Slam here. (Beliefs and Opinions Thread)

[Shinryuu]

Gay people who want kids will adopt other's children. I am not sure if this is legal in whereever you all live, but in the Netherlands it's a great way to

a. Help those kids out (else they will grow up in a bad situation)
b. A way for gay people to have children, even if not their own

Another way for gay people to have kids is to impregnate a woman (who wants this, there are very few) with help of the hospital (they don't have intercourse ofcourse) and when the woman gives birth, the gay couple (with one of them as the baby's father) raises the baby. I know one guy who is raised like that. Conservative people will be against this, because how can someone be raised by 2 men? That's wrong, isn't it?

No. This guy is in my year at school, and he is no different than any of us. He sometimes visits his mother (like once a month) but he is raised by his dads. Really, having a mother and a father is no different than having two fathers.

[Demetrick]

Endo, you know i luv you,

Gregor Mendell was the pea guy, Darwin was the evolution guy, however not really the 'first.' Only problem is that the amount of alleles (the expressed genes of the peas) is enough you can count on your hand, yeilding results of rations of 1:1, 3:1, and 1:2:1. The amount of genetic info and crap going in to making us up is way more than that.

Being raised by two dads, or two moms might not be all that bad. Look at todays divorce rates (between hetero couples since gay marriage is very limited or unrecognized). Every child in that couple is touched by that divorce.

[Endo]

Endo, you know i luv you,

Gregor Mendell was the pea guy, Darwin was the evolution guy, however not really the 'first.' Only problem is that the amount of alleles (the expressed genes of the peas) is enough you can count on your hand, yeilding results of rations of 1:1, 3:1, and 1:2:1. The amount of genetic info and crap going in to making us up is way more than that.

Being raised by two dads, or two moms might not be all that bad. Look at todays divorce rates (between hetero couples since gay marriage is very limited or unrecognized). Every child in that couple is touched by that divorce.

Oh yeah again early morning Anyway agreed because just about every person I know has come from a broken home in one way or another including myself

Also that was one of the points of the experiments. He was able to isolate a specific gene or trait per say. By doing this he would not document nor look at any other structure or trait besides say the amt of leaves or specific color of the pods. Therefor even though our genetic makeup has 1000x more dna codes and structures you can still isolate individual characteristics by say just documenting eye color, hair color, or in this case sexual preference, instead of overall genetic makeup. I for one do not believe that our DNA contains any codes based on preferance of anything. If I like dogs I dont believe that it is contained in my DNA. That would take freedom of choice and reasoning away from human characteristic table and say that we are predetermined to make certain decisions. That makes no sense because of our ability to choose.

[Shinryuu]

Yes, indeed, children are always touched by a divorce (they think it's their fault most of the time).

But gay couples can divorce too, so why would that be any different? It's not like gays won't divorce. Well, maybe it's different in a country were gays don't have the same rights as hetero's because their government is too stupid or scared to lose conservative votes next elections.

[Septimus]

Good point. But on that note, I also don't think all heterosexual people are born heterosexual or that all of them choose to be heterosexual either. For a large portion of most people's earliest years they are asexual, and influenced and taught genders in their relationships (with friends, siblings, parents), toys (barbies, army men) and clothes (blue or pink, frilly, pants or dresses) and so on.

My question is, why does it all have to come down to this anyway? Why does it matter whether someone is born with that inclination or makes a decision without any predisposition either way? I think that, unfortunately, the largest motivating factor behind assigning sexual preference to genes is to be able to use it as an excuse. To me that means that a lot of the people who are doing it have been influenced enough by those saying homosexuality is wrong to feel guilty about their sexuality. Who cares if it was or wasn't in your control? Why doesn't anyone try to make the argument that even if it was a choice there's nothing wrong with choosing it? Instead of "God wouldn't send me to hell over this, he made me this way!" If that wasn't at least part of the motivation for a lot of people then why is it so important? Why is it such a big debate?

