Nature vs nurture....

[Testing]

[/QUOTE][/FONT][/COLOR]

parentastic: With this kind of argument, black people would still have to sit in their own side of the buses and go to their own toilets in America. [/COLOR]
...[/COLOR]
The bus driver excluding the black woman (unless she accept to sit in the "black" area) did NOTHING different to this black women that was not applicable to every black woman in the city, either.[/COLOR]
[/COLOR]

<i></i>
<FONT font="Verdana">Don't EVEN start with the inapposite example of race. I realize everyone with an agenda wants to ride the civil rights bus, but sorry, that only applies to immutable characteristics like race and gender and age.

Race is an immutable inborn characteristic, NOT a behavior. Sexual behavior is indeed something you DO, not something you are.
[/COLOR]
This is so unbelievably offensive to black people, who actually fought this battle for hundreds of years. [/COLOR]
<FONT font="Verdana">
A snippet by an African American from the OC Register[/COLOR][/URL]: [/COLOR]
(There are dozens of similar sources but this showed up first)[/COLOR]
[/QUOTE][/FONT][/COLOR]

Newspaper souce: As an African American, I am offended at this scene and at homosexuals, in general, who attempt to identify their perceived struggle for equality with the struggle for equality that African Americans have gone through. Let me point out a few of many differences.[/COLOR]
Homosexuals were never enslaved as a population in this country.[/COLOR]
African Americans cannot change their race when it is popular or convenient.[/COLOR]
The U.S. government never, in effect, condoned the lynching of homosexuals as they once did with African Americans.[/COLOR]
The U.S. government never denied homosexuals the right to vote or to own property.[/COLOR]
It is undefined as to what makes someone a homosexual. Some say it is the actual experience of engaging in sexual activity with a member of one’s own sex. Others say it’s the desires an individual has for someone of their same sex. It appears if one desired to rob a bank, and never actually did it, it would not make one a bank robber. The U.S. government established guidelines as to what criterion determines one to be an African American.[/COLOR]
The struggle of African Americans and homosexuals are not the same. People choose to be homosexual; people don’t choose their race or to have a developmental disability. I have spoken to homosexuals and they tell me rather emphatically, “I am what I choose to be sexually,” which is different from race. Sexuality is a free will choice.[/COLOR]
I am not homophobic; I do not fear homosexuals, I just wish they would stop attempting to hijack the pain, deaths, suffering and struggles of the African American people in this country.[/COLOR]
[/COLOR]

<i></i>
<FONT font="Verdana">
I'm so tired of this old worn-out, inapposite argument. I realize that it was appealing to co-opt the successful civil rights movement, no matter how distasteful to blacks and to a lesser extent, women. But it doesn't work, no matter how hard you try to torture it into those parameters.

I think what is astonishing to me is that you seem so entrenched in your heterosexism and your discrimination that you genuinely don't seem to see it. Seems that the law didn't agree with you either, since the organizers had to shut down the prom since they couldn't stop her from dressing the way she wanted.[/QUOTE]<i>[/FONT][/COLOR]</i>
Nothing could be further from the truth; I actually see what is happening quite clearly. And...I have a teen. You try stopping a teen from wearing something.[/COLOR]
[/COLOR]
It's the sacred cow of this generation. You MUST bow to the sacred cow and not touch that subject, so the school has to fold from maintaining normal rules. If some girl insisted that she had to wear a black robe because she was a goth, the school would have denied her and been fine. But should goths achieve celebrity status, and create a movement, convincing people that one is "born a goth" and must be allowed to dress as a goth to be herself, eventually, the school would have to permit that too. It just never ends.[/COLOR]
[/QUOTE][/FONT][/COLOR]

In a prom, two young persons, in couple, go dance with each other, fully dressed for the occasion. These two young person did, and were prevented from it, on the basis of their sexual orientation. THAT is where the discrimination is. [/COLOR]
[/COLOR]

<i></i>
<FONT font="Verdana">No. This is not what occurred. She didn't show up fully dressed for the occasion, minding her own business before the prom.<I> HAD she done so, she probably would have simply attended her prom.</I> She lobbied a legal bombshell at the school <I>in advance</I>, letting it know she was coming in a tux and bringing a girl, thinking the school system would fold immediately, since she invoked the sacred cow. Her request, made calculatingly in December, was rejected on the basis that to allow her and another girl to come as a "couple" would force the school to sell the cheaper "couple" tickets to any two people who asked for them. She filed suit. The school did fold, but not in the way she expected, determining not to hold the prom at all. Whoops. She didn't expect that and got a backlash. Immediately, the ACLU steps in. A series of events ensues that never had to happen.

