The ethics of homosexuality.

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Undecided, Feb 11, 2005.

  1. duendy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,585
    let Me worry about MY argument SpyMoose. that's first

    secondly, i always feel that overly concern by how one types and composes is a bit anal retentative. it is something i NEVER do. i have communicated with some pretty 'weird' communicators yet never crit their style.

    3rdly, i am Queer. many Queers can be very
    f;amboyant in the way they speak and use language. such has been termed 'effeminate'. no harm in that cept for the 'real men' who denigrate femininity, or anything pointing to such

    fourthly, i do n ot have access to an ITALIC key--if i did i would use it instead as i love expressing language with sublte inflection, and tone and colour. which...is WHYYYY--i use caps. i am not shouting. i COULD do 'this', but i always feels that is like using quotes, so i dont use that. i use caps. get USEd to it hun, or dont read me
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    And yet gays say that they want to "fit" into the same world/society as normal people!

    And yet gays say that they want to be able to adopt children just like normal people!

    And yet gays say that they want to be able to join the military and be in the same units as normal men and women!

    Geez, see ....is it any wonder that y'all are treated the way you are? Y'all just walk around ASKING for problems and trouble ...no wonder you get beat up and yelled at and fired and kicked out of the military and .....damn, I don't know what all else.

    Ye're different, dammit, and you shouldn't be treated otherwise.

    Baron Max
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. who Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2
    It takes along time for an extinction to occur.

    Which to my knowledge will happen even if there were no homosexuals, I remember watching CNN and there was a man who wrote a book about the extinction of men. That should happen in about 100,000 years regardless with modern technology it is not even nessecary for men to exist. If I am not mistaken it is now possible to create a another human with simply a cell from virtually any part of the body, if that doesn’t exist already. So it is entirely possible to have a purely homosexual society with modern technology and within a 100,000 years it will have to be one.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. ReighnStorm The Smoke that Thunders Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    510

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    SAY IT ISN'T SO !!! YOU JUST SPOILED MY APPETITE :bugeye:
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2005
  8. who Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2
    http://www.heartuk.org.uk/artman/publish/article_368.shtml

    It be so... “men are basically genetically modified women” and described our evolution as a “gigantic and long-running GM experiment”!

    http://genealogy.about.com/cs/geneticgenealogy/fr/adams_curse.htm

    "We could survive as a species with no men at all by arranging fertilizations not between sperm and egg, but rather between one egg and another, and the techniques for that are already here." Sykes actually goes so far as to envision a world made up entirely of women - a world where even lesbian couples could have babies with genes coming from both parents. At this point he quips, "It is almost certain to happen and, unlike human cloning, I doubt there would be serious ethical objections. Men are now on notice."

    A Future Without Men," is inciting controversy with its startling theory that the male of the species will only last for another 5000 generations before irreparable damage done to the Y-chromosome consigns him to the history books. Sykes uses his own research to show that the all-important male Y-chromosome is degenerating as it advances through evolution, rendering men infertile with increasing frequency, and the female X-chromosome (mDNA), which has a "twin" and can repair itself to minimize bad mutations, is slowly taking over. In other words, women are winning the evolutionary battle of the sexes.
     
  9. ReighnStorm The Smoke that Thunders Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    That can also be said for those respected, well educated, well established individuals who are definitively against homosexual behavior! Also, there was evidence in the article that I posted. I don't even think you read it.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. JohnGalt Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    135
    There is no point in having a discussion if it's going to go on like this. I mean, let's screw being rational, it's not like that will help the argument either.

    Now, I must ask something. I assume(though I am not sure) that something other than the child's happiness has been fueling this debate. Like why this debate came up in the first place-Someone was so opposed to the concept of gays raising a child, they blindly pursued, hoping that someone would come up with evidence(Not necessarily this thread, but the argument itself)for them. Unluckily, they did. However, the proof supported(to a larger degree) the side that it was okay, but that just led to the trashing of evidence. So, what fuels people(or what starts them) onto the idea that they shouldn't raise the children? I'm sure some start as a standard for upholding reasons, but the vast majority started out with the pursuit of something else. What is that pursuit?
     
  11. SpyMoose Secret double agent deer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,641
    Very poignant, Max, except for the fact that I'm the one who accused duendy of arguing like shit, and got all grammar nazi on him. Guess what, I'm a queer too! I think that would indicate that there are a spectrum of kinds of people who are queers, just like heterosexuals. Its a pretty obvious conclusion, though you chose to make that one above because you probably feel more or less desperate to oppose homosexuals for reasons you wouldn't discuss in a public forum. You've already demonstrated your dislike of homosexuals does not have rational basis, so I'm going to go out on a limb and hypothesize that you aren’t terribly secure with your masculinity, or maybe your dog was killed in a catastrophic gay pride parade accident.
     
