Do gays choose to be gay? How can we refuse equal rights?

[sfcalifornia]

You have equal access to marriage. You can marry anyone any other woman can marry. What more do you want? Ohyeah, you want special privileges.

Equal access to marriage is not the same as equal access to state and federal benefits.

Gay people don't want special privileges, they want the same benefits.

What did I say? They want to be able to dip into the same cookie jar as real married couples. Rather than lobby for real equality, they find it expedient to hijack marriage, a concept long clearly defined and held sacred by most peoples.

Real equality? As opposed to fake equality?

What does that mean?

 

[The Rabbi]

Equal access to marriage is not the same as equal access to state and federal benefits.

Gay people don't want special privileges, they want the same benefits.

They can have the same benefits. Any gay man who marries a woman is considered married, just like any straight man. Ditto any straight man who marries another straight man is not considered married by the state.
I fail to see any discrimination here.

Why would a gay man want to marry a woman??

Your argument fails right from the start.

First off you understand that happens all the time, right?
Second, why would a straight man want to marry a fat ugly woman? It doesn't matter. They have the right to do so, is all that counts.

 

[The Rabbi]

Environment not "life experiences". When scientists talk about orientation being about environmental factors, they're talking about in the womb.

You also keep missing the consenting adult part. Why is that?

In Europe "consenting' can be 14. It is an arbitrary number.
Why do you not answer the question as to whetehr I am describing homosexuality or pedophilia?

Yes, it has been an arbitrary number. Still is. Tell me, have age of consent laws gone up or down in the US? I'm for a Federal standard of no less than 18 with "Romeo and Juliet" (or Romeo and Romeo/Juliet and Juliet) carve outs. You?

OK, so "consenting adult" is not really a factor.
Therefore homosexuals and pedophiles (and there's plenty of overlap there) are roughly equivalent. We got it.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Well, I certainly hold my straight marraige sacred. In fact, I hold all four of them sacred!

 

[Vox]

Having red hair or being left-handed are not genetic abnormalities. If, as you claim, homosexuality is a genetic trait, it is by far best compared with other genetic traits that signal a defect that prevents the individual from functioning naturally.

I never made the claim that sexual orientation is a genetic trait. I said people do not choose their orientation.

If it isn't genetic, and it isn't chosen, just how the hell does it happen? Oh, right...god made you that way.

in some instances ( minority) it is genetic ( not by sexual orientation gene, which doesn't exist, but by the composition of the hormones and other traits in the body which is genetically determined), but the vast majority is a choice - even if the choice is not voluntary.

 

[freedombecki]

I never made the claim that sexual orientation is a genetic trait. I said people do not choose their orientation.

If it isn't genetic, and it isn't chosen, just how the hell does it happen? Oh, right...god made you that way.

in some instances ( minority) it is genetic ( not by sexual orientation gene, which doesn't exist, but by the composition of the hormones and other traits in the body which is genetically determined), but the vast majority is a choice - even if the choice is not voluntary.

You are absolutely, positively correct, Vox.

And for that purpose, maybe the native American saying of "Never judge a man until you have walked a mile in his moccasins" could be a consideration for people who don't accept the situation well, among whom I am numbered due to my belief system.

 

[Seawytch]

I never made the claim that sexual orientation is a genetic trait. I said people do not choose their orientation.

If it isn't genetic, and it isn't chosen, just how the hell does it happen? Oh, right...god made you that way.

in some instances ( minority) it is genetic ( not by sexual orientation gene, which doesn't exist, but by the composition of the hormones and other traits in the body which is genetically determined), but the vast majority is a choice - even if the choice is not voluntary.

The actions associate with the natural (or god given) attractions are the only choice. Why should we, as consenting adults, not act on those attractions as long as they are with other consenting adults?

 

[Redfish]

I never made the claim that sexual orientation is a genetic trait. I said people do not choose their orientation.

If it isn't genetic, and it isn't chosen, just how the hell does it happen? Oh, right...god made you that way.

I said it is not a genetic trait, not that genetics are not involved.

I don't believe in god. I was simply born with a greater attraction to women than to men.

and therein lies your problem. you are a sad pititul human being wytch.

 

[Seawytch]

If it isn't genetic, and it isn't chosen, just how the hell does it happen? Oh, right...god made you that way.

I said it is not a genetic trait, not that genetics are not involved.

I don't believe in god. I was simply born with a greater attraction to women than to men.

and therein lies your problem. you are a sad pititul human being wytch.

That I don't believe in your god makes me "a sad and pitiful human being"?

What's sad is that the fucking Catholic Pope has more understanding of what makes people "sad and pitiful" than you do, Fishy.