She could have just gone to the prom if this was REALLY about having her prom experience. No, it was never really about that. She wanted to make a political statement here, and not unexpectedly, got lots of national and celebrity support on that. Indeed, other groups even offered to hold a prom where she could bring her girlfriend. It wasn't about that.
[/COLOR]
Oh, Ellen Degeneres gave her a $30K scholarship for this. And she got to appear at a number of celebrity events, and was chosen to be the Grand Marshall at the NYC Gay Pride event. Oh...and she got to meet the President. [/COLOR]
[/COLOR]

You are free to display your heterosexism and your discrimnatory views for the world to see. Just don't be surprised when people call you on it. [/COLOR]

<FONT font="Verdana">
Well, if that were the case, that would be reasonable. That is a mischaracterization of my views.

[/COLOR]

You do realize, as someone else pointed out above, that students get dressed in different or unique ways every time at all proms, and they are never excluded or prevented from attending? She was excluded <I>specifically on the basis of her sexual orientation</I> because she decided to dress <I>with man cloths</I> while being a girl. Nobody here is stupid. We perfectly know, you and I and all the readers that she was not simply excluded for violating the dress code. Let's at least be honest here[/COLOR]

<FONT font="Verdana">

No, she was excluded because she wanted to dress as a man. Any other girl would have been excluded as well under the policy at the time, not just any girl who identified as gay. Let's really be honest here. It was never about attending the prom AT ALL. It was a calculated series of events intended to bully the schoolboard into bowing to her on this sacred cow issue, when it had bowed to no one else. It failed. But she came out ok, with the money and the celebrity recognition. No word on where or if she went to college. [/COLOR] </SIZE>[/FONT]

 

[Testing]

parentastic: I think what momtoallkids is saying here is simply that you cannot pretend that gay/lesbian people "happen" only in families in which there are "happy gays/lesbians loving each others" around to "influence" the "malleable" sexuality of youngsters, as Testing believes:

Again, not what I believe. I never said they had to be in your family. There are predatory kids making moves on other kids in middle schools today. They are in high schools. They are in bars. They can be the next door neighbor's kid.

You seem to think EVERY teen not "born that way" will resist the affection and attention of another teen. Not the lonely ones. The marginalized ones. They don't even know what they are attracted to yet.

Ever seen the movie, "The Color Purple" with Whoopie Goldberg? (Yes, I am showing my age). This was criticized at the time for having "gay themes". Uh, actually, NO. It didn't. Whoopie's character, Celie, was so beaten down after years of abuse by her rotten husband and his kids, so lonely after her sister was ripped away from her, and her babies by her own father were taken away, that when a vibrant beautiful singer kissed her later in the movie, she was amazed that anyone saw her at all, and longed for her. This was NOT about sex or even sexual attraction. It was about opportunity and attention and feeling loved. This is what every person is looking for, and lonely, marginalized people will take where they can find it.

It's not all about sex, believe it or not.

Believe me, I've got kids in the demographic. This is definitely happening. Get on some public schooled teen's facebook some time and see what I mean.

Just recently, I saw the photo of a beautiful young model, maybe 13 (models start very young). The photo was placed on Facebook by a <U>teen girl</U>, with the caption, "I want to f**k Her! Yum".

What in the hell has happened?

even in "respected families" (in Testing views) where people go to church and all, children can and have been born gay too, which tends to show that it is something you are born with, not something you grow or become influenced from your environment.

No. It was influenced somewhere, but I never said it was necessarily in the home in which the person grew up.

 

[Testing]

Oh my....LOL at the "Rep Power and Reputation rating" at the side under my name.

