Gay marriage: where do you stand?

[BrianLewis]

Hmm, it's been a week or so and still no evidence to back up their claims. Furthermore, they have posted more parallels about racism, in an attempt to bolster their argument about tolerance of genetic diversity. Yet, a week has passed, and still nothing... I hope none of you are planning on becoming scientists (or are -gasp!) you would actually be required to have some sort of corroborating evidence for your arguments if so. I think I have seen some "Hoarders" episodes with "scientists" that make claims and stare into their 25 oscilloscopes to show you the evidence.

I think I see that this thread was created, not to learn about opposing viewpoints, but to point fingers and pat each other on the back. Quite typical really.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Hmm, it's been a week or so and still no evidence to back up their claims.

If your mind was a scientific one, you would see that there is no need to back up any claims made by the pro-gay marriage side. All the claims made by them were related to sex and homosexuality, not gay marriage. But you don't seem to possess the intellectual faculties to separate those.

It was the anti gay marriage side who made grandiose claims about a devastating drop in the birth rate, multitudes of men becoming gay, and serious damage to the institution of marriage and society. Its THOSE contentions that need backing up.

We cannot prove negatives about those crazy claims. To expect it would be RETARDED.

I think I see that this thread was created, not to learn about opposing viewpoints, but to point fingers and pat each other on the back.

I can only speak for myself, the OP. My ears were open, but you and your camp have only run a bunch of crap up the flagpole and expected us to salute it. You have dragged this topic off the subject of gay marriage and into homosexuality and gay sex in general, and the whole point has merely been to derail the discussion, assuming your camp is capable of having a point and is not just completely random and scatter-brained.

And seriously, I am being as nice to you as I possibly can without kow-towing to the utter silliness you and yours have wasted our time with.

If you want people's ears and you want respect, how about posting things of intellectual, scientific and logical merit for a change? And try to stick to the topic.

 

[BrianLewis]

It's unreasonable to demand that someone backs up their scientific claim with scientific evidence?

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

Where's your scientific evidence?

Don't you have something to back up your discrimination, if you want to justify it in the law?

Other than the Bible. I already pointed out the hypocrisy of Christian churches marrying the divorced, while discriminating against homosexuals. Do you really have no reply to make there?

---------- Post added at 21:13 ---------- Previous post was at 21:10 ----------

Hezam, I'm curious: what happens to homosexuals in Saudi Arabia? You must have them. Every society does.

Homosexuality seems to be poorly accepted in Japan, at least openly. Most Japanese won't talk about it. But I know they're there, because when I was living in Japan I had several men -- salarymen, nicely dressed in business suits -- try to pick me up.

One tip for you if you ever go there: If a guy asks you in Japanese, "Do you dislike men?" (Otoku-ga kirai?), make sure you answer "yes."

 

[nahadef]

I think a fair question for BrianLewis is: If it's scientifically proven that homosexuality is natural and not a product of a troubled environment, will he support legislation for its equality? I doubt it, just from what I've read in this thread.
All the same, I don't think it even needs to be a natural occurrence to make it legal. It's just a matter of respecting other people. It really is unquestionably a victimless crime. With drugs, with prostitution, I understand the arguments that there are people involved claiming to be voluntary participants, who might not actually be, though I still favor the legality of that in general. But in gay marriage? Not a chance. If two guys choose to be with men their whole lives, it's none of my business. I really think any American against it is only supporting accepted bigotry, much as was done against other minorities/fringe groups in the past. Was Lenny Bruce rightfully arrested for obscenity? Were the Salem witches rightfully burned?
Homosexuality has become prevalent in American culture, and popularly accepted (among the young, the old stick to their guns). It is mostly not okay to discriminate against them publicly, unlike a few decades back. But some will choose the discrimination they are legally allowed, which is this marriage issue. I pity them, because they will look like the Strom Thurmonds of the 21st century.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

Exactly. I think homosexuality is mostly an innate trait of certain individuals.

