disorder, why or why not?

"Sherman, why did you set the WayBack Machine for 1950?"

"OOPS! Sorry Mr. Peabody...!!"

[dbs944]

It has no biological purpose. It is purely self serving. There is absolutely no benefit to the human race.

My wife and I just married in our mid-50s. I guess we serve no purpose either.

Perhaps people can serve a purpose without breeding. Perhaps having joy in the company of another is enough. If gay couples are like others, the time spent making love is small compared to the rest of their life so there really isn't any self serving.

[signcut]

Perhaps it is God's way of continually testing, to see how we, as Christians, act towards others who are not 'like us'... :cool:

[See It Clearly]

My wife and I just married in our mid-50s. I guess we serve no purpose either.

Perhaps people can serve a purpose without breeding. Perhaps having joy in the company of another is enough. If gay couples are like others, the time spent making love is small compared to the rest of their life so there really isn't any self serving.

Do either of you have children, previously, before this marriage?

People CAN serve a purpose without breeding but I believe the point of the statement was breeding within the marriage relationship.

Being gay is about who you have sex with. I have many same sex friends but we do not have sex nor are we gay. I have joy in the company of these friends.

[Sinister Rouge]

Do either of you have children, previously, before this marriage?

People CAN serve a purpose without breeding but I believe the point of the statement was breeding within the marriage relationship.

Being gay is about who you have sex with. I have many same sex friends but we do not have sex nor are we gay. I have joy in the company of these friends.

I have many female friends who I do not have sex with.

And what does it matter whether he had children before he got married? Would that make his marriage more valid?

[DLaw911]

I'm not saying gays are bad people, actually I have tons of gay friends, and I don't hate them or anything, but it just seems to me that homosexuality can really only be a sort of mental disorder or illness.Please SPARE me!!

Tell that to your "ton" of gay friends. Speaking for myself, if any of my TONS of straight friends said I was mentally ill for BEING gay they would instantly join the ranks of FORMER friendship.

We are talking about sexual attraction. Some straight men are only attracted to women with huge butts, or huge breasts, and are totally turned off by small chested or small posterior women. Some women only like bald men. I have a close family member that only seeks and goes out with women who IMO are one step out of a circus. Now what if I said to all these people, "You're mentally ill -- you should be sexually attracted to all women -- haven't you heard of 'any port in a storm.'"

I really wish that straight people would take off their blinders and stop posting nonsense, like you just did, to make NO point whatsoever. The fact is sexual attraction to other human beings is very natural, but certainly not universal. Two single straight men might be on an elevator when a 20 year old lady in hot pants and a perfect body and face with 40" breasts and killer legs gets on at floor 3 and gets off at floor 10. The men look at each other and one says, "Wow, I am so horny, I would love some of THAT!!!" and the other guy might say, "You're sick, she's trash, she looks like a whore, she's too thin, she does absolutely nothing for me." By your incredibly standard of logic that second man would be mentally ill for not getting an instant erection and drooling over the prospects of having sex with the girl.

You see you have limited your discussion to SAME sex relationships. I can tell you, as a gay man, I find most men NOT sexually attractive. I am turned on by specific characteristics. That is far different from love. My partner is someone I love, not someone I think of as a sex buddy. Maybe that's where you have failed in your logic --- the idea that gay people are sex maniacs. Well let me assure you that we are just as human as you are and the fact that we might be attracted to persons of the same sex is no different from a straight man being attracted only to women who look like Pamela Anderson and totally turned off by women who look like Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg (or vice versa).

So here we have another ridiculous thread that will surely go downhill fast about a topic that has been discussed to death and has only resulted in the two camps becoming entrenched. The usual suspects are going to join into this thread and run it into the ground. So thanks for opening up another can of worms.

[DLaw911]

Being gay is about who you have sex with. .........Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong!!!! When did you become heterosexual? Did you have to have sex with a member of the opposite sex to become straight? If so, what were you BEFORE that?

Seriously --- where do you come up with this nonsense! Who are you listening to?

[See It Clearly]

I have many female friends who I do not have sex with.

And what does it matter whether he had children before he got married? Would that make his marriage more valid?

Do you have many that you DO have sex with then? What the heck is the purpose of that silly line?

I believe you do not understand the reasoning of my question about children. I will type slowly for you.

They stated they were in their 50's, the assumption is they will not have children anymore and therefore they were questioning their relevance to the OP's statement of being useful by bearing children.

So...... I wanted to know if they had any children from previous marriages.

Got it?

[DLaw911]

It has no biological purpose. It is purely self serving. There is absolutely no benefit to the human race.Tell that to all the men out there with a Playboy in their left hand and their manhood in their right.

[Sinister Rouge]

Please SPARE me!!

Tell that to your "ton" of gay friends. Speaking for myself, if any of my TONS of straight friends said I was mentally ill for BEING gay they would instantly join the ranks of FORMER friendship.

We are talking about sexual attraction. Some straight men are only attracted to women with huge butts, or huge breasts, and are totally turned off by small chested or small posterior women. Some women only like bald men. I have a close family member that only seeks and goes out with women who IMO are one step out of a circus. Now what if I said to all these people, "You're mentally ill -- you should be sexually attracted to all women -- haven't you heard of 'any port in a storm.'"

I really wish that straight people would take off their blinders and stop posting nonsense, like you just did, to make NO point whatsoever. The fact is sexual attraction to other human beings is very natural, but certainly not universal. Two single straight men might be on an elevator when a 20 year old lady in hot pants and a perfect body and face with 40" breasts and killer legs gets on at floor 3 and gets off at floor 10. The men look at each other and one says, "Wow, I am so horny, I would love some of THAT!!!" and the other guy might say, "You're sick, she's trash, she looks like a whore, she's too thin, she does absolutely nothing for me." Buy your incredibly standard of logic that second man would be mentally ill for not getting an instant erection and drooling over the prospects of having sex with the girl.

You see you have limited your discussion to SAME sex relationships. I can tell you, as a gay man, I find most men NOT sexually attractive. I am turned on by specific characteristics. That is far different from love. My partner is someone I love, not someone I think of as a sex buddy. Maybe that's where you have failed in your logic --- the idea that gay people are sex maniacs. Well let me assure you that we are just as human as you are and the fact that we might be attracted to persons of the same sex is no different from a straight man being attracted only to women who look like Pamela Anderson and totally turned off by women who look like Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg (or vice versa).

So here we have another ridiculous thread that will surely go downhill fast about a topic that has been discussed to death and has only resulted in the two camps becoming entrenched. The usual suspects are going to join into this thread and run it into the ground. So thanks for opening up another can of worms.


:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

[Mimiheart]

I mean, it's amazing those gays can get anything done. Every time they see another guy, they jump him. It's like their sole purpose in life is self gratification...*


*sarcasm captioned

[Lima India Bravo]

It has no biological purpose. It is purely self serving. There is absolutely no benefit to the human race.

There are a LOT of things that have "absolutely no benefit to the human race".....doesn't mean they're not good things. :rolleyes:

[Sinister Rouge]

Do you have many that you DO have sex with then? What the heck is the purpose of that silly line?

I believe you do not understand the reasoning of my question about children. I will type slowly for you.

They stated they were in their 50's, the assumption is they will not have children anymore and therefore they were questioning their relevance to the OP's statement of being useful by bearing children.

So...... I wanted to know if they had any children from previous marriages.

Got it?

First, I wish I could have sex with all of my female friends. That would be rad. But my girlfriend might disapprove.

As for the second point, the OP stated that because gays cannot produce children, they are biologically useless. Whether a couple already has children shouldn't have any basis on the argument, as the one in question will not be producing any more. If a gay man had had a child in a previous heterosexual relationship, him being in a homosexual relationship later will still not produce children. From a biological standpoint, they are similar situations.

[See It Clearly]

snip...

What do you think is the cause or role of homosexuality in biology? Do you feel it's a mental disorder, why or why not?

O.K. after reading these responses I'm ready to vote.

When do we vote?

[TheBurningRed]

If gay is a mental disorder or illness, then please explain why my male cat likes to hump other male cats.

[Fitz]

If gay is a mental disorder or illness, then please explain why my male cat likes to hump other male cats.
Do you really need the dots connected on this one?

[BillBrown]

If gay is a mental disorder or illness, then please explain why my male cat likes to hump other male cats.

Maybe your cat's crazy.

[DLaw911]

If gay is a mental disorder or illness, then please explain why my male cat likes to hump other male cats.That's a case for CWDA (Cats with Disabilities Act).

The OP should be careful what he (sort of) wishes for. If homosexuality was declared a disability then they might open a big can of worms.

[BasicGreatGuy]

If gay is a mental disorder or illness, then please explain why my male cat likes to hump other male cats.

When a male cat exhibits that behavior, they are showing dominance over the other cat. They are not trying to have sex. It is the hierarchy.

[DRS]

I think starting threads on homosexuality when you are not a homosexual either shows signs of mental illness or it is just your way of tapping you foot under the stall. :D

[Homo Sapien]

When a male cat exhibits that behavior, they are showing dominance over the other cat. They are not trying to have sex. It is the hierarchy.

There are MANY animals that engage in homosexual acts, and it isn't always an act of domination (maybe even usually isn't??).

[BasicGreatGuy]

There are MANY animals that engage in homosexual acts, and it isn't always an act of domination (maybe even usually isn't??).

I know what I am talking about here. The cat was not engaging in homosexual behavior. The poster I replied to, made an incorrect comment.

I am not going to start going through the animal list.

[StockMarket77]

Homosexuality is a result of a chemical imbalance in the brain. It alters the libido (sex drive) of the person and causes them to be gay. Homosexuality can also become a mental illness due to the person's prolonged experimentation and enjoyment of homosexual activity.

[Wild Bill03]

Perhaps it is God's way of continually testing, to see how we, as Christians, act towards others who are not 'like us'... :cool:


Didnt he turn them into pillars of salt?

[FidelisAdMortem]

Im happy that in some states homosexuals will now be able to enjoy what heterosexuals have been enjoying for years.

Divorce, lol.

[Sinister Rouge]

Homosexuality is a result of a chemical imbalance in the brain. It alters the libido (sex drive) of the person and causes them to be gay. Homosexuality can also become a mental illness due to the person's prolonged experimentation and enjoyment of homosexual activity.


And I'm sure you have sources to back this up.

[Gabby]

If gay is a mental disorder or illness, then please explain why my male cat likes to hump other male cats.

My border collie, a female, humps my male newfoundlander. She wants to be the alpha... Like many border collies she's a control freak. She wants to be the alpha. He just ignores her, he knows he's the alpha.

Now my newfoundlander has a thing for his bed pillow. He drags and humps that thing all over the place. We named it "Penny Pillow". I don't think there is a genetic pre-dispostion for pillows. He's just a fixed dog who is now confused. Poor guy. And yes he more than a bit insane.

[Fitz]

My border collie, a female, humps my male newfoundlander. She wants to be the alpha... Like many border collies she's a control freak. She wants to be the alpha. He just ignores her, he knows he's the alpha.

Now my newfoundlander has a thing for his bed pillow. He drags and humps that thing all over the place. We named it "Penny Pillow". I don't think there is a genetic pre-dispostion for pillows. He's just a fixed dog who is now confused. Poor guy. And yes he more than a bit insane.