I should also mention that I don't think sexual preference is so neatly defined and set in stone anyway. I'm not talking about "fluid sexuality" or whatever someone else calls it. I'm just saying I don't think it's like a switch with 2, or 3 or even 6 positions. To me it is just a matter of one of the means of originally causing our species to reproduce being used for things other than reproduction. To argue that any of it is wrong morally I think you would have to argue that all sex for any purpose other than reproduction is wrong. And I don't think there are many people who would agree with that, even the majority of strict catholics (who I'm sure, even if they agree in words, prove otherwise with their actions).

Gender roles are completely irrelevant to sexuality. I grew up playing with toy cars and action figures, and yet I still turned out gay. (But I did play with "Masters of the Universe" toys, and as we all know, they are pretty much just "Tom of Finland" action heroes.) For all of the "flaming queens" who rebel against their gender roles, there are plenty of "butch homos" who go under the gay-dar of the common heterosexual folk. Same with "bull dykes" and "lipstick lesbians", and now metrosexuality is all of the rage for straight guys because they realized that it is fun to get clean. (Mr. Bubble told that to them years ago.) People have tried to "toughen up" boys who are "light in the loafers" for years, if homosexuality were a learned behavior then it would have been unlearned many centuries ago. (Plus the whole thing about gay animals.)

I do not see trying to label homosexuality as genetic as an excuse, I think of it as more of a reason. Certain factions want to label homosexuals as perverted predators who prowl around elementary schools looking for children to convert. By showing a genetic predisposition then the argument can be made that we aren't all molested as kids or coddled by our mothers too much, and that those certain factions should shut their yaps about shit they do not understand. By applying science homosexuals can be humanized (wow scary thought) - rumors about deviant acts like bestiality can be dispelled and gays and lesbians can be shown to be the same as everyone else, no more and no less.

Of course the Kinsey scale is not the end-all be-all of sexuality. You cannot apply integers to human behavior and expect to capture it all. (That is why I think the two-dimensional scale is a better measure.) Sexual pleasure is different from reproduction, sexual pleasure was a mean trick played on us by biology to con us into making a bunch of wailing kids. One of the primary goals of most every religion on this planet is to tell people who they can and cannot sleep with, applying "morality" to sex and telling people that they are going to "Hell", "Hel", "Tartarus", "Stovokor", or wherever else is just one of the ways that any particular religion tries to enforce its judgment.

And of course there are plenty of people who tell people something and practice something else. For as long as there has been religion, there have been religious hypocrites.

[Elcura]

I was raised as a girl till the age of 5.

Edit: Page 4 woooo.

[Septimus]

PS: When this hits page 4 i expect Mithra porn...well seeing the Topic Galka porn will do just fine 8)

Altana willing we will...

[Demetrick]

In animals, take the peacock, again, the idea behind HOW it got such a friggin huge tail in the first place was an unconsious desire.

The first peacocks had normal bird tails (and probably weren't "peacock") when the first peacock had a tail that had a "deformed" tail, the other male peacocks were not as lucky, and thus didn't get as many mates or had a successful time breeding, until a new male, with a bigger better, more crazy tail. and thus time goes on and now our peacock's look pretty silly, with a tail that has no benifit except to get the chicks.

Looking back now, the first peacock had no knowledge of these future tails, but the sexual desire for it was ingrained into it from the very begging.

[Endo]

In animals, take the peacock, again, the idea behind HOW it got such a friggin huge tail in the first place was an unconsious desire.

The first peacocks had normal bird tails (and probably weren't "peacock") when the first peacock had a tail that had a "deformed" tail, the other male peacocks were not as lucky, and thus didn't get as many mates or had a successful time breeding, until a new male, with a bigger better, more crazy tail. and thus time goes on and now our peacock's look pretty silly, with a tail that has no benifit except to get the chicks.

Looking back now, the first peacock had no knowledge of these future tails, but the sexual desire for it was ingrained into it from the very begging.

