<p>This is problematic. So far, you’ve explained that vaginal heterosexual sex is not deviant because it can be used to reproduce. Am I missing something? what are these other attributes?</p>
<p>But if you don’t force married couples to sign contracts guaranteeing that they will and can bear children, they could be exploiting marriage benefits without doing their part to improve society. The government would be promoting things that nature had not intended . . .</p>
<p>I think that in order to answer my question and hope to remain consistent, you have to say yes.</p>
<p>@BigEastBeast: Not even trying to argue with you here - I’m genuinely curious now that you brought up the “science” argument since I’m double majoring in 2 sciences and you made me very interested:</p>
<p>We know so little about genetics and developmental neurobiology at this point. If it were scientifically proven than homosexuality is caused by say, a mutation of the gene that determines sexuality (and normally makes people straight); then you would you accept homosexuality? The same way you accept people with blue and green eyes because a mutation originally caused proteins to color our eyes differently?</p>
<p>I realize heterosexuality is designed for species survival. But there are thousands of genetic changes and mutations that cause different development - that’s why disease exists.</p>
<p>We know so little about genetics and developmental neurobiology at this point. If it were scientifically proven than homosexuality is caused by say, a mutation of the gene that determines sexuality (and normally makes people straight); then you would you accept homosexuality? ~ Alix</p>
<hr>
<p>I accept homosexuality now. I just don’t think it should be rewarded with marriage.</p>
Actually, that is not entirely true. I mean, it may come from environment (your opinion) but scientists did infact discover something. Scientists began to study worms, who have no sexual preference, and the scientists changed the chemicals in the worms brain. This lead the worms to only go to a certain type of worm (male or female). Also, there was another study in the early 2000’s with gay sheep. There have been many, many studies that had demonstrated that there is some type of genetics in homosexuality. The thing that makes people believe that it is not a genetic trait is because 1. people fight against it and 2. homosexuality used to be a “disease”. Psychologists believed that homosexuality was a disease that people merely obtained. As psychologists started to comprehend homosexuality, they began to realize that it is not a disease.</p>
<p>This is problematic. So far, you’ve explained that vaginal heterosexual sex is not deviant because it can be used to reproduce. Am I missing something? what are these other attributes?</p>
<p>But if you don’t force married couples to sign contracts guaranteeing that they will and can bear children, they could be exploiting marriage benefits without doing their part to improve society. The government would be promoting things that nature had not intended . . .</p>
<p>I think that in order to answer my question and hope to remain consistent, you have to say yes. ~ Silence Kit</p>
<hr>
<p>Ummmm, what? You are forcing an argument on me and I didn’t make.</p>
<p>No, I don’t think people should have to sign contracts that they are fertile, that is stupid so get your head out of your butt.</p>
<p>What I said is that marriage is used to promote a good lifestyle (and reproduction is one outcome), so stop twisting stuff around.</p>
<p>Actually, that is not entirely true. I mean, it may come from environment (your opinion) but scientists did infact discover something. Scientists began to study worms, who have no sexual preference, and the scientists changed the chemicals in the worms brain. This lead the worms to only go to a certain type of worm (male or female). Also, there was another study in the early 2000’s with gay sheep. There have been many, many studies have demonstrated that there is some type of genetics in homosexuality. The thing that makes people believe that it is not a genetic trait is because 1. people fight against it and 2. homosexuality used to be a “disease”. Psychologists believed that homosexuality was a disease that people merely obtained. As psychologists started to comprehend homosexuality, they began to realize that it is not a disease. ~ Rokangel</p>
<hr>
<p>lol, sheep and worms. </p>
<p>I never said it was a disease, I said I believe it comes from enironment and life experiences.</p>
<p>For example, men who were sexual molested by adult males at young age have a high rate of being homosexuals when they grow up.</p>
<p>Well, you haven’t given a reason why a heterosexual relationship should be promoted by the govt., and why a homosexual relationship should not, apart from the point that one can bear children and the other not. So I hope you understand why I’ve belabored that point.</p>
<p>Apart from that, why is a heterosexual relationship something that the government should promote, and why is a homosexual relationship one that it shouldn’t?</p>
<p>@r0kAng3l - I’m very pro-gay marriage, but I firmly agree with BigEastBeast on one thing: there is no scientific evidence yet that proves homosexuality is an inborn trait as opposed to a developed trait - same for transgendered people. And I’ve read about the experiments with nematodes (roundworms) and sheep extensively too - we talked about them briefly in a Developmental Neurobio class i took once - keep in mind I’m not saying it’s purely psychological either, just that there is no real “evidence” either way. We also cannot ignore the studies that show correlation between sexual molestation and homosexuality (provided those are valid studies - idk, I’ve never looked at them!) Scientists have to be skeptical and keep their minds open and consider every plausible explanation - it could very well be psychological, I don’t know. </p>