Gee, I wonder who might be rating me badly. Hmm. I dislike cowardly people who hide behind things like this but say nothing and would much appreciate it if they just tell me up front in a rational way that they think I am wrong and why, as parentastic is doing.

Funny. I've never seen anything like that before. Do I get banned if enough people or moderators (whoever is rating this) who dislike my position? It's ok. I can just go now if you'd prefer. It's fine and I'm not offended at all. I probably waste too much time on the computer anyway. But it's been a tough time lately and I'm not particularly active right now since my back is healing, so it is easy to sit here...

I'm going to go test this rating thing on other people to see what happens. Parentastic, I will give you some positive points (if it works the way it looks like it might).

Edited to Add: Ok, I guess you can click on the "Reputation" icon and give an approval or disapproval to anyone's post, though it appears to not accept multiple reputation clicks.

So I gave everyone on this thread an "I approve" rating.

I considered making a comment but am not sure where that appears. In the User's CP? Curious how that works.

 

[ElliottCarasDad]

No, she was excluded because she wanted to dress as a man. Any other girl would have been excluded as well under the policy at the time, not just any girl who identified as gay. Let's really be honest here. It was never about attending the prom AT ALL. It was a calculated series of events intended to bully the schoolboard into bowing to her on this sacred cow issue, when it had bowed to no one else. It failed. But she came out ok, with the money and the celebrity recognition. No word on where or if she went to college. [/COLOR][/QUOTE]
So what do you think the purpose is of a dress code that requires women to not dress like men? or vice-versa? Does that apply to jeans or shirts at school? Good luck with that! I like how you hang your hat on this issue with the "dress code" but its actually because you are a bigot who doesnt like gays.

This is thread is awesome, because it exposes people like you!

 

[mom2many]

Oh my....LOL at the "Rep Power and Reputation rating" at the side under my name.

Gee, I wonder who might be rating me badly. Hmm. I dislike cowardly people who hide behind things like this but say nothing and would much appreciate it if they just tell me up front in a rational way that they think I am wrong and why, as parentastic is doing.

Funny. I've never seen anything like that before. Do I get banned if enough people or moderators (whoever is rating this) who dislike my position? It's ok. I can just go now if you'd prefer. It's fine and I'm not offended at all. I probably waste too much time on the computer anyway. But it's been a tough time lately and I'm not particularly active right now since my back is healing, so it is easy to sit here...

I'm going to go test this rating thing on other people to see what happens. Parentastic, I will give you some positive points (if it works the way it looks like it might).

Edited to Add: Ok, I guess you can click on the "Reputation" icon and give an approval or disapproval to anyone's post, though it appears to not accept multiple reputation clicks.

So I gave everyone on this thread an "I approve" rating.

I considered making a comment but am not sure where that appears. In the User's CP? Curious how that works.

Rep can only be given to one person then you have to move on. The system prevents one person from repping anyone to much. So while there may be one person giving you some down rep that person is not resposible alone. There is a way to find out though who it is.

 

[cybele]

Also, pretty sure you can check your rep by going into user CP settings. It tells you who has repped you if im not mistaken?


Meanwhile Testing... wow, just wow.

My daughter and some of her friends went to the Moomba festival today, (which is a huge carnival that falls on a public holiday here run by the city of Melbourne, we took the younger kids yesterday, so much fun) when she gets back im going to ask her how many naive, sweet, innocent young teenage girls she seduced into homosexuality today, if she comes back going "What? I went on some rides, ate some junk food and won a teddy bear" im going to tell her she's doing her job as a lesbian wrong :laugh:

I'll also make sure she dosent want to wear a black dress to her school formal this year, cant have any lesbian goths running around, INAPPROPRIATE!

 

[Testing]

Also, pretty sure you can check your rep by going into user CP settings. It tells you who has repped you if im not mistaken?


Meanwhile Testing... wow, just wow.

My daughter and some of her friends went to the Moomba festival today, (which is a huge carnival that falls on a public holiday here run by the city of Melbourne, we took the younger kids yesterday, so much fun) when she gets back im going to ask her how many naive, sweet, innocent young teenage girls she seduced into homosexuality today, if she comes back going "What? I went on some rides, ate some junk food and won a teddy bear" im going to tell her she's doing her job as a lesbian wrong :laugh:

I'll also make sure she dosent want to wear a black dress to her school formal this year, cant have any lesbian goths running around, INAPPROPRIATE!

