People Are Not Born Gay

[Vigilante]

Seems the Mayor's wife is PROOF it's a LIFE STYLE CHOICE!!!

 

[80zephyr]

I applaud you fro your efforts. However, like I stated earlier, I have been researching this subject for years. I have NEVER read even one article that shows gay men to be monogamous in any significant numbers.

If anyone has one, I would be glad to look at it.

BTW, in all of my forum travels, I will say that gay men tend to debate this subject with more logic than their straight supporters do.

Mark

Some people; gay or straights, do not place a high value on monogamy. I am not one of those people. I am from a different school of thought regarding this issue. Being promiscuous isn't exactly a compelling reason to deny gays marriage.

I disagree. Monogamy IS marriage. That gays want marriage ON THEIR terms is a slap in the face to our traditions.

If they want marriage on their terms, why have marriage at all? I mean, just what is marriage without monogamy?

Nothing.

Mark

Some straight married couples do not practice monogamy or have "open marriages" as well. Monogamy in marriage doesn't have an exactly wonderful record throughout it's history, so this appeal to tradition is faulty on it's face considering history is rife with infidelity.

It always amazes me, the stupidity of an argument against gay marriage (which encourages monogamy) because gays are too promiscuous.

It is nothing more than a last ditch attempt to deny gays marriage. Even the anti-gay marriage side is not making these types of arguments in court. Gays are promiscuous so they should be denied marriage is one of the weaker arguments I've encountered when discussing this topic. It isn't a very compelling argument.

Its not a compelling argument? So, if monogamy in marriage is not important, what is?

Nothing.

Exactly what the left wants.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

Yes. Is this where you now accuse me of being a closet gay? Lol. Like I said, it is always "kill the messenger".

Maybe you can get me a link to disprove what I have said?

Mark

Why are you overly sensitive over your own words? "I have studied this subject for a very long time."

Sensitive? No. Psychic.

Mark

Oh...you've studied "this subject" for a very long time AND you're psychic.

Having such an obsession with something that he has 'studied' it for years and years begs the question: why is he so enamored with this subject? Usually, psychiatrists would say it is because of repressed homosexual feelings. Seriously: do people spend years of their lives studying something that is unimportant to them, something that has no role in their lives?

And there we have it. Thanks for not letting me down. Oh, and BTW, psychiatrists "usually" don't say that. Its made up bullshit by the left. Look it up.

Mark

 

[bodecea]

Do tell.

Yes. Is this where you now accuse me of being a closet gay? Lol. Like I said, it is always "kill the messenger".

Maybe you can get me a link to disprove what I have said?

Mark

Why are you overly sensitive over your own words? "I have studied this subject for a very long time."

Sensitive? No. Psychic.

Mark

Oh...you've studied "this subject" for a very long time AND you're psychic.

I have never been in a debate where that wasn't brought up. Never. I suppose I wasn't really being psychic. Just being a step or two ahead of the crowd.

Why do you harp on me studying the "subject"? Do people who study bother you somehow?

Maybe you should try it sometime.

Mark

Why are you sensitive about your own words?

 

[80zephyr]

The author makes some interesting points but he isn't the final word when it comes to monogamy in the gay community. Most people want marriage on their terms. It is why arranged marriages are not as common in this nation as there were in the past. If married couples; gay or straight, want to open their marriage and they both agree to the terms then have it. That is not my cup tea though. Monogamy isn't just an issue of the gay community. Heterosexuals seem to have this problem as well.

I don't discuss this often because it is really isn't anyone's business but I feel it is important while discussing this topic. I am a gay man and I've been in a monogamous relationship with my husband for almost 14 years now. I've never subscribed to the hook-up culture because when I was growing up I was inundated with news of the devastating effects of AIDS and it terrified me greatly. I started dating my husband when I was a freshman in college and I have remained faithfully this entire. Some people take their vows more seriously then others and I would never do anything to dishonor myself or my husband.

I applaud you fro your efforts. However, like I stated earlier, I have been researching this subject for years. I have NEVER read even one article that shows gay men to be monogamous in any significant numbers.

If anyone has one, I would be glad to look at it.

BTW, in all of my forum travels, I will say that gay men tend to debate this subject with more logic than their straight supporters do.

Mark

Some people; gay or straights, do not place a high value on monogamy. I am not one of those people. I am from a different school of thought regarding this issue. Being promiscuous isn't exactly a compelling reason to deny gays marriage.

