WWYD if your child was gay?

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: TheFamilyMan
There is just as much legitimate, scientific and anecdotal evidence saying that homosexual tendencies are an amalgamation of many things a previous poster has indicated...hormones, upbringing, environment, et al and that CHOICE plays a major part. Yes, a male can be attractive and some males are very handsome and put together well. Beauty isn't something that is owned purely by the female form. There is a point where a choice is made whether the homosexual community wants to recognize it or not. I think they don't because once they do they lose all leverage they have when "discrimination" is one of their major weapons.

Wow. You know more about gays than they do about themselves!
And, of course, regardless of why someone is gay, discriminating against them is still wrong.

I think the reason is TheFamilyGuy is attracted to men and had to force/choose to me with women. Only thing that makes sense that he thinks people choose it.
Or just call it the craig/republican defense.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: TheFamilyMan
There is just as much legitimate, scientific and anecdotal evidence saying that homosexual tendencies are an amalgamation of many things a previous poster has indicated...hormones, upbringing, environment, et al and that CHOICE plays a major part. Yes, a male can be attractive and some males are very handsome and put together well. Beauty isn't something that is owned purely by the female form. There is a point where a choice is made whether the homosexual community wants to recognize it or not. I think they don't because once they do they lose all leverage they have when "discrimination" is one of their major weapons.

Wow. You know more about gays than they do about themselves!
And, of course, regardless of why someone is gay, discriminating against them is still wrong.

I think the reason is TheFamilyGuy is attracted to men and had to force/choose to me with women. Only thing that makes sense that he thinks people choose it.
Or just call it the craig/haggerty/christian/republican defense.

fixed

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Skacer
You realize this thread reads like a moderator equivalent of a speed trap.

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: TehMac
I think I used to be homosexual. But then I think it sorta phased out. It was one of those things. I kinda doubt it's one of those things that's "pure scientific" we try and explain science too much. Who knows? Maybe being gay is the thing right now. Colleges will sure dig you if you are.

Am I the only one who finds this ridiculous?

Only because it slanders popular opinion that gayness is something you're born with.

I am continually fascinated by straight people who maintain in the face of nearly all legitimate scientific and anecdotal evidence to the contrary that having homosexual tendencies is a choice. It is a remarkable exercise in self-delusion.

I just find it funny how people will attempt to rationalize something they claim to have no ability to relate to. It's like passing judgment on a 42 year old Indian mother of 5 deciding curry flavored chutney would be the most appropriate garnish for her husbands laugh club associates.

Here's the skinny, if you're not gay then how the hell are you supposed to know if being gay is a choice or not? I'm not gay so therefor I rely on the testimony of those that are to inform myself of their lifestyle, seems reasonable no?

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: TehMac
I think I used to be homosexual. But then I think it sorta phased out. It was one of those things. I kinda doubt it's one of those things that's "pure scientific" we try and explain science too much. Who knows? Maybe being gay is the thing right now. Colleges will sure dig you if you are.

Am I the only one who finds this ridiculous?

Only because it slanders popular opinion that gayness is something you're born with.

I am continually fascinated by straight people who maintain in the face of nearly all legitimate scientific and anecdotal evidence to the contrary that having homosexual tendencies is a choice. It is a remarkable exercise in self-delusion.

I just find it funny how people will attempt to rationalize something they claim to have no ability to relate to. It's like passing judgment on a 42 year old Indian mother of 5 deciding curry flavored chutney would be the most appropriate garnish for her husbands laugh club associates.

Here's the skinny, if you're not gay then how the hell are you supposed to know if being gay is a choice or not? I'm not gay so therefor I rely on the testimony of those that are to inform myself of their lifestyle, seems reasonable no?

Didn't you see all the numerous links TheFamilyMan posted about studies that show homosexuality is a combination of genetics and upbringing? I mean, there were numerous links. Numerous!

 

[RadiclDreamer]

Originally posted by: fatdragondzc
sleep on it and wen i wake up hopefulli its all a dream. if not, time make a new baby and start from scratch. label this one failure and send it off.

We have many good, contributing members who happen to be gay.


AnandTech Moderator hzl

Not to make light of it, but this reminds me of the George Carlin skit where he mentions the gay communities are the only group that "happen to be"

Someone doesnt happen to be black, but they always happen to be gay. Eh, its funnier when he said it

 

[jjzelinski]

Oh links? Sorry, I recant any attempt at logic I may have made.


I didn't know there were links...

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer

Originally posted by: fatdragondzc
sleep on it and wen i wake up hopefulli its all a dream. if not, time make a new baby and start from scratch. label this one failure and send it off.

