Posts
It's true, all sex acts are a choice. Many people reserve the act for marriage in the first place (mostly a heterosexual situation actually). Many take vows of celibacy for life (Catholic Priests, even Gay Cardinals).
It may also reign true that humans come out of the womb as non-sexual beings. Yes, it's possible that we are ALL born with a mind for molding on the matter and, thus, choices to make accordingly.
Perhaps parenting can cause certain reactions among children to the opposite gender later in life. Being abused might cause gender identity issues. Treatments on the playground may cause one to believe he/she must be gay because 'I just can't identify with the opposite gender'. Maybe it's simple shyness that causes it sometimes. Sometimes imprisonment or isolation with extended time exposed only to the same gender might cause homosexuality. Drug habits might lead to a tendency to 'get off one's rocks' anyway one can. I'm not laying claim to any specific scientific proof, yet I believe theoretically some of this probably happens.
Likewise I'd bet sometimes we ARE talking about born tendency. Geneticists claim to have isolated some evidence for this among homosexuals ... even alcoholics.
So, two things:
First, being 'born gay' is at least similar to being 'born an alcoholic'. In the future, some parents, given such information at or before the birth of their children, might choose to affect the fruition of certain tendencies through environmental nudging or nurturing. Perhaps someday genetic solutions will be made available and some parents will choose to medically eliminate such tendencies altogether. And, on the other hand some of these parents might choose to put beer in their children's lunch box.
Second, often Prop 8 opposers represent a hypocritical stance that gay is ALWAYS a born trait and NEVER choice. Of course that is the norm among the Prop 8 opposition because it's the only way to lay claim to a MLK style Civil Rights piggyback ride. So, sometimes the argument is made (because I for one often argue a link to governmental interest in marriage intended to affect responsible child rearing) that only people who intend to or even CAN make babies should be afforded a marriage license. Fine then. Since the 'Gay Marriage' movement is pushed solely as a Civil Rights issue, ONLY gays who are proven BORN 'that way' should get marriage certs. Bi's and Trannies are out lest they choose opposite gender commitments.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
Additionally, those with vasectomy or hysterectomy scars must secure an annulment prior to surgery.
And what of the "marriage of convenience" problem? What keeps Adam and Steve from marrying their lesbian friends Evelyn and Eve?
Put up any wall (in this case, govt. endorsed marriage) and they will figger a way around, under, over, through it.
If most of the world were gay, would it be appropriate for heteros to dance in the Gay Pride parade? And if it were not, would it be a civil rights issue? I think not.
Marriage, like driving, is a privilege. If you don't meet the minimum test requirements, you are forbidden the privilege under the law. If you fail to live up to the standards, you are similarly forbidden.
Limiting privilege does not constitute a violation of the "pursuit of happiness."
Anon,
Absolutely not. First, if only one of the members of a relationship has a permanent fix put on their fertility, the other still has to remain committed in order to avoid the possibility of out of wedlock pregnancy.
Second, by putting a permanent fix on their fertility, heterosexuals are behaving responsibly so as not to make unwanted babies, a concern with which gays need not trouble themselves.
Sid,
They can already do that if they want. Really if it were simply about rights, they would simply become partners in a fictitious LLC to gain any and more rights married couples share.
It's not about rights. It's about emotion. It's a covet thang. It's about looking over the fence and saying, "You have one of those? Well I deserve one, too!'
Great point Mr. Weathers!
This happened where I once worked: The owner of the company offered a raise to employees who would quit smoking. It worked as a few quit smoking and received the raise. The entire point was wasted on the non-smokers, though, who complained that they deserve the raise too because they didn't smoke in the first place.
A good idea was lost. The entire incentive program aimed at increased production could not exist because those to whom it did not apply felt it wasn't fair.
No one in that company started smoking to get the raise, but they did complain.
They didn't realize they were already being paid what they were worth given their level of productivity. Smokers who quit smoking improved their productivity. This didn't matter to the non-smoking workers. Instead they saw it as a personal violation.