But it's irrelevant whether it's caused by genetics, environment in the womb, or how you're brought up. Individuals should have the right to marry the person of their choice.

 

[Half-n-Half]

Hmm, it's been a week or so and still no evidence to back up their claims.

I hope you're not referring to the post I made referencing the textbook on homosexuality in nature:

Just to take one example, all of the references at the bottom that refer to Bagemihl (which is a great majority of them) are citing from this text. It's hardly a "gay propaganda magazine."

 

[BrianLewis]

Exactly. I think homosexuality is mostly an innate trait of certain individuals.

But it's irrelevant whether it's caused by genetics, environment in the womb, or how you're brought up. Individuals should have the right to marry the person of their choice.

It's relevant if your contention is a social disorder, and not genetic diversity, like everyone here seems to assume. If it is a social disorder, then the right thing to do is find a cure for these poor people. Suicide is a sociological disorder that any good human being would attempt to help alleviate. We would not push legislation for the right to kill oneself because a person is emotionally disturbed. If your contention is that gays are different biologically, you need to prove it. Not knowing does no one any good.

Where's your scientific evidence?

"I know you are, but what am I?" is no argument in any court or any scientific journal. You all infer, or directly state genetic predisposition. Prove it.

 

[Hezam]

Hezam, I'm curious: what happens to homosexuals in Saudi Arabia? You must have them. Every society does.

Too many homosexuals here, No one cares and we don't talk about it...I had friends who are actually gay !
All they get is bad reputation but no one cares as long as they don't harm people.

One tip for you if you ever go there: If a guy asks you in Japanese, "Do you dislike men?" (Otoku-ga kirai?), make sure you answer "yes."

Well, It's rude here to say " i dislike men " because the culture is different !
For example, Men usually say " My Love " to each other in a manly way because we are very close to each other, It's cultural thing, Have you seen Saudi or Arab kissing shakes ?

 

[nahadef]

It's relevant if your contention is a social disorder, and not genetic diversity, like everyone here seems to assume. If it is a social disorder, then the right thing to do is find a cure for these poor people. Suicide is a sociological disorder that any good human being would attempt to help alleviate. We would not push legislation for the right to kill oneself because a person is emotionally disturbed. If your contention is that gays are different biologically, you need to prove it. Not knowing does no one any good.
"I know you are, but what am I?" is no argument in any court or any scientific journal. You all infer, or directly state genetic predisposition. Prove it.

If it's scientifically proven that homosexuality is natural and not a product of a troubled environment, will you support legislation for its equality?

 

[Mark of Zorro]

It's unreasonable to demand that someone backs up their scientific claim with scientific evidence?

You have one hard skull dude.

What scientific evidence pertaining to gay marriage would you like? What was the contention you insist be backed up?

Note that it is not at all the topic of thread, but is it scientific evidence pertaining to homosexuality you want? What contention do you want backed up?

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

Recent history of psychological classification of homosexuality:

Removal from the DSM

In 1973, the weight of empirical data, coupled with changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Some psychiatrists who fiercely opposed their action subsequently circulated a petition calling for a vote on the issue by the Association's membership. That vote was held in 1974, and the Board's decision was ratified.

Subsequently, a new diagnosis, ego-dystonic homosexuality, was created for the DSM's third edition in 1980. Ego dystonic homosexuality was indicated by: (1) a persistent lack of heterosexual arousal, which the patient experienced as interfering with initiation or maintenance of wanted heterosexual relationships, and (2) persistent distress from a sustained pattern of unwanted homosexual arousal.

This new diagnostic category, however, was criticized by mental health professionals on numerous grounds. It was viewed by many as a political compromise to appease those psychiatrists – mainly psychoanalysts – who still considered homosexuality a pathology. Others questioned the appropriateness of having a separate diagnosis that described the content of an individual's dysphoria. They argued that the psychological problems related to ego-dystonic homosexuality could be treated as well by other general diagnostic categories, and that the existence of the diagnosis perpetuated antigay stigma.