Mockery, instead of substantive response. Well, ok.

I guess you have to work with what you've got...

I guess THIS part is just fine with everyone. I'd cut and paste it from the Facebook page here along with some of the yuck accompanying it, except that is a crappy thing to do to the young model, whoever she is. I'm sure you could find it online.

Me, previously: Believe me, I've got kids in the demographic. This is definitely happening. Get on some public schooled teen's facebook some time and see what I mean.

Just recently, I saw the photo of a beautiful young model, maybe 13 (models start very young). The photo was placed on Facebook by a <U>teen girl</U>, with the caption, "I want to f**k Her! Yum".

What in the hell has happened?

 

[cybele]

Teenagers are at a point where they start developing sexual feelings. Do I agree with them being so out there with it on a public forum such as facebook? Not really, I do miss the good old days of the diary under the mattress, however that isnt a homosexual issue, its a teenagers and technology issue.

So I have issues with a teenage girl finding a female attractive and having sexual thoughts about her? No.


Another issue here is 13yr olds and modelling, if your issue is with the age of the model, then again, thats not a homosexual issue, thats a modelling issue and sexualisation of young girls.

 

[parentastic]

Race is an immutable inborn characteristic, NOT a behavior. Sexual behavior is indeed something you DO, not something you are. [/COLOR][/quote]<FONT font="Verdana">

Sexual <I>orientation</I> is not a behavior. It's how you are attracted.
The behavior is whether or not you act on it.

Some priests decide never to have sex, regardless of whether they are homosexual or heterosexual priests... they made a choice of behavior.
It has nothing to do with <I>sexual orientation.</I>
The <I>orientation </I>is immutable.

It's the sacred cow of this generation. You MUST bow to the sacred cow and not touch that subject[/COLOR][/quote]<FONT font="Verdana">
You call it a "sacred cow" and "politically correct.". I call it <U>respect</U>.

 

[Testing]

cybele: Teenagers are at a point where they start developing sexual feelings. Do I agree with them being so out there with it on a public forum such as facebook? Not really, I do miss the good old days of the diary under the mattress, however that isnt a homosexual issue, its a teenagers and technology issue.

No, this is not a "teens and technology" issue.

This poster was nearly EIGHTEEN years old from the birthdate. The model was maybe 12 or 13. I can see I was unclear about that.

That's a few months away from a potential arrest for disseminating child porn. Maybe the model would need to be dressed a little skimpier, but this was way out there.

So I have issues with a teenage girl finding a female attractive and having sexual thoughts about her? No.

No. Posting "She's really pretty" is finding her attractive. "I want to F her. Yum" is just revolting, especially coming from a girl who is nearly an adult, but coming from ANYONE. How degenerate.

Another issue here is 13yr olds and modelling, if your issue is with the age of the model, then again, thats not a homosexual issue, thats a modelling issue and sexualisation of young girls.

No, the age of the model is not the problem here, though I dislike seeing the sexualization of anyone. It just isn't necessary and is very sleazy, but that's another issue. The posting of a picture of a very young girl by a near adult girl (or anyone, actually) with the words "I want to F her. Yum" is the problem.

 

[parentastic]

The posting of a picture of a very young girl by a near adult girl (or anyone, actually) with the words "I want to F her. Yum" is the problem.

If it was the posting of a picture of a very young boy by a near adult girl, or of a very young girl by a near adult boy, with the same words - would that be a problem, then?

 

[cybele]

Okay, so its a boundaries problem. Maybe this 18yr old girl has some problems, maybe she dosent know the age of the model, maybe she likes young girls (which, before you jump on me, no I do not think this is okay) yes her language is crude.

But again, this is not a homosexual issue. The MAJORITY of gay 18yr olds do not want to have sex with 13yr olds. Its the same as me pulling up some of the examples ive seen of old threads on this forum about parents worried about their teenage girls dating men in their 20's and going "LOOK, HETEROSEXUALITY IS BAD" its IRRELEVANT to the actual problem.