If 'marriage' brings with it incentives involving responsible baby prevention, then why should gays be interested in that incentive? I say that it's for the same reasons the non-smokers wanted a raise in my example. It has nothing to do with the intention of the incentive. It has more to do with peering over the fence and saying, "Hey, you have one of those, I deserve one, too."
To clarify. In my analogy, single and promiscuous heterosexuals play the role of the less productive smoker. If they 'quit smoking' by getting married, they become far less likely to make a baby out of wedlock, hence more productive in terms of societal health (yes, adultery will occur among the population so out of wedlock pregnancy is not eliminated).
The non-smokers are represented by single and promiscuous homosexuals. By getting married they become absolutely NO less likely to make a baby out of wedlock, hence no more productive in terms of societal health (yes, adultery will occur among the population and out of wedlock pregnancy is STILL not affected).
But for lack of a better term, jealousy drives them to feel entitled to the same treatment as those who become more productive even if their productivity remains unchanged.
Again, I am not talking about productivity in terms of making babies, but in NOT making babies accidentally.
Though the non-smokers couldn't see anything but their own oppression, they were not entirely at fault for being petty.
What should have been done (and carried from this analogy to the subject at hand) is for the boss to give everyone a $1 raise who doesn't smoke on the job, OR lower everyone's wage and reward the non-smokers $1 for not smoking.
The carrot needs to be in front of the jackass pulling the cart.
I disagree.
The non-smokers were already being paid what they were worth and seemed to be working up to their potential. The smokers were also being paid what they were worth given a decreased level of productivity due to smoking.
For the businessman to offer incentive to he smokers is to increase productivity through one simple step. The non-smokers aren't even on this cart and are free to pursue any mode of increased productivity they can muster. But they can't quit smoking to increase their productivity. Smoking is not slowing them down at all.
Much like gays. Accidental baby making is not an issue. They are not less productive members of society when they get promiscuous because this accident of life will NEVER occur. They are not on this cart.
But they and YOU might very well be jackasses!
You can finish my unfinished sentence in that last post ...
"Sex is a Choice"
- I'm pretty sure from your pic that you have no choice in that matter. I'm saying no one wants to have sex with you. But back the the human population with only one chin...
The fact is, some people are born gay. Some swans are born gay (look up "gay swans") some dogs are born gay (look up gay dogs). All mamals have a percent, looks like 10 -15, of beings that like the same sex.
Now, I know you love sucking Jesus' cock and telling him how not gay you are, but the fact is, what other people do in their spare time is 0 of your business.
And I'm not even gay. I have no dog in this fight. I just find you to be a disgusting and sad being.
You should be ashamed of yourself and if there is a god, and he created everything, he hates you for making the fellow creatures he created feel as if they don't belong. And this imaginary being certainly would not hate the gay people he created nor deny them the gift of love, and he certainly would not wish for them to be something they are not. Which seems to be what you are proposing.
So the question begs an answer, why do presume to judge something you know nothing of?
I have an Associates in Religious Studies, and I was born and raised Christian (2 credits away from a Bachelor's but I transfered). And the likes of you, and your idiocy (this oodd new, competely counter to what Jesus actually ever said according to Mathew Mark Luke and John)simplton explanation of human behavior, has forced me to abandon any god.
I figure there likely is not one, since only the dumbest and least educated of society seems to espouse such a being. But if there is some all mighty, he most certainly is not this hypocrital ass the Christian faith makes him out to be.
Good luck. I certainly hope that history does not remember you as the sad and narrow fool your silly blog portrays you as. I hope you learn a lesson from the New Testament and stop judging your fellow man.
You have no right to. You frankly, are the least capable of the judgemental, with your silly blog and your ideas that most dismissed as juvenile by the fourth grade. At least a few of the pharisees today have some concept of history and human nature. You are a pharisee, judging without knowledge, comdemning without empathy. No gay person by virtue of being gay along has commited such a sin as you by judging them.