Moreover, widespread prejudice against homosexuality in the United States meant that many people who are homosexual go through an initial phase in which their homosexuality could be considered ego dystonic. According to the American Psychiatric Association, "Fears and misunderstandings about homosexuality are widespread.... [and] present daunting challenges to the development and maintenance of a positive self-image in gay, lesbian and bisexual persons and often to their families as well."

In 1986, the diagnosis was removed entirely from the DSM. The only vestige of ego dystonic homosexuality in the revised DSM-III occurred under Sexual Disorders Not Otherwise Specified, which included persistent and marked distress about one's sexual orientation (American Psychiatric Association, 1987; see Bayer, 1987, for an account of the events leading up to the 1973 and 1986 decisions).

Text of APA resolutions

The American Psychological Association (APA) promptly endorsed the psychiatrists' actions, and has since worked intensively to eradicate the stigma historically associated with a homosexual orientation (APA, 1975; 1987).

Conclusion

Some psychologists and psychiatrists still hold negative personal attitudes toward homosexuality. However, empirical evidence and professional norms do not support the idea that homosexuality is a form of mental illness or is inherently linked to psychopathology.

Homosexuality and Mental Health

Question for BrianLewis:

Would more links help change your mind, or are you simply throwing up straw-men to justify your denial of reality? I'd appreciate an honest answer, 'cause I hate wasting my time.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

coupled with changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States,

They really could not throw a less scientific variable in there. They are doing the same for research concerning anything remotely related to pedophilia. Only the changing social norms means condemnation rather than acceptance for pedophilia, which is interesting because over the course of 150 years, one was taboo and the other wasn't, and they have switched places because of social norms. Science should NEVER bow to scatter-brained social norms.

Doing this means that the psychology trying to determine what is and is not a sexual identity mental illness has become completely meaningless. Therefore, whether homosexuality is a mental illness or not is simply a matter of opinion. I would never cite the ever changing and conforming DSM on this issue.

Not that it matters. Anti-homosexuals will try to use that very specific criticism to dismiss all psychology in general which is nuts. Further they will try to apply their opinion to homosexual marriage, which is also nuts.

It matters not one jot if its mental illness that makes people homosexual or not. There is no harm, there is no "cure", and many, if not a majorty, of homosexuals don't want to be "cured" anyway.

Its like the lady that "married" her compound bow, later a bridge and later the Eiffel tower. Of course those are not legally registered marriages, nor do should they be. But the lady is happy and harming no one. Therefore anyone taking issue actually has WORSE MENTAL PROBLEMS, same as the anti-homosexuals.

 

[BrianLewis]

Would more links help change your mind, or are you simply throwing up straw-men to justify your denial of reality? I'd appreciate an honest answer, 'cause I hate wasting my time.

Probably not. I asked that those of you that support the premise that gays are genetically predisposed to being gay prove your point through actual biological evidence.

Psychology is hardly quantifiable nor a provable science. In fact, I would argue that it is not a science at all, but that's another argument. I believe the mistake you made was trying to oppose my opinion with another man/association's opinion, instead of proving your/their premise.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

I understand your point, but when you want to impose your opinion on others through the law, I think it's reasonable for others to object.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Probably not. I asked that those of you that support the premise that gays are genetically predisposed to being gay prove your point through actual biological evidence.

Is that your only problem? Because earlier you made it sound like there were a million things bothering you.

In a way, I don't even want to talk about this anymore. Why? Because you think its relevant to gay marriage and its not. This is about gay marriage, not homosexuality. Whether there is a genetic predisposition or not is not at all important.

But if I answer this question, you will again try and drag this thread off topic and accuse us again of being unscientific. Fact is, there is really nothing about the issue of gay marriage that is in need of science.

And I have said this before: there is enough indirect evidence to prove a genetic (but not hereditary) predisposition to homosexuality for some (but not all) homosexuals. But it does not matter. Its moot. You just want to damage this thread by making it look like you have a point (but you don't).