I have a flemish giant rabbit that tried to mount a cocker spaniel yesterday.

No, I don't have a point.

[Gabby]

.....I don't think one could choice to be gay, why would someone choose to be discriminated against or hated? ......


I've heard people say this many times about homosexuality. It's an argument that does not hold water. People choose to do all kinds of things that make them discriminated against, hated, riticuled, etc.

[Gabby]

I have a flemish giant rabbit that tried to mount a cocker spaniel yesterday.

No, I don't have a point.

That rabbit probably could have thumpted the stuffing out of that dog.

I used to have a 20 lb French Lop that took sport in beating the snot out of cats. That was entertaining. :))

[Fitz]

That rabbit probably could have thumpted the stuffing out of that dog.

I used to have a 20 lb French Lop that took sport in beating the snot out of cats. That was entertaining. :))

Yeah, it's going to take a while for me to get bored of stuff like that... I don't think I've ever seen a dog so confused before.

[DLaw911]

Im happy that in some states homosexuals will now be able to enjoy what heterosexuals have been enjoying for years.

Divorce, lol.hahah you guys and gals have all the fun.

[Sketch]

... I do oppose it on I suppose what can be called scientific grounds. What purpose does homosexuality have biologically? What biological benefits are gained or what is needed about homosexuality? Homosexuality doesn't result in the continuation of the human species, so right there it's biologically unsound.



considering that same sex encounters have been observed in the overwhelming majority of know species, then there simply must be more to it. We may not have figured out what the benefit is, but obviously there is at least no harm done.

[Antrel]

It's assuming that there's a solitary reason for homosexuality. I believe there's a mixture of those who choose and those who are born that way. Either way, it doesn't need to be justified or vindicated with any reason.

[signcut]

Didnt he turn them into pillars of salt?

The 'them' covered more than just gays...



To be honest, I have no idea what God thinks of homosexuality; I do know that I find it an interesting litmus test on the acceptance of other people.

[camarozz]

Please SPARE me!!

Tell that to your "ton" of gay friends. Speaking for myself, if any of my TONS of straight friends said I was mentally ill for BEING gay they would instantly join the ranks of FORMER friendship.

We are talking about sexual attraction. Some straight men are only attracted to women with huge butts, or huge breasts, and are totally turned off by small chested or small posterior women. Some women only like bald men. I have a close family member that only seeks and goes out with women who IMO are one step out of a circus. Now what if I said to all these people, "You're mentally ill -- you should be sexually attracted to all women -- haven't you heard of 'any port in a storm.'"

I really wish that straight people would take off their blinders and stop posting nonsense, like you just did, to make NO point whatsoever. The fact is sexual attraction to other human beings is very natural, but certainly not universal. Two single straight men might be on an elevator when a 20 year old lady in hot pants and a perfect body and face with 40" breasts and killer legs gets on at floor 3 and gets off at floor 10. The men look at each other and one says, "Wow, I am so horny, I would love some of THAT!!!" and the other guy might say, "You're sick, she's trash, she looks like a whore, she's too thin, she does absolutely nothing for me." By your incredibly standard of logic that second man would be mentally ill for not getting an instant erection and drooling over the prospects of having sex with the girl.

You see you have limited your discussion to SAME sex relationships. I can tell you, as a gay man, I find most men NOT sexually attractive. I am turned on by specific characteristics. That is far different from love. My partner is someone I love, not someone I think of as a sex buddy. Maybe that's where you have failed in your logic --- the idea that gay people are sex maniacs. Well let me assure you that we are just as human as you are and the fact that we might be attracted to persons of the same sex is no different from a straight man being attracted only to women who look like Pamela Anderson and totally turned off by women who look like Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg (or vice versa).

So here we have another ridiculous thread that will surely go downhill fast about a topic that has been discussed to death and has only resulted in the two camps becoming entrenched. The usual suspects are going to join into this thread and run it into the ground. So thanks for opening up another can of worms.


And your point is?

[Greyclouds]

Population control.

Actually, not entirely.


It is a socio-biological trait that forms a larger social bond between members of the same tribe. You find instances of homosexuality in tribes of Bonobo chimpanzees in which homosexual activity encourages the tribe to gather together.

It's a form of tension relief that prevents internal conflict.

Sexual contact in primates often serves two purposes: a) reproduction and b) social-bonding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo


Please note that Human Homosexuality does not entirely fit this paradigm, but that this paradigm might explain the selective pressures for the maintenance of homosexual behavioral traits. Basically, homosexuality benefits the group by making its individuals closer, so individuals that can respond to homosexual stimuli will better fit within that group.

[signcut]

...You see you have limited your discussion to SAME sex relationships. I can tell you, as a gay man, I find most men NOT sexually attractive...

How dare you not find me sexually attractive!

The NERVE of some people!
















:)

[captusa]

Has it occurred to anyone that someone who is overly concerned about what, why, how and with whom other people are have sex has an obscession about which they should consult a professional ?

[ExDem]

I don't think homosexuality is a mental illness in itself. However, homosexual behavior can be a symptom of mental illness, as are other types of inappropriate behavior. There are many types of mental illness that manifest themselves through innappropriate behavior.

[ExDem]

considering that same sex encounters have been observed in the overwhelming majority of know species, then there simply must be more to it. We may not have figured out what the benefit is, but obviously there is at least no harm done.

Just because a behavior is seen in animals, doesn't mean it is acceptable or normal behavior......for animals or humans. I don't think we really want to justify human behavior by pointing to animals, now do we?

[Values]

Just because a behavior is seen in animals, doesn't mean it is acceptable or normal behavior......for animals or humans. I don't think we really want to justify human behavior by pointing to animals, now do we?

unless canabalism and eating our own feces is now neavou.

[Sinister Rouge]

I don't think homosexuality is a mental illness in itself. However, homosexual behavior can be a symptom of mental illness, as are other types of inappropriate behavior. There are many types of mental illness that manifest themselves through innappropriate behavior.


Yes, as can heterosexual acts.

Just because a behavior is seen in animals, doesn't mean it is acceptable or normal behavior......for animals or humans. I don't think we really want to justify human behavior by pointing to animals, now do we?

So first we argue that Homosexuality is unnatural, and then we argue that just because animals do it doesn't mean we should?
Hmm...

[DLaw911]

How dare you not find me sexually attractive!

The NERVE of some people!

:)I'll fill your tank with gay and we can call it even.

[signcut]

I'll fill your tank with gay and we can call it even.

:))

[DRS]

So is it a disability yet?

Can one get benefits from the governments?

[RayMan]

Didnt he turn them into pillars of salt?

Nope. That was Lot's wife.

[Greyclouds]

Just because a behavior is seen in animals, doesn't mean it is acceptable or normal behavior......for animals or humans. I don't think we really want to justify human behavior by pointing to animals, now do we?

That's true... we might actually be a more social, caring and playful society like dolphins!


So long as human emotions are controlled (for the most part) by hormonal rhythms, we have parallel tendencies with other mammals. No exceptions.

[ExDem]

Yes, as can heterosexual acts.



So first we argue that Homosexuality is unnatural, and then we argue that just because animals do it doesn't mean we should?
Hmm...

Yes, just because some animal exhibits a behavior does not mean it is normal behavior. Are you trying to equate homosexual behavior with animal behavior? I don't understand what point you are making. I am saying that unnatural/innappropriate behavior can be seen in animals as well as humans. I don't think we want to point to those acts by animals to try and justify human behavior. Do you?

[Vaard]

what other meantal disorders can be cured with prayer?

[ExDem]

That's true... we might actually be a more social, caring and playful society like dolphins!


So long as human emotions are controlled (for the most part) by hormonal rhythms, we have parallel tendencies with other mammals. No exceptions.

Humans have the ability to control their behavior and not be ruled by hormones. Or are you trying to say homosexuals are more like animals in that they cannot control their behavior???

[ExDem]

what other meantal disorders can be cured with prayer?

I don't know, but I have seen folks get relief from depression, anxiety, etc. with prayer. I don't know if you would call that cured, since they continue to pray everyday and continue to stay free of depression and anxiety. There may be some studies out there on it. But, I don't believe homosexuality is a mental disease in itself, but more a symptom----as are other types of inappropriate behavior.

[Greyclouds]

Humans have the ability to control their behavior and not be ruled by hormones. Or are you trying to say homosexuals are more like animals in that they cannot control their behavior???

One word: testosterone.

Look up the hormonal effects of that one and tell me that you can control this hormone indefinitely.

Oh, and oxytocin, adrenaline and norepinephrine. FSH, HGH, and Leutinizing hormone.



Human behavior is 50% hormones at the least. Otherwise, we would rarely associate with other humans for lack of logical reasons to do so. Also, without hormones, we would lack capability to sexually associate, which is the primary reason for us to form extensive social hierarchies.

[ExDem]

One word: testosterone.

Look up the hormonal effects of that one and tell me that you can control this hormone indefinitely.

Oh, and oxytocin, adrenaline and norepinephrine. FSH, HGH, and Leutinizing hormone.



Human behavior is 50% hormones at the least. Otherwise, we would rarely associate with other humans for lack of logical reasons to do so. Also, without hormones, we would lack capability to sexually associate, which is the primary reason for us to form extensive social hierarchies.

Now that you have changed it to 50%, then you are right in line with what I said. Humans have the ability to control their response to hormones and control their behavior. Thanks.

[Greyclouds]

Now that you have changed it t 50%, then you are right in line with what I said. Humans have the ability to control their response to hormones and control their behavior. Thanks.

I didn't "change it," and the qualifier ("for the most part") in my prior post still stands.

Humans can choose to ignore hormonal influences, but at their own peril. Social interactions are necessary for the release of oxytocin, vasopressin, dopamine and serotonin. If you were to lock yourself in a room without any human contact at all (complete control over your emotions/hormones) you'd actually reduce the span of your life by increasing your risk of depression.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19401723?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsP anel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

http://seniorjournal.com/NEWS/Aging/Arch-Aging03-02/3-07-02-depression.htm

So your only "control" is complete and utter isolation. That, in and of itself, leads to a faster death.


Your behavior, in and of itself is not controlled, especially if you're married! If you married a person, and are engaged in a monogamous heterosexual relationship, then you're following the path that your hormones dictated to you. This is evidenced in the fundamental core activities of monogamous relationships, namely sexual activity and procreation. Both activities result in massive releases of hormones; the secondary effects of which serve as incentives to continue to perform such activities. As a self-evident truth (hopefully): you continue to have sex because it feels "good," right?

[Fitz]

Humans have the ability to control their behavior and not be ruled by hormones. Or are you trying to say homosexuals are more like animals in that they cannot control their behavior???
I'm sure many of them can control their behavior.
There just isn't really a compelling reason for them to do so other than it being "icky"

[Values]

One word: testosterone.

Look up the hormonal effects of that one and tell me that you can control this hormone indefinitely.

Oh, and oxytocin, adrenaline and norepinephrine. FSH, HGH, and Leutinizing hormone.



Human behavior is 50% hormones at the least. Otherwise, we would rarely associate with other humans for lack of logical reasons to do so. Also, without hormones, we would lack capability to sexually associate, which is the primary reason for us to form extensive social hierarchies.