The problems you have in that example are:

Crude language
An adult making sexual comments about a child

End of.

 

[parentastic]

The problems you have in that example are:

Crude language
An adult making sexual comments about a child

End of.

The <I>issue</I> in this example of course has nothing to do with homosexuality. Yet it seems obvious to me the problem Testing have truly <U>IS</U> with homosexuality.
Testing just can't find a logical explanation for it, because there is nothing rational here. It's the bigotry that speaks. Hence the constant double standard.

 

[superman]

I honestly feel it is a mixture of both, leaning towards nurture.

 

[singledad]

Testing - homosexuality is NOT all about sex. Sex is something you do and yes, young people do sometimes experiment. Homosexuality is about so much more than sex. Its about who you are attracted to on an emotional, spiritual and physical level. Like you are to your wife. You didn't marry her just because you thought having sex with her was fun, did you?

But I think I know where you come from. It would be so much harder to dehumanize homosexuals to the point where its ok to deny them the right to be who they are, if you had to admit that they weren't evil deviants, stalking innocent heterosexual youths at night like vampires, bent on "turning" them...

 

[Testing]

If it was the posting of a picture of a very young boy by a near adult girl, or of a very young girl by a near adult boy, with the same words - would that be a problem, then?

Asked and answered. Twice I said this would be disgusting if anyone did it, but I'm not seeing "anyone" do it. I am specifically seeing girls doing this.

By the way, I have to laugh at this distraction tactic, with which I - and any parent of teens - am quite familiar. Do you have teens or grown kids?

No one here has the guts to say, "That is disgusting!" on its face, without comparing it to something else? Wow.

But instead, let's divert to another topic or side issue.

Yes, both are disgusting. Of course. Need you really ask...

Now back to the issue at hand...this is ok with you people, because "other things are equally bad or worse".:arghh:

My teens use this all the time. Typical conversation.

Me: Do not do X. You know X has bad results like (fill in the blank). Be wise.

Teen: But Susie did Y. I COULD be doing Y. See...X is not that bad when you compare it to all the things in the world I could be doing.

Me: Yes, you COULD be a tyrannical dictator like Hitler attempting to exterminate a whole group of people, and that WOULD be worse than having done X. But we aren't TALKING about that other subject. We are talking about X. So Y is irrelevant here, and is merely a distraction technique. About X....

By the way, I live in a large, urban area and my kid goes to an urban school. Hardly anyone, we have discovered, even has a Mom or Dad. One kid said once, when our daughter was embarrassed that we showed up for something, "Oh man! You have a Dad who comes to things for you. I haven't ever had that. That's amazing."

Perhaps you all live in fairy tale world where things like a predatory sexual teen community and kids with no parents around ever are not typical fare for your teens. If so, please tell me where that is, as it sounds wonderful.

 

[Testing]

But I think I know where you come from. It would be so much harder to dehumanize homosexuals to the point where its ok to deny them the right to be who they are, if you had to admit that they weren't evil deviants, stalking innocent heterosexual youths at night like vampires, bent on "turning" them...

You obviously do not know "where I come from" as this is a total mischaracterization to the extreme of what I said. Nowhere did I ever said anything remotely like this. But I did say that predatory teens exist, because they do, and flipping is a well-known concept in the community, because it is.

 

[mom2many]

Testing, I am trying to follow what it is exactly you are saying but this thread has gotten a little off track which isn't uncommon in heated type discussions.

Can you break it down into simpler terms what you do believe. Parentastic I will ask that you not respond to his answers to me...anyone for that matter, please do not. I believe I know where everyone else stands just not Testing exactly.

Now to everyone who is hitting the down rep button. Please refrain if your only main complaint is a difference of opinion. While we may not all agree that does not mean that any one person is wrong. Down repping should only be for things that are so far off base such as "The reason my child is gay is because he was abducted by aliens". Be fair, play fair and fight fair. I will shut this thread down if that can not be done.

 

[Testing]

mom2many: Testing, I am trying to follow what it is exactly you are saying but this thread has gotten a little off track which isn't uncommon in heated type discussions.