  12. s0meguy Worship me or suffer eternally Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,635
    That's just so funny. Maybe this thread should be moved to the Cesspool. I wonder why she was banned

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    My opinion on homosexuals is that they have the same right as heterosexuals. People that feel Homosexuals are sick are retarded.
     
  13. ReighnStorm The Smoke that Thunders Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Who got banned????????

    I do apologize for the for the rainbow of colors...this time away from sciforum has cleared my head....and I'm thinking that ...........yes, I still feel that no homosexual should be alldwed to adopt children unless there's absolutely no one else who will, life is already way to hard....and that's all I have to say....no more post for me on this topic...sometimes feelings have to count over public opinion and that's my real honest to goodness feeling about the subject..
     
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    So ... why do we have over 110,000 kids a year needing homes? Have we run out of heterosexuals who will adopt children? Maybe not.
     
  15. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    nahh smart ass
    i'd go with budget cuts, inefficent bureaucracies and failed philosophies
     
  16. Mystech Adult Supervision Required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,938
    Moraly speaking, Homosexuals need to lay off the 80s new wave. I mean honestly. There's no excuse for it. You have no idea how many times I've had a friend pick me up and start playing Duran Duran on his CD player.
     
  17. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    I'll take the 80s stuff over the house remixes. I don't ever again want to hear "Here Comes The Sun" at 120 a minute. And the "Macarena" was annoying enough without a techno backbeat.

    And besides, "Save A Prayer" and "The Chauffer" are great songs for ... uh ... yeah. (Unlike, say, The Vapors' "Turning Japanese".)

    Funny thing about Duran Duran--I just saw them live not too long ago--is that if you turn up the guitars and ignore the homo-chic fashion-show aspect, they become something of a proper modern-rock band. It's really weird, and has everything to do with the guitars. Seriously, even that annoying beat behind "Sunrise" becomes forgivable. I wouldn't be surprised to find Primal Scream in Simon's CD/mp3 collection.

    And yes, please, please, please, I'll take gay men and Duran Duran any day before I ever repeat the nightmare of watching rednecks line-dance to The Social Club. Which, of course, spills over into gay country & western, and I am just sick to death of Big Gay Lance, even though I've seen less than ten minutes of that show. Buggery, Brooks, and Dunn is more properly a gag law firm than a sexy evening at home.

    I would, however, prefer a return to cocktail straws, which is perhaps the best thing that can be done in a gay bar or club to keep the poor hetero sonofagun dragged there by his girlfriend from trying to beat the holy living shit out of the entire room.

    Oh, and I refuse to wear a white belt.

    I do not have a position on the obligation to swallow, however.
     
  18. ReighnStorm The Smoke that Thunders Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    There are other factors regarding the issue of children not being adopted... there are other rules in place as to allow even heteroes to adopt children....until those rules are given a chance to renew and change we have to work within those guidelines....as far as the article goes (which I did not read by the way) imagine what problems may arise if we allow the type of adoption that you want to occur....noone can truely know with 100% certainty that children will be better off....don't get me wrong, as I've stated so many times before...I have no problem with a person's sexual preference...some of my favorite shows are : a queer eye for the straight guy, will and grace...etc....some of the most adorable, vibrant people I know are gay....they have a very unique way of dealing with issues....regardless of that I still do not believe they should be allowed to develop and mold an adolescent mind because sexual individuality is very important and in the long run I can't see a male boy being raised by a gay man or lebian raising a girl because of that I'm soley against the issue of adoption....but I could be wrong...until that time comes I'll still feel the same way..it's just the way I feel....I have the same deep feeling about the issue that you do just the opposite reaction to it...if everyone on the forum agrees on gay adoption..well that's fine...but I don't, plain and simple enough??
     
  19. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    (Insert Title Here)

    Yep.

    I really do need you to be more specific. Most notably:

    • What are you talking about in the first place?
    • What would you like done?​

    Again, I need you to be more specific in order that I might understand your point. Namely:

    • Such as?
    • Compared to what?​

    Imagine my surprise. Don't worry, though, it's nothing big. Just another example of a heterosexual adoptive parent.

    So let me get this straight: Because nobody can give you the guarantee that cannot be given about anything in the world, you want to hang how many children out to dry, and disrupt how many families?

    Yeah. Right. If you say so. You have no problem except that you deem them unfit to be treated decently because nobody can guarantee you perfection.

