Why would someone be "proud" of being gay?

[RonD1120 58]

I know Anday9o8 well enough to know when he is being straight up, subtle or just jerking my chain.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[RonD1120 58]

I have been delivered from the curse of the law. So can you.

Galatians 3:13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”)

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[turtlespeed 212]

LyraM45

"well, I'm proud to be XX."

Why are you bringing chromosomes into this ?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kelpdiver 2]

AndyBoyd

I'm just posting to point this out. Attorneys do not make arguments because they believe deep down in their heart that they are taking some sort of courageous moral stand. They make arguments because they are being paid. So, yes, attorneys can and do take stances they don't personally believe in. That's the job. Sorry for the thread drift. Carry on.

They do that for work. Posting here is a recreational activity.

Sally forth.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Innate sexual orientation...; it exists from birth.

There indeed is my hangup. I am going to spend some time with this subject. At this juncture, I do not believe it has been proven to be true.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[kawisixer01 0]

stayhigh

again, I hate being stereotypical, but

Are you white/Caucasian republican aged between 40-50 years old, slightly obese, starting to bold, that lives in bible thumping states like Kentucky, Tennessee?

Have you ever ate Sushi? Those are Japanese food that has raw fish in it. This question is important; to find out just how much are you exposed to other culture besides corn fields and tobacco.

Boy you are really pushing for this whole white republican stereotype aren't you. I can assure you if you walk into any democrat voting black populated neighborhood and started asking some fellas on the street if they are gay, invite them to a date, and how they feel about gays, that you would likely very quickly get your lights knocked out. I can also tell you from experience that I have been witness to a whole lot of democrat voting union members in factories and job sites that would most certainly not support, agree to, or condone gay rights and are very intolerant. They vote for the dems for their own personal interests and simply go along with the other policies of the party as a side effect.
Likewise there are quite a few right leaning and libertarian folks like myself on the other side of the spectrum who want nothing more than for people to leave other people alone, mind their own business, and especially for the government to get out of peoples lives and bedrooms. Moral of the post is quit the idiotic stereotyping, you know as well as I do this is one of those topics that the two parties try to make waaaaay more of a divisional and partisan issue than it really is.

[kelpdiver 2]

stayhigh

Have you ever ate Sushi? Those are Japanese food that has raw fish in it. This question is important; to find out just how much are you exposed to other culture besides corn fields and tobacco.

If you live in bible country and there aren't a lot of sushi eaters, I wouldn't eat it there either. You need that fish to keep moving in and out of inventory, or it gets a bit funky.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Sally forth.

She and I dated for a while, but I found her to be two-dimensional.

[normiss 620]

This is irony at it's best.

[narcimund 0]

RonD1120

Quote

Innate sexual orientation...; it exists from birth.

There indeed is my hangup. I am going to spend some time with this subject. At this juncture, I do not believe it has been proven to be true.

I also have no idea if it's true but I don't see that it matters. So what if it's innate? So what if it's learned? So what if it's chosen on a whim? It's nobody's business regardless.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

So what if it's innate? So what if it's learned? So what if it's chosen on a whim?

This is so what:

https://www.google.com/search?q=gay+deprogramming&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=nts

https://www.google.com/search?q=beating+the+gay+out+of+your+child&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=nts

[JohnnyMarko 1]

stayhigh

well, the younger generation will see it as a some old dude rambling about his religion/ideology. Just like we let some old grandma or grandpa to be racist. They are going to die in few years anyways. Let them have at it.

I'd actually rather sit down and have a conversation/beer with Ron than with you.

[narcimund 0]

Andy9o8

Quote

So what if it's innate? So what if it's learned? So what if it's chosen on a whim?

This is so what:

https://www.google.com/search?q=gay+deprogramming&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=nts

https://www.google.com/search?q=beating+the+gay+out+of+your+child&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=nts

Yeah, that's the consequence of meddlers feeling sexual orientation is malleable. But the problem isn't in the malleability of sexual orientation -- it's in the meddlesomeness.

I'm not going to pretend I can somehow mystically sense 'geneticness' to shut them down. The answer is it's none of their concern and they should butt out.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Yeah, that's the consequence of meddlers feeling sexual orientation is malleable. But the problem isn't in the malleability of sexual orientation -- it's in the meddlesomeness.

I think you're kidding yourself if you try to deny the linkage between "the causation issue" and people's attitudes; and in that regard, not all negative attitudes manifest themselves in the form of "meddlesomeness". Even in the minds of lots of people who readily agree that other people's sexuality is none of their business (and act accordingly), there's still a huge difference between "something that you DO" and "something that you ARE". The difference informs the entire social discussion.

Quote

they should butt out.

I see what you did there.

[stayhigh 2]

Now you are being racist.

I lived in northern part of Long Beach, next to 710 and 405. I know black people. They are not gonna knock my ass out.

If I ask some black dude out on the street, most likely they will tell me to get the fuck out, and possibly/likely they will call me fag at the same time.

Not all blacks are violent criminals.

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[rehmwa 2]

narcimund

I also have no idea if it's true but I don't see that it matters. So what if it's innate? So what if it's learned? So what if it's chosen on a whim? It's nobody's business regardless.

SCORE - this ^

you take 100 people and ask them WHY they are that way: some just are that way (born), some might have chosen, some it might be good for them, some it might not be, etc etc etc

individuals are individuals - the whole one size fits all thing is really annoying

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[narcimund 0]

Andy9o8

I think you're kidding yourself if you try to deny the linkage between "the causation issue" and people's attitudes

I didn't deny that there's a linkage in the minds of the meddlers. I don't know what spurious justifications they prop themselves up with, nor do I care.