I disagree. Monogamy IS marriage. That gays want marriage ON THEIR terms is a slap in the face to our traditions.

If they want marriage on their terms, why have marriage at all? I mean, just what is marriage without monogamy?

Nothing.

Mark

Some straight married couples do not practice monogamy or have "open marriages" as well. Monogamy in marriage doesn't have an exactly wonderful record throughout it's history, so this appeal to tradition is faulty on it's face considering history is rife with infidelity.

It always amazes me, the stupidity of an argument against gay marriage (which encourages monogamy) because gays are too promiscuous.

You could refute you know, with a link.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

Correct. But, now logic kicks in. If the gays, with 2% of the population, account for 70% of sexual diseases, can we now assume that not only is the practice of indiscriminate sex dangerous, but they are predisposed to that activity?

And, since they are, that gay sex is a danger just like alcohol and drugs?

Mark

And Lesbians have a lower % of STDs, particularly AIDS than anyone else. So...we should be the only ones who can legally marry using your logic.

Yes, if marriage was to bond any two humans together. Its not....

Mark

WHY one chooses to marry is no more the business of society, church, govt, meddlers, than the WHO.

If the goal is to cheapen marriage, and destroy the family unit, you are correct.

Do you want to be correct?

Mark

The idea of cheapening marriage is an emotional idea. About 50 percent of heterosexuals cheapen marriage by the way they function within a marriage and end up divorcing. Modern day life has made marriage something that is far less than sacred, and it has not been made that way by gays.

Another argument I hear a lot.

Translation: the left has cheapened marriage by advocating for divorce, single motherhood, and welfare. Since we have broken it, whats a few more cracks?

Mark

 

[Darlene]

Some people; gay or straights, do not place a high value on monogamy. I am not one of those people. I am from a different school of thought regarding this issue. Being promiscuous isn't exactly a compelling reason to deny gays marriage.

I disagree. Monogamy IS marriage. That gays want marriage ON THEIR terms is a slap in the face to our traditions.

If they want marriage on their terms, why have marriage at all? I mean, just what is marriage without monogamy?

Nothing.

Mark

Some straight married couples do not practice monogamy or have "open marriages" as well. Monogamy in marriage doesn't have an exactly wonderful record throughout it's history, so this appeal to tradition is faulty on it's face considering history is rife with infidelity.

It always amazes me, the stupidity of an argument against gay marriage (which encourages monogamy) because gays are too promiscuous.

It is nothing more than a last ditch attempt to deny gays marriage. Even the anti-gay marriage side is not making these types of arguments in court. Gays are promiscuous so they should be denied marriage is one of the weaker arguments I've encountered when discussing this topic. It isn't a very compelling argument.

Anti gay marriage side would NEVER make that argument in court. It is not politically correct.

Tell you what, if the liberal media didn't make gays into Christ like beings, you might not even be where you are now.

Can you imagine if the public actually knew the truth about gays and the incident of disease and psychological problems they have, not to mention their complete dismissal of monogamy, there probably wouldn't be one state that allows gay marriage today.

The American public is not allowed to hear facts, only emotion.

Mark

Those points you're trying to make aren't exclusive to homosexuals. They are equally prevalent in the hetero society but don't get much attention because people like yourself are so obsessed with outing the homosexuals. Go be an idiot elsewhere. Thank you.

 

[bodecea]

Some people; gay or straights, do not place a high value on monogamy. I am not one of those people. I am from a different school of thought regarding this issue. Being promiscuous isn't exactly a compelling reason to deny gays marriage.

I disagree. Monogamy IS marriage. That gays want marriage ON THEIR terms is a slap in the face to our traditions.

If they want marriage on their terms, why have marriage at all? I mean, just what is marriage without monogamy?

Nothing.

Mark

Some straight married couples do not practice monogamy or have "open marriages" as well. Monogamy in marriage doesn't have an exactly wonderful record throughout it's history, so this appeal to tradition is faulty on it's face considering history is rife with infidelity.

It always amazes me, the stupidity of an argument against gay marriage (which encourages monogamy) because gays are too promiscuous.

It is nothing more than a last ditch attempt to deny gays marriage. Even the anti-gay marriage side is not making these types of arguments in court. Gays are promiscuous so they should be denied marriage is one of the weaker arguments I've encountered when discussing this topic. It isn't a very compelling argument.

Anti gay marriage side would NEVER make that argument in court. It is not politically correct.

