quote:

homosexuality is clearly un-natural and therefore not a choice, but a defect.

But does this make it wrong? I think that's what most people get hung up on. The word defect tends to have negative connotations, even though it's perfectly true. The human body simply isn't wired to be homosexual, so something has to be "wrong," per se, to make someone homosexual.

Not that this is a bad thing, mind you. Autism is a defect, but it's not always bad. Heck, one could even say that being ginger is a defect, and I really hope no one discriminates against people with red hair and freckles.

I agree a bit with riskbreaker, I have this theory that you're born gay but it takes a process of discovering it and realizing it.

quote:

I have a friend who doesn't like chocolate. That's not normal at all, but it doesn't mean she's defective.

there is a big difference between dietry choice and sexuality, lots of people don't like chocolate, it is to do with the sensitivity of your tastebuds and can be changed, children don't often like vegetables but grow to like then...one doesn't turn gay, you are born gay and undergo a process to realise it...as society would condition even the gay to believe it is wrong and unnatural.

Alright, Torin, I was wrong about one thing. (and you were wrong about...)

Also: Do. Not. Pity. Me. That is a sure way to piss me off if you're looking to do it.

one last comment for shade as i just read his last post and felt bad for him.

homo/bisexual men accounted for approximately 73% of "Chicago" syphilis cases in the year 2005."

Pay attention to the bold word with quotes and if you can figure it out before the end of next semester, pat yourself on the back, if not, it's okay keep trying you'll get it some day. *Hint: it means ALL syphilis cases in chicago.

It's pretty hard to lose a debate without a mediator...

Take it easy

Someone could argue that homosexuality hurts society, or that homosexuals hurt themselves, or so on and so forth. It's a piss poor argument, but it's halfway common.

have fun everyone, fun while it lasted but gotta get geared up for next semester.

quote:

Its not like homosexuals are hurting people,

I put this statement in there to to conteract that one. Technically raping toddlers is hurting someobody

Cue "some people don't think raping toddlers is wrong what are you a toddler rapist huh" counterargument.

you see what I don't get about the whole homo and hetro debate is why the other party cares what the sexuality of other people are. Everybody is intitled to their own decisions, who are we to judge others? Its not like homosexuals are hurting people, you may not think its right, but its part of who they are whether they "chose it" or not. The same with extremely religious people, lots of religious people will state that sex outside of marraige is wrong, but for lots of people its not that big of a deal. It really depends on your view on what is right and wrong.

quote:

homosexuality is clearly un-natural and therefore not a choice, but a defect.

I have a friend who doesn't like chocolate. That's not normal at all, but it doesn't mean she's defective.

Not got time to read through the argument, so ill just offer my opinion.

Humans are creations of their own genetics, homosexuality is clearly un-natural and therefore not a choice, but a defect.

There are many defects, and this is one of them. It is wholly impossible for a normal male to be attracted to another...it goes against all processes of nature, humans simply do not make those kind of choices consciously...were just a big bundle of impulses and instincts.

quote:

Someone besides shade because obviously he thinks were all below him in intelligence and he is above "truth", oh and his head hurts too

You lose the debate and so now you're trying to insult me? That's funny. How am I above truth, again?

quote:

whats 73%-100% Shade?

It's, uh, the rest of the homosexual/bisexual men?

I stopped halfway because I have responsibilities outside of the internet. Like buying food?

I can't argue that article, I sold my psychology book and with it, all my sources.

...So, do I offend you or something?

Well, I was going to jump in on this debate, but everyone else has already said what I was going to say, and I don't even want to bother with it anyways. I don't need to prove anything about homosexuality to you since it's something you'll never fully be able to understand. Neither will I, for that matter (since we're both straight), but I do have quite a few homosexual friends, and from what I've heard from them, they're no different than heterosexuals in terms of sexual promiscuity, multiple partners, and love. And I think they know what they're talking about.

There's not much else I can say.

quote:

No, your second quote never compared them. It just said homosexual/bisexual men. That's it.

whats 73%-100% Shade? a remainder of 27% of people who have syphilis who AREN'T male homo/bisexual.

Comparison= 73%(male homo/bisexual) as appose to 23%(everyone else!)

As i don't have time to jot all this info down, just read this guys statements they pretty much sum up what a homosexual relationship is and why it is the way it is.

http://members.aol.com/slevay/page23.html

And yes, we know shade that you can tear this guy to shreds and totally debunk his arguement so no need to mention it, oh and that you stopped half way because of uninterest, anway thanks.

quote:

once again...can anyone present an arguement instead of just ridculing my comments all day long?

Oh chill.

I am getting there. Sadly I don't have time to debate on this site 24/7

is that all you have to say?

once again...can anyone present an arguement instead of just ridculing my comments all day long?

Funny, I never felt as though Shade thought anyone was below him.

I am really tired of arguing my point endlessly to only get replies that critcize my thoughts....can please someone present an arguement? Or is CLPO the only person on this entire website that knows how to debate?

Someone besides shade because obviously he thinks were all below him in intelligence and he is above "truth", oh and his head hurts too

Oh, I remembered something I forgot to clarify this morning. We weren't talking about love through sex, we were just talking about love. I mean, if it were down to arguing the acts themselves it might be different, but love by itself? Come now, no one's proved they can't love each other. Real love. (sigh) Alright, real romantic love, since you want to distinguish it.

Good article, sort of. (Article 1) It's way biased (well, obviously.) Sometimes it compared homosexuals and heterosexuals, sometimes it didn't. Some of the things they said were absurd (like blaming homosexuals for babies born with aids). I admit, I stopped about halfway. Well, I have to go grocery shopping. I'm not sure it hinged the whole reason for homosexuals not to marry on their sexual practices. Like I've said before, sodomy exists everywhere, in practically every community..this article seemed to think only homosexuals did it. It was cleverly put together, and I could pick it apart if you like (but my head hurts).