You have greatly inflated hormonal influence in societal matters.
Besides, as a human you can influence your desires and the hold hormones would have if you let them run amok. It is just one example of the difference between humans and animals.

[Greyclouds]

You have greatly inflated hormonal influence in societal matters.
Besides, as a human you can influence your desires and the hold hormones would have if you let them run amok. It is just one example of the difference between humans and animals.

Really?

Why do we still have such concepts as "nations" in light of the fact that all human beings were discovered to be genetically related at a rate of 99.99% of nucleotide sequence?

Why do we still glorify sex in a religious society that views open sexual activity under severe scrutiny?

Biochemical feedback mechanisms control far more of your behaviors than I think you believe. Imposed moral guidelines to those behaviors serve as mechanisms of control by which you are regulated. There are both secular and religious guidelines that serve to organize us as people of a nation, and to pit us against other nations.


If you can defy this entirely, then I concede the point: go the rest of your life without a single sexual thought, desire or activity.

[neoINDIE]

I know 2 people very well that are gay. Both of them were in straight relationships until their late 20's. Then they both decided to "come out" and be who they felt they were. Both are much happier now.

I guess they should have continued to be miserable in straight relationships just so some people don't have to be uncomfortable.

Selfish bitches.

[ExDem]

I didn't "change it," and the qualifier ("for the most part") in my prior post still stands.

Humans can choose to ignore hormonal influences, but at their own peril. Social interactions are necessary for the release of oxytocin, vasopressin, dopamine and serotonin. If you were to lock yourself in a room without any human contact at all (complete control over your emotions/hormones) you'd actually reduce the span of your life by increasing your risk of depression.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19401723?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsP anel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

http://seniorjournal.com/NEWS/Aging/Arch-Aging03-02/3-07-02-depression.htm

So your only "control" is complete and utter isolation. That, in and of itself, leads to a faster death.


Your behavior, in and of itself is not controlled, especially if you're married! If you married a person, and are engaged in a monogamous heterosexual relationship, then you're following the path that your hormones dictated to you. This is evidenced in the fundamental core activities of monogamous relationships, namely sexual activity and procreation. Both activities result in massive releases of hormones; the secondary effects of which serve as incentives to continue to perform such activities. As a self-evident truth (hopefully): you continue to have sex because it feels "good," right?

Blah, blah, blather. Of course sex feels good (when properly done):drool:. Stick to the topic. People can control themselves if they want to.........quite different than animals.

[paulbenedict]

If there is an evolutionary mental disease to control human population it would be Liberalism.

American Psychological Association did classify homosexuality as a mental disease until 1960? They were sued/persuaded into submission.

I think Liberalism, though, is still on the list.

P.S. -- population control anxiety is a social darwinist fear programmed into public school children (instead of English grammar) in the 1970's. There are problems with population, but nothing that a free enterprise system can't capitalize on solving.

[-American-]

My view is that homosexuality is some type of mental disorder. Similar to gender identity disorder.

[neoINDIE]

My view is that homosexuality is some type of mental disorder. Similar to gender identity disorder.

Feel free to comment on my post above then.

My friend Jen is probably one of the sweetest people I have ever met. She travelled to New Orleans 3 times to help clean up after the hurricane, expecting nothing in return.

Yeah, sounds real mental.

[ExDem]

Feel free to comment on my post above then.

My friend Jen is probably one of the sweetest people I have ever met. She travelled to New Orleans 3 times to help clean up after the hurricane, expecting nothing in return.

Yeah, sounds real mental.

I know several sweet people that volunteer for various things, but also have mental problems. What is your point? Do you think mental problems only affect mean and selfish people???

[neoINDIE]

I know several sweet people that volunteer for various things, but also have mental problems. What is your point? Do you think mental problems only affect mean and selfish people???

She has no mental problems. Thats the point.

[DLaw911]

Humans have the ability to control their behavior and not be ruled by hormones. Or are you trying to say homosexuals are more like animals in that they cannot control their behavior???"Behavior" has nothing to do with being homosexual.

Some gays and lesbians do not have sex --- or have stopped. Some heterosexuals have never had sex. Are either of them less gay, or less straight?

Next issue?

[DLaw911]

I don't know, but I have seen folks get relief from depression, anxiety, etc. with prayer. I don't know if you would call that cured, since they continue to pray everyday and continue to stay free of depression and anxiety. There may be some studies out there on it. But, I don't believe homosexuality is a mental disease in itself, but more a symptom----as are other types of inappropriate behavior.People with anxiety and depression should skip the prayer and just get a good night's sleep. If they have to pray, like meditation and other techniques of relaxation, it does benefit some people in the SHORT TERM.

By the way you keep in referring to homosexulity as behavior and it's not. Are you ever going to get that straight (no pun intended)??

[ExDem]

People with anxiety and depression should skip the prayer and just get a good night's sleep. If they have to pray, like meditation and other techniques of relaxation, it does benefit some people in the SHORT TERM.

By the way you keep in referring to homosexulity as behavior and it's not. Are you ever going to get that straight (no pun intended)??

I was talking about homosexual behavior, not homosexuality in general. That is why I referred to it as homosexual behavior. :rolleyes: That really isn't that difficult to understand. In addition, who are you to tell another person what they should do to handle their own personal problem. If they choose to pray, and it is working for them, why are you upset about that? It really isn't any of your business to tell them they are wrong to do so, now is it?

[ExDem]

"Behavior" has nothing to do with being homosexual.

Some gays and lesbians do not have sex --- or have stopped. Some heterosexuals have never had sex. Are either of them less gay, or less straight?

Next issue?

Again, go back to my original post on the subject of this OP. I am talking about behavior.

[ExDem]

She has no mental problems. Thats the point.

So if someone is sweet and volunteered at Katrina, they have no mental problems. Gotcha. I don't know exactly what that had to do with the topic at hand, but thanks for that insightful analysis.:rolleyes:

[Marleysdaddy]

What purpose does homosexuality have biologically? What biological benefits are gained or what is needed about homosexuality?
We aren't sure yet, but homosexual behavior hasn't been selected against - it is still prevalent in many species within the Animal kingdom, so it evidently either serves some purpose or did serve some purpose, and is now "vestigial", so to speak, but doesn't cause enough harm to be eradicated by natural selection.

[neoINDIE]

So if someone is sweet and volunteered at Katrina, they have no mental problems. Gotcha. I don't know exactly what that had to do with the topic at hand, but thanks for that insightful analysis.:rolleyes:


Here is the point. Read slow so you don't get confused.

If I had to pick between her and any of the clowns saying homosexuality is a mental disorder when it comes to being a good person, a good friend, and a productive member of society, I'll take her.

I think when she faces God after she leaves this place, she'll have a much easier time than those who bashed her.

Savy?

[ExDem]

Here is the point. Read slow so you don't get confused.

If I had to pick between her and any of the clowns saying homosexuality is a mental disorder when it comes to being a good person, a good friend, and a productive member of society, I'll take her.

I think when she faces God after she leaves this place, she'll have a much easier time than those who bashed her.

Savy?

Who bashed her? And by the way, I leave the judging to God. I would never presume to say what he would do. PS--I said I did not believe homosexuality was a mental disorder. Go back and read REAL slow so you are not confused.

[DLaw911]

I was talking about homosexual behavior, not homosexuality in general. That is why I referred to it as homosexual behavior. :rolleyes: That really isn't that difficult to understand. In addition, who are you to tell another person what they should do to handle their own personal problem. If they choose to pray, and it is working for them, why are you upset about that? It really isn't any of your business to tell them they are wrong to do so, now is it?Science has shown that getting a good night's sleep is sometimes the best medicine for anxiety and depression.

As for prayer, to each his own. Prayer is good. But it still boils down to relaxing the mind and taking it on a short vacation from the trials of life.

I would be curious to know (with all the kneeling and praying they do) if Muslims have a lower rate of depression?! Just curious.

[DLaw911]

Again, go back to my original post on the subject of this OP. I am talking about behavior.I understand what your're saying but I still want to know why you're even discussing "behavior."

The question is whether or not homosexuality is a mental illness and since homosexuality is defined by sexual ATTRACTION, and NOT by behavior, I totally missed your point. MY point, which is scattered throughout my first long response to the OP, is that almost everyone has sexual attractions that are unique and there is no shortage of people who would deem some totally legal heterosexual behavior as SICK and mentally ill (like S&M, mommy/daddy). I'm willing to bet that if the average person could spy on their straight friends and neighbors having sex they would see a whole lot of sexual behavior which they might deem to be REALLY sick! But that's all about personal opinion. As a gay person I don't judge what straight people do in their bedrooms.

Are you going to include straight prison inmates having homosexual sex? I would not want to be the one to call either one of them gay when they get out of the joint.

[DLaw911]

Homosexuality is a result of a chemical imbalance in the brain. It alters the libido (sex drive) of the person and causes them to be gay. Homosexuality can also become a mental illness due to the person's prolonged experimentation and enjoyment of homosexual activity.David Duchovny? Now that's one crazy mentally ill dude!

[Antrel]

Does it matter?

[TexasForever]

God is a loving Father, while at the same time He cannot let sin go unpunished. I don't believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder, because I don't think that God would punish someone for commiting a sin that they can't control. To clarify, just read Romans 1:20-32, 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 (New King James Version). Homosexuality is so unnatural that even someone with a mental illness should be repulsed enough to refrain from practicing it.

[DLaw911]

God is a loving Father, while at the same time He cannot let sin go unpunished. I don't believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder, because I don't think that God would punish someone for commiting a sin that they can't control. To clarify, just read Romans 1:20-32, 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 (New King James Version). Homosexuality is so unnatural that even someone with a mental illness should be repulsed enough to refrain from practicing it.Honestly I could care less what the bible says. The fact is BEING homosexual is a reality. The way you phrase is people who ARE homosexual should, essentially, go through their lives practicing total abstinence.

You know something TexasForever. The love between two gay people is just as natural as the love between two straight people. You talk about being repulsed? Well keep in mind that EVERY sex act attributed to gays and lesbians is also practiced by heterosexuals and don't pretend it's not. I don't see protests against straight people having anal intercourse. It's even graphically featured in movies (remember "Monster Ball"). Did you protest that movie? Did anyone? There's some weird sex going on out there between seemingly straight people but it seems that the only concern you [might] have and others DO have is a fixation on 'dem gays.

Seriously - do you really care? Is it affecting your life, your mental health, your family?

[Pudge]

What I've not seen a lot of people saying, is the possibility of homosexuality being a sort of mental illness.

I am sure it's been said, but that possibility never had evidence to back it up. Prior to the formation of the APA, it was simply considered a perversion and a moral failing (some still hold that view today). It was only after Kinsey's research and the rise of the APA that it was included as a mental illness. Yet many today believe Kinsey was wrong about so much- especially his oft-touted '1-in-10 men is homosexual claim'.

Why are people who have issues with homosexuality quick to downplay Kinsey's 1-in-10 theory and claim it's exaggerated, but have no problem considering homosexuality to be a mental illness, the classification of which was based on Kinsey's research?

I've seen a lot of people say that homosexuality is a choice, which I don't agree with.

I don't agree either, it was never a choice I made.

I've seen a lot of people say that there are mental conditions associated with homosexuality (like depression, etc) which is understandable because gays have been persecuted for decades if not centuries, so I could understand depressional in a gay guy or girl.