Tell you what, if the liberal media didn't make gays into Christ like beings, you might not even be where you are now.

Can you imagine if the public actually knew the truth about gays and the incident of disease and psychological problems they have, not to mention their complete dismissal of monogamy, there probably wouldn't be one state that allows gay marriage today.

The American public is not allowed to hear facts, only emotion.

Mark

Wait....you're trying to tell us that legal experts who spend tons of money to stop gay marriage in court don't bring up what YOU claim is a valid argument because it is..........not politically correct?

 

[80zephyr]

Yes, being prejudiced against homosexuality is a choice. It is a stupid choice, of course, because it is so arbitrary, and cannot withstand any rigors of inquiry as to WHY it is wrong any better than similar prejudices once held against being left handed.

"It's icky because people say it's icky and because people say it's icky, it's icky" doesn't cut it by way of argumentation. Such circular arguments are the stuff of children. The onus is upon all the bigots to explain WHY homosexuality consumes their thoughts to such an extent that they go on and on and one with their hatred of it. Is it inherently harmful? Does it involve coercion? Is it exploitative? Unless the answers are yes, there is absolutely no reason for the prejudice other than as opinions that have been taught but never questioned.

Similar

I could care less if its "icky". Fact is, gay "sex" is dangerous. Do you also think that drug users and alcoholics should be celebrated in this country?

I mean, not only allow it, but condone it?

Mark

Any type of sex, whether it be "gay" or hetero, can be dangerous. It's not about whether it's two vaginas or two penises that makes it a danger. It's the all-around lifestyle of each person---not just their sexuality.

Ummm. No. I'm sorry, but an anus is not designed to accommodate a penis. It is one of the reasons that their incident of sexual disease is sky high, compared to straights.

Mark

 

[Luddly Neddite]

And Lesbians have a lower % of STDs, particularly AIDS than anyone else. So...we should be the only ones who can legally marry using your logic.

Yes, if marriage was to bond any two humans together. Its not....

Mark

WHY one chooses to marry is no more the business of society, church, govt, meddlers, than the WHO.

If the goal is to cheapen marriage, and destroy the family unit, you are correct.

Do you want to be correct?

Mark

The idea of cheapening marriage is an emotional idea. About 50 percent of heterosexuals cheapen marriage by the way they function within a marriage and end up divorcing. Modern day life has made marriage something that is far less than sacred, and it has not been made that way by gays.

Another argument I hear a lot.

Translation: the left has cheapened marriage by advocating for divorce, single motherhood, and welfare. Since we have broken it, whats a few more cracks?

Mark

You were saying?

 

[Darlene]

Yes, being prejudiced against homosexuality is a choice. It is a stupid choice, of course, because it is so arbitrary, and cannot withstand any rigors of inquiry as to WHY it is wrong any better than similar prejudices once held against being left handed.

"It's icky because people say it's icky and because people say it's icky, it's icky" doesn't cut it by way of argumentation. Such circular arguments are the stuff of children. The onus is upon all the bigots to explain WHY homosexuality consumes their thoughts to such an extent that they go on and on and one with their hatred of it. Is it inherently harmful? Does it involve coercion? Is it exploitative? Unless the answers are yes, there is absolutely no reason for the prejudice other than as opinions that have been taught but never questioned.

Similar

I could care less if its "icky". Fact is, gay "sex" is dangerous. Do you also think that drug users and alcoholics should be celebrated in this country?

I mean, not only allow it, but condone it?

Mark

Any type of sex, whether it be "gay" or hetero, can be dangerous. It's not about whether it's two vaginas or two penises that makes it a danger. It's the all-around lifestyle of each person---not just their sexuality.

Ummm. No. I'm sorry, but an anus is not designed to accommodate a penis. It is one of the reasons that their incident of sexual disease is sky high, compared to straights.

Mark

What about the hetero women who enjoy anal?

 

[Syriusly]

A statement by the Royal College of Psychiatrists that people are not born gay has been welcomed as "a major admission" by a Christian charity that helps men and women change unwanted same-sex feelings.
Core Issues Trust (CIT), which is campaigning against a ban on therapy being offered to people who want to move away from a homosexual lifestyle, says the latest statement by the Royal College admits what it previously denied
People Are Not Born Gay Affirms Royal College of Psychiatrists

Yep, even if it was genetic, it is still your choice to have same-sex pleasure or not. Anyone and everyone has a choice. Say yes or say no. It is really that simple...BUT queers choose to suck each other's dicks

Of course the Royal College of Psychiatrists didn't actually say that.