We have many good, contributing members who happen to be gay.


AnandTech Moderator hzl

Not to make light of it, but this reminds me of the George Carlin skit where he mentions the gay communities are the only group that "happen to be"

Someone doesnt happen to be black, but they always happen to be gay. Eh, its funnier when he said it

I?d like to mention something about language, there are a couple of terms being used a lot these days by guilty white liberals. The first is ?Happens to be? ?He happens to be black? ?I have a friend, who happens to be black? like it?s a #%!@in accident ya know. Happens to be black? Yes, he happens to be black. He has two black parents? Oh yes, yes he did. And they #%!@ed? Oh indeed they did. So where does the surprise part come in? I?d think it?d be more unusual if he just happened to be scandinavian.

The other term is openly. ?He?s openly gay? that?s the only minority they use that for. You wouldn?t say someone is openly black well maybe James Brown. Or Louis Farrakhan, Louis Farrakhan is openly black. Colin Powell is not openly black, Colin Powell is openly white, he just happens to be black.

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer

Originally posted by: fatdragondzc
sleep on it and wen i wake up hopefulli its all a dream. if not, time make a new baby and start from scratch. label this one failure and send it off.

We have many good, contributing members who happen to be gay.


AnandTech Moderator hzl

Not to make light of it, but this reminds me of the George Carlin skit where he mentions the gay communities are the only group that "happen to be"

Someone doesnt happen to be black, but they always happen to be gay. Eh, its funnier when he said it

Maybe it's because it doesn't take the onset of adolescence to know if a kid is black or not?

 

[RadiclDreamer]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer

Originally posted by: fatdragondzc
sleep on it and wen i wake up hopefulli its all a dream. if not, time make a new baby and start from scratch. label this one failure and send it off.

We have many good, contributing members who happen to be gay.


AnandTech Moderator hzl

Not to make light of it, but this reminds me of the George Carlin skit where he mentions the gay communities are the only group that "happen to be"

Someone doesnt happen to be black, but they always happen to be gay. Eh, its funnier when he said it

I?d like to mention something about language, there are a couple of terms being used a lot these days by guilty white liberals. The first is ?Happens to be? ?He happens to be black? ?I have a friend, who happens to be black? like it?s a #%!@in accident ya know. Happens to be black? Yes, he happens to be black. He has two black parents? Oh yes, yes he did. And they #%!@ed? Oh indeed they did. So where does the surprise part come in? I?d think it?d be more unusual if he just happened to be scandinavian.

The other term is openly. ?He?s openly gay? that?s the only minority they use that for. You wouldn?t say someone is openly black well maybe James Brown. Or Louis Farrakhan, Louis Farrakhan is openly black. Colin Powell is not openly black, Colin Powell is openly white, he just happens to be black.

Thats the one, funnier when in his words

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: intogamer

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
I wouldnt do anything. A sexual preference is something you are born with, not something you learn or choose. It can't be changed whether you want it changed it or not.

What about if he/she turned gay.

What people would call "turning" gay or bi is really their actual orientation coming to the surface.

but what if their ooriginal orientation turned gay?

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: conehead433
Ask Dick Cheney. His answer - Take them on a hunting trip with you.

Dick Cheney's daughter is openly lesbian. He fully supports his daughter and has a good relationship with her.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: TehMac
I think I used to be homosexual. But then I think it sorta phased out. It was one of those things. I kinda doubt it's one of those things that's "pure scientific" we try and explain science too much. Who knows? Maybe being gay is the thing right now. Colleges will sure dig you if you are.

Am I the only one who finds this ridiculous?

Only because it slanders popular opinion that gayness is something you're born with.

Maybe he was just confused. This doesn't mean that people are not born gay by no means. I do also believe that some people may have a predisposition that social surroundings may determine whether they are gay or not. Just because some one is born genetically predispositioned towards something does not mean they will turn out that way. (A good example are people who are genetically predispositioned to alcohlolism by do not become alcoholics.)

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem
I really think hairy butts and anal sex come to mind whenever straight guys think of gay guys.

Is this true?

yep.

but whatever floats your boat, I say.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: conehead433
Ask Dick Cheney. His answer - Take them on a hunting trip with you.

Dick Cheney's daughter is openly lesbian. He fully supports his daughter and has a good relationship with her.

Even though politically he denys rights to homosexuals and condemns the lifestyle.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: TheFamilyMan

Originally posted by: fatdragondzc
sleep on it and wen i wake up hopefulli its all a dream. if not, time make a new baby and start from scratch. label this one failure and send it off.