These are all genetic factors. And while none of them are absolute indicators of gayness, they do indicate a predisposition:

Some studies have found correlations between physiology of people and their sexuality. These studies provide evidence which they claim suggests that:

Gay men report, on an average, slightly longer and thicker penises than non-gay men.[50]
Gay men and straight women have, on average, equally proportioned brain hemispheres. Lesbian women and straight men have, on average, slightly larger right brain hemispheres.[51]
The VIP SCN nucleus of the hypothalamus is larger in men than in women, and larger in gay men than in heterosexual men.[52]
The average size of the INAH-3 in the brains of gay men is approximately the same size as INAH 3 in women, which is significantly smaller, and the cells more densely packed, than in heterosexual men's brains.[31]
The anterior commissure is larger in women than men and was reported to be larger in gay men than in non-gay men,[30] but a subsequent study found no such difference.[53]
Gay men's brains respond differently to fluoxetine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.[54]
The functioning of the inner ear and the central auditory system in lesbians and bisexual women are more like the functional properties found in men than in non-gay women (the researchers argued this finding was consistent with the prenatal hormonal theory of sexual orientation).[55]
The suprachiasmatic nucleus was found by Swaab and Hopffman to be larger in gay men than in non-gay men,[56] the suprachiasmatic nucleus is also known to be larger in men than in women.[57]
The startle response (eyeblink following a loud sound) is similarly masculinized in lesbians and bisexual women.[58]
Gay and non-gay people's brains respond differently to two putative sex pheromones (AND, found in male armpit secretions, and EST, found in female urine).[27][59][60]
The amygdala, a region of the brain, is more active in gay men than non-gay men when exposed to sexually arousing material.[61]
Finger length ratios between the index and ring fingers may be different between non-gay and lesbian women.[55][62][63][64][65][66]
Gay men and lesbians are significantly more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous than non-gay men and women;[67][68][69] Simon LeVay argues that because "[h]and preference is observable before birth[70]... [t]he observation of increased non-right-handness in gay people is therefore consistent with the idea that sexual orientation is influenced by prenatal processes," perhaps heredity.[31]
A study of 50 gay men found 23% had counterclockwise hair whorl, as opposed to 8% in the general population. This may correlate with left-handedness.[71]
Gay men have increased ridge density in the fingerprints on their left thumbs and pinkies.[71]
Length of limbs and hands of gay men is smaller compared to height than the general population, but only among white men.[71]

Biology and sexual orientation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The issue of why gays are gay is very, very complicated. Each gay man is going to have slightly different reasons than another, and these reasons will span genetics (hormonal, biological) and experience. Both nature and nurture play a part. It would be nuts to write anything off at this point.

But something people do not appreciate is that each straight person also has slightly different reasons and variance of factors for their sexual orientation. The issue of sexual orientation, and indeed most sexual issues are extremely complicated. I don't know why people tend to believe its all easy, but they do, and they make horrible judgments for it.

---------- Post added at 17:17 ---------- Previous post was at 17:10 ----------

Psychology is hardly quantifiable nor a provable science.

Its still very useful though, and you would discover that if you ever had any relatives with a mental illness. Its just fine if you think its more art than science. It means F all to the question of gay marriage.

 

[BrianLewis]

A study of 50 gay men found 23% had counterclockwise hair whorl, as opposed to 8% in the general population.

Sorry, I had to laugh at this one. I wonder how much money went into this study.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Sorry, I had to laugh at this one. I wonder how much money went into this study.

Why laugh? Its people like you demanding this information. Perhaps you should laugh at yourself?

 

[Davey]

I'm pretty shocked to see the results 9 for and 6 against.

If someone is happy with the same sex and doesn't hurt anyone with it why not?

My mother is married to woman for already 9 years and she is a lot happier now than when she was with my dad and she doesn't cause any trouble to neither the family or her surroundings.

