| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"robin" |
| Date: |
08 Mar 2005 02:57:56 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Can Homosexuals Change? |
Is the topic still alive?
Too much depth there to really digest at this time. However, as to "can
homosexuals change" -- I think (one) all of us are changing all the
time. Aren't we told by philosophers that Life is a river, that every
moment of every day each of us (the live ones, anyway) are
ever-changing, growing, learning.
So, yes, we all change. And those heterosexuals (or homosexuals) who
refuse to change, grow, learn are only entrenching in a rigidity that
will harm themselves (while not helping others).
Second, the condemnation heaped on any divergent style or group or
philosophy (or sexual orientation) may some day backfire on the bullies
who take to themselves the right to do so.
Europe's Christian history is a pathetic record of forcing outcasts to
"repent" and convert, of stigmatizing outsiders, or anyone different,
of forcing Jews to wear a yellow badge of infamy, at the very time when
Jews were breathing life and inspiration into a continent badly in need
of it.
How different is the present stigmatizing of alternative sexual
attitudes, perspectives, honesty?
.
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
10 Mar 2005 04:28:35 PM |
|
|
In article <6uqdnQnISpY0WK3fRVn-2Q@comcast.com> "R?ain - ריעין" <riain@riain.com> writes:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
{...}
Are you saying that pedophiles, incest and beastiality are not
illnesses, but are all perfectly normal? That it is society's fault for
not accepting them as they are?
Or just homosexuality and some fetishes are allright... as long as both
sides consent.
How can one pick and choose what sexual orientations are illnesses and
which are not.
Why bother trying to engage in such a meaningless project?
Instead, decide which sexual acts are harmful to the
vulnerable and the unprotected -- bestiality can be a form of
cruelty to animals, pedophilia is harmful to children -- and beyond
that, let consenting adults do whatever they mutually
wish to. There's no reason not to.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Saban" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
10 Mar 2005 11:09:27 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <6uqdnQnISpY0WK3fRVn-2Q@comcast.com> "R?ain - =F8=E9=F2=E9=EF"
<riain@riain.com> writes:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the
same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
{...}
Are you saying that pedophiles, incest and beastiality are not
illnesses, but are all perfectly normal? That it is society's fault
for
not accepting them as they are?
Or just homosexuality and some fetishes are allright... as long as
both
sides consent.
How can one pick and choose what sexual orientations are illnesses
and
which are not.
Why bother trying to engage in such a meaningless project?
Instead, decide which sexual acts are harmful to the
vulnerable and the unprotected -- bestiality can be a form of
cruelty to animals, pedophilia is harmful to children -- and beyond
that, let consenting adults do whatever they mutually
wish to. There's no reason not to.
-- cary
Yes, that sounds good.
However, much good can come from figuring out which is actually a
sickness or mental illness and what isn't.
If it turns out homosexuality is an illness, we should help those poor
people and put them into special hospitals for treatment.
If Peadophilia isn't an illness but simply an unchangeable state of
prison.
What if the consenting adults happen to be related? Is that an illness?
A mental derangement? Or simply two consenting adults that should have
the same rights as everyone else?
To call one orientation or perversion perfectly ok, that people are
born that way, and then stop short of so many others and label them
"illnesses" is completely asinine! A bit hypocrytical too.
Heterosexuality is the only "orientation" that makes sense with nature.
A woman needs to become pregnant by a man to continue the human race.
Anything else is a perversion and is wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
11 Mar 2005 10:59:58 AM |
|
|
In article <1110517767.478458.185310@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Saban" <andrewh36@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <6uqdnQnISpY0WK3fRVn-2Q@comcast.com> "R?ain - =F8=E9=F2=E9=EF"
<riain@riain.com> writes:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the
same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
{...}
Are you saying that pedophiles, incest and beastiality are not
illnesses, but are all perfectly normal? That it is society's fault
for
not accepting them as they are?
Or just homosexuality and some fetishes are allright... as long as
both
sides consent.
How can one pick and choose what sexual orientations are illnesses
and
which are not.
Why bother trying to engage in such a meaningless project?
Instead, decide which sexual acts are harmful to the
vulnerable and the unprotected -- bestiality can be a form of
cruelty to animals, pedophilia is harmful to children -- and beyond
that, let consenting adults do whatever they mutually
wish to. There's no reason not to.
-- cary
Yes, that sounds good.
However, much good can come from figuring out which is actually a
sickness or mental illness and what isn't.
If it turns out homosexuality is an illness, we should help those poor
people and put them into special hospitals for treatment.
The term "illness" is of no interest, since it is meaningless in
this area -- and further, contains much potential for abuse
by those who reason: "Anything that makes me queasy must be an `illness'".
If Peadophilia isn't an illness but simply an unchangeable state of
prison.
Call it an "illness" or not as you wish: I have said that anything causing
harm to the vulnerable and the unprotected should not be
permitted. You don't to describe burglary as in illness in
order to forbid it. Same with pedophilia.
What if the consenting adults happen to be related? Is that an illness?
A mental derangement? Or simply two consenting adults that should have
the same rights as everyone else?
Meaningless, and generally unnecessary. An aversion to incest is
a part of our wiring; it's found in all cultures. Laws against
incest are probably as unnecessary as laws against jumping off tall
buildings.
But if two related people wish to get it on, I don't really
see that as any of my business.
To call one orientation or perversion perfectly ok, that people are
born that way, and then stop short of so many others and label them
"illnesses" is completely asinine! A bit hypocrytical too.
Which is one of several reasons why the term "illness" and "perversion"
are of little use, and should be scrapped.
Heterosexuality is the only "orientation" that makes sense with nature.
A woman needs to become pregnant by a man to continue the human race.
Anything else is a perversion and is wrong.
A dangerous argument: rape has been around as long as we have
written records, and rape produces children. Therefore, by
your argument, rape makes sense with nature, while at the same time sex
between my girlfriend and myself, in which we go to some
lengths to avoid producing children, is a perversion and wrong.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
15 Mar 2005 02:33:36 PM |
|
|
In article <42325C2D.8394C935@netvigator.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1110517767.478458.185310@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Saban" <andrewh36@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <6uqdnQnISpY0WK3fRVn-2Q@comcast.com> "R?ain - =F8=E9=F2=E9=EF"
<riain@riain.com> writes:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the
same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
{...}
Are you saying that pedophiles, incest and beastiality are not
illnesses, but are all perfectly normal? That it is society's fault
for
not accepting them as they are?
Or just homosexuality and some fetishes are allright... as long as
both
sides consent.
How can one pick and choose what sexual orientations are illnesses
and
which are not.
Why bother trying to engage in such a meaningless project?
Instead, decide which sexual acts are harmful to the
vulnerable and the unprotected -- bestiality can be a form of
cruelty to animals, pedophilia is harmful to children -- and beyond
that, let consenting adults do whatever they mutually
wish to. There's no reason not to.
-- cary
Yes, that sounds good.
However, much good can come from figuring out which is actually a
sickness or mental illness and what isn't.
If it turns out homosexuality is an illness, we should help those poor
people and put them into special hospitals for treatment.
The term "illness" is of no interest, since it is meaningless in
this area -- and further, contains much potential for abuse
by those who reason: "Anything that makes me queasy must be an `illness'".
There are recorded cases of over zealous social workers who when interviewing a child that has been abused
makes up their own mind about the alleged abuser and 'causes' by inference and impressionable argument the
child victim to make claims of abuse that never actually existed.
Is this social worker suffering from an illness?