Likely I'm wasting my breath. But as against the tide as it now is, the right direction for Christianity is now, always has been, acceptance. Damnation if there is such a horrid thing, is god's business and not your's.
"Sex is a Choice"
- I'm pretty sure from your pic that you have no choice in that matter. I'm saying no one wants to have sex with you. But back the the human population with only one chin...
The fact is, some people are born gay. Some swans are born gay (look up "gay swans") some dogs are born gay (look up gay dogs). All mammals have a percent, looks like 10 -15, of beings that like the same sex.
Now, I know you love sucking Jesus' cock and telling him how not gay you are, but the fact is, what other people do in their spare time is 0 of your business.
And I'm not even gay. I have no dog in this fight. I just find you to be a disgusting and sad being.
You should be ashamed of yourself and if there is a god, and he created everything, he hates you for making the fellow creatures he created feel as if they don't belong. And this imaginary being certainly would not hate the gay people he created nor deny them the gift of love, and he certainly would not wish for them to be something they are not. Which seems to be what you are proposing.
So the question begs an answer, why do presume to judge something you know nothing of?
I have an Associates in Religious Studies, and I was born and raised Christian (2 credits away from a Bachelor's but I transfered). And the likes of you, and your idiocy (this oodd new, competely counter to what Jesus actually ever said according to Mathew Mark Luke and John)simplton explanation of human behavior, has forced me to abandon any god.
I figure there likely is not one, since only the dumbest and least educated of society seems to espouse such a being. But if there is some all mighty, he most certainly is not this hypocrital ass the Christian faith makes him out to be.
Good luck. I certainly hope that history does not remember you as the sad and narrow fool your silly blog portrays you as. I hope you learn a lesson from the New Testament and stop judging your fellow man.
You have no right to. You frankly, are the least capable of the judgemental, with your silly blog and your ideas that most dismissed as juvenile by the fourth grade. At least a few of the pharisees today have some concept of history and human nature. You are a pharisee, judging without knowledge, comdemning without empathy. No gay person by virtue of being gay along has commited such a sin as you by judging them.
Likely I'm wasting my breath. But as against the tide as it now is, the right direction for Christianity is now, always has been, acceptance. Damnation if there is such a horrid thing, is god's business and not your's.
Right Clammy,
What'd you do? A google search on the words 'gay and choice'? You sought 'the likes of me' out for ... that? What gets you looking for this sort of an interesting read in the first place?
I'm not much for religion myself but maybe reading comprehension is something you'll have a chance to improve upon in some after life ... You know? That eternity you'll face once you've finally pulled the trigger ...
I can see from your pic and your words you might face some gender identity issues. Clearly superficiality suits you. Stick with that as your knee-jerk reaction to my headline and lead leaves your thought basket about as full as it can get ...
By the way, while evidence of gay animals exists, you claim that this evidence in and of itself must represent born trait is laughable.
I mean, you were born gay and choose out of the lifestyle. See? CHOICE!
Mmmm ... jesus cock
Hah,
What a joke that was clamscratcher.
I like the part about 'wasting your breath'.
Like the people I know who can't read without moving their lips, you can't type without slowly vocalizing eeevvveerrryyy syylllaabbuulll.
LMAO ...
Try reading the blog before commenting next time.
Sex IS choice. As is sex with dildos.
I say enough! I am very intimidated and emasculated by artificial phallai. They are bad for society, setting unrealistic expectations for their users in the same way porn poisons intimacy expectations.
Unplug, America. No dildos is Good dildos.
Hey Chicken of the Sea,
If I were you, I'd worry more about lesbians. They all have the same equipment so know just how to stimulate it.
Yup, once they try it, it's VERY tough to bring them back. Our days of getting laid may very well be numbered, counting down until the day they've all 'tried it'.
IN FACT!
I wonder why anyone would ever want to have sex with a man at all!
Allow me to say this about boobs ...
Nuff said, there saucy! Hear, hear!
I'll add what Ron White says, ' ... seen one pair, you wanna see all of 'em!'
Post a Comment