Debate Topic - H0m0s**uality and Bis**uality

[Dangermouse]

??|?? said:

The reality of it is it happens. There's no use getting in a huff about it & try searching the universe for unlocked secrets. People are who they are so spend your energy accepting & appreciating people for themselves. Snap out of it & kick along with it.

Well said.

Lets not turn this into a "belief", "faith" and "religion" thread

[Webagent]

well those would make nice debates, if everyone agrees and just dont ever think further then "it just happens" you wont have a nice debate.

Einstein never thought "it just happens" and Einstein was religious btw

[.•´¯`•þasђγ•._.•´]

okay devil's advocate time...

i actually believe that everyone is born bis**ual with varying degrees with one degree (the extreme) being homos**ual and the other degree (another extreme) being hetero...however, i also believe it's our environment that encourages heteros**uality because of a *moral* viewpoint. ppl view heteros**uality as the be all and end all because of procreation...

anyway the reason i came up with this arguement after initially deciding on something else with ohio, was because i read this: [/i][/color]

Being born a hobos**ual = BIG LIE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing like a catchy title to draw one's attention, eh?


In many discussions with several members of this board I've challenged the theory (which all it really is) that as men and women we do not chose to be hobos**uals but are born that way. "Why would I subject myself to this sort of life? I'd not choose it!" is the favorite argument among hobos**uals and lesbians. Many hobos**uals and lesbians alike rallied in joy as "scientists" affirmed for the world, "hobos**uals are born colorful, it has been found in their genetic makeup". hobos**ual worldwide now use this as their basic argument in their defense claiming they have absolutly no control over their hobos**ual urges. That it is the same as being born a certain skin color and having no say so in the matter. To myself, a reasonably intelligent man, that "theory" is not only absurd but laughable on every level of argument.

I've asked some hobos**uals both on here and in person why they feel they believe they were born colorful. Most rely on the "evidence" supplied by the "scientists" saying it is so. I've argued no one's born a theif or a murderer or a serial killer but choose to engage in those acts, what makes hobos**uality differnet? No hobos**ual has yet to provide me with a logical answer. The truth is, most hobos**uals never even would have thought they were born colorful. Relying on "scientific fact" is enough for them. Add to this idiotic notion that within our genetic makeup, there is absolutely no evidence of a colorful gene clearly evident in every hobos**ual. Most hobos**uals do not want to adhere to any moral standards according to others and live by their own set of rules of conduct and behavior. Most oppose God and the Word of Scriptures for the simple fact it condems hobos**uality.

I came across a website today which touched on this subject. It goes as followsbr]
"Everybody knows that hobos**uality is genetic; it's constitutional. Science has proven it." But science hasn't proven it. There is some indication that there may be some physiological factors contributing to a person's hobos**uality, but no one has demonstrated any necessary genetic link.

Here's an example to give you an idea how careful you've got to be in drawing some conclusions. I was challenged on this issue by someone who pointed out there were enlarged hypothalamus in one study of hobos**ual cadavers. I asked, "How do we know that the enlarged hypothalamus in the hobos**uals was the cause of hobos**uality and not the effect ? These men were dead. Their lives were over. What evidence justifies our presumption that an enlarged hypothalamus was their in the beginning, causing the hobos**ual behavior? Why not rather presume that it was the hobos**ual behavior that caused the enlarging of the hypothalamus later in life?

To be honest, I don't know one way or another, because I'm not an expert in this field. I'm just raising the issue to show you how you can't simply jump to that conclusion. Those who are careful about the scientific evidence haven't come to that conclusion. The ones who have are those who are not in the field, who are not careful, yet who have something at stake in making the case for constitutional hobos**uality.

I actually don't care if it turns out that hobos**uality is genetic. It's irrelevant to the moral question. Just because hobos**uality may come naturally for some doesn't mean it's moral to practice it. Indeed, one could say that the difference between just doing what comes naturally and principled self-restraint is called civilization.

Do we want to argue that whatever we "naturally" feel like doing at any moment ought to be morally allowed? That's the same as living like animals, because animals always obey their base physical impulses. Human beings are different. They have moral rules that constrain their behavior.

