Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Homosexuality

Page 73 of 93 [ 1477 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76 ... 93  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 10:42 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Also, did you know that not having sex is natural to everyone? The body and psyche are designed to live without sex for months and years -- even decades -- because such periods are circumstantially normal in people's lives. In fact, those who never have sex, even while desiring to, are usually quite normal in other respects. Thay may be a little eccentric, but fully functional in their lives, and as content as anyone else. Therefore, I could validly say, "I was born this way: I'd rather not have sex now, and probably ever, thank you very much." That's very normal. Few if any of us will respond "Sure!" if propositioned on the street. That's completely normal. Whereas, free food from a local vendor will be taken by most people upon the offer. Abstaining from sex for long periods is just as natural as having sex. Sex has no natural regular intervals. Whereas, eating and sleeping have regular intervals, and a person's abstaining from either for months will result in death. Sexual abstinence doesn't result in death, nor disease, nor physical weakness, nor mental weakness. Plently of abstient people have booming, lucrative careers because of a certain specialty they're great in, such as engineering or book-keeping.

Why are you telling me this?
I know people don't have to have sex. I don't give a sh** whether they do or they don't. This has nothing to do with being gay.


Yes it does. It shows that, when it comes to sexuality, there's a wide range of changable behaviours which are mostly influenced by circumstance. Whereas, autism is hardwired.

No. The best comparison there would be to asexuality. Someone can be naturally asexual and that won't change no matter how many people they encounter. Not wanting to have sex for a while isn't the same as an actual orientation. I could choose to try having sex with men because there are no girls I like available. That wouldn't mean I was becoming straight.


In my definition, you'd be straight.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

12 Aug 2007, 10:44 am

Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
A person with AS can pretend to be NT or whatever.


Doesn't work for most people with AS. If it did, they'd be able to make friends, which almost all claim they can't. And what about a person with full-on classic autism. Can he pretend to be NT?

Again, I'm not talking about severe Autism. What about the people who have mild AS. Why isn't that more common then? After all, it's natural to them. Why would it being natural mean half the population were gay?



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 10:44 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
It's just the same as being straight, only with people of the same sex.


So you say....

It's certainly not true in a lot of cases;

Such as?


Prison, and other places where access to females is lacking, like China. Many men there resort to gay relationships because there is a lack of women because of all the baby girls that they killed.

I wouldn't say that's typical homosexuality though. I couldn't choose to make myself straight. They're not turning gay, they're resorting to sex with men because there are no women there. IMO everyone is bisexual to some extent, everyone has the capacity to go either way in extreme circumstances.

Also, it could go the other way, if I was in a situation for several years where I was ONLY surrounded by men, I could end up having sex with them. So that's not a difference between being gay and being straight, that's just sexuality in general.


So, sex is societal.

Sex = whatever. Irrelevant.
Being gay isn't just about sex.


What else is it about? Flowers?


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

12 Aug 2007, 10:45 am

Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Also, did you know that not having sex is natural to everyone? The body and psyche are designed to live without sex for months and years -- even decades -- because such periods are circumstantially normal in people's lives. In fact, those who never have sex, even while desiring to, are usually quite normal in other respects. Thay may be a little eccentric, but fully functional in their lives, and as content as anyone else. Therefore, I could validly say, "I was born this way: I'd rather not have sex now, and probably ever, thank you very much." That's very normal. Few if any of us will respond "Sure!" if propositioned on the street. That's completely normal. Whereas, free food from a local vendor will be taken by most people upon the offer. Abstaining from sex for long periods is just as natural as having sex. Sex has no natural regular intervals. Whereas, eating and sleeping have regular intervals, and a person's abstaining from either for months will result in death. Sexual abstinence doesn't result in death, nor disease, nor physical weakness, nor mental weakness. Plently of abstient people have booming, lucrative careers because of a certain specialty they're great in, such as engineering or book-keeping.

Why are you telling me this?
I know people don't have to have sex. I don't give a sh** whether they do or they don't. This has nothing to do with being gay.


Yes it does. It shows that, when it comes to sexuality, there's a wide range of changable behaviours which are mostly influenced by circumstance. Whereas, autism is hardwired.

No. The best comparison there would be to asexuality. Someone can be naturally asexual and that won't change no matter how many people they encounter. Not wanting to have sex for a while isn't the same as an actual orientation. I could choose to try having sex with men because there are no girls I like available. That wouldn't mean I was becoming straight.