We have many good, contributing members who happen to be gay.
You may not continue to post such verbal abuse on our forums.
Doing so again may be reason to suspend your posting privileges for an indefinite period of time.

Is that clear?

AnandTech Moderator hzl

Not trying to call a mod out here, but please explain why ATOT also has many good, contributing members who happen to be Catholic, Christian, et al and they suffer worse abuse at the hands of many agnostic, atheistic and anti-religion posters? Why are the anti-religious posters not sent on vacation/banned or at least held to the same standards mods like holding someone who posts something regarding anything but positive responses regarding homosexuality? I mean ffs, a topic was locked because someone called people who think Tony Romo is good "Tony Romo-Homo's" (which is quite fifth-grade but made me chuckle regardless) but I've seen more than one post bashing/flaming/attacking religious beliefs that had mods posting within...

QFT, although what do you expect in the new communist AT world. At least I wasn't disapointed in my estimate of the replies once I saw the thread title and number of replies.

Because anyway you look at it, religion is a true choice.
You are not born a Catholic. You are not born Baptist.
Religion has always been a center point for arguments because in essence it is no more than an opinion. And unfortunately the opinions of the masses can alter the world of people who don't believe in what you do. There is a lot of resentment when it comes to religion.

And I could find an equally large portion of people whom would happily make the same statements about gays.

but those people actually happen to be wrong. Religion, is not natural--it is not genetic in any way whatsoever.

sexuality, for a very large part, is. Just because a mass of ignorant people want to argue one over the other, doesn't make them correct about this extremely simple point.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: conehead433
Ask Dick Cheney. His answer - Take them on a hunting trip with you.

Dick Cheney's daughter is openly lesbian. He fully supports his daughter and has a good relationship with her.

Even though politically he denys rights to homosexuals and condemns the lifestyle.

How do you know that is his real position? He has stated that he was very much for civil unions but that he feels it is a states rights issue to determine that. He is also against an amendment to the constitution banning gay marriage.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: conehead433
Ask Dick Cheney. His answer - Take them on a hunting trip with you.

Dick Cheney's daughter is openly lesbian. He fully supports his daughter and has a good relationship with her.

Even though politically he denys rights to homosexuals and condemns the lifestyle.

How do you know that is his real position? He has stated that he was very much for civil unions but that he feels it is a states rights issue to determine that. He is also against an amendment to the constitution banning gay marriage.

Because he's a republican in the Bush assministration.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
what could you do? we don't have dna fixing machines or whatever yet.

Would you really need to fix him/her?

Anandtech Moderator hzl

IMHO gayness is an unnatural genetic defect in the most biologically possible sense. Gay people can't reproduce. Period. Thus, if all of the hetero people suddenly vanished, humanity would be dead as a species. This is the definition of unnatural.

That said, I don't believe gay people should be limited when it comes to marriage. Child-rearing, however, is another story. Straight children should not be raised by gay couples. As there is no definitive test for gayness yet, I don't think that gays should be allowed to raise kids. Other than that, they can do whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.

/flamesuit

whopping huge contradiction right there. it is biologiclaly possible, therefore it is indeed natural. I think you mean to suggest that it is evolutionarily unfavorable. to me, that makes sense. but you will find homosexual or simply "loose" sexual behavior thorughout the animal kingdom.

also, all fo the published data shows that gay couples are just as effective, if not moreso, at raising kids than are straight couples. When you look at these situations, the gay parents often provide far more stable households than do a straight couple with a horrible marriage. It seems the largest correlation to raising a stable child has to do with a solid example of a stable relationship in the form of the parents. Gay or straight simply doesn't matter.

you may have your opinion, but it runs counter to all of the available data.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: intogamer

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
what could you do? we don't have dna fixing machines or whatever yet.

Would you really need to fix him/her?

Anandtech Moderator hzl

IMHO gayness is an unnatural genetic defect in the most biologically possible sense. Gay people can't reproduce. Period. Thus, if all of the hetero people suddenly vanished, humanity would be dead as a species. This is the definition of unnatural.

That said, I don't believe gay people should be limited when it comes to marriage. Child-rearing, however, is another story. Straight children should not be raised by gay couples. As there is no definitive test for gayness yet, I don't think that gays should be allowed to raise kids. Other than that, they can do whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.

/flamesuit

What the fuck? Gay people can't reproduce? Do their respective penises and vaginas fall off once they realize they're gay? Just because gay people choose not to reproduce doesn't mean they can't. How many thousands of children do you think have been born from relationships where the father repressed his true feelings. Do you know how many married men with children solicit gay sex? Your post is mind-fuck retarded and unbelievable.