The point I'm making here is that, even if hobos**uality did turn out to be hard-wired into the physiology, it still wouldn't begin to answer the question of whether it is moral to act on the desire. That's a different issue entirely.

My point is that people seize upon scanty evidence to justify something because they want it justified, not because they've examined the issue carefully. They'll say animals practice hobos**uality. How do they know that? Because they see male dogs mounting other male dogs, or licking them in their genital areas. See? It's obvious: hobos**uality is natural.

But it's not so obvious. Think about this for a second. If you ever had a male dog, you know that they don't just mount other male dogs. They also mount sofas, and trees, and will mount the leg of your guests if you're not careful. This is not hobos**ual behavior. This is auto-eroticism.

The only way one could show this behavior was hobos**ual is if one could demonstrate that the dog was desiring the male gender of the animal he was mounting. One can't conclude from the observed activity alone that any animal has hobos**ual desires . This is just another example of a hasty judgment." - End.

Take from the above article what you will. My only hope is that the truth is part of it.

I welcome any and all rebuttles as always.


so thats it....was an interesting read, and he got some good replies. so what are your thoughts ? [/b][/i]

[Warrior124]

Dangermouse said:

Lets not turn this into a "belief", "faith" and "religion" thread

Dangermouse, belief is most definitely at the heart of this topic. Here is what Pashy asked.

.•´¯`•þasђγ•._.•´ said:

do you think hobos**uality (and for that matter bis**uality) is born to a person or do you think it's more a matter of choice ??

[/i][/color][/quote]

In other words, do you believe that homos**uality is borned to a person, or is it genetic? My belief is that most of it is a matter of choice. However, genetics might play a large roll in it. I really don't know.

[Webagent]

thats a verry interesting read pashy, pedo's cant act on desire because it would harm children, homo's can act on desire because it doesnt hurt anyone.

There's one thing I would like to mention and this isnt just for homo's in particulair if you do alot of anal s** in your life the anal muscle will loose its flexibility, the anus is not made for what homo's (or anyone might) use it for and you will become incontinent.

This is no joke I have a friend who originally is from spain and she has a surgeon friend there who regulair has to do some muscle corrections because they cant no longer keep up their...... you know

[Dangermouse]

Webagent said:

There's one thing I would like to mention and this isnt just for homo's in particulair if you do alot of anal s** in your life the anal muscle will loose its flexibility, the anus is not made for what homo's (or anyone might) use it for and you will become incontinent.

Well i know i havent had much experience yet, but i still prefer the intimate things, kissing/spo­oning and oral s** etc compared to anal s**

...and id hate that to happen to me lol

[Webagent]

well correction, I said "you will become incontinent" but its not a fact that it will happen at all times offcource, it simply can occure.

btw if any country is open and social about lesbo's, travo's and homo's its Holland, I think holland was the first country that introduced the homo marriage.

[.•´¯`•þasђγ•._.•´]

yeah you can lose control of your pelvic floor muscles and become incontinent from having babies

are you gonna stop having kids because it's a possibility ? lol

i think not !

besides....if you ask me, the benefits far outway the risks

yes it is interesting......i will give you the whole site argument if i can find it again lol. [/i][/color]

[Webagent]

.•´¯`•þasђγ•._.•´ said:

besides....if you ask me, the benefits far outway the risks

[/i][/color][/quote]

haha! that tells us something about yourself

[.•´¯`•þasђγ•._.•´]

i think all these debates tell us something about eachother [/i][/color]

[Alexander]

Webagent said:

thats a verry interesting read pashy, pedo's cant act on desire because it would harm children, homo's can act on desire because it doesnt hurt anyone.

actually in a paedophiles mind they dont harm children, they believe they are helping them, its due to them having something psychologically wrong with them, but they believe they arnt harming anyone, they dont have control over their emoticons or themselves and just like being bis**ual, homos**ual or hetros**ual it is something they are born with, its just that paedophiles happen to not be affected by the reaction until later on in life, just like skitzophrenia which has been proven to be a genetic disorder because it can actually travel down generations, it does run in the family so if your dad was skitzo then theres a high chance of you being skitzo

[p00p]

And dont say pedo wasn't mentioned in the debate because its a seksual preference like beeing homo or bi, and if you say pedo is something totally diffrent then whats so diffrent between a homo and a pedo by just having the fantasy and not comitting the act?

