Gay people

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Then why would you want to eradicate it?

Because it would be something that is caused by a mutation, a "mistake" if you will in genetics.

You claim science all the time right? According to SCIENTISTS, male *******uals are the highest carriers of venereal disease by % of any other group.

Aids has hit that community extremely hard. It's science, not Jesus that says it's not healthy for a man to insert his penis into another mans anus but some of us already knew this.

You avoid the point rather well by the way.

[TheJoker]

Because it would be something that is caused by a mutation, a "mistake" if you will in genetics.

You claim science all the time right? According to SCIENTISTS, male *******uals are the highest carriers of venereal disease by % of any other group.

Aids has hit that community extremely hard. It's science, not Jesus that says it's not healthy for a man to insert his penis into another mans anus but some of us already knew this.

You avoid the point rather well by the way.

I think piggy's point is something close to "If scientists could "cure" the genetic code which controls skin pigmantation so everyone would be white/black/Latin/etc., would you be opposed?"

It's a slippery slope argument to try and "cure" (I dislike that term for the topic, but it's being thrown around so I'll go along with it) *******uality. It's not some life threatening condition, it's a personal preference. Who knows, we could start to find genes that manipulate other preferences (like attraction to certain physical features to propogate those traits, say blue eyes and blonde hair?).

The majority of arguments seem to circle back to "I find it personally distasteful", which is your right. The simplest answer is you don't have to engage in that behavior, but excluding others or "curing" others becomes a violation of their rights.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

I think piggy's point is something close to "If scientists could "cure" the genetic code which controls skin pigmantation so everyone would be white/black/Latin/etc., would you be opposed?"

It's a slippery slope argument to try and "cure" (I dislike that term for the topic, but it's being thrown around so I'll go along with it) *******uality. It's not some life threatening condition, it's a personal preference. Who knows, we could start to find genes that manipulate other preferences (like attraction to certain physical features to propogate those traits, say blue eyes and blonde hair?).

The majority of arguments seem to circle back to "I find it personally distasteful", which is your right. The simplest answer is you don't have to engage in that behavior, but excluding others or "curing" others becomes a violation of their rights.

I agree with you and that's why I put the word in quotations.

I also think that comparing skin pigmentation is something completely different and is a bad analogy. It's like when gays compare the prejudice towards them in the same light as the prejudice let's say blacks have faced. IMO it's something totally different, when people judge black people, it's something completely superficial and nothing to do with behavior.

When people judge *******uals, it's based on a behavior and actions that frankly are disgusting to a lot of people.

[Run]

so why there has been contineous attempts by doctors and psychiatrics to treat *******ual attitudes early in childhood , although it was unsuccessful ?

What is there to evaluate? The mother****ers like ****

Sure to me that's not normal but I'm not about to up and fight the gays.

If I did that clearly makes me a ****. Why? Because the White Pride Christian ideology is the driving force behind the blanket hatred towards Gays and ***s on this site and in many if not most cases I've seen when I wasn't sitting behind a keyboard. Someone talking about how *******uals should be either treated or erradicated...........Someone else talking about how the ***s are Mankind's enemy.



| |

[Grand Champ]

Because it would be something that is caused by a mutation, a "mistake" if you will in genetics.

You claim science all the time right? According to SCIENTISTS, male *******uals are the highest carriers of venereal disease by % of any other group.

Aids has hit that community extremely hard. It's science, not Jesus that says it's not healthy for a man to insert his penis into another mans anus but some of us already knew this.

You avoid the point rather well by the way.

Many things are like this. Blue eyes, blond hair is.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Many things are like this. Blue eyes, blond hair is.

For the record, I don't think this way I was making a point and even though technically blue eyes come from a genetic mutation I was speaking more on the lines of the "I have 6 fingers" type of mutation.

[squealpiggy]

I agree with you and that's why I put the word in quotations.

I also think that comparing skin pigmentation is something completely different and is a bad analogy. It's like when gays compare the prejudice towards them in the same light as the prejudice let's say blacks have faced. IMO it's something totally different, when people judge black people, it's something completely superficial and nothing to do with behavior.

When people judge *******uals, it's based on a behavior and actions that frankly are disgusting to a lot of people.

Then don't engage in it....

[Oasis_Lad]

"They're pushing their gayness in our face! They're being overtly camp!"



All I saw were normal people, peacefully protesting for human rights, and bigots screaming obscenities and being violent.

[TheJoker]

I agree with you and that's why I put the word in quotations.

I also think that comparing skin pigmentation is something completely different and is a bad analogy. It's like when gays compare the prejudice towards them in the same light as the prejudice let's say blacks have faced. IMO it's something totally different, when people judge black people, it's something completely superficial and nothing to do with behavior.

When people judge *******uals, it's based on a behavior and actions that frankly are disgusting to a lot of people.

I chose skin pigmentation because it is the closest thing (if we are discussing hereditary genetics) to society's attitude toward *******uality. If genetically gay people are hardwired and predisposed to a certain behaviour, can we still blame the individual for their consentual actions with other individuals with the same predispositions because we think it' "icky"? Much in the same way skin pigmentation is not a choice, if we discuss *******uality as genetic I think the analogy in broad terms is apt. "Separate but equal", that once described skin pigmentation as well...

If we are talking about behaviour, I think it is no longer a scientific discussion. Just to steer the question toward another idea, what if scientists discover a "straight gene" which they can manipulate to a "bi***ual gene". Problem solved? I doubt any anti-gay advocates would endorse such an idea simply because it would seem to cycle back to "but it's icky".

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

I chose skin pigmentation because it is the closest thing (if we are discussing hereditary genetics) to society's attitude toward *******uality. If genetically gay people are hardwired and predisposed to a certain behaviour, can we still blame the individual for their consentual actions with other individuals with the same predispositions because we think it' "icky"? Much in the same way skin pigmentation is not a choice, if we discuss *******uality as genetic I think the analogy in broad terms is apt. "Separate but equal", that once described skin pigmentation as well...

If we are talking about behaviour, I think it is no longer a scientific discussion. Just to steer the question toward another idea, what if scientists discover a "straight gene" which they can manipulate to a "bi***ual gene". Problem solved? I doubt any anti-gay advocates would endorse such an idea simply because it would seem to cycle back to "but it's icky".

Only if we do it to women............