In my definition, you'd be straight.

Well in the definition, I wouldn't. Sexual orientation is about attraction, not who you f**k. Wow, you really are stupid, aren't you?



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 10:46 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
A person with AS can pretend to be NT or whatever.


Doesn't work for most people with AS. If it did, they'd be able to make friends, which almost all claim they can't. And what about a person with full-on classic autism. Can he pretend to be NT?

Again, I'm not talking about severe Autism. What about the people who have mild AS. Why isn't that more common then? After all, it's natural to them. Why would it being natural mean half the population were gay?


Would you call the elephant man's condition normal? It exists in/from nature. So does that mean it's as natural to be an elephant man as it is to not be?
Image


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Last edited by Ragtime on 12 Aug 2007, 10:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

12 Aug 2007, 10:47 am

Ragtime wrote:
What else is it about? Flowers?

Are you really telling me that relationships are just about sex?
I like someone right now. It didn't work out with her, but if it had, I'd be perfectly happy being in a relationship with her with or without sex.



Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

12 Aug 2007, 10:47 am

Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
A person with AS can pretend to be NT or whatever.


Doesn't work for most people with AS. If it did, they'd be able to make friends, which almost all claim they can't. And what about a person with full-on classic autism. Can he pretend to be NT?

Again, I'm not talking about severe Autism. What about the people who have mild AS. Why isn't that more common then? After all, it's natural to them. Why would it being natural mean half the population were gay?


Would you call the elephant man's condition normal? He exists in/from nature. So does that mean it's as natural to be an elephant man as it is to not be?
Image

To him it's natural, yes.
Your point is..?



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 10:50 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
What else is it about? Flowers?

Are you really telling me that relationships are just about sex?

Centrally, yes.
Sopho wrote:
I like someone right now. It didn't work out with her, but if it had, I'd be perfectly happy being in a relationship with her with or without sex.


Well, to each his/her own. I personally think it's a bit kinky to start a relationship with zero sexual intent, unless one or both people are physically unable. And then, it would be a very unusual relationship.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 10:52 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Also, did you know that not having sex is natural to everyone? The body and psyche are designed to live without sex for months and years -- even decades -- because such periods are circumstantially normal in people's lives. In fact, those who never have sex, even while desiring to, are usually quite normal in other respects. Thay may be a little eccentric, but fully functional in their lives, and as content as anyone else. Therefore, I could validly say, "I was born this way: I'd rather not have sex now, and probably ever, thank you very much." That's very normal. Few if any of us will respond "Sure!" if propositioned on the street. That's completely normal. Whereas, free food from a local vendor will be taken by most people upon the offer. Abstaining from sex for long periods is just as natural as having sex. Sex has no natural regular intervals. Whereas, eating and sleeping have regular intervals, and a person's abstaining from either for months will result in death. Sexual abstinence doesn't result in death, nor disease, nor physical weakness, nor mental weakness. Plently of abstient people have booming, lucrative careers because of a certain specialty they're great in, such as engineering or book-keeping.

Why are you telling me this?
I know people don't have to have sex. I don't give a sh** whether they do or they don't. This has nothing to do with being gay.


Yes it does. It shows that, when it comes to sexuality, there's a wide range of changable behaviours which are mostly influenced by circumstance. Whereas, autism is hardwired.

No. The best comparison there would be to asexuality. Someone can be naturally asexual and that won't change no matter how many people they encounter. Not wanting to have sex for a while isn't the same as an actual orientation. I could choose to try having sex with men because there are no girls I like available. That wouldn't mean I was becoming straight.


In my definition, you'd be straight.

Well in the definition, I wouldn't. Sexual orientation is about attraction, not who you f**k. Wow, you really are stupid, aren't you?


The point is, during sex with a man, you'd have to re-orient yourself enough to comply.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Last edited by Ragtime on 12 Aug 2007, 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

12 Aug 2007, 10:52 am

Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
What else is it about? Flowers?

Are you really telling me that relationships are just about sex?

Centrally, yes.
Sopho wrote:
I like someone right now. It didn't work out with her, but if it had, I'd be perfectly happy being in a relationship with her with or without sex.


Well, to each his/her own. I personally think it's a bit kinky to start a relationship with zero sexual intent, unless one or both people are physically unable. And then, it would be a very unusual relationship.