See, the underlying axiom in this battle between "innate" and "choice" is that gayness is a transgression and the only excuse would be congenital inevitability. The implication is that gayness should be allowed only if gay people are victims of fate. I deny that whole mindset.

Claiming immutable genetic causation is a bullshit ploy in a number of ways. First, it's a made up claim of a fact of nature. Nobody knows if it's true. Second, it accepts the presumption that homosexuality is inferior to the alternative. I don't buy that.

I'm still not pretending I know where being gay comes from even if the meddlers could be dissuaded by it. I don't know where it comes from and I don't accept that it matters.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[narcimund 0]

rehmwa

the whole one size fits all thing is really annoying

Absolutely! That points to yet another falsehood in the "innate" vs "choice" debate: that there's a singular answer.

To demand that gayness comes as a consequence of DNA is to claim there's only ONE way for a homosexual encounter to occur. This way of thinking denies the possibility that a kid might jerk off his buddy on a passing whim. Or that a woman could fall in love with her best lady friend just because they're so goddamn wonderful together. Or that I could mostly love men because I totally dig how they think and communicate and secondarily because their bodies are hot.

People are different and even when they're the same they get there by different paths.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[rifleman 61]

There are some very interesting explorations of the "nature vs. nurture" debate in "A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What The Internet Tells Us about Sexual Relationships" by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam. I personally found it an extremely interesting and thought provoking read.

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Claiming immutable genetic causation... accepts the presumption that homosexuality is inferior to the alternative.

I don't think that logically follows at all, nor have I heard it either expressed or implied as such, at least by people who support gay rights. But I understand your point.

[narcimund 0]

Andy9o8

Quote

Claiming immutable genetic causation... accepts the presumption that homosexuality is inferior to the alternative.

I don't think that logically follows at all, nor have I heard it either expressed or implied as such, at least by people who support gay rights. But I understand your point.

Yeah, I haven't heard it expressed either. I'm expressing it as my own view. I know it's sacrilege to have a non-partyline view but there you go.

I remember getting in an argument with the leader of a gay/lesbian group in college in roughly 1985. The two of us were about to get in front of an auditorium to educate the straight masses. At the last minute she discovered I wasn't prepared to assert that I just KNEW gayness was OBVIOUSLY genetic in basis. She made the same case you're making: people want to change us and our defense must be that we're unchangeable. I said my defense is different: my sexual orientation is nobody's lookout but my own. I wasn't invited back.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[rehmwa 2]

narcimund

people want to change us and our defense must be that we're unchangeable. I said my defense is different: my sexual orientation is nobody's lookout but my own. I wasn't invited back.

You should stick around narce

I know this is about one topic only, but this applies to so many other aspects of everything in life. "I'm a victim of chance, please help me" vs "I'm an individual capable and willing to responsibly live my own life based on MY choices (or just plain how I am) and don't need or want any help, just respect that I'm my own boss and let me live my life as I see fit for me"

Individualism and responsibility is great, that's the easy part - getting the busybodies (from both spectrums of politics and all spectrums of social intrusiveness) to respect that is the real key - I don't know how to do that except by one person as a time being an example to others and hoping it grows.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[narcimund 0]

rehmwa

this applies to so many other aspects of everything in life. "I'm a victim of chance, please help me" vs "I'm an individual capable and willing to responsibly live my own life based on MY choices (or just plain how I am) and don't need or want any help, just respect that I'm my own boss and let me live my life as I see fit for me"

I think you're slipping into an unrelated rant. This is quite different. This is between "I'm a victim of chance but I'm stuck with it so leave me alone" vs "I'm an individual capable and willing to responsibly live my own life so leave me alone."

Both are defenses against busybodies who are actively attacking, not (as in your example) pleas for undeserved social assistance.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[rehmwa 2]

I'm good with your quotes - pretty much exactly my intent

but to clarify - the "please help me" is more about "can't help it so force social advocacy" rather than entitlements


but I'm a big fan of unrelated rants though....and extension of the topic to general social gunk is fine by me regardless......

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[narcimund 0]

Andy9o8

Quote

Claiming immutable genetic causation... accepts the presumption that homosexuality is inferior to the alternative.

I don't think that logically follows at all, nor have I heard it either expressed or implied as such, at least by people who support gay rights. But I understand your point.

I missed an important concept in my earlier reply to this. Only a lawyer could care but here we go:

I don't mean to sound like I'm arguing that "immutable genetic causation" implies that "homosexuality is inferior to the alternative". I find no connection between those two precepts.

Instead I'm arguing (and I should have been more careful with this nuanced phrasing) that engaging in the debate by countering the bigots' axiom that gayness is changeable tacitly accepts the bigots' OTHER axiom that gayness is morally wrong. The gay side is countering meddlers with, "Don't oppose our sex lives -- it's immutable so we can't help it." But that's inferior to, "Don't oppose our sex lives -- it's not a transgression so you have no legitimate interest."

Not only does it address the wrong aspect, the gay side has also let itself be cornered into an untenable position, claiming as fact a position that has not yet been teased out by science. That'll come back to bite them if science works out the origin(s) of gayness someday and gays picked the wrong side. That's a lot to bet on a complete unknown.

First Class Citizen Twice Over