Sorry extreme liberals, but homosexuality IS a choice

It has two meanings according to M-W. There are other dictionaries cited, such as on dictionary.com, that list only 1 definition for it in the noun sense.

Completely wrong. When a dictionary lists two definitions, that means that the word can either mean definition 1 OR defintion 2. It doens't have to mean both definition 1 AND definition 2. If I, a heterosexual male, engage in homosexual activity, then I am exhibiting homosexuality.

Surely by now you've realized that you were incorrectly interpreting how to read a dictionary. I'm going to just assume that it was because you did it on purpose to fit your agenda and that you're actually not mildly retarded.

Wrong again. I could exhibit homosexuality by engaging in homosexual activities, I just choose not to. Choice is a completely relevant factor in determining one's sexuality.

 

Sure. I make the decision every time I have an opportunity to engage with another man that is attracted to me.

That's exactly what I was doing.

OK

 

So each time a gay male propositions you, you have to consider the offer and come to the conclusion that you should decline?

Then that's not a choice. Instincts != choice.

 

Yes, these are biological functions for most members of the species, but as the genpool is quite diverse not every individual has the same drive to fullfill these functions. That said, you cannot define biological functions as normal or not.

So you agree that normality is subjective, but still continue to act as if there was a objective purpose for humanity. Whatever happens, happens. Nothing else. What you mean with "normal" is the behavior that leads to greater success of survival. Latter is affected by an infinite number of factors, so it's not enough to view one factor individually and determine its value towards said success.

 

How often does this happen? It hasn't happened to me even once.

 

True. But that definition is exactly the one that doesn't help your case. Guess you should have read it first.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homosexual?s=t
Notice how it doesn't require homosexual activity.

I wasn't saying that both are necessary conditions. You were using homosexuality as if it had only one meaning when the term was in fact ambiguous.

I don't see how this even remotely attempts to counter the point that attraction isn't a choice.

Actually, it isn't. Because before one chooses to engage in homosexual activity, he is already inclined to homosexual behavior. In other words, the "sexually attracted to the same-sex" definition presupposes "engaging in homosexual activity."

You might argue "What about people who engage in homosexual intercourse but are not attracted to the same sex?" Consider a victim of homosexual rape. That person has engaged in homosexual intercourse. But would you say someone who has been raped by a member of the same sex is gay? Is that how simple-minded your definition of homosexuality really is?

ETA: Seriously. Step up your game. I'm really struggling to take you seriously.

 

I don't believe that gays have a choice, there is something in their biological make up that lead them to that life style. They should not be punished for it but also they should not be rewarded. I disagree with gay marriage, that name has always meant to be between a man and a woman. That is how I feel. Each side is entitled to their view on this but the demonstrations aren't helping they are damaging the gay movement or what ever they call it.

 

So you refuse gay marriage on base of tradition? While we're at it, we could revoce women's right to vote, since it has been a tradition for quite a while a few years ago. Tradition is a pretty weak argument against change.

 

A constitutional ammendment gave women their protected status and right to vote. When the homos can convince the country to ammend the constitution giving them the same status, then you'll get no more arguments from me.

 

Hmm kind of a weak standpoint IMO. You could make the same argument during the 60`s with black rights........as long as you can convince the country to allow blacks the same rights as whites you wont hear an argument from me.... but in the mean time (*)(*)(*)(*) em!

 

When you use the word "homos"... you convince me that your notions are essentially trash, to be disposed of. Bigotry expressed like that is worth virtually nothing.

 

He meant homo-sapiens!

 

I could only WISH for that.

 

What about QUEER? I have news for you, sir...a lot of us are no longer going to refer to homosexuals as "happy" which is what GAY means. There is nothing wrong with the word homosexual, and people are getting fed up with the nonsense of word play. Call me HETERO, wouldn't bother me in the least. Actually I like STRAIGHT too, because it means the other side is bent. How's that? Work for you?

 

I'm sorry you feel that way. They have worse words for me.

Except the Civil Rights movement was based on rights already secured for blacks by the Constitution. The Civil Rights Act was an enforcement tool for what was already Constitutional. There is no constitutional status for lifestyle choice and you can't convince the country to incorporate such a notion into the Constitution, so instead you pretend like you're part of the Civil Rights act when you're not.

 

This isn't about just YOU. Please, get real.

Okay. But don't sit there imagining that one Civil Rights movement cannot or will not set a precedence for others. I really shouldn't have to explain that to you; I think you're feigning ignorance.

(see the above)

What the hell is "lifestyle choice"; that term and the way you are applying it is a display of abject idiocy. Who told YOU that homosexuality is some "lifestyle choice"? Really, that is just stupid to say.

No matter your warped and unjust views... these issues will be debated in this society AND take to courts and legislatures UNTIL homosexual people achieve equal rights. It may be beyond either of our lifetimes... but it will happen.

 

Homosexuality is NOT a choice. It is who they are. People are homo or heterosexual regardless of whether or not they choose to be sexually active. Big difference. You made you OP sound like if someone chose abstinence than they were choosing not to be homosexual.

Also for people who believe that it IS a choice, a disorder, a sin, stupid and whatever else I have seen/heard it called, here is another interesting fact. Homosexuality occurs in the animal kingdom. Multiple species have been observed engaging in homosexual behavior.

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx

 

" Sorry extreme liberals, but homosexuality IS a choice"

it's only a choice to bi-sexuals to the rest of us, were born without a choice in the matter, that has to be a hard concept for bisexuals to understand as they had a choice, they assume we did too


.

 

It isn't about you either. See I can do that too.

I already outlined why there is no correlation between Civil Rights and the gay movement. I think YOU are feigning ignorance. See, I can do that too.

Because you say so? It is a lifestyle choice. They aren't a race or a gender. It's fundamental justice to say that a man be judged by his actions rather than his race, gender, religious belief, etc and this is what it's all about. I'm not judging homos by what can't be helped, I'm judging them by the immoral, ungodly way they choose to live. This isn't rocket science.

Repeating that homos don't have equal rights over and over doesn't make it true. You want special rights, not equal rights.

 

LOL!! That is exactly what he was saying. (Screw 'em!)

 

"Repeating that homos don't have equal rights over and over doesn't make it true. You want special rights, not equal rights. "

wrong, all they want is equal rights, same as inter-racial couples wanted and eventually received

 

No, what you do has nothing to do with science at all. Science has already delivered empirical evidence of the existence of homosexuality as sexual preference coexisting with heterosexuality. You condemn it because of your beliefs, which seem to be founded on irrational hate. What do homosexuals do to be called "immoral, ungodly"?

 

Don't expect to be tolerated yourself; and don't whine when people get into your face if you use that term. It's your choice.

You ain't sayin' nothin' new here, Mr.

That just some foolish rambling. Whatever man.

Use the words that make sense to you. But if you deliberately offend other human beings... don't cry about it when you're rejected outright. There's no reason that homosexual people (or their advocates) should tolerate you/yours... if your refer to them in disparaging or hateful ways.

I'm not worried about what you call me so much, I'm concerned about how you treat other human beings.

Get real. But it is up to you how you live your life. Usually people won't bother you, unless you bother them. Choose.

 

Reading all this cr4p in this thread, I'm amazed inter-racial marriages are legal in the US..