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/PS02_2014.pdf

The Royal College of Psychiatrists considers that sexual orientation is
determined by a combination of biological and postnatal environmental
factors.1–3 There is no evidence to go beyond this and impute any kind of
choice into the origins of sexual orientation

None of us choose which gender to be attracted to- but we all choose how- and with whom we have sex.

And I don't have a problem with that- do you?

 

[80zephyr]

I disagree. Monogamy IS marriage. That gays want marriage ON THEIR terms is a slap in the face to our traditions.

If they want marriage on their terms, why have marriage at all? I mean, just what is marriage without monogamy?

Nothing.

Mark

Some straight married couples do not practice monogamy or have "open marriages" as well. Monogamy in marriage doesn't have an exactly wonderful record throughout it's history, so this appeal to tradition is faulty on it's face considering history is rife with infidelity.

It always amazes me, the stupidity of an argument against gay marriage (which encourages monogamy) because gays are too promiscuous.

It is nothing more than a last ditch attempt to deny gays marriage. Even the anti-gay marriage side is not making these types of arguments in court. Gays are promiscuous so they should be denied marriage is one of the weaker arguments I've encountered when discussing this topic. It isn't a very compelling argument.

Anti gay marriage side would NEVER make that argument in court. It is not politically correct.

Tell you what, if the liberal media didn't make gays into Christ like beings, you might not even be where you are now.

Can you imagine if the public actually knew the truth about gays and the incident of disease and psychological problems they have, not to mention their complete dismissal of monogamy, there probably wouldn't be one state that allows gay marriage today.

The American public is not allowed to hear facts, only emotion.

Mark

Those points you're trying to make aren't exclusive to homosexuals. They are equally prevalent in the hetero society but don't get much attention because people like yourself are so obsessed with outing the homosexuals. Go be an idiot elsewhere. Thank you.

If you were correct. then logically, the numbers from the CDC would show that gays only generate 3% of the problem, not 70%.

Like I said, I am willing to listen, not with emotion but with facts.

Mark

 

[Syriusly]

A statement by the Royal College of Psychiatrists that people are not born gay has been welcomed as "a major admission" by a Christian charity that helps men and women change unwanted same-sex feelings.
Core Issues Trust (CIT), which is campaigning against a ban on therapy being offered to people who want to move away from a homosexual lifestyle, says the latest statement by the Royal College admits what it previously denied
People Are Not Born Gay Affirms Royal College of Psychiatrists

Yep, even if it was genetic, it is still your choice to have same-sex pleasure or not. Anyone and everyone has a choice. Say yes or say no. It is really that simple...BUT queers choose to suck each other's dicks

Doesn't really matter because, IF you are a consenting adult and IF your actions harm no one, what you choose for your own life and who you choose as a partner is none of my business.

Would you agree with that?

MYOB

Absolutely. However, if its a choice, society does not have to condone it. It would be just like a person who does drugs. Make it legal, and let them live their lives. Should it be "normalized" by allowing them to marry?

Absolutely not.

Mark

We do allow people who use drugs to get married.

 

[Darlene]

I personally don't trust the CDC because the information and "studies" they conduct are biased, like yourself. Bigots trust bigots.

 

[80zephyr]

Yes, being prejudiced against homosexuality is a choice. It is a stupid choice, of course, because it is so arbitrary, and cannot withstand any rigors of inquiry as to WHY it is wrong any better than similar prejudices once held against being left handed.

"It's icky because people say it's icky and because people say it's icky, it's icky" doesn't cut it by way of argumentation. Such circular arguments are the stuff of children. The onus is upon all the bigots to explain WHY homosexuality consumes their thoughts to such an extent that they go on and on and one with their hatred of it. Is it inherently harmful? Does it involve coercion? Is it exploitative? Unless the answers are yes, there is absolutely no reason for the prejudice other than as opinions that have been taught but never questioned.

Similar

I could care less if its "icky". Fact is, gay "sex" is dangerous. Do you also think that drug users and alcoholics should be celebrated in this country?

I mean, not only allow it, but condone it?

Mark

Any type of sex, whether it be "gay" or hetero, can be dangerous. It's not about whether it's two vaginas or two penises that makes it a danger. It's the all-around lifestyle of each person---not just their sexuality.

Ummm. No. I'm sorry, but an anus is not designed to accommodate a penis. It is one of the reasons that their incident of sexual disease is sky high, compared to straights.