<p>Personally I think 2 adult humans who want to marry should be allowed to despite many people thinking it’s a “perversion”.</p>
<p>Well, you haven’t given a reason why a heterosexual relationship is good and a homosexual relationship is bad, apart from one can bear children and the other not. So I hope you understand why I’ve belabored that point.</p>
<p>Apart from that, why is a heterosexual relationship good, and a homosexual relationship bad? ~ Silence Kit</p>
<hr>
<p>I’m not saying a homosexual relationship is necessarily bad, I just don’t think the government should promote the lifestyle.</p>
<p>If two guys want to date, go for it - none of my business. But I don’t think it entitles them to an incentive that was made for men and women - together, the way nature made it.</p>
<p>i changed my language in that post. but the points are not that different. you must think that it is bad if you think that the government has no business encouraging that behavior. if you don’t, why does the government encourage/discourage certain things?</p>
<p>if you don’t think that the government should encourage homosexuality because it is unnatural, then you’ll agree that the government has no business encouraging agriculture, manufacturing, and medicine. </p>
<p>The earth was not made to be covered in corn and wheat fields, coated with fertilizer and pesticides. Animals were not made to be bred for domestication, packed in pens, waiting to be slaughtered. Metals and semiconductors in the earth were not made to be mined and shaped into buildings and electronic circuits. Doctors and pharmacists shouldn’t be in the business of concocting treatments and chemicals that unnaturally extend people’s lives. </p>
<p>This is what I think unnatural means, and those are some consequences to opposing things that are unnatural. Is that what you mean by unnatural?</p>
<p>The divorce rate wouldn’t be so high if “Christians” respected it. I quoted Christians because many people claim they are one but probably don’t even know the name of the first book in the bible.No christian upbringing whatsoever, no strong will, no diligence. Many of these divorces occurring in America is due to the sinful nature of the flesh. If its not pleasing to you, then you don’t want it so you divorce it. Your wife gets pregnant and loses her figure you divorce her, you husband gains 50 pounds, you divorce him. Too many people are marrying what they see with their eyes instead of what they feel in their hearts which should be love. The vows of marriage that you promise to keep are never kept nor are they cherished. People who cherish and are faithful to their vows will stay together.</p>
<p>And another thing…Women and Men need to stop being whores. Why do men sleep around but expect a virgin for a wife? The women gets called a hoe, but the man is praised. I remember reading somewhere that couples who didn’t have intercourse until marriage stayed together 90% of the time. People get married and miss their old promiscuous lives. If they are true Christians like they say they are, then they would save themselves for marriage or not sleep around so much. Everyday on Divorce court, Maury Povich Show etc, you see DUMB people who are married or engaged disrespecting the vows of marriage and the laws of God. But they claim to be Christians. I do not like fake Christians at all.If your real about it, THEN BE REAL ABOUT IT.</p>
<p>"I remember reading somewhere that couples who didn’t have intercourse until marriage stayed together 90% of the time. "</p>
<p>I’d be interested in seeing that research. If it really is true, I’d wonder if it were because the couple practiced a faith that doesn’t allow divorce. Lots of people stay in miserable marriages for that reason.</p>
<p>" Why do men sleep around but expect a virgin for a wife? The women gets called a hoe, but the man is praised. </p>
<p>I don’t know people who praise men who sleep around. I know people who think such males are sluts. I don’t know people who think women should be virgins when they marry.</p>
<p>“My comment was in reference to the statement the heterosexuality was also a “purely sexual function” like homosexuality is. I said it wasn’t because heterosexuality actually leads to reproduction, and has other attributes than satisfying sexual fetishes.”</p>
<p>Homosexuals also decide to have children with their homosexual partners. They use donor sperm to do this. Being homosexual doesn’t preclude having a desire and ability to reproduce.</p>
<p>Also, being homosexual doesn’t mean that one is involved in sex acts of any kind just like being heterosexual doesn’t mean that one has sex. This even is true if people are married. There are people who choose to remain virgins despite being married. People’s sexual activities vary widely.</p>
<p>When a woman sleeps around, she would be considered a slut when people talk about her. But honestly, it is kind of the same way for guys. Although to his “man” friends he would be looked upon as a god for sleeping with many women. Yet, when women talk about that guy they would probably describe him as a whore. That is what I hear. There are many guys at my school who sleep around and girls would gossip and say “oh, so and so sleeps around! How nasty is that! He’s such a man-whore.” Though I must admit, when a girl does sleep around it is much more “intense”.</p>