That depends on whether "gullibility" and too little skepticism regarding
"recovered memory" and other woo-wooistic beliefs qualifies as an actual
illness.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Saban" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
10 Mar 2005 11:13:52 PM |
|
|
Just fixing a sentence that I deleted a peice of somehow in my previous
post:
If Peadophilia isn't an illness but simply an unchangeable state of
mind, we then should not waste money on rehabilitation and treatment,
but simply put the people affected by it in prison.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "R?ain - ריעין" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
10 Mar 2005 11:50:48 PM |
|
|
Then please tell us why there is homosexuality in all of the Animal
Kingdom????
"Saban" <andrewh36@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110517767.478458.185310@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <6uqdnQnISpY0WK3fRVn-2Q@comcast.com> "R?ain - ריעין"
<riain@riain.com> writes:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the
same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
{...}
Are you saying that pedophiles, incest and beastiality are not
illnesses, but are all perfectly normal? That it is society's fault
for
not accepting them as they are?
Or just homosexuality and some fetishes are allright... as long as
both
sides consent.
How can one pick and choose what sexual orientations are illnesses
and
which are not.
Why bother trying to engage in such a meaningless project?
Instead, decide which sexual acts are harmful to the
vulnerable and the unprotected -- bestiality can be a form of
cruelty to animals, pedophilia is harmful to children -- and beyond
that, let consenting adults do whatever they mutually
wish to. There's no reason not to.
-- cary
Yes, that sounds good.
However, much good can come from figuring out which is actually a
sickness or mental illness and what isn't.
If it turns out homosexuality is an illness, we should help those poor
people and put them into special hospitals for treatment.
If Peadophilia isn't an illness but simply an unchangeable state of
prison.
What if the consenting adults happen to be related? Is that an illness?
A mental derangement? Or simply two consenting adults that should have
the same rights as everyone else?
To call one orientation or perversion perfectly ok, that people are
born that way, and then stop short of so many others and label them
"illnesses" is completely asinine! A bit hypocrytical too.
Heterosexuality is the only "orientation" that makes sense with nature.
A woman needs to become pregnant by a man to continue the human race.
Anything else is a perversion and is wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Saban" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
11 Mar 2005 12:21:15 AM |
|
|
R?ain - =F8=E9=F2=E9=EF wrote:
Then please tell us why there is homosexuality in all of the Animal
Kingdom????
I don't know?
Maybe because they find same sex animals to be more affectionate? Maybe
better listeners and understanding?
Maybe because they have the same illness that human homosexuals?
R?ain - =F8=E9=F2=E9=EF wrote:
Then please tell us why there is homosexuality in all of the Animal
Kingdom????
"Saban" <andrewh36@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110517767.478458.185310@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <6uqdnQnISpY0WK3fRVn-2Q@comcast.com> "R?ain -
=F8=E9=F2=E9=EF"
<riain@riain.com> writes:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the
same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
{...}
Are you saying that pedophiles, incest and beastiality are not
illnesses, but are all perfectly normal? That it is society's
fault
for
not accepting them as they are?
Or just homosexuality and some fetishes are allright... as long
as
both
sides consent.
How can one pick and choose what sexual orientations are
illnesses
and
which are not.
Why bother trying to engage in such a meaningless project?
Instead, decide which sexual acts are harmful to the
vulnerable and the unprotected -- bestiality can be a form of
cruelty to animals, pedophilia is harmful to children -- and beyond
that, let consenting adults do whatever they mutually
wish to. There's no reason not to.
-- cary
Yes, that sounds good.
However, much good can come from figuring out which is actually a
sickness or mental illness and what isn't.
If it turns out homosexuality is an illness, we should help those
poor
people and put them into special hospitals for treatment.
If Peadophilia isn't an illness but simply an unchangeable state of
prison.
What if the consenting adults happen to be related? Is that an
illness?
A mental derangement? Or simply two consenting adults that should
have
the same rights as everyone else?
To call one orientation or perversion perfectly ok, that people are
born that way, and then stop short of so many others and label them
"illnesses" is completely asinine! A bit hypocrytical too.
Heterosexuality is the only "orientation" that makes sense with
nature.