That's... oversimplifying, because depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and self-destructive behaviors affect people from all different backgrounds, and some people use sex as a means of self-destruction regardless of their orientation. Furthermore, there has been some evidence to suggest that even in countries where homosexuality is more accepted there are still slightly higher rates of depression and anxiety among gays. I do not believe there's a direct connection, but indirectly, it's difficult even in socially neutral or supportive places to find lasting happiness and relationships- not impossible, but more difficult.

I oppose it on I suppose what can be called scientific grounds. What purpose does homosexuality have biologically? What biological benefits are gained or what is needed about homosexuality? Homosexuality doesn't result in the continuation of the human species, so right there it's biologically unsound.

We are a species, one of few, who engage in sex for pleasure and love. Furthermore, human beings are the only species who actively engage in non-procreative forms of sexual contact on a regular basis and understand why. We use birth control. We actively try to prevent pregnancy from occurring so we can enjoy the sexual act without worrying about a bundle of joy 9 months down the line.

Is that biologically sound? Are humans defined by the quantity of children we produce or by the quality of life we leave for the ones we have?

seeing as homosexuality has no biological purpose, it leads me to believe that maybe it's some kind of mental disorder, similar to say Autism, which we don't really know the cause of, there's a bunch of possible causes, but is present usually from birth.

A disorder, in my not-so-scientific opinion, is something that prevents or hinders an individual in their efforts to be part of society. It is not the homosexuality that poses this hindrance, but society's reluctance to accept it as a non-threatening variation of human sexuality. If homosexuals cannot help being gay anymore than heterosexuals cannot help being straight, then why is the 'disorder' on the homosexual, and not on the person who can't accept the homosexual?

if it was genetic, than that would be an argument as for it being ''normal''--But even still, a lot of scientists believe alcoholism and drug addiction are genetic, and they aren't positive.

Substance addiction does have negative results in many cases, whether there's a genetic component or not. Homosexuality does not.

What do you think is the cause or role of homosexuality in biology? Do you feel it's a mental disorder, why or why not?

I don't know, but given that homosexuality has no negative impact in and of itself on the individual and that, if in a neutral or supportive society, does not hinder or affect that individual's ability to contribute and be part of that society, then it's not a disorder.

[captusa]

I don't know, but I have seen folks get relief from depression, anxiety, etc. with prayer. I don't know if you would call that cured, since they continue to pray everyday and continue to stay free of depression and anxiety. There may be some studies out there on it. But, I don't believe homosexuality is a mental disease in itself, but more a symptom----as are other types of inappropriate behavior.

Many people believe that if 2 adults have a sufficient mutual attraction that sexual activity is appropriate behavior.
Why does the combination of genders make a difference ?

I repeat, worrying who has sex with whom is might be a symptom of a mental disease problem.

[captusa]

God is a loving Father, while at the same time He cannot let sin go unpunished. I don't believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder, because I don't think that God would punish someone for commiting a sin that they can't control. To clarify, just read Romans 1:20-32, 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 (New King James Version). Homosexuality is so unnatural that even someone with a mental illness should be repulsed enough to refrain from practicing it.

I assume those that consider homosexual behavior unnatural and are repulsed by it enough to refrain from practicing it DON'T PRACTICE IT.

Those that DO NOT consider homosexual behavior unnatural and are NOT repulsed by it enough to refrain from practicing it DO PRACTICE IT.

Also many people do not subscribe to the same Deities you do and many homosexuals do.

To clarify, just read Romans 1:20-32, 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 6:9 (New King James Version)
Why the NEW version ?
Has King James changed his interpetation ?

[captusa]

I have a flemish giant rabbit that tried to mount a cocker spaniel yesterday.

No, I don't have a point.

Only an opinion but I would bet in the Border Collie case it was alpha domination.
I bet in the case of the rabbit it was sexual.
Sorry for the hasty generalization

[captusa]

......While I don't view homosexuality as a ''sin'' or oppose it on any biblical grounds (because I don't believe in the Bible), I do oppose it on I suppose what can be called scientific grounds. What purpose does homosexuality have biologically? What biological benefits are gained or what is needed about homosexuality? Homosexuality doesn't result in the continuation of the human species, so right there it's biologically unsound.

Every thing I do does not result in the continuation of the human species.
Recreational heterosexual sex not result in the continuation of the human species.
Does every thing you do result in the continuation of the human species ?


......
...... I don't think we've found any ''gay gene'', because if it was genetic, than that would be an argument as for it being ''normal''--But even still, a lot of scientists believe alcoholism and drug addiction are genetic, and they aren't positive.

Why bring up an arguement and immediately contradict it ?

[captusa]

If gay is a mental disorder or illness, then please explain why my male cat likes to hump other male cats.

Your cat has a feline mental disorder.
That's why he's gay.
Next question.

[RiverRat]

First: Homosexuality is a HUMAN condition (hence the name: HOMOsexuality) and logically one cannot apply human conditions to animals.

Second: It is my belief that not only is homosexuality a choice but it is an abomination in the eyes of God.

Third: Homosexuality is rampant in the prison system because all those young bucks in prison just got to stick their tools somewhere. (but they'll claim they ain't homosexuals)

Fourth: If you have EVER engaged in ANY kind of homosexual activity, you are a homosexual. Grandpa used to say: "It don't matter if you are pitching or catching, you're still playing ball."

Last: Homosexuality is described as sexual relations between two people of the same sex.

Don't try to gussie it up by calling it "gay". I really hate political correctness. If this offends you, tough. No one has the right not to be offended and it offends me to see homosexuals trying to get special treatment because of their choice of sexual activity. :exclaim:

[Arya]

All:

This type of thread has been debunked before-years ago.

Homosexuality is a sexual orientation, not a mental disease. That is all.

It is only the insistance of those that follow specific religious philosophies that insist it is otherwise. Neither God nor Jesus ever spoke out against homosexuality. There are no records of such.

Perhaps we should all pay attention to correcting the "sins" that exist within our very own families, or within ourselves, instead of focusing so critically upon what other strangers may do in their own lives.

In other words, before you criticize another's "house" make sure yours is not in need of "repair" as well.

[Gabby]

Only an opinion but I would bet in the Border Collie case it was alpha domination.
I bet in the case of the rabbit it was sexual.
Sorry for the hasty generalization


I agree that my female Border Collie humping my male Newfoundlander is about her trying to assert herself as the alpha. It has not worked yet as he just ignores her when she does it. .. it's pretty funny to watch the interaction when this goes on.

The rabbit.. yep, rabbits are notorious for trying to have sex constantly, with anything. Since they are tasty little critters, preferred by predators, reproduction is the main drive.

[John2598]

What do you think is the cause or role of homosexuality in biology? Do you feel it's a mental disorder, why or why not?

I suppose it could be a mental disorder if you look at it from a perspective of "identification". A boy first identifies with his mother but as he matures he switches over to identify with his father or other fatherly figure. A girl first identifies with her mother, then father, and eventually back to the mother. That's if everything is working right. But in homosexuality the brain somehow misses its chance to perform as expected. The girl identifies with the father and somehow gets stuck there. The boy identifies with the mother and somehow gets stuck there. It could be some sort of mental malfunction.

Here's another question to consider: What's the biological purpose of a woman continuing to have sex, long after her child-bearing years are over? Is it a mental disorder? :think:

[Greyclouds]

First: Homosexuality is a HUMAN condition (hence the name: HOMOsexuality) and logically one cannot apply human conditions to animals.

That is entirely illogical. The suffix "homo" does not refer to the genus "Homo" (to which, Homo sapiens belong); it means "same."



Second: It is my belief that not only is homosexuality a choice but it is an abomination in the eyes of God.

So you chose to not be Homosexual? Were you ever really tempted to be Homosexual? As a Heterosexual male, I've never felt such urges.



Third: Homosexuality is rampant in the prison system because all those young bucks in prison just got to stick their tools somewhere. (but they'll claim they ain't homosexuals)

That is a pretty disturbing and faulty point to try to argue in context. Are you saying that all men in prison are homosexuals, and that this somehow proves that homosexuality outside of prison conforms to your expectations?

You need more data and statistics to support your contention.



Fourth: If you have EVER engaged in ANY kind of homosexual activity, you are a homosexual. Grandpa used to say: "It don't matter if you are pitching or catching, you're still playing ball."

Quite a broad brush here; is this how you expect to prove your above point? Well, there's a flip-side to your Grandpa's analogy: if you ever engaged in heterosexual activity, you're a heterosexual!! OOPS! Looks like Bisexual individuals will forever be in a situation similar to Shroedinger's cat: half-homosexual/half-heterosexual depending on their last actions!

I'm sorry to say, but this analogy also does not work.



Last: Homosexuality is described as sexual relations between two people of the same sex.

Which is what the name means. "Homo" meaning same and "Sexuality" meaning sexual activity/conceptions.

So?



Don't try to gussie it up by calling it "gay". I really hate political correctness. If this offends you, tough. No one has the right not to be offended and it offends me to see homosexuals trying to get special treatment because of their choice of sexual activity. :exclaim:


Does it offend you when they try to get EQUAL treatment?

[Fitz]

Don't try to gussie it up by calling it "gay". I really hate political correctness. If this offends you, tough. No one has the right not to be offended and it offends me to see homosexuals trying to get special treatment because of their choice of sexual activity. :exclaim:

You're getting ****ed off at the one minority group that doesn't want you to add extra syllables to avoid offending them for pushing political correctness?

[Antrel]

First: Homosexuality is a HUMAN condition (hence the name: HOMOsexuality) and logically one cannot apply human conditions to animals.

Second: It is my belief that not only is homosexuality a choice but it is an abomination in the eyes of God.

Third: Homosexuality is rampant in the prison system because all those young bucks in prison just got to stick their tools somewhere. (but they'll claim they ain't homosexuals)

Fourth: If you have EVER engaged in ANY kind of homosexual activity, you are a homosexual. Grandpa used to say: "It don't matter if you are pitching or catching, you're still playing ball."

Last: Homosexuality is described as sexual relations between two people of the same sex.

Don't try to gussie it up by calling it "gay". I really hate political correctness. If this offends you, tough. No one has the right not to be offended and it offends me to see homosexuals trying to get special treatment because of their choice of sexual activity. :exclaim:
The "homo" in homosexual is the greek prefix for "same," not in reference to the genus of homo. It certainly can apply to animals.

[captusa]

You're getting ****ed off at the one minority group that doesn't want you to add extra syllables to avoid offending them for pushing political correctness?

If you initiate the word Homo-American you'd have to initiate Hetero-American.
BTW I am a solid hetero-American (not that it makes any difference)

[DLaw911]

"Live life fully while you're here. Experience everything. Take care of yourself and your friends. Have fun, be crazy, be weird. Go out and screw up! You're going to anyway, so you might as well enjoy the process. Take the opportunity to learn from your mistakes: find the cause of your problem and eliminate it. Don't try to be perfect; just be an excellent example of being human.” ~ Anthony Robbins

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/calzero/p5x.jpg

[neoINDIE]

Who bashed her? And by the way, I leave the judging to God. I would never presume to say what he would do. PS--I said I did not believe homosexuality was a mental disorder. Go back and read REAL slow so you are not confused.