Well, I'm certainly not "heated". This is a debate forum, so I figured it was acceptable to share contrary opinions and unpopular facts. Maybe not.

Can you break it down into simpler terms what you do believe. Parentastic I will ask that you not respond to his answers to me...anyone for that matter, please do not. I believe I know where everyone else stands just not Testing exactly.

I'm not sure what you are asking here. You want me to summarize everything I believe on this subject? Everything I have said on this thread? What I believe about nature v. nurture, specifically?

I'm going to guess that is is the third option. Homosexuality is "natural" in that it does appear in nature but I do not believe that we are created this way, and I believe that our equipment and its natural function verifies this fact. All kinds of things appear in nature and in man that is not in our own best interest; we can make choices. As a Christian, who is well-versed in scripture, I believe that you can't distort scripture enough to say that homosexuality is ok (see Romans 1). Same sex attraction can occur in ANYBODY, given the circumstances that it can develop. One does not have to act on same sex attraction, any more than one has to act on other sexual thoughts that are outside of marriage. Marriage is best, and indeed, if we all had one marriage partner and stayed faithful, there would be no sexual disease.

That is what I believe.

Now to everyone who is hitting the down rep button. Please refrain if your only main complaint is a difference of opinion.

<i></i>
Thank you for this. I thought I was in middle school there for a moment, when I noticed the "reputation" indicator. I actually can interact with people of violently oppositional views quite easily and thought all adults could do this without getting bent out of shape. Apparently, that is not the case.

Let me announce up front: I have made ONLY POSITIVE reputation clicks to every single person on this thread, just to see how it all works. Even those of you who are absolutely wrong (kidding). I don't have to secretly show you how annoyed I am by the fact that your position is in opposition to mine by clicking on something. I'll just tell you why you are wrong. Show me the same courtesy and we will get along fine.

Down repping should only be for things that are so far off base such as "The reason my child is gay is because he was abducted by aliens". Be fair, play fair and fight fair. I will shut this thread down if that can not be done.

Thank you. No problem on this end. I don't even care if someone does say his kid was abducted by aliens (I sometimes think my oldest falls into this category). Just back it up with some EVIDENCE. Support your position. That's all I expect from people.

 

[mom2many]

Well, I'm certainly not "heated". This is a debate forum, so I figured it was acceptable to share contrary opinions and unpopular facts. Maybe not.

That wasn't aimed at you specifically. It was for everyone.

I'm not sure what you are asking here. You want me to summarize everything I believe on this subject? Everything I have said on this thread? What I believe about nature v. nurture, specifically?

I'm going to guess that is is the third option. Homosexuality is "natural" in that it does appear in nature but I do not believe that we are created this way, and I believe that our equipment and its natural function verifies this fact. All kinds of things appear in nature and in man that is not in our own best interest; we can make choices. As a Christian, who is well-versed in scripture, I believe that you can't distort scripture enough to say that homosexuality is ok (see Romans 1). Same sex attraction can occur in ANYBODY, given the circumstances that it can develop. One does not have to act on same sex attraction, any more than one has to act on other sexual thoughts that are outside of marriage. Marriage is best, and indeed, if we all had one marriage partner and stayed faithful, there would be no sexual disease.

That is what I believe.

That's what I was asking. Like I said things were getting lost by everyone's need to prove a point.


I am a staunch supporter of Gay rights. I believe they are born that way and outside influence be damn.

However, your points are also correct. That is not what nature intended, you are right that our reproductive organs have a purpose, and at the end of the day they are created for reproduction. The fact that is enjoyable is a bonus (thankfully). Like you said though, nature does show us that these genetic anomalies do exist. No matter where you stand in the debate these facts can not be ignored. I also agree that no one <I>has </I>to act on their feelings, but I believe that people have a right to be happy. Whatever that is so long as it doesn't break any laws. Not religious laws, peoples beliefs are personal and should stay that way. I firmly believe religion should have no role in any government.

This is why I asked you to break it down. I felt that to much of your opinion was being lost in the debate when at it's core it is not an incorrect view. Just being pushed to the point that you were not getting a fair representation.


As for everything else, you are welcome. I do not like to see the rep buttons abused....that goes for anyone.