 debbyski says: Well, this is a very interesting article and suffice it to say that I don't believe truly gay people are gay by choice. I have spoken to many gay people and I don't believe they have ever "chosen" to be gay. I DO however, believe that sexual attraction is more fluid for some people than we think. I also believe that society "socializes" us to be heterosexual. Hmmm...wonder what they have to say about bi-sexuals? I dunno Kkapricorn; I've always thought labeling was more appropriate on clothing than people.  Some of my best friends are straight Some of my best friends are gay Some of my best friends are lesbian Some of my best friends are in denial about any of the above. Some just don't know. Some just are. If we all just let people BE instead of trying to BOX them up in neat little packages, we would have less stress and happier lives all around. Amen to that. If we all just let people BE instead of trying to BOX them up inundersigned. If we all just let people BE instead of trying to BOX them up inThat is what Materialists do. However, I do not think that is what you are talking about. Examples, please. I actually read the first page and a half of the full article, and I don't think their main interview subject and poster child provides any proof that homosexuality is a choice. First of all, I have an overbearing mother and I'm not gay, so I'm suspicious of the idea that these kinds of environmental influences by themselves make you gay. But even if you accept the primacy of early environmental influences, that still doesn't make homosexuality a choice. Those early influences are still an accident of birth beyond the individual's control. Ha, I'm here to tell you Kevin, that homosexuality is definitely NOT a choice. Who would choose that? I will confess to knowing virtually nothing about homosexuality. I do remember that my daughter had a friend in high school who 'suddenly' began to be "gay". I think that, at least for this young girl, it was an attention grabbing thing...a way of being noticed and *different*. Pretty pitiful, actually. She was never happy before or after. it ain't so bad eitherYou ain't kidding baby! Gay don't creep up on you suddenly Jatfla @Alanocu: not as much as i luv u baby it has been written here already, we are "socialized", if not conditioned, into the roles we play! Since the "pill revolution" of the late sixties, sex has become ever more a pleasurable interaction between humans and been derailed from "just for multiplying"! So if sex is for fun, to make one or xx number of people feel good, happy, why not have sex with people of the the same gender, even without being gay or lesbian? They are barriers, put up by societies social rulez, which are highly questionable! Save it to your favorites topfilmi, you homophobic bastard. Homophobic ?, Bastard? Wow! Now THAT'S name-calling. Thanks Willhelm. Do you know Topfilmi? Not well enough to know about the absence or presence of a father. If one is a liar, then that is readily evident. If one is ignorant, then that is readily evident. Those are not names. They are observations. Then again. it seems you do not know the difference. You ask: Who would choose that? Are you kidding? So, if I think everyone has a choice, then I am homophobic? Who "chooses" to be an alcoholic? Who "chooses" to be a street whore? Who "chooses" to be homeless? Who "chooses" to commit murder? Who "chooses" to kill their children? Who "chooses" to be in a porn movie? Who "chooses" to do drugs? Who "chooses" to exterminate jews? Who "chooses" to fly planes into buil... Who would choose to molest a 4 year old? Who would choose to commit perjury? Who would choose to waste time at Clipmarks, when you could be working to earn money to give to the poor? Who would choose to fight with their spouse? Who would choose to be lazy? Who would choose to be poor? Who would choose to tatto and pierce their entire body? Who would choose to spend all their time hating a political party? Who would choose to spend their time defending a political party? Who would choose to remain ignorant? By the way, You should not name-call. If you disagree with someone, say why. If Topfilmi is ignorant, say why. If vile, say why. if wrong, say why. If a liar, say why. Your rant tells me more about you than you can possibly imagine. Please do your homework before commenting further. I was completely justified in saying what I had to say. And I don't care if you agree with me or not. You can only be justified in calling someone a Bastard if, a) they are technically a bastard or b) you are ignorant and know no better. Why do you describe my comment as a rant? Does that make you somehow feel like you do not need to respond in any rational way? You certainly are on to assume much in the way of another's intentions. That says a lot about you. No amount of homework justifies calling someone a bastard. Especially when you so often hold yourself up as a moral authority. It appears you are against name-calling only when it is subjectively determined by you NOT to be justified. So goes the materialist mentality ot the Left. Debbyski, I do not care if you disregard my comments. In fact, I expect you to. The truth hurts. Wrong! Noun: Bastard 1. Insulting terms of address for people who are stupid or irritating or ridiculous. How does that prove me wrong? That is quite funny. So now you admit to engaging in PETTY namecalling. HA!! And you are wrong again Willhelm. Actually, the truth sets me free. It is obvious from this thread that truth has set me free. You are a slave to the subjective lens by which you irrationally view the world. I know a lot about being set free by the truth and I can easily spot when someone is a slave to subjective bias and denial. Unfortunaltly, that means you have a long way to go. The next four phases are more difficult. wilhelm, if I were a psychologist, then I would have done everything possible to have you as my patient. Just off the topic remark, no offense.  I'm a pretty boring person. I read way to much and play too little. Sing and play music too much and talk too little. I like everything ordered in threes and fives. I document my dreams, but they never seem to reveal anything profound. At least that I can tell. I like to cook, but I am very picky about what I eat. (I am sure this is due to some problematic "issue") I love work. I love yard-work. I love people, but generally despise humanity. I've been to psychologists, never been to a psychiatrist, and I never detected any unusual level of interest. It may surprise you to know that I am just a troll. Ahem. But let's say being gay IS by choice. So what? Ahem. But let's say being gay IS by choice.Exactly! To say someone does not have a right to be gay is bigoted, controlling, and anti-Liberty. To say someone has no choice but to be gay is bigoted, controlling, and anti-Liberty. A child molester will say they had no choice by Debbyski's hateful and materialist standard. To say someone does not have a right to be gay is bigoted, controlling, and anti-Liberty.True To say someone has no choice but to be gay is bigoted, controlling, and anti-Liberty.That would be a true statement from the perspective of homosexuality being a matter of choice, as if a person could simply "change their mind". It would be imposing. If it's a biological factor, like blue eyes, your statement is of course false. Is it bigoted for a person to have blue eyes? Debbyski has already stated consistently that: "I don't believe truly gay people are gay by choice." Notice the distinction concerning "truly" gay people; those on the top of the scale sliding ... AL, It seems to me the only clippers making it an issue are Debbyski and yourself. By what standard do you suppose your opinion to be better than my opinion? One of is right and one of is wrong regarding the nature of homosexuality. It seems we agree on the liberty of homosexuals, so I really do not know what point you are trying to make other than to counter my point with the obvious counterpoint. That aside, you should really keep your points to a minimum. You come across rather clear-thinking on some, then it all goes to hell the more you ramble on. We all get overly pointy at times. It seems to me the only clippers making it an issue are Debbyski and yourself.Really? Here is a sample of your words: You are a slave to the subjective lens by which you irrationally view the world. A child molester will say they had no choice by Debbyski's hateful and materialist standard. That is what Materialists do.Re: "liar" and "ignorant".. Those are not names. They are observations. Then again. it seems you do not know the difference.-- Can you see the same pattern of your usual ad hominems? Seems to me you made it an issue when you decided to attack the "person" while offering your point of view. And th... AL, your pretense is alarming, especially given your obvious challenges. Then again, perhaps it is to be expected. See, you should have quit a long time ago. Is it possible to extrapolate from this article, that one could also choose to be straight? |
View the Top Clips from August 31, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|