I took people saying she has a mental disorder as bashing her.

[Epic_Dude]

ok, this thead is tl;dr. (too long; didn't read)

Homosexuality is a kink. Nothing more, nothing less. Everything besides Sex as a means for reproduction, is a kink. People who are flamboyantly gay are attention whores and need to stop blocking up traffic with their parades. And they need to shut up because you can't go making issue because of your kink when everyone else is quiet about theirs. You don't hear the S&M people complaining about their rights being trampled. :D haha that was sarcasm, but seriously. Everyone shut up. Homosexuality debate is cancer. No one cares for anyone else's opinion, so...silence.

[DLaw911]

ok, this thead is tl;dr. (too long; didn't read)

Homosexuality is a kink. Nothing more, nothing less. Everything besides Sex as a means for reproduction, is a kink. People who are flamboyantly gay are attention whores and need to stop blocking up traffic with their parades. And they need to shut up because you can't go making issue because of your kink when everyone else is quiet about theirs. You don't hear the S&M people complaining about their rights being trampled. :D haha that was sarcasm, but seriously. Everyone shut up. Homosexuality debate is cancer. No one cares for anyone else's opinion, so...silence.So you contribute to this "cancer" with another provocative statement.

As for "block up traffic with their parades" they get permits. Just like everyone else does like the St Paddy's Day Parade for the flamboyant Irish, the Macy's parade, etc. They all block traffic. Our country makes accomodations for freedom of speech and expression.

By the way not all gays are flamboyant like Richard Simmons and Perez Hilton. You probalby see dozens of gay people every day and have no idea they're gay.

[mdk190]

]Don't try to gussie it up by calling it "gay". I really hate political correctness. If this offends you, tough. No one has the right not to be offended and it offends me to see homosexuals trying to get special treatment because of their choice of sexual activity. :exclaim:[/SIZE][/FONT]


Special treatment? You would be allowed to enter into a homosexual union if you so wished. So much for special treatment nonsense.

[Epic_Dude]

So you contribute to this "cancer" with another provocative statement.

As for "block up traffic with their parades" they get permits. Just like everyone else does like the St Paddy's Day Parade for the flamboyant Irish, the Macy's parade, etc. They all block traffic. Our country makes accomodations for freedom of speech and expression.

By the way not all gays are flamboyant like Richard Simmons and Perez Hilton. You probalby see dozens of gay people every day and have no idea they're gay.


X_X

Provocative? Riiiiight. I'm just calling it what it is. It's not a big deal, as you said I see dozens of gay people every day and have no idea they're gay. So...what makes them different? The same thing that makes lots of other people different: They enjoy a certain kink.

St. Paddy's day and Macy's are ONCE a year things. There are LOTS of Gay Pride parades...almost each organization holds one, and it's really just geared towards them. You can't take small children to that, OR get drunk and boisterous there. How selfish of them...at least make it more boozer friendly.

[Fitz]

By the way not all gays are flamboyant like Richard Simmons and Perez Hilton. You probalby see dozens of gay people every day and have no idea they're gay.
He never claimed all gays were flamboyant, he just said the flamboyant ones annoy him

[captusa]

X_X

Provocative? Riiiiight. I'm just calling it what it is. It's not a big deal, as you said I see dozens of gay people every day and have no idea they're gay. So...what makes them different? The same thing that makes lots of other people different: They enjoy a certain kink.

St. Paddy's day and Macy's are ONCE a year things. There are LOTS of Gay Pride parades...almost each organization holds one, and it's really just geared towards them. You can't take small children to that, OR get drunk and boisterous there. How selfish of them...at least make it more boozer friendly.

The no alcohol is tightly enforced at St. Patrick's Day parade in NYC.
You can take small children to any parade you want to.
BTW There are many that do not agree with your, "Everything besides Sex as a means for reproduction, is a kink. "

What do you mean by kink.
None of the dictionary definitions for kink make sense in your sentence.

[FidelisAdMortem]

By the way not all gays are flamboyant like Richard Simmons and Perez Hilton. You probalby see dozens of gay people every day and have no idea they're gay.

I have a pretty good gaydar. LOL.

[skyyyguy]

We aren't sure yet, but homosexual behavior hasn't been selected against - it is still prevalent in many species within the Animal kingdom, so it evidently either serves some purpose or did serve some purpose, and is now "vestigial", so to speak, but doesn't cause enough harm to be eradicated by natural selection.

I am just curious, what species? I have never heard of any species in which homosexuality is prevalent. I do not believe any species would last long if the majority practiced homosexuality.......extinction would become the result in relatively few generations.
I must assume you meant present rather than prevalent.

[captusa]

I am just curious, what species? I have never heard of any species in which homosexuality is prevalent. I do not believe any species would last long if the majority practiced homosexuality.......extinction would become the result in relatively few generations.
I must assume you meant present rather than prevalent.

Who said anything about the majority.
There is no other proof necessary since it can't be disputed that species HAVE NOT BECOME EXTINCT when a part of the population is homosexual.
Humanity has been around for 1000000+ years and our population doesn't seem to indicate we are heading for extinction.

[Greyclouds]

I am just curious, what species? I have never heard of any species in which homosexuality is prevalent. I do not believe any species would last long if the majority practiced homosexuality.......extinction would become the result in relatively few generations.
I must assume you meant present rather than prevalent.

Look up Bonobo chimps, Giraffes and Dolphins.

When food is in abundance, sexual promiscuity is rampant in the animal kingdom.

Also, keep in mind that the above species use sexual reproduction as an additional means of socializing and enforcing a pack-bond.

[captusa]

So you contribute to this "cancer" with another provocative statement.

As for "block up traffic with their parades" they get permits. Just like everyone else does like the St Paddy's Day Parade for the flamboyant Irish, the Macy's parade, etc. They all block traffic. Our country makes accomodations for freedom of speech and expression.

By the way not all gays are flamboyant like Richard Simmons and Perez Hilton. You probalby see dozens of gay people every day and have no idea they're gay.

Richard Simmons is a "celebrity" who makes his living by his exposure and popularity to sell excercise tapes.
Being flamboyent is supporting his career.
I don't know if he has ever stated his sexual orientation.

[neoINDIE]

I am just curious, what species? I have never heard of any species in which homosexuality is prevalent. I do not believe any species would last long if the majority practiced homosexuality.......extinction would become the result in relatively few generations.
I must assume you meant present rather than prevalent.

Right now you could say stupidity is more prevalent than intelligence in the human race.

So whats the point?

[ExDem]

I understand what your're saying but I still want to know why you're even discussing "behavior."

The question is whether or not homosexuality is a mental illness and since homosexuality is defined by sexual ATTRACTION, and NOT by behavior, I totally missed your point. MY point, which is scattered throughout my first long response to the OP, is that almost everyone has sexual attractions that are unique and there is no shortage of people who would deem some totally legal heterosexual behavior as SICK and mentally ill (like S&M, mommy/daddy). I'm willing to bet that if the average person could spy on their straight friends and neighbors having sex they would see a whole lot of sexual behavior which they might deem to be REALLY sick! But that's all about personal opinion. As a gay person I don't judge what straight people do in their bedrooms.

Are you going to include straight prison inmates having homosexual sex? I would not want to be the one to call either one of them gay when they get out of the joint.

Go back and read my posts and you will see why I was discussing behavior. I must wonder why you are talking about "sick" behavior in heterosexuals as a comparison to gays. That is weird. Anyway. I said what I think about it. Sorry if you don't like it. However, I will talk about behavior or anything else I wish, whenever I wish. Free country.

[ExDem]

Many people believe that if 2 adults have a sufficient mutual attraction that sexual activity is appropriate behavior.
Why does the combination of genders make a difference ?

I repeat, worrying who has sex with whom is might be a symptom of a mental disease problem.

Who is worried about who has sex with whom? We are answering the OP's question. If you don't like the answers, don't read them.

[Epic_Dude]

The no alcohol is tightly enforced at St. Patrick's Day parade in NYC.
You can take small children to any parade you want to.
BTW There are many that do not agree with your, "Everything besides Sex as a means for reproduction, is a kink. "

What do you mean by kink.
None of the dictionary definitions for kink make sense in your sentence.


a kink is something that you find kinky. Hurr Durr. Kinks get you off. The only reason you'd be 'attracted' to men (or any other kink) is because it's your cup of tea, It gets your rocks off, etc. Let me rephrase. If it's not the proper use for natural engineering, then it's just for fun. Not saying it's wrong, just saying it's...fun. That's all.

[captusa]

a kink is something that you find kinky. Hurr Durr. Kinks get you off. The only reason you'd be 'attracted' to men (or any other kink) is because it's your cup of tea, It gets your rocks off, etc. Let me rephrase. If it's not the proper use for natural engineering, then it's just for fun. Not saying it's wrong, just saying it's...fun. That's all.

I sort of figured what you meant but I was waiting for the Websters to get used to the word.
One has a very tiny imagination if he can not find alternate uses other than what something is naturaly engineered for.
I never realized it was a "kink" when I used a time for something other than currency, like when I used one to turn a screw.
I must be kinky as hell.
When I was working as an electrician I used my 9" Kleins to pull out a brad or to hammer in a staple.


BTW There are many that do not agree with your, "Everything besides Sex as a means for reproduction, is kinky*. "

It is hard to define 99% of the sexually activity that occurs as kinky.
*I'll wait til kink getsa in the dictionary.

[Epic_Dude]

I sort of figured what you meant but I was waiting for the Websters to get used to the word.
One has a very tiny imagination if he can not find alternate uses other than what something is naturaly engineered for.
I never realized it was a "kink" when I used a time for something other than currency, like when I used one to turn a screw.
I must be kinky as hell.
When I was working as an electrician I used my 9" Kleins to pull out a brad or to hammer in a staple.


BTW There are many that do not agree with your, "Everything besides Sex as a means for reproduction, is kinky*. "

It is hard to define 99% of the sexually activity that occurs as kinky.
*I'll wait til kink getsa in the dictionary.


I didn't say going against engineering was bad nor did I say that it was 'kinky' to go against engineering in relation to every object on earth (cause hey, I just assumed we'd stay somewhat on topic and you'd know what I was talking about since it's the topic of the thread.) But since I like you, I'll re-clarify in a method that is understandable even to someone who is intentionally trying to poke holes in my argument.

Kinky = Something sexual, gets you off. For some people consensual sex in the missionary position is kinky enough for them. It. Gets. Them. Off. Now, Some people want to try other things because they are different, taboo, or in general give them that sexual rush they desire or need to get off.

Natural Engineering. "Tab Penis" goes in "Slot Vagina" to Reproduce. To the best of my limited biology knowledge, this effect cannot be reproduced in any other orifice or with any other tab.

P.S. What other "intended" purpose does sex have besides reproduction?

[captusa]

.......P.S. What other "intended" purpose does sex have besides reproduction?


You wouldn't understand if you have to ask.

[Voxpopuli]

You wouldn't understand if you have to ask.

:))

[Epic_Dude]

You wouldn't understand if you have to ask.

Oh Har Har, How clever. Unfortunately, I'm all serious business here, Mister.

...

How about you humor me and tell me what. Scientific evidence would be nice. I'll shut up if you prove me wrong.