    I'm sorry. I know you don't want to talk about it. And I understand why. Were I you, well, I would be ashamed of my beliefs, too.

    At least they're good enough to entertain you.

    So do most people, if you get to know them.

    That makes no sense whatsoever. Wait, wait. Let me try again: Because sexual individuality is so important, we should treat sexuality as restrictively and impose as much ignorance as possible?

    Maybe I should just ask you to clarify? Please?

    See? You do have a problem with people's sexual orientation.

    Since you seem to be holding out for an unattainable standard, that doesn't mean a whole lot, does it?

    It's not just an opposite reaction, ReighnStorm.

    Look, what you believe is what you believe. But one of the big differences between your belief and mine is that mine reflects available facts, while yours holds out for the one thing no human being can deliver: a 100% guarantee, perfection.

    So there's another problem you have with people's sexual orientation: you expect homosexuals to be perfect. Apparently, they're not entitled to be human.

    Queer Eye. Will and Grace. Ye gads!
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2005
  20. Mystech Adult Supervision Required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,938
    I'd like to remind you that these types of adoptions are already taking place in every State in the US except for Florida and, I think, Texas.

    You're right that no one can give you a 100% assurance that the kids will be better off, but the same is true of any adoptive parent, and indeed about any fact of life. I can't give you 100% assurance that the sun will rise tomorrow. At the moment, however all research seems to indicate that kids are just as likely to be better off (than say growing up as a ward of the state) with two stable loving homosexual parents as with two heterosexual parents. I think We've linked to these resources enough already so I'm just going to tell you to go look up info from the APA and AAP yourself, it's early and writing out links is terribly fatiguing.

    It's not a 100% assurance, but it is the sort of thing that well reasoned safe decisions and national policy are based on. . . or at least would be if government were 100% reliable.
     
  21. ReighnStorm The Smoke that Thunders Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    I'd would also like to remind you of two things (again) I am from Florida....and last I checked the question was asked so it begs for the answer of my own opinion which will not change anytime soon....also lest you forgot the world is in total chaos because of the same rules and surveys and clinical studies that you speak of....wonder what could happen if all the incredibly studpid decisions made by the so called policy makers would put a little more thought and guidence in the simple minded solutions that if it works for some then it's great for all.....and THEN when it all goes to hell what excuse will you make up.....

    oh by the way...the sun does not rise....and no one said that you have to reply to my post..............
     
  22. ReighnStorm The Smoke that Thunders Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    510
    Tiassa......you're way to needy....it's my opinion.....k.....my opinion....there are alot of fact's I could state and research that I've already done.....but it's still my opinion....geez you are so damn needy.....I would like to see 100% perfection in any adoption....and as I stated so clearly before...until the policy holders figure that out then I don't see why confusing it more....but whatever...still my own personal opinion that gay people should not be allowed to adopt children...just like white people should not be allowed to adopt out of their nationality.......but still it's my opinion...no need to elaborate on it any further because your post are way to imaginative and embelished and lonnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggggggg.............................But ponder this if you will....wouldn't it be ok if gays had their own children to raise...like millions and millions of them......and then do a study of those children as they grow....if that happens well then I may agree with you....actually tiassa....in the studies that you like to write about...roughly how many kids and families were involved in it????????
     
  23. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882
    And you need to ask the Wizard for a brain, but that's just my opinion.

    What makes those adoptions any different from a family joined by biology?

    The prudery of the ignorant is no decent advisor to public policy.

    Okay. Now I think I get it: seek professional help.

    Don't blame your sloth on others, ReighnStorm.

    Well, we might look at Florida, where 'tis better to place a child with a convicted murderer and accused child molester than to allow her to grow up in the custody of her own mother.

    I know, I know, it's Florida. We should just give it over to Cuba, but in more realistic terms, you're just begging for time to continue being an irrational bigot.

    I doubt it; you don't seem to have much respect for facts.

    Add 'em up and you've got thousands over at least twenty years showing consistent results.

    The fact of the matter is, ReighnStorm, that children of gay parents do no worse than their peers whose parents are heterosexual. In some cases, they even do better, and before you think these studies are somehow biased, that assessment comes even after study authors attempt to downplay the advantages shown by children of gay parents.

    Say what you want, but even your best-intended arguments reek of bigotry.

    After all, you only demand of homosexuals what nobody has been able to pull off; why judge by two sets of standards, if not to preserve and excuse your bigotry?

    Think about it, ReighnStorm. And perhaps you'd be so kind as to explain in a few words why homosexuals are not human beings?
     

Share This Page