 

[Macrobiotic]

One funny thing about the middle-east though, until Sweden started having mass immigration from middle-eastern nations, the concept of "gay rape" was unknown to society aside from the occasional paedophile and rare cases of kids molesting each other in orphanages in the 1950's.
These days you read about men wrestling down other men in the open streets on saturday nights and gang raping them, gangsters going to each others apartments gay-raping under gun threat because of a drug debt or something, and in all reported cases the perpetrators are of middle eastern origin.

If middle-easterners are so heavily against homosexuality, why does gay rape indeed seem to be a cultural phenomenon in those cultures? I'm not asking as a racist thing or anything, just based on simple observation.

As for gay marriage, I don't see anything controversial with it at all. Some expressions of gay love are outright silly and horribly exhibitionist and histrionic which suggests weak self image (which in turn shows a gap between liberal gay policies and actual society and culture) but I don't see any reason why people shouldn't be allowed to marry.

I am of the opinion though that too much "gay-politics" actually give young gay people mental problems and disrupts and distorts their path to a strong self. I don't think pride parades and loud voiced gay lobbying is always a good way to go.
The political organizations wants people to "come out" as 14-year olds preferably. At the same time these kids are drowned in propaganda and told step by step what to do "come out to your parents", "speak in class", "go hand in hand in the streets" etc and by the time they are 20 they are charicaturized wrecks without any personality of their own.
Of course there are also those who supress their feelings and stay in the closet for years. Once they come out, the emotional turbulence and fear is too great for them so their only way to handle it is to fall back on the "moral safety net" gay lobbying and popular culture created for them, which means they take the crash course to becoming a dehumanized pride-parade wreck for the rest of their lives. This is western gay culture in a nut shell.

 

[BrianLewis]

It's a bit much to characterize the whole middle eastern society with the same values. Perhaps the ones immigrating into Sweden were the less respectful of their traditional ways. People don't generally leave their country when they are happy with it.

I don't believe in "damaged for life," or "without personality." What is most certain in human beings is that they change a great deal over a lifetime. It may seem like they have no personality of their own, but it's probably just hidden behind an artificial personality.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

in all reported cases the perpetrators are of middle eastern origin.

A contention like that should be easy enough to prove. Go for it.

 

[Macrobiotic]

A contention like that should be easy enough to prove. Go for it.

I'm not going to manually search for and publish articles and information about individual cases, but the cultural problems are basically the same as in Norway and they actually have official statistics proving that in every single assault rape in Oslo over a three year period the rapists were immigrants of middle-eastern or african origin.

- Innvandrere bak alle anmeldte overfallsvoldtekter i Oslo - nyheter - Dagbladet.no

 

[BrianLewis]

I have noticed some cultures have bigger issues with certain criminal acts. I can think of a certain ethnicity that seems to have issues with molestation.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

I'm not going to manually search for and publish articles and information about individual cases, but the cultural problems are basically the same as in Norway and they actually have official statistics proving that in every single assault rape in Oslo over a three year period the rapists were immigrants of middle-eastern or african origin.

- Innvandrere bak alle anmeldte overfallsvoldtekter i Oslo - nyheter - Dagbladet.no

Your evidence is a tabloid??

Here is some good information about UFOs from the same prestigious source in case you are interested. Ufo-foto avslrt som blff - magasinet - Dagbladet.no

I hope you got your tin foil hat ready just in case they come for you!

Anyway, that was your one and only chance. If you want to have a rant about Middle-eastern male-on-male rapists, you can keep it out of my thread thank you very much.

This is about gay marriage, full stop.

---------- Post added at 21:18 ---------- Previous post was at 21:16 ----------

I have noticed some cultures have bigger issues with certain criminal acts. I can think of a certain ethnicity that seems to have issues with molestation.

Certain ethicity? Is it the ethnicity that shall not be named? The Voldemortians perhaps?

Feel free to PM me who this "certain ethnicity" is. Or open a thread about it. I am curious to know. But you too will not continue that off-topic trash in my thread. Understand?