For example, A stomach has purposes, and the method of using that stomach has purpose. Tell me, besides the obvious "disposal of waste", what purpose do SEXUAL ORGANS hold besides SEXUAL REPRODUCTION that aren't...shall we say "Man invented" uses?

[captusa]

....Kinky = Something sexual, gets you off. For some people consensual sex in the missionary position is kinky enough for them. It. Gets. Them. Off. Now, Some people want to try other things because they are different, taboo, or in general give them that sexual rush they desire or need to get off.

........

Excuse me if I am unaware of the language you are using.
Kinky means unconventional or wierd and unusual for sex and other things.
Or something bent in places.
For some people limiting their activities to consensual sex in the missionary position may be considered kinky.
I don't think many people would think consentual sex in the missionary position as being wierd.

[Epic_Dude]

Excuse me if I am unaware of the language you are using.
Kinky means unconventional or wierd and unusual for sex and other things.
Or something bent in places.
For some people limiting their activities to consensual sex in the missionary position may be considered kinky.
I don't think many people would think consentual sex in the missionary position as being wierd.

Touche, you magnificent bastard! Touche!

It's alright. We're here to bridge gaps. Now we're starting to understand each other, am I right? Understanding really helps in us finding at least SOME common ground...or even a conclusion we can both agree on.

also, there are in fact some weird people who consider consensual sex in the missionary position to be weird. Go figure. lol.

[captusa]

Oh Har Har, How clever. Unfortunately, I'm all serious business here, Mister.

...

How about you humor me and tell me what. Scientific evidence would be nice. I'll shut up if you prove me wrong.

For example, A stomach has purposes, and the method of using that stomach has purpose. Tell me, besides the obvious "disposal of waste", what purpose do SEXUAL ORGANS hold besides SEXUAL REPRODUCTION that aren't...shall we say "Man invented" uses?

Sea Otters use their stomachs to hold abalone. That is a secondary use of the stomach.
I thank your Deity that humans have discovered more imaginary secondary uses for sex organs.
What is wrong with man or woman invented uses ?

Also in reality the percentage of times sexual organs are used just for sexual reproduction is so small that one might conclude that sexual reproduction is a secondary purpose.
What percentage of the time do you believe sexual organs are used for reproduction ?
(The urethra is not a sexual organ I can't imagine what primary sexual organ has the has the purpose the desposal of waste.)

[Epic_Dude]

Sea Otters use their stomachs to hold abalone. That is a secondary use of the stomach.
I thank your Deity that humans have discovered more imaginary secondary uses for sex organs.
What is wrong with man or woman invented uses ?

Also in reality the percentage of times sexual organs are used just for sexual reproduction is so small that one might conclude that sexual reproduction is a secondary purpose.
What percentage of the time do you believe sexual organs are used for reproduction ?
(The urethra is not a sexual organ I can't imagine what primary sexual organ has the has the purpose the desposal of waste.)


lol, I wasn't talking about using other animals as examples. What I desire for you to tell me is: What NATURAL ENGINEERED PURPOSES do sexual organs have besides reproduction. They are on our bodies for the sole purpose to carry on the species.

I have an inkling that we are really thinking a similar thing, just looking at it from vastly different viewpoints.

Let me restate my points so we can get on the same page, I'd like you to do a counterpoint, quick and concise, for each of these if you'd be so kind.

1. Homosexuality is a kink (that is, something that is not reproductive sexual action, and used to evoke sexual "happy feelings).

2. It (Homosexuality) is not a naturally intended use for SEXUAL organs, since sexual organs are for the sole purpose of REPRODUCTION (I stand to be wrong of course if sexual organs have the naturally designated secondary purpose to make us FEEL GOOD)

3. There's nothing WRONG with kinks, I'm a very kinky guy myself. Meow.

4. There's nothing WRONG with going against NATURAL ENGINEERING, like you said with your dime example, oftentimes that's a good method of critical thinking. Though I don't think sexual kinks fall into the category of 'critical thinking' in terms of circumventing natural engineering.

[DLaw911]

1. Homosexuality is a kink (that is, something that is not reproductive sexual action, and used to evoke sexual "happy feelings).

2. It (Homosexuality) is not a naturally intended use for SEXUAL organs, since sexual organs are for the sole purpose of REPRODUCTION (I stand to be wrong of course if sexual organs have the naturally designated secondary purpose to make us FEEL GOOD)

3. There's nothing WRONG with kinks, I'm a very kinky guy myself. Meow.Let me restate my point. You are talking about behavior. Two people do not have to be homosexual to engage in homosexual behavior. You want to call the BEHAVIOR "kinky" or whatever ... be my guest. I consider a lot of heterosexual behavior kinkIER.

But that's not the issue and, like another poster, you define homosexuality by BEHAVIOR and that is not how it's done. It [homosexuality] is purely about sexual attraction. There are lots of reasons NOT to define homosexuality by behavior and the reasons should be obvious. If they are not obvious to you, then do a little research.

Maybe you're trying to be funny or serious ... I can't tell. But like so many gay "experts" on this board you have also entered into the INSULTING arena. Kinky can mean unnatural and love and sexual attaction between two people of the same sex IS A NATURAL thing for THEM. The fact that they are in the minority does not make it "kinky."

[Epic_Dude]

Let me restate my point. You are talking about behavior. Two people do not have to be homosexual to engage in homosexual behavior. You want to call the BEHAVIOR "kinky" or whatever ... be my guest. I consider a lot of heterosexual behavior kinkIER.

But that's not the issue and, like another poster, you define homosexuality by BEHAVIOR and that is not how it's done. It [homosexuality] is purely about sexual attraction. There are lots of reasons NOT to define homosexuality by behavior and the reasons should be obvious. If they are not obvious to you, then do a little research.

Maybe you're trying to be funny or serious ... I can't tell. But like so many gay "experts" on this board you have also entered into the INSULTING arena. Kinky can mean unnatural and love and sexual attaction between two people of the same sex IS A NATURAL thing for THEM. The fact that they are in the minority does not make it "kinky."


Let's agree then, that it is not a mental illness?

Let's agree then, that if something sexual is not "man+woman for procreation purposes" then it has a GOOD CHANCE of being kinky?

Let's start with finding common ground and then expanding. I don't mean to insult, serious and funny are often too similar things with me, and I in fact AM an expert on gays. They Love me. I go to gay bars and get drinks ALL NIGHT! ****, I might even be gay, Though I'm not totally stoked about the whole...other dude part.

[DLaw911]

a kink is something that you find kinky. Hurr Durr. Kinks get you off. The only reason you'd be 'attracted' to men (or any other kink) is because it's your cup of tea, It gets your rocks off, etc. Let me rephrase. If it's not the proper use for natural engineering, then it's just for fun. Not saying it's wrong, just saying it's...fun. That's all.Don't get me wrong. I'm not attacking you. Just what you said above. And it's got to be the dumbest thing posted on hannity.com short of gay gas.

Even the cockroaches in my computer room are laughing out loud.

[DLaw911]

Let's agree then, that it is not a mental illness?

Let's agree then, that if something sexual is not "man+woman for procreation purposes" then it has a GOOD CHANCE of being kinky?No I won't agree on that. This discussion is kinky. Kinly is about what people DO. It is not about what people ARE. Why do you consolidate the two?

If you want to talk about weird sex acts then include men, women, gays and straights. I am sure you and I would find sexual behavior by some straight and gay people to be VERY kinky including group sex, orgies, etc. That has nothing to do with the issue. Gay people have same sex relations BECAUSE they are homosexual. Straight people SOMETIMES have same sex relations for personal reasons, e.g. prison inmates, horny women. Just because two people of the same sex engage in sexual behavior DOES NOT mean that EITHER is gay. Just like if a gay person has sex with a straight person does not mean both are straight.

If you just manage to get the concept right you would not be straying so far off the path. And in the case of this threat is it's a well beaten path.

[DLaw911]

I have a pretty good gaydar. LOL.I know a lot of people who are gay that I knew for YEARS and never for a second suspected. I only found out by their bios on Facebook and I was blown away.

Two were prosecutors I worked with for years. Never even entered my mind. And they did not know about me either. And none of us are in the closet. Of course we don't walk up to each other and say, Hi, I'm DLaw911 and I'm gay. I don't need to advertise. That's kinda dumb.

And I told everyone about my BAD experience in which I was so sure a Judge was gay I asked him about it. Talked feminine, walked, stood and used hand gestures just like you would expect a sterotypical flamboyoant gay male to exhibit, loved show tunes, had two dogs, and wore designer eye glasses. So I was talking alone in chambers with him one day and asked him if he was going to the gay pride parade. He glared at me and asked me why I was asking and I told him, "I thought you were gay." BAD MOVE for DLaw911. Turns out he is married, 4 kids, and is intolerant of gays and lesbians. I was asked to leave his chambers and he treated me like crap from then on. I'm glad he finally retired because it was hard to avoid his courtroom. Talk about SHOULD HAVE kept my big trap shut.

[captusa]

I know a lot of people who are gay that I knew for YEARS and never for a second suspected. I only found out by their bios on Facebook and I was blown away.

Two were prosecutors I worked with for years. Never even entered my mind. And they did not know about me either. And none of us are in the closet. Of course we don't walk up to each other and say, Hi, I'm DLaw911 and I'm gay. I don't need to advertise. That's kinda dumb.

And I told everyone about my BAD experience in which I was so sure a Judge was gay I asked him about it. Talked feminine, walked, stood and used hand gestures just like you would expect a sterotypical flamboyoant gay male to exhibit, loved show tunes, had two dogs, and wore designer eye glasses. So I was talking alone in chambers with him one day and asked him if he was going to the gay pride parade. He glared at me and asked me why I was asking and I told him, "I thought you were gay." BAD MOVE for DLaw911. Turns out he is married, 4 kids, and is intolerant of gays and lesbians. I was asked to leave his chambers and he treated me like crap from then on. I'm glad he finally retired because it was hard to avoid his courtroom. Talk about SHOULD HAVE kept my big trap shut.

I saw an interview with the NBA star that came out.
He said with all the guys looking at themselves in the mirrors naked with jewelery he had to remind himself that he was the one that was gay.

[Epic_Dude]

No I won't agree on that. This discussion is kinky. Kinly is about what people DO. It is not about what people ARE. Why do you consolidate the two?

If you want to talk about weird sex acts then include men, women, gays and straights. I am sure you and I would find sexual behavior by some straight and gay people to be VERY kinky including group sex, orgies, etc. That has nothing to do with the issue. Gay people have same sex relations BECAUSE they are homosexual. Straight people SOMETIMES have same sex relations for personal reasons, e.g. prison inmates, horny women. Just because two people of the same sex engage in sexual behavior DOES NOT mean that EITHER is gay. Just like if a gay person has sex with a straight person does not mean both are straight.

If you just manage to get the concept right you would not be straying so far off the path. And in the case of this threat is it's a well beaten path.

"This discussion is kinky." You naughty, naughty...er...person.


about what people DO. It is not about what people ARE. Why do you consolidate the two?

So what I AM can be different than what I DO? That sounds like hypocrisy.

What people ARE is a reflection of what they do. You can't be 'Gay' it's not a type of human. You can just indulge in the homosexual activity/kink whatever you want to call it. Gays are not special or different more so than anyone else. Terms developed by man to classify people are so small minded people can wrap their minds around things. Gays aren't different people, they're same people with different tastes. So...you should get on the right path and stop trying to define things beyond what they are. It's so damn simple.

[Epic_Dude]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not attacking you. Just what you said above. And it's got to be the dumbest thing posted on hannity.com short of gay gas.


Por que?

I appreciate the feedback, but can you explain why?

[DLaw911]

I saw an interview with the NBA star that came out.
He said with all the guys looking at themselves in the mirrors naked with jewelery he had to remind himself that he was the one that was gay.hahaha kinky NBA players!

[DLaw911]

....So what I AM can be different than what I DO? That sounds like hypocrisy.

What people ARE is a reflection of what they do.That is a common misconception. Substitute the word "is" underlined above with "CAN BE" and you will be correct.

Also, you AGAIN started this post with reductio ad absurdum logic (the proof of a proposition by showing its opposite). You AGAIN are trying to derive a definition from behavior and you can only use that as EVIDENCE and not to draw a conclusion.

If you saw two women passionately kissing each other would you assume them to be lesbian? If not why would you assume two men kissing were gay. Maybe they are, maybe one is, maybe neither is.

But it is the inverse, that is, the argument that you are NOT making that is true logic, that is, homosexual are persons who are sexually attracted to members of the same sex. You don't need to get into insulting "kinky" talk when it comes to BEING gay since a lot of homosexuals have (1) never had sex, (2) no longer engage in sex, (3) are incapable of engaging in sex. Yet they are JUST AS GAY as the gay slut who goes out every night looking for anonymous sex.

Again, stop playing expert. Your opinion is totally wrong and backwards. Once you get into the TRAP of defining sexuality by behavior you are going to get into trouble.

[DLaw911]

Por que?

I appreciate the feedback, but can you explain why?Because you are sterotyping and either consciously or unconsciously being insulting. You are speaking for what you BELIEVE gay people do in the privacy of their homes. But you don't KNOW. Are you there? Are you a spy? Do you have hidden cameras? Or are you replying on porn videos, porn internet photos and what people SAY gay people do? You just don't know any more than I know what my closest gay friends so in the privacy of their bedrooms. For all I know they just hug and kiss. And if you call THAT kinky I feel sorry for you.

Please stop with the implied assertion that you are an expert on gay behavior. I'm gay, I should know, and I DON'T. It's none of my business. Yet you hold yourself out as all knowledgeable so as to terms everything gay people ARE as "kinky."

[Epic_Dude]

That is a common misconception. Substitute the word "is" underlined above with "CAN BE" and you will be correct.

Also, you AGAIN started this post with reductio ad absurdum logic (the proof of a proposition by showing its opposite). You AGAIN are trying to derive a definition from behavior and you can only use that as EVIDENCE and not to draw a conclusion.

If you saw two women passionately kissing each other would you assume them to be lesbian? If not why would you assume two men kissing were gay. Maybe they are, maybe one is, maybe neither is.

But it is the inverse, that is, the argument that you are NOT making that is true logic, that is, homosexual are persons who are sexually attracted to members of the same sex. You don't need to get into insulting "kinky" talk when it comes to BEING gay since a lot of homosexuals have (1) never had sex, (2) no longer engage in sex, (3) are incapable of engaging in sex. Yet they are JUST AS GAY as the gay slut who goes out every night looking for anonymous sex.

Again, stop playing expert. Your opinion is totally wrong and backwards. Once you get into the TRAP of defining sexuality by behavior you are going to get into trouble.

I just said no more definitions based on sexual behavior. There are no gay people. there are no straight people. there are only people. Because when gay people because a different type of people you'd have to have BDSM people, and then cross-breeds of GAY-BDSM people, and then FOOT-FETISH people, and possibly Beastiality People. How hard is it to understand that there are just...people. One heart, two lungs, put their pants on one leg at a time...people. (couple exceptions with the pants thing)

People = People. What they do, is what they do. You said you're gay? No you're not. You're a person who, as I'm going to ASSUME, partakes in things classified as gay by society. Be it same sex...er...sex. or intimacy with someone of the same sex...you're still a person. just. like. me. No different in that respect. Your things that you do to get off (if in fact you do things to get off) are what get you off. They may work for you and a select group of people, but that doesn't make you different types of people, it makes you people who like different things. If we were all the same and liked the same this place would be boring and we wouldn't be able to have this conversation about how similar we really are no matter how different we think we are. It is 2 a.m. I should be asleep.

[DLaw911]

Por que?

I appreciate the feedback, but can you explain why?And, please, this is nothing personal. I enjoy arguing with you. That's what this board should be about. So don't take anything I say personally --- OK?!

[Epic_Dude]

Because you are sterotyping and either consciously or unconsciously being insulting. You are speaking for what you BELIEVE gay people do in the privacy of their homes. But you don't KNOW. Are you there? Are you a spy? Do you have hidden cameras? Or are you replying on porn videos, porn internet photos and what people SAY gay people do? You just don't know any more than I know what my closest gay friends so in the privacy of their bedrooms. For all I know they just hug and kiss. And if you call THAT kinky I feel sorry for you.

Please stop with the implied assertion that you are an expert on gay behavior. I'm gay, I should know, and I DON'T. It's none of my business. Yet you hold yourself out as all knowledgeable so as to terms everything gay people ARE as "kinky."

I apologize for being insulting. I'm working on that, I have this issue with being belligerent. Just ignore it and it goes away eventually. It's a condition they tell me...no cure...

[Fitz]

Please stop with the implied assertion that you are an expert on gay behavior. I'm gay, I should know, and I DON'T. It's none of my business. Yet you hold yourself out as all knowledgeable so as to terms everything gay people ARE as "kinky."
He's made it pretty clear that his definition of kink is not at all a pejorative, just a statement of fact.

You might disagree on the definition and and connotations that come with, but it seems pretty clear that there's no malice involved.

[DLaw911]

You said you're gay? No you're not. You're a person who, as I'm going to ASSUME, partakes in things classified as gay by society. Be it same sex...er...sex. or intimacy with someone of the same sex...you're still a person.No, I'm a gay person. I am a member of a minority. I'm not interested in becoming absorbed into a group called "persons." And, again, you are assuming. Yes, I have a partner of many years. But I know many single gay men AND women who have been single for many years, ARE STILL GAY AND LESBIAN, and have not had intimate relations with a member of the same sex. Believe it or not, to SOME people sex is not a big deal in their lives. That does not mean they do not get turned on sexually by another member of the same sex.

[DLaw911]

He's made it pretty clear that his definition of kink is not at all a pejorative, just a statement of fact.

You might disagree on the definition and and connotations that come with, but it seems pretty clear that there's no malice involved.I never said there was malice and I never said it was a pejoritive. What part of what I said gave you that impression.

I'm being VERY clear. Any discussion of homosexuality must begin with the proposition that you DEFINE homosexuality by SEXUAL attraction to a member of the same sex. People can be gay and never ever have sex with another person of either sex. The act of having sex or intimate relations with a member of the same sex is not a necessary condition for BEING gay.

Geeeeeeeeeeeeeez! You guys are have got to be joking. :)

[Epic_Dude]

No, I'm a gay person. I am a member of a minority. I'm not interested in becoming absorbed into a group called "persons." And, again, you are assuming. Yes, I have a partner of many years. But I know many single gay men AND women who have been single for many years, ARE STILL GAY AND LESBIAN, and have not had intimate relations with a member of the same sex. Believe it or not, to SOME people sex is not a big deal in their lives. That does not mean they do not get turned on sexually by another member of the same sex.


It's too late. You're a person. Welcome to the majority. Now, if you were SIGNIFICANTLY different from the majority, I'd consider (ha as if it were up to me) giving you your own grouping or classification...but...I just can't help but think...We're so much the same person, it's scary. Is that what bothers you perhaps? That you really know, deep down inside we're all the same and you have to have something to set you apart? And how does someone who doesn't engage in sexual activity anymore have a sexual preference...sounds like more hypocrisy to me. It's not about the sex, it's about the classifications of how we engage in sex and sex related things. The one thing really I can say is legit is definition between what is a man and what is a woman, but that's because...well there are different blueprints for each.

[Fitz]

I never said there was malice and I never said it was a pejoritive. What part of what I said gave you that impression.
Because you are sterotyping and either consciously or unconsciously being insulting.

I'm being VERY clear. Any discussion of homosexuality must begin with the proposition that you DEFINE homosexuality by SEXUAL attraction to a member of the same sex. People can be gay and never ever have sex with another person of either sex. The act of having sex or intimate relations with a member of the same sex is not a necessary condition for BEING gay.
Again, from the context of some of the other posts I think that's relatively close to what he was saying. His definition of kink seems to pretty much be "sexual attraction"

[Epic_Dude]

I never said there was malice and I never said it was a pejoritive. What part of what I said gave you that impression.

I'm being VERY clear. Any discussion of homosexuality must begin with the proposition that you DEFINE homosexuality by SEXUAL attraction to a member of the same sex. People can be gay and never ever have sex with another person of either sex. The act of having sex or intimate relations with a member of the same sex is not a necessary condition for BEING gay.

Geeeeeeeeeeeeeez! You guys are have got to be joking. :)


Maybe we should call it Homo-gender-ality? or go back to using Intercourse instead of 'sex'...we use the word sex too much so that just like the word Love, it's lost a lot of its weight and is much easier to throw around.

[Epic_Dude]

Again, from the context of some of the other posts I think that's relatively close to what he was saying. His definition of kink seems to pretty much be "sexual attraction"


Kinks are what get you off. Some people share them, some people have outrageous ones. You know what I could use the word Fetish if that offends less?

[DLaw911]

Maybe we should call it Homo-gender-ality? or go back to using Intercourse instead of 'sex'...we use the word sex too much so that just like the word Love, it's lost a lot of its weight and is much easier to throw around.Do you define homosexuals as people who engage in sexual activity with members of the same sex. If you do, you really have no credibility in this issue.

Ask yourself a question. When did you know you were heterosexual? Did you HAVE TO WAIT to have sex with a member of the opposite sex to know you were heterosexual? And what if you decided to remain a virgin your entire life. Would you lose you heterosexuality? Now answer those questions to yourself and you will see how silly your "kinky" talk is.

[DLaw911]

Again, from the context of some of the other posts I think that's relatively close to what he was saying. His definition of kink seems to pretty much be "sexual attraction"Epic_Dude's getting to sexual attraction via sexual behavior. That is the inverse argument and why it is illogical logic.
Reductio ad absurdum is a mode of argumentation that seeks to establish a contention by deriving an absurdity from its denial, thus arguing that a thesis must be accepted because its rejection would be untenable. It is a style of reasoning that has been employed throughout the history of mathematics and philosophy from classical antiquity onwards.Example, " If that's so, then I'm a monkey's uncle."

[Epic_Dude]

Do you define homosexuals as people who engage in sexual activity with members of the same sex. If you do, you really have no credibility in this issue.

Ask yourself a question. When did you know you were heterosexual? Did you HAVE TO WAIT to have sex with a member of the opposite sex to know you were heterosexual? And what if you decided to remain a virgin your entire life. Would you lose you heterosexuality? Now answer those questions to yourself and you will see how silly your "kinky" talk is.


I guess I 'knew' I was heterosexual when I got that first rush of excitement from seeing a beautiful girl. No I did not have to wait, but once I did, I was pretty sure it was the nail in the coffin. I held out til I was 20. Wanted it so bad, but I knew I could wait just a little longer. Had I made it forever, good on me. But that proves nothing. You just proved my point, most of those questions lead me to believe that what made me 'hetero' were the things that turned me on. Girls. and girls doing naughty things. Oh yeah...bad girls...But I digress. No guy has ever looked attractive to me. Gay sex doesn't bother me, but it's not my cup o' tea. Does that mean that one day I won't get into homsexuality? only time will tell, but I've got a pretty solid track record thus far of enjoying heterosexuality. Does that make me hetero? No. You can't be a sexual preference, you can only have one. Heterosexual is a classification, and classifications are for classifying people to try and better divide and/or understand them. But at the end of the day, when the science is done. We're all people. Perhaps people who enjoy different colors too should have special titles. Redlovers and Bluelovers. Greenhaters. Sure it's a method to classify people by things they find attractive/repulsive in terms of colors but does that make them different people? Nope. They're still people. If we continue to play to this diversity and classification ********, we just fan the flames. I repeat once more. You are not a gay person because gay people don't exist. Gay is merely one more example of something your human brain enjoys, no matter how you enjoy it; sex, intimacy, spending time with someone, etc.

I eagerly await your response. HUrry, I want to sleep soon. don't. know. how long. can. keep head. from smashing keyboasfujsdb

[Fitz]

Epic_Dude's getting to sexual attraction via sexual behavior. That is the inverse argument and why it is illogical logic.
Example, " If that's so, then I'm a monkey's uncle."
I get where you're coming from, I just get the impression you guys actually agree, just have differences in language...
And reductio ad absurdum isn't necessarily a fallacy :p

[Epic_Dude]

Epic_Dude's getting to sexual attraction via sexual behavior. That is the inverse argument and why it is illogical logic.



Because something sexually attractive to you doesn't make you want engage in sexual behavior with it. Ever. That's just illogical. Yeah. You're right. I must be CRAZY!

[Epic_Dude]

I get where you're coming from, I just get the impression you guys actually agree, just have differences in language...
And reductio ad absurdum isn't necessarily a fallacy :p


That's what I said a few pages ago but...everyone's got to prove their point...so here I sit. learning.

[DLaw911]

Because something sexually attractive to you doesn't make you want engage in sexual behavior with it. Ever. That's just illogical. Yeah. You're right. I must be CRAZY!What are you talkiung about? I don't know where you're coming up with this stuff!

I never said, never implied, never suggested, never disputed that sexual attraction CAN lead to sexual behavior. But it does not necessarily lead to sexual behavior. Some people CHOSE to not engage in sexual behavior. Some take vows of celibacy or otherwise decide to be life long virgins.

[ArmericanArmstrong]

I have heard about a suppressed study dealing with homosexuality and organ transplants. This would prove that heterosexual people that receive organ transplants from gay donors have later exhibited homosexual traits caused by the homosexual DNA of the new organs. This would prove that homosexuality is a genetic illness and not a simply a mental one. This study have been suppressed over the concern of the panic it may cause those who have received organs, where the sexuality of the donor is unknown. In my view it would be the same a getting a organ that is cancerous.

[Greyclouds]

Oh Har Har, How clever. Unfortunately, I'm all serious business here, Mister.

...

How about you humor me and tell me what. Scientific evidence would be nice. I'll shut up if you prove me wrong.

For example, A stomach has purposes, and the method of using that stomach has purpose. Tell me, besides the obvious "disposal of waste", what purpose do SEXUAL ORGANS hold besides SEXUAL REPRODUCTION that aren't...shall we say "Man invented" uses?

It isn't a man-made side-effect that women release the hormones prolactin, vasopressin and oxytocin after orgasm.

It also isn't a man-made side-effect that men release the hormones prolactin, serotonin, oxytocin and vasopressin after orgasm.



Oxytocin is the "bonding" hormone and induces feelings of "love" towards the person who caused its release (notably: there is a significant release of oxytocin after women give birth).

Vasopressin is analogous to oxytocin, and performs an overlapping function insofar as it encourages a pair-bond. It also regulates retention of water in the body.

Prolactin grants a feeling of sexual gratification and also prevents repetitive male coitus for a period of time (often related to the amount of the hormone released after orgasm).

Serotonin is a hormone that grants feelings of satiation and is associated with feelings of exhaustion/tiredness after orgasm.


All of these hormonal effects serve to reinforce a pair-bond between human males and females after heterosexual sex. Homosexual sex also induces these hormones after coitus. Without these hormones, human monogamy would be a far rarer event; primarily because we'd have no hormonal/emotional incentive to be monogamous!

[Greyclouds]

I have heard about a suppressed study dealing with homosexuality and organ transplants. This would prove that heterosexual people that receive organ transplants from gay donors have later exhibited homosexual traits caused by the homosexual DNA of the new organs. This would prove that homosexuality is a genetic illness and not a simply a mental one. This study have been suppressed over the concern of the panic it may cause those who have received organs, where the sexuality of the donor is unknown. In my view it would be the same a getting a organ that is cancerous.

Link please?

I don't think that this is possible, considering that mosaicism often only affects local tissue.

[neoINDIE]

Oh Har Har, How clever. Unfortunately, I'm all serious business here, Mister.

...

How about you humor me and tell me what. Scientific evidence would be nice. I'll shut up if you prove me wrong.

For example, A stomach has purposes, and the method of using that stomach has purpose. Tell me, besides the obvious "disposal of waste", what purpose do SEXUAL ORGANS hold besides SEXUAL REPRODUCTION that aren't...shall we say "Man invented" uses?

"Man invented?"

If man would have invented sex, man would have ****ed it up.

Even old people in nursing homes like to get it on (thanks, Viagra). There is nothing wrong with seeking pleasure. It is the same reason people go to Hawaii.

Or are you one of those people who think we are here on earth just to suffer?

[neoINDIE]

It isn't a man-made side-effect that women release the hormones prolactin, vasopressin and oxytocin after orgasm.

It also isn't a man-made side-effect that men release the hormones prolactin, serotonin, oxytocin and vasopressin after orgasm.



Oxytocin is the "bonding" hormone and induces feelings of "love" towards the person who caused its release (notably: there is a significant release of oxytocin after women give birth).

Vasopressin is analogous to oxytocin, and performs an overlapping function insofar as it encourages a pair-bond. It also regulates retention of water in the body.

Prolactin grants a feeling of sexual gratification and also prevents repetitive male coitus for a period of time (often related to the amount of the hormone released after orgasm).

Serotonin is a hormone that grants feelings of satiation and is associated with feelings of exhaustion/tiredness after orgasm.


All of these hormonal effects serve to reinforce a pair-bond between human males and females after heterosexual sex. Homosexual sex also induces these hormones after coitus. Without these hormones, human monogamy would be a far rarer event; primarily because we'd have no hormonal/emotional incentive to be monogamous!

Too scientific for me.

Short version:

Its *******ed fun and it feeeeeeeeels good!

[neoINDIE]

I have heard about a suppressed study dealing with homosexuality and organ transplants. This would prove that heterosexual people that receive organ transplants from gay donors have later exhibited homosexual traits caused by the homosexual DNA of the new organs. This would prove that homosexuality is a genetic illness and not a simply a mental one. This study have been suppressed over the concern of the panic it may cause those who have received organs, where the sexuality of the donor is unknown. In my view it would be the same a getting a organ that is cancerous.

I can just see all the little gay organism in the straight persons body fighting for their rights with parades and crap.

Sickening.

[DLaw911]

I have heard about a suppressed study dealing with homosexuality and organ transplants. This would prove that heterosexual people that receive organ transplants from gay donors have later exhibited homosexual traits caused by the homosexual DNA of the new organs. This would prove that homosexuality is a genetic illness and not a simply a mental one. This study have been suppressed over the concern of the panic it may cause those who have received organs, where the sexuality of the donor is unknown. In my view it would be the same a getting a organ that is cancerous.ROFLOL --- my sides hurt!

[captusa]

Because you are sterotyping and either consciously or unconsciously being insulting. You are speaking for what you BELIEVE gay people do in the privacy of their homes. But you don't KNOW. Are you there? Are you a spy? Do you have hidden cameras? Or are you replying on porn videos, porn internet photos and what people SAY gay people do? You just don't know any more than I know what my closest gay friends so in the privacy of their bedrooms. For all I know they just hug and kiss. And if you call THAT kinky I feel sorry for you.

Please stop with the implied assertion that you are an expert on gay behavior. I'm gay, I should know, and I DON'T. It's none of my business. Yet you hold yourself out as all knowledgeable so as to terms everything gay people ARE as "kinky."

You don't realize that Epic_Dude has his own meanings for words.
This is his definition of "Kinky"
Kinky = Something sexual, gets you off. For some people consensual sex in the missionary position is kinky enough for them.

[FidelisAdMortem]

I know a lot of people who are gay that I knew for YEARS and never for a second suspected. I only found out by their bios on Facebook and I was blown away.


pm me your facebook link, I just created one the other day and I need friends lol.

[eviljagtech]

Im not sure if i even follow what this thread was exactly supposed to prove? I thought that in America i would matter as its a natural freedom to choose what partner you want to be with. Whether its an illness or not is kinda degrading to them, i think its a choice both mental and physical. BTW i am friends with gay women and men, and have found that they are looked down on to much. Just lettem be i say, it not like they're going to come over and beat you up.
So i end it with its both and it normal as Humans are not the only gay animal on the planet:surprised

[flowercopter]

Im not sure if i even follow what this thread was exactly supposed to prove? I thought that in America i would matter as its a natural freedom to choose what partner you want to be with. Whether its an illness or not is kinda degrading to them, i think its a choice both mental and physical. BTW i am friends with gay women and men, and have found that they are looked down on to much. Just lettem be i say, it not like they're going to come over and beat you up.
So i end it with its both and it normal as Humans are not the only gay animal on the planet:surprised


We Humans are lucky, gay Black Swans sometimes beat up straight couples and steal their babies.

[toreyj01]

Do either of you have children, previously, before this marriage?

People CAN serve a purpose without breeding but I believe the point of the statement was breeding within the marriage relationship.

Being gay is about who you have sex with. I have many same sex friends but we do not have sex nor are we gay. I have joy in the company of these friends.

One of my dear friends is a Gay gentleman in his late fifties who happens to be a virgin.

So your argument fails.

[toreyj01]

And your point is?
http://www.kevinteneyck.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/misc-brick-wall.jpg

[DRS]

I was watching a program last night on the third sex and it got me wondering what if a person who was "born gay" suffered from sort of the same thing and it was a chromosone thing.

[camarozz]

http://www.kevinteneyck.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/misc-brick-wall.jpg


Bummer, I forget what my response was responding to...

[DLaw911]

pm me your facebook link, I just created one the other day and I need friends lol.Will do!

[DRS]

Apparently not a mental disorder.

The six-member task force was appointed two years ago to address concerns about "efforts to promote the notion that sexual orientation can be changed through psychotherapy or approaches that mischaracterize homosexuality as a mental disorder."

The American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1975.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/05/gay.to.straight/index.html