Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Stephen





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 645
Reputation: 72.9
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FF_Canuck wrote:
Quote:
To act upon this predisposed behaviour (or not) is a choice... but how can we fault individuals for acting upon this predisposition if that's how they were made?


Ultimately, this is one of those questions that has to be answered on a case-by-case basis. To use an extreme example, there is strong evidence to support a biological basis for predisposition toward pedophilia. While its fair to acknowledge this predisposition may be beyond someone's control, society rightly demands we hold people accountable when they act on such impulses.


There may be a biological basis, but... there are victims here: children. Children cannot consent to sexual acts.

We hold pedophiles accountable because in that situation, there is a victim.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Indeed, Stephen. And I didn't mean to imply by my statement that homosexuals should be somehow punished or looked down on for acting on their preference. My example was to illustrate that in some cases, we certainly should hold people responsible for acting on inborn potentials or preferences. Sorry for the confusion.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen wrote:
Children cannot consent to sexual acts.

Likewise, if gays committed sexual acts non-consensually, they would be prosecuted for sexual assault. Where there is no victim...

-Mac
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The urge for sex is genetic - while orientation is caused by environmental conditioning - this conditioning starts very early and in each person there are many considerations concerning the many 'inputs' to this process - usually by puberty one is already conditioned one way or the other and one is not likely to 'question' their conditioning - it's who they are - once an identity is embraced then everything is experienced from that perspective. As I've noted in other postings on this issue - it is a choice to engage one's sexuality or not - one can spend energy on contemplating sex or one can move forward with important issues in life. Sexual contact is for procreation - without all the human interferences - the result of sex is a child - if a person pursues a sexual relationship without this result then there are going to be subtle ill-reactions - mostly emotional and psychological. Most sexually active people gay or straight won't admit that they feel empty and unfulfilled.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen wrote:
Craig wrote:
gc wrote:
Why do some people choose to go out with one girl one week and another girl another week? They are genetically programmed to be attracted to both girls, but they choose one over the other.


Exactly. It is a choice.


Can't our choices be influenced by genetic predisposition?


YES!!!! That is what I've been arguing all along. Look at the statements I've made. Genetics can result in a predisposition but ultimately it is a CHOICE.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some people are genetically predisposed to violence. But they still make a choice to commit violence.
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stephen wrote:
Can't our choices be influenced by genetic predisposition?


Sure they can. But at the end of the day it is still a choice. Some people are genetically predisposed to having a violent temper. Does that mean after they put someone in the hospital due to physical violence we should just say it is ok because they couldn't help themselves? Having a choice that is harder to make due to genetics is still a choice. Looking at the evidence we have so far pertaining to the homosexual lifestyle it is a deadly and vastly unhealthy lifestyle that is totally un natural. So therefore I see no reason to say that a homosexual can't help who they are. That is ridiculous. They are simply giving in to a sexual or psychological attraction that has disastrous consequences on not only themselves, but society as a whole. If we excuse this behavior based on such weak theoretical and scientific evidence, then we will start excusing many other behaviors that are unhealthy and un natural resulting in a society ripe for collapse. Wait, that is happening around us right now!
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
YES!!!! That is what I've been arguing all along. Look at the statements I've made. Genetics can result in a predisposition but ultimately it is a CHOICE.


I think we are using different definitions of homosexuality. While both definitions may be acceptable, I am using the definition that homosexuality is the attraction to members of the same-sex. Whether to act on that attraction is a choice. I could choose to be with men, but I won't because I am not the least bit attracted to them, I am attracted to women. Likewise, a homosexual could choose to be with a member of the opposite sex, but why would they when they are attracted to the same sex?
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

truth4freedom wrote:
Some people are genetically predisposed to having a violent temper. Does that mean after they put someone in the hospital due to physical violence we should just say it is ok because they couldn't help themselves?


No, because they are commiting a crime where there is a victim.

Quote:
They are simply giving in to a sexual or psychological attraction that has disastrous consequences on not only themselves, but society as a whole.


What are these disastrous consequences?
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
truth4freedom wrote:
Some people are genetically predisposed to having a violent temper. Does that mean after they put someone in the hospital due to physical violence we should just say it is ok because they couldn't help themselves?


No, because they are commiting a crime where there is a victim.

Quote:
They are simply giving in to a sexual or psychological attraction that has disastrous consequences on not only themselves, but society as a whole.


What are these disastrous consequences?


1. Committing a crime has nothing to do with the point at hand.

2. Refer to my previous post for the consequences.

Circular reasoning is a weak way to argue a point.
urbanmonk





Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 307
Reputation: 16.8Reputation: 16.8
votes: 5

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

westmanguy wrote:
Its not a choice.

Who 'chooses' to be abnormal, a social outcast, hated by some people.

Nobody chooses that.


Too funny WMG.... politically correct you are not!
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

truth4freedom wrote:
1. Committing a crime has nothing to do with the point at hand.


It does when people try to compare the issue with violence or paedophilia

Quote:
2. Refer to my previous post for the consequences.


I didn't see any "disastrous consequences" in your last post. What are they?
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't care if it is genetics or choice, it is what it is. People have every right to be homosexual. I don't see why it would make a difference either way.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
Craig wrote:
YES!!!! That is what I've been arguing all along. Look at the statements I've made. Genetics can result in a predisposition but ultimately it is a CHOICE.


I think we are using different definitions of homosexuality. While both definitions may be acceptable, I am using the definition that homosexuality is the attraction to members of the same-sex. Whether to act on that attraction is a choice. I could choose to be with men, but I won't because I am not the least bit attracted to them, I am attracted to women. Likewise, a homosexual could choose to be with a member of the opposite sex, but why would they when they are attracted to the same sex?


Yes. I think that is the distinction. The act of committing homosexual acts is a choice. Who one is attracted to is likely a combination of genetics and societal influences.

I believe that who we are attracted to isn't written in stone either. I went through a phase where I was obsessed with oriental women - not so much anymore. I don't see harm in marginalizing homosexual behaviour. To consider it equal or just as normal as hetero relationships is absurd.
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bleatmop wrote:
I don't care if it is genetics or choice, it is what it is. People have every right to be homosexual. I don't see why it would make a difference either way.


Agreed.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 4

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Being gay - choice vs. genetics

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB