i have always wondered what it is with you guys in the US and homosexuality - some of you lot are always getting their knickers in a twist over it.
regarding being a genetic miscue, im sure i read somewhere that only humans and dolphins (!) enjoy sex for sex sake. all other animals do it because they are genetically programmed to. if this is true then surely homosexuality isnt some kind of miscue as genetics have clearly given us more choice in our sexual exploits if that makes sense.
Lots of different animals show homosexual behavior.
I know for a fact, for instance, that male ducks, when there are no more chick-ducks around, resort to homosexual behavior.
I think you could probably debate the issue of the cause of homosexuality (or metro- or bisexuality) with the greatest minds of our time (so, totally excluding the religious right) until 2020 and still not come up with a decent answer.
What it comes down to, is that some people prefer same-gender sex (and quite obviously, perhaps for different reasons, so do ducks).
And this is where the knickers-twisting really comes in...
How can the party (the Republicans) honestly defend capitalism by stating that communism doesn't allow individuality and at the same time want to ban individuality from any scene, let alone the sex scene (I mean I'm pretty damned sure that some of those religious right-wing nut cases have pretty obscure sexual tastes ala: "Yes honey, I'll dress up as a chicken for you tonight and you can pluck my ass hairs with the red hot tweezers" )?
It's ridiculously and embarrassingly hypocrite.
so are we presuming that people are born gay rather than aquire it (the old nature vs nuture argument)? i personally think that there is a spectrum starting at totally straight to totally gay and everyone is somewhere along that spectrum (with very few people at either extreme). Maybe the problem is that by labelling people either "gay" hetero" or "bi" we are pigeon holing people into being something that they not necessarily are. maybe we should just accept that people should be entitled to sleep with whoever they like without any stigma attached to that.
Originally posted by shavixmirit isn't about sex, it's about preserving marriage (between a man and a woman) since that is best for society and raising children. The liberal ideology of "anything goes" leads to less marriage, more co-habitation, less committment, etc.....and the children are worse off. Nobody cares what homosexuals do in their own homes but to say they deserve the "legal" right to be married is where the arguement is.
Lots of different animals show homosexual behavior.
I know for a fact, for instance, that male ducks, when there are no more chick-ducks around, resort to homosexual behavior.
I think you could probably debate the issue of the cause of homosexuality (or metro- or bisexuality) with the greatest minds of our time (so, totally excluding the religious ri ...[text shortened]... ass hairs with the red hot tweezers" )?
It's ridiculously and embarrassingly hypocrite.
Originally posted by newdad27what if they are married, committed to each other over their life time and raise (adopted children), arent they then helping to preserve society?
it isn't about sex, it's about preserving marriage (between a man and a woman) since that is best for society and raising children. The liberal ideology of "anything goes" leads to less marriage, more co-habitation, less committment, etc.....and the children are worse off. Nobody cares what homosexuals do in their own homes but to say they deserve the "legal" right to be married is where the arguement is.
Originally posted by davidtravellingsure, but when looking at the issue you have to look at the big (general) effect and its un-intended consequences, not just at one specific example. The fact is where there are no restrictions on marriage marriage rates have gone down. I'm all for civil unions but I believe the privledge of marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman.
what if they are married, committed to each other over their life time and raise (adopted children), arent they then helping to preserve society?