 

[Redfish]

I said it is not a genetic trait, not that genetics are not involved.

I don't believe in god. I was simply born with a greater attraction to women than to men.

and therein lies your problem. you are a sad pititul human being wytch.

That I don't believe in your god makes me "a sad and pitiful human being"?

What's sad is that the fucking Catholic Pope has more understanding of what makes people "sad and pitiful" than you do, Fishy.

Earlier you claimed that God made you gay and then you deny his existence. You are a walking contradiction.

the fact that you have to jump into every thread that discusses any aspect of homosexuality is proof that you are continually trying to justify your behavior to yourself and others, and that deep down inside you know that you are wrong.

I actually feel sorry for you.

 

[P@triot]

It has been admitted before, so face it ladies and gents, if government wasn't handing out premiums to married couples (tax breaks for married couples) and if government would get out of the business of directing how people handle their personal affairs (end of life decisions, insurance, etc), this whole marriage thing would be a non-issue. THAT is the crux of this entire "marriage equality" brouhaha. Homosexuals want to be able to do for their chosen partners what heterosexual couples can do for each other. It has nothing to do with love or Nature or reproduction.
It should be unnecessary to beg permission from some government agency to form a union with someone you care for. If you cared so much for your partner, you would give a flip whether you got "equal treatment" for a treasured relationship.

I brought that up to Seawytch a long time ago. It's always been about working the system for all they can get by the gay community and it always will be.

 

[Seawytch]

and therein lies your problem. you are a sad pititul human being wytch.

That I don't believe in your god makes me "a sad and pitiful human being"?

What's sad is that the fucking Catholic Pope has more understanding of what makes people "sad and pitiful" than you do, Fishy.

Earlier you claimed that God made you gay and then you deny his existence. You are a walking contradiction.

the fact that you have to jump into every thread that discusses any aspect of homosexuality is proof that you are continually trying to justify your behavior to yourself and others, and that deep down inside you know that you are wrong.

I actually feel sorry for you.

I never claimed god made me gay.

I'm gay. Why do YOU "jump into every thread that discusses any aspect of homosexuality"?


Spelling errors courtesy of auto-correct

 

[Seawytch]

It has been admitted before, so face it ladies and gents, if government wasn't handing out premiums to married couples (tax breaks for married couples) and if government would get out of the business of directing how people handle their personal affairs (end of life decisions, insurance, etc), this whole marriage thing would be a non-issue. THAT is the crux of this entire "marriage equality" brouhaha. Homosexuals want to be able to do for their chosen partners what heterosexual couples can do for each other. It has nothing to do with love or Nature or reproduction.
It should be unnecessary to beg permission from some government agency to form a union with someone you care for. If you cared so much for your partner, you would give a flip whether you got "equal treatment" for a treasured relationship.

I brought that up to Seawytch a long time ago. It's always been about working the system for all they can get by the gay community and it always will be.

So take away the rights for everyone, Puppy, instead of just trying to keep gays from equal access to them.


Spelling errors courtesy of auto-correct

 

[Vox]

If it isn't genetic, and it isn't chosen, just how the hell does it happen? Oh, right...god made you that way.

in some instances ( minority) it is genetic ( not by sexual orientation gene, which doesn't exist, but by the composition of the hormones and other traits in the body which is genetically determined), but the vast majority is a choice - even if the choice is not voluntary.

The actions associate with the natural (or god given) attractions are the only choice. Why should we, as consenting adults, not act on those attractions as long as they are with other consenting adults?

Nope, those are very often not natural.

The issue is not a polarization of "natrural-chosen", it is much more complicated, but it is in no way comparable, for example, to race, no matter how much you would like it to be.
You act on your natural drives as much as on your programmed ones in choosing your attractions.

 

[Seawytch]

in some instances ( minority) it is genetic ( not by sexual orientation gene, which doesn't exist, but by the composition of the hormones and other traits in the body which is genetically determined), but the vast majority is a choice - even if the choice is not voluntary.

The actions associate with the natural (or god given) attractions are the only choice. Why should we, as consenting adults, not act on those attractions as long as they are with other consenting adults?

Nope, those are very often not natural.

The issue is not a polarization of "natrural-chosen", it is much more complicated, but it is in no way comparable, for example, to race, no matter how much you would like it to be.
You act on your natural drives as much as on your programmed ones in choosing your attractions.

An innate trait is an innate trait no matter how badly you wish do deny equality to one (or more) of them.


Spelling errors courtesy of auto-correct

 

[The Rabbi]

If it isn't genetic, and it isn't chosen, just how the hell does it happen? Oh, right...god made you that way.

in some instances ( minority) it is genetic ( not by sexual orientation gene, which doesn't exist, but by the composition of the hormones and other traits in the body which is genetically determined), but the vast majority is a choice - even if the choice is not voluntary.