With that I will say I have one big tail

[Sargeras]

actually in the bible it says something like "man shouldnt go to bed with another man" or something along those lines... making it a sin. personally i dont have a problem with gay people, even tho i do think the whole born that way stuff is a load

It does say that man/women should be together only or something like that in gensis. I am not really for homosexuality, but if they want to be gay, then let them.

[Shinryuu]

Are you serious? People don't 'want' to be gay or not, they don't have a choice. The only choice they have is to cover it up or be open about it. And because of people with your type of mindset, there are still plenty of homosexuals who won't say anything about their sexuality and suffer in silence, sometimes their whole life long.

[Endo]

<--------- Is just very happy that an adult topic such as this was able to be discussed in a forum with adult views and points explained. I like debates such as these as long as they are kept civil and the everyone remembers that each one of us has an opinion

[Septimus]

In animals, take the peacock, again, the idea behind HOW it got such a friggin huge tail in the first place was an unconsious desire.

The first peacocks had normal bird tails (and probably weren't "peacock") when the first peacock had a tail that had a "deformed" tail, the other male peacocks were not as lucky, and thus didn't get as many mates or had a successful time breeding, until a new male, with a bigger better, more crazy tail. and thus time goes on and now our peacock's look pretty silly, with a tail that has no benifit except to get the chicks.

Looking back now, the first peacock had no knowledge of these future tails, but the sexual desire for it was ingrained into it from the very begging.

Peacocks' tails fall under the concept of "sexual selection". A big bright tail is not very conducive for survival (target for predators, slows them down, requires a lot of nutrition to keep healthy), the tail shows that the bearer has very good genes because he is able to survive with a big, gaudy target on his back. So the peacock with the biggest, gaudiest tail is generally the one that the females want to copulate with, since his offspring have the greatest chance of survival. (And the male doesn't care who he sleeps with because he is a male. And I am so not making that up.)

[Shinryuu]

And that, kids, is why a peacock's charm costs millions.

[Roree]

Nature vs, Nurture is virtually impossible to debate. I have tried in many classes/debates and it always falls short. The only true way to study nature/nuture is to take identical twins and keep some together and seperate others.... Which except for Hitler isnt nor wil lever be purposely done.

Peacock tails are used for two things... Mating display and Warding off predators. Natural selcation shows us that a Bigger more vivid tail was less likely to be eaten as opposed to a darker less flashy. Likewise for sexual desire or proof of breeding same goes... Flashy, big good... small boring bad...

Comparisons of humans to animals is very hard to go by. Humans are the only animals that have sex for the most part for pleasure and not da babies. We do not choose our mate/mates based on survivability or breeding. If we did i would be scared.... Look what we did to dogs.... From a Bull mastiff to a tiny teacup toy poodle.... All dogs originated from similar size species/sub-species yet we breed genetic mutation with one another to create new species or to make a specialized dog.

Humans for the most part take alot of time in selecting breeding for pets but rarely spend the time for thier own offspring...

The topic of religion is always very closely intertwinned with homosexuality. People try to use the bible and other relgious doctrines to prove why gays are bad. Yet as with any Debate you need a few more sources. One will never win the booty. Adam and eve not adam and steve.... is stil lthe funniest thing i have ever heard. What most people never pay attention to nor even are told... Eve wasnt the first woman. I forget the first womans name but she was not very desirable. In most religious texts Women are breeding purposes only. The story of adam and eve was about women ruining paradise more so than the temptation which somepeopel try to teach from it. Had it been adam and Steve it would have been more like" I dare you to eat that apple..." moreso than "hmmmm that looks yummy i wonder what will happen if i eat it".

Both of my parents are gay... i have one brother and no sisters. He is "homophobe str8" and i am "Changing the flat tire while trying to not mess up my perdy clothes gay" He was raised for the most part seperate from me. So the nurture side will kick in here. Yet he has some of the exact same mannerisms and gestures as my father yet me nor my brother was around him that much. I tend to ride the fence with N vs N I think we are pre-disposed with certain things and with nurturing whiel we are growing up we arrive at what we are now.