Ok to clear a few things up with you web as you seem to be stuck on this " Pedophilia is a s**ual prefrence" Its not its a Disorder of the MIND! FACT! if someone with the condition carry's out an act of that nature on a child they then become whats Known in law as a "Clinical Pedophile" There is no Prefrence to speak. Its seen as a disorder of the mind. Theres a Big d**n difference between hobos**uality and Pedophilia to even try and draw a similarity becuase they both invlove s** is frankly petty, childish and shows a true lack of insight on the issues at hand


To Start with the definition of the Disorder of Pedophilia

"Pedophila is a disorder of the mind that intails Fantisies And/Or Urges to carry out acts of a s**ual nature with a pre pubecent child"

Now let me expand on this a little more just so you WEB get this loud and clear as it is for "Fact"

The Majority of Pedophiles are Criminals of Situation, A vast number of Pedophiles function as both hetros**uals and hobos**uals in their everyday life but "Suffer" from the disorder of Pedophilia. On the other hand some dont function in normal s**ual relationships due to the effects of the disorder , the urges, self disgust, not understanding why they are in such a mind set, but also have the feeling of s**ual gratification a natrual human feeling thats second to the condition actualy as the majority of pedophiles dont carry out the urges and when they do its a crime of "Situation and opertunity" this in its self completely contradicts the criteria for s**ual prefrence . Becuase Pedophilia is in some ways like rape when it comes to the Question of "Prefrence"
Rape is commonly an act of "Self gratification" A release like pedophilia, yes it can be pre planned but at the end of the day when the act takes place its a release from the feelings the urges that torment them, And after the act they feel gratified and can go a very long amount of time without interaction with a victim

What im saying is "s**" is second to the Disorder of Pedophila , The s** isnt a choice its an effect of the " Disorder" and there fore is not a prefrence, and thats a Fact web regardless of how much you want to put a slant on it, The s** is a direct effect of a mental disorder and by no means indicates prefrence in any sense of the word. If you want more on info on why it isnt a prefrence web ask a qualified clinical Psychologist. I dont know why you persist on calling Pedophilia a s**ual prefrence when its clearly not and its rather worrying, its also degrading to the thousands apon thousands of children
who have fallen vicitim to this type of Abuse to call what happend to them a "s**ual Prefrence" when it wasnt, they sufferd at the hands of someone with a serious mental Disorder.

End of the line is, Pedophilia is NOT a prefrence Webagent and thats a clinical fact and unless your telling me you've some how disproven some of the best Psychological minds in the world? Id kindly ask you to not to express wholey unfounded opinions on such horrific issue such as pedophilia. I respect your opinion and its your right to express it, but one this matter its wholey wrong and would be laughable if it wasnt such a serious issue....

But thats me done on the matter

[Alexander]

well fook, i agree with what u said but in webbies defence, nothing in science is 100% accurate, its an impossiblity it cannot be achieved, lol

[p00p]

actually in a paedophiles mind they dont harm children, they believe they are helping them, its due to them having something psychologically wrong

But remember a Pedophile is someone who Suffers the disorder of "Pedophilia" and dont always offend in relation to molesting children. And yes indeed Alex for once we agree possibly becuase we both have/Are in the study of Mental Health? The "s** act" is an effect of the condition of pedophilia and as i stated above cannot in an case be looked apon as a prefrence..


On a side note alex id love to hear your thoughts on a case i read about it involves alot of "refinement of theory and logic" but its most likely not sutibale for here? possibly something for us to discuss over PM

[Chuck]

FooK said:

Ok to clear a few things up with you web as you seem to be stuck on this " Pedophilia is a s**ual prefrence" Its not its a Disorder of the MIND! FACT!
<skiped: read the rest yourself>

First of all, she is not advocating pedophilia... you missed the point. It is just a discussion, and it's good to campare why one thing is right, while the other is wrong.

Second, hobos**uality was also consider mental disorder until 1970s.
source:http://www.fact-index.com/h/ho/hobos**uality_and_psychology.html