The actions associate with the natural (or god given) attractions are the only choice. Why should we, as consenting adults, not act on those attractions as long as they are with other consenting adults?

And no one's telling you you can't.

 

[Seawytch]

in some instances ( minority) it is genetic ( not by sexual orientation gene, which doesn't exist, but by the composition of the hormones and other traits in the body which is genetically determined), but the vast majority is a choice - even if the choice is not voluntary.

The actions associate with the natural (or god given) attractions are the only choice. Why should we, as consenting adults, not act on those attractions as long as they are with other consenting adults?

And no one's telling you you can't.

But you want to deny equality to those consenting adult relationships based on either 1)it's icky or 2) god told me to.

You're losing and will continue to lose in public opinion and a court of law.


Spelling errors courtesy of auto-correct

 

[P@triot]

Are you ignorant of history or just voluntarily choose to ignore it? What you are trying to tell gays and lesbians was once told to blacks who wanted to marry whites. They even said it wan't discriminatory because blacks could marry blacks and whites could marry whites.

Legal marriage hasn't been "one man and one woman" for a decade or more now and we've always had religious marriage.

I'm sorry Puppy, but your goat can't consent. You'll have to make due with living in sin with it. As for polygamists, well, they've got a battle ahead of them and I wish them well.

First of all, goat's can't NOT consent as well. How do you know that the goat is not 100% committed?

Second, and more important, why do you keep running from a simple YES or NO question? Are you prepared to support a man and 12 women?

Legal consent Puppy. Legal, civil marriage not the vows you make to Bessie in the barn.

I'm not running from anything. I've addressed Polygamy. I'm neither for or against it. From a legal standpoint, I simply don't see it working.

Exactly - you're 100% dead-set against it. But if you admit that, it shows that you are not only a hypocrite, but also the "insensitive bigot" that you accuse everyone else of being.

The fact is, the precious "COURT" ruling that you love to scream now means that we MUST as a nation recognize 1 jerk being married to 13 women. You'd know that if you were actually informed on the item you support (just fellow Dumbocrat Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the filth in Washington from that party, Seawytch here didn't read the suit before she supported it).

Way to go homosexuals - pat yourselves on the back for a job well done just further fucking this nation.

 

[Seawytch]

First of all, goat's can't NOT consent as well. How do you know that the goat is not 100% committed?

Second, and more important, why do you keep running from a simple YES or NO question? Are you prepared to support a man and 12 women?

Legal consent Puppy. Legal, civil marriage not the vows you make to Bessie in the barn.

I'm not running from anything. I've addressed Polygamy. I'm neither for or against it. From a legal standpoint, I simply don't see it working.

Exactly - you're 100% dead-set against it. But if you admit that, it shows that you are not only a hypocrite, but also the "insensitive bigot" that you accuse everyone else of being.

The fact is, the precious "COURT" ruling that you love to scream now means that we MUST as a nation recognize 1 jerk being married to 13 women. You'd know that if you were actually informed on the item you support (just fellow Dumbocrat Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the filth in Washington from that party, Seawytch here didn't read the suit before she supported it).

Way to go homosexuals - pat yourselves on the back for a job well done just further fucking this nation.

No, I'm not "dead set" against it, I'm saying that I simply don't see it working from a legal standpoint because there are more than two parties involved. Nothing more than a word or two on a license has to change for gays to have equal access to civil marriage. That would not be true of Polygamy.

The DOMA ruling means nothing of the sort.


Spelling errors courtesy of auto-correct

 

[Vox]

The actions associate with the natural (or god given) attractions are the only choice. Why should we, as consenting adults, not act on those attractions as long as they are with other consenting adults?

Nope, those are very often not natural.

The issue is not a polarization of "natrural-chosen", it is much more complicated, but it is in no way comparable, for example, to race, no matter how much you would like it to be.
You act on your natural drives as much as on your programmed ones in choosing your attractions.

An innate trait is an innate trait no matter how badly you wish do deny equality to one (or more) of them.


Spelling errors courtesy of auto-correct

there is no innate trait for homosexuality. or heterosexuality. or bisexuality. It is a complex combination of anatomy/physiology and the most important influence of social structures.

sexual identification and sexual preference is way more influenced by social construction than biology.

Denying it does not change it.

here is a very brief summary on the very wide scope of sexual field interactions of today ( mostly on the social side of the story, since medical is too complicated to discuss on a message board):

Introducing the New Sexuality Studies: 2nd Edition - Google Books