That's your problem then. I'm capable of being with a girl without sex, obviously you're not.



Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

12 Aug 2007, 10:53 am

Ragtime wrote:
The point is, during sex with a man, you'd have to re-orient yourself to do that.

No I wouldn't. I can force myself to eat food I don't like. I could force myself to have sex with a person I wasn't attracted to.
You're going back on what you were saying yesterday.



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 10:56 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
What else is it about? Flowers?

Are you really telling me that relationships are just about sex?

Centrally, yes.
Sopho wrote:
I like someone right now. It didn't work out with her, but if it had, I'd be perfectly happy being in a relationship with her with or without sex.


Well, to each his/her own. I personally think it's a bit kinky to start a relationship with zero sexual intent, unless one or both people are physically unable. And then, it would be a very unusual relationship.

That's your problem then. I'm capable of being with a girl without sex, obviously you're not.


I didn't say I wasn't "capable". As I said earlier, the human mind and body are designed to do without sex for whatever period of time. If I lived with a girl, and circumstantially couldn't have sex with her, be it my will or hers, then I could do that. I don't like going to work every day, but I do that too.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

12 Aug 2007, 10:58 am

Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
What else is it about? Flowers?

Are you really telling me that relationships are just about sex?

Centrally, yes.
Sopho wrote:
I like someone right now. It didn't work out with her, but if it had, I'd be perfectly happy being in a relationship with her with or without sex.


Well, to each his/her own. I personally think it's a bit kinky to start a relationship with zero sexual intent, unless one or both people are physically unable. And then, it would be a very unusual relationship.

That's your problem then. I'm capable of being with a girl without sex, obviously you're not.


I didn't say I wasn't "capable". As I said earlier, the human mind and body are designed to do without sex for whatever period of time. If I lived with a girl, and circumstantially couldn't have sex with her, be it my will or hers, then I could do that. I don't like going to work every day, but I do that too.

Well there you go then: there is more to a relationship than sex.



Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 11:03 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
The point is, during sex with a man, you'd have to re-orient yourself to do that.

No I wouldn't. I can force myself to eat food I don't like. I could force myself to have sex with a person I wasn't attracted to.
You're going back on what you were saying yesterday.


My point is, in eating food you don't like, you are "an eater of that food". If you don't like construction work, but you start building a highway because that's the only work available, you ARE a construction worker. You see, I'm not talking about "internally gay" or whatever the hell that means. I'm talking about functionally straight. Sex is mainly an external application, not an internal identity. That's why I CHOOSE to be straight. Because of my CHOICE, I AM 100% straight. Get it through your head. A person who intentionally kills someone IS A MURDERER.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

12 Aug 2007, 11:04 am

Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
It's just the same as being straight, only with people of the same sex.


So you say....

It's certainly not true in a lot of cases;

Such as?


Prison, and other places where access to females is lacking, like China. Many men there resort to gay relationships because there is a lack of women because of all the baby girls that they killed.

Yes in prison men who are straight have sex with other men, or to put it in a better way, they rape them, yeah, they do it because they only want any place to stick their dicks because they don't have women there, if there were small animals in jail instead of inmates, they would have sex with them as well.

There is no real attraction, I really doubt there would be holding hands, lip kissing, even the ones who rape other men would be gross out at kissing and romantic stuff, they just want some place to stick their thing in.

There's the difference.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

12 Aug 2007, 11:05 am

Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
What else is it about? Flowers?

Are you really telling me that relationships are just about sex?

Centrally, yes.
Sopho wrote:
I like someone right now. It didn't work out with her, but if it had, I'd be perfectly happy being in a relationship with her with or without sex.


Well, to each his/her own. I personally think it's a bit kinky to start a relationship with zero sexual intent, unless one or both people are physically unable. And then, it would be a very unusual relationship.

That's your problem then. I'm capable of being with a girl without sex, obviously you're not.


I didn't say I wasn't "capable". As I said earlier, the human mind and body are designed to do without sex for whatever period of time. If I lived with a girl, and circumstantially couldn't have sex with her, be it my will or hers, then I could do that. I don't like going to work every day, but I do that too.

Well there you go then: there is more to a relationship than sex.


OF COURSE THERE IS! Geez! I said sex is the focal point, NOT THE ENTIRE THING.


_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.