I was outin High School which was not an easy task... Well i was Bi in High School but anyways... I always found it humerous to have this Himophobe guy bashing you in public yet away from everyone was thrying to get some. The population of gays is very much more higher.... hehe i made a funny sentence... than what people are lead to believe. Nurture is oneof the main reasons why we have gay bashings and closeted homosexuals. For instance... my best freind has Two kids and is Divorced. His Wife HATES ME WITH A PASSION.... anyways... I went with him the other day as he was dropping his kids off at her place. His son wanted to give him a kiss goodbye and she freaked. She was like Boys dont kiss other boys. I was like um... yeah they do look.... and kissed my freind. Did i ever mention i didnt like her either. Anyways... My freidn picked him up and kissed him and we left. The ex-wifes reasons for this was she did not want her son to grow up gay. So brainwashing him from birth was best way to do it. Anyways... homophobes and biggots and such aside i am not really concerned with approval from people or for that fact what they really think. My parents raised me to be very open-minded and to always balance the equation. I am a Libra so i like to debate and plus i am liek so many other posters full of endless amounts of useless knowledge thats just screaming to get out.

Anyways have fun i think its tiem for my shell to go sacrifice me more in sky.

[Demetrick]

Peacocks' tails fall under the concept of "sexual selection". A big bright tail is not very conducive for survival (target for predators, slows them down, requires a lot of nutrition to keep healthy), the tail shows that the bearer has very good genes because he is able to survive with a big, gaudy target on his back. So the peacock with the biggest, gaudiest tail is generally the one that the females want to copulate with, since his offspring have the greatest chance of survival. (And the male doesn't care who he sleeps with because he is a male. And I am so not making that up.)

my point of that was that its an attraction that was never in a population before but would end up being the trend for things to come once introduced. Anyways, i'm just trying to support that gays and straights are born not choosing their mates but your choice has been programmed into you.

Thats why I hate people that say, "Why do you choose to be gay?" Well, they don't choose, but if you were to ask them "Why do you choose to be straight?" I don't choose. I'm just attracted to young hawties with large breasts! and i always will be.

The nature/nurture debate I think has some relevance as well. My parents were always openminded, and my mom's best friend is some really old lesbian. I grew up not hating or being prejudice towards any religion/sex pref/race/etc. But there are other kids that grew up probably the same way end just hate everyone.

Humans are not the only animal that has sex for fun, there are species of bird and primates that do as well, and probably many others. Theres groups of monkey's that have very orgy-astic behaviors, including male/male. To be more specific, the shape of the penis has evolved, it rather looks like a spear, designed to penetrate inwards, and scrap as pulled out, removing the previous mate's semen.

An example from Jared Diamond's "The Third Chimpanzee" is humans actually are more "Secretive" about sex when you look at the grand sceme of animals. some monkeys's ass gets really large and red when they want to have sex. If that happened in the work place, every one would be fighting to fuck Susy when her ass showed she was ready to mate right there at the water cooler.

Again quoting Diamond, there are 3 things that seperate humans from animals. One is our capability to destroy our habitat. Only the elephant comes in 2nd but they don't have the capability of destroying the entire planet at the click of a bottom that we do. Our capability to genocide ourselves, is 2nd, monkeys commit genocide (via war) but however they don't on the large scale that we do. The third is our consumption of mood altering substances, Acid, coke, pcp, beer, etc. Is a trademark of human kind.

If you want to argue that humans are not animals please feel free to take that up with me, because you are wrong, lol.

[Shinryuu]

^ This is the most correct answer in this topic so far.

The only thing is: there are so much species undiscovered, and extraterrestrial life (who knows) is undiscovered as well. We can only begin to understand the human brain, and the more we discover, the less we know about it.