Mark

What about the hetero women who enjoy anal?

That would be a problem as well. Yet, the numbers do not show that it is significant. So logically, while married women will have anal sex, logic shows its rare.

Mark

 

[Darlene]

I used to do hard drugs and started experimenting with psychedelics before I got pregnant with my first son. I don't do that anymore.

 

[Darlene]

Yes, being prejudiced against homosexuality is a choice. It is a stupid choice, of course, because it is so arbitrary, and cannot withstand any rigors of inquiry as to WHY it is wrong any better than similar prejudices once held against being left handed.

"It's icky because people say it's icky and because people say it's icky, it's icky" doesn't cut it by way of argumentation. Such circular arguments are the stuff of children. The onus is upon all the bigots to explain WHY homosexuality consumes their thoughts to such an extent that they go on and on and one with their hatred of it. Is it inherently harmful? Does it involve coercion? Is it exploitative? Unless the answers are yes, there is absolutely no reason for the prejudice other than as opinions that have been taught but never questioned.

Similar

I could care less if its "icky". Fact is, gay "sex" is dangerous. Do you also think that drug users and alcoholics should be celebrated in this country?

I mean, not only allow it, but condone it?

Mark

Any type of sex, whether it be "gay" or hetero, can be dangerous. It's not about whether it's two vaginas or two penises that makes it a danger. It's the all-around lifestyle of each person---not just their sexuality.

Ummm. No. I'm sorry, but an anus is not designed to accommodate a penis. It is one of the reasons that their incident of sexual disease is sky high, compared to straights.

Mark

What about the hetero women who enjoy anal?

That would be a problem as well. Yet, the numbers do not show that it is significant. So logically, while married women will have anal sex, logic shows its rare.

Mark

Marital status is irrelevant.

 

[Syriusly]

Yes, being prejudiced against homosexuality is a choice. It is a stupid choice, of course, because it is so arbitrary, and cannot withstand any rigors of inquiry as to WHY it is wrong any better than similar prejudices once held against being left handed.

"It's icky because people say it's icky and because people say it's icky, it's icky" doesn't cut it by way of argumentation. Such circular arguments are the stuff of children. The onus is upon all the bigots to explain WHY homosexuality consumes their thoughts to such an extent that they go on and on and one with their hatred of it. Is it inherently harmful? Does it involve coercion? Is it exploitative? Unless the answers are yes, there is absolutely no reason for the prejudice other than as opinions that have been taught but never questioned.

Similar

I could care less if its "icky". Fact is, gay "sex" is dangerous. Do you also think that drug users and alcoholics should be celebrated in this country?

I mean, not only allow it, but condone it?

Mark

Any sex can be dangerous.

Women risk pregnancy- a life threatening condition- every time they have sex.
Everyone who has sex risks contracting STD's up to and including AIDS.

What you are saying is that you think that anal sex between two men is 'more dangerous'- because you find it icky.

Sex between two women is less dangerous than sex between a man and a woman.

Are you opposed to lesbian sex too- or turned on by it- or both?

 

[mdk]

Some people; gay or straights, do not place a high value on monogamy. I am not one of those people. I am from a different school of thought regarding this issue. Being promiscuous isn't exactly a compelling reason to deny gays marriage.

I disagree. Monogamy IS marriage. That gays want marriage ON THEIR terms is a slap in the face to our traditions.

If they want marriage on their terms, why have marriage at all? I mean, just what is marriage without monogamy?

Nothing.

Mark

Some straight married couples do not practice monogamy or have "open marriages" as well. Monogamy in marriage doesn't have an exactly wonderful record throughout it's history, so this appeal to tradition is faulty on it's face considering history is rife with infidelity.

It always amazes me, the stupidity of an argument against gay marriage (which encourages monogamy) because gays are too promiscuous.

It is nothing more than a last ditch attempt to deny gays marriage. Even the anti-gay marriage side is not making these types of arguments in court. Gays are promiscuous so they should be denied marriage is one of the weaker arguments I've encountered when discussing this topic. It isn't a very compelling argument.

Its not a compelling argument? So, if monogamy in marriage is not important, what is?

Nothing.

Exactly what the left wants.

Mark

Then I suppose you'll have to that issue up with "the left" since I am an independent libertarian. If your argument was very compelling it would be presented to the courts by your side. It is not being presented because like most of their quarrels against marriage it will laughed out of court.