And why shouldn't straight children be raised by gay people? Being gay is not something you will pick up from being raised in a gay environment. If that were true I'd be a devout catholic and go to church every sunday.. when I'm anything but.

People can turn gay then.. as I said before.

you're still a raging idiot. married dude was always gay. Plat's point is that gay men get married to women b/c of societal pressure. they go through "religious re-education" to turn them straight and cast out the gay demons. they aren't straight, never were and never will be. their marriages are disaster.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: TheFamilyMan

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
what could you do? we don't have dna fixing machines or whatever yet.

Would you really need to fix him/her?

Anandtech Moderator hzl

IMHO gayness is an unnatural genetic defect in the most biologically possible sense. Gay people can't reproduce. Period. Thus, if all of the hetero people suddenly vanished, humanity would be dead as a species. This is the definition of unnatural.

That said, I don't believe gay people should be limited when it comes to marriage. Child-rearing, however, is another story. Straight children should not be raised by gay couples. As there is no definitive test for gayness yet, I don't think that gays should be allowed to raise kids. Other than that, they can do whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.

/flamesuit

Uh-oh...someone may be MORE unpopular around threads like this than me.

Good point on the aspect of homosexuality being counter-productive to biological design of the human species. If homosexuals are truly a different species, albeit different in only .000001% of the design of how the homo-sapien was designed, then evolution would take care of that and they'll one day reproduce. Not likely, but it is evolution and stranger things have happened.

show me a gay person incapable or reproducing with a straight person. I don't think you understand the definition of "species," much less evolution.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Because he's a republican in the Bush assministration.

Wait a minute. I have a few points for you to consider before you label all Republicans anti-gay.

1. There is an entire wing of the Republican party called The Log Cabin Republicans that fully support gay rights. Yes, gay people can be Republicans. (And many are)

2. The Democrats record on gay right is not much better than the Republicans. Most of the Democrats in Congress voted for the Defense of Marriage Act and Bill Clinton signed it into law. The Dems talk a good talk when it comes to gay rights but balk when it comes to actually putting them into place.

3. There are openly gay members in the Bush White House staff.

Neither party has a stellar record when it comes to gay rights.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
what could you do? we don't have dna fixing machines or whatever yet.

Would you really need to fix him/her?

Anandtech Moderator hzl

IMHO gayness is an unnatural genetic defect in the most biologically possible sense. Gay people can't reproduce. Period. Thus, if all of the hetero people suddenly vanished, humanity would be dead as a species. This is the definition of unnatural.

That said, I don't believe gay people should be limited when it comes to marriage. Child-rearing, however, is another story. Straight children should not be raised by gay couples. As there is no definitive test for gayness yet, I don't think that gays should be allowed to raise kids. Other than that, they can do whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.

/flamesuit

whopping huge contradiction right there. it is biologiclaly possible, therefore it is indeed natural. I think you mean to suggest that it is evolutionarily unfavorable. to me, that makes sense. but you will find homosexual or simply "loose" sexual behavior thorughout the animal kingdom.

also, all fo the published data shows that gay couples are just as effective, if not moreso, at raising kids than are straight couples. When you look at these situations, the gay parents often provide far more stable households than do a straight couple with a horrible marriage. It seems the largest correlation to raising a stable child has to do with a solid example of a stable relationship in the form of the parents. Gay or straight simply doesn't matter.

you may have your opinion, but it runs counter to all of the available data.

Obviously gay parents would raise gay kids, since straight parents only raise straight kids, right?

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
what could you do? we don't have dna fixing machines or whatever yet.

Would you really need to fix him/her?

Anandtech Moderator hzl

No, but maybe we could fix people like Oroo Sadly even the promise of genetics has no answer for ignorance, you can lead a horse to water blah blah blah....


WWYD if your child was gay?

Spend my time worrying about more relevant issues concerning my child. Raise them to treat people well and hope that whatever gender their significant other may happen to be that their relationship is healthy mentally, emotionally, and physically.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: conehead433
Ask Dick Cheney. His answer - Take them on a hunting trip with you.

Dick Cheney's daughter is openly lesbian. He fully supports his daughter and has a good relationship with her.

Even though politically he denys rights to homosexuals and condemns the lifestyle.

How do you know that is his real position? He has stated that he was very much for civil unions but that he feels it is a states rights issue to determine that. He is also against an amendment to the constitution banning gay marriage.

Because he's a republican in the Bush assministration.

hoooooooold on a minute. don't put everyone in the same corral there.