A woman needs to become pregnant by a man to continue the human race.
Anything else is a perversion and is wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
13 Mar 2005 03:35:13 AM |
|
|
"Saban" <andrewh36@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110522075.182048.194140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
R?ain - ריעין wrote:
Then please tell us why there is homosexuality in all of the Animal
Kingdom????
I don't know?
Maybe because they find same sex animals to be more affectionate? Maybe
better listeners and understanding?
Maybe because they have the same illness that human homosexuals?
*****
Being allergic to bigotry?
Why am I not a homosexual, then?
Susan
R?ain - ריעין wrote:
Then please tell us why there is homosexuality in all of the Animal
Kingdom????
"Saban" <andrewh36@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110517767.478458.185310@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <6uqdnQnISpY0WK3fRVn-2Q@comcast.com> "R?ain -
ריעין"
<riain@riain.com> writes:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the
same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
{...}
Are you saying that pedophiles, incest and beastiality are not
illnesses, but are all perfectly normal? That it is society's
fault
for
not accepting them as they are?
Or just homosexuality and some fetishes are allright... as long
as
both
sides consent.
How can one pick and choose what sexual orientations are
illnesses
and
which are not.
Why bother trying to engage in such a meaningless project?
Instead, decide which sexual acts are harmful to the
vulnerable and the unprotected -- bestiality can be a form of
cruelty to animals, pedophilia is harmful to children -- and beyond
that, let consenting adults do whatever they mutually
wish to. There's no reason not to.
-- cary
Yes, that sounds good.
However, much good can come from figuring out which is actually a
sickness or mental illness and what isn't.
If it turns out homosexuality is an illness, we should help those
poor
people and put them into special hospitals for treatment.
If Peadophilia isn't an illness but simply an unchangeable state of
prison.
What if the consenting adults happen to be related? Is that an
illness?
A mental derangement? Or simply two consenting adults that should
have
the same rights as everyone else?
To call one orientation or perversion perfectly ok, that people are
born that way, and then stop short of so many others and label them
"illnesses" is completely asinine! A bit hypocrytical too.
Heterosexuality is the only "orientation" that makes sense with
nature.
A woman needs to become pregnant by a man to continue the human race.
Anything else is a perversion and is wrong.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mitchell Holman" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
11 Mar 2005 08:33:05 PM |
|
|
"Saban" <andrewh36@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1110522075.182048.194140
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
R?ain - ריעין wrote:
Then please tell us why there is homosexuality in all of the Animal
Kingdom????
I don't know?
Maybe because they find same sex animals to be more affectionate? Maybe
better listeners and understanding?
Maybe because they have the same illness that human homosexuals?
If sexual orientation is a choice when did you choose yours?
Can you tell us what your criteria were, what options you
tried, and what led to your final decision?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Saban" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Heterosexuals Change? |
10 Mar 2005 11:25:19 PM |
|
|
R?ain - =F8=E9=F2=E9=EF wrote:
You are too stupid to be able to separate things that are not the
same
thing at all!!!!!!!!!
SEXUAL ORIENTATION is one thing
SEXUAL DEVIANCE is another thing -- Paedophilia falls here!
SEXUAL FETISHES are something else!
THREE DIFFERENT THINGS WHICH MEAN THREE DIFFERENT THINGS!!!!
sexual orientation
n. The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same,
opposite, or both sexes
deviance
noun The condition of being abnormal: aberrance, aberrancy,
aberration,
abnormality, anomaly, deviancy, deviation, irregularity,
preternaturalness, unnaturalness.
fet=B7ish also fet=B7ich
n.
1.. An object that is believed to have magical or spiritual powers,
especially such an object associated with animistic or shamanistic
religious practices.
2.. An object of unreasonably excessive attention or reverence:
made a
fetish of punctuality.
3.. Something, such as a material object or a nonsexual part of the
body, that arouses sexual desire and may become necessary for sexual
gratification.
4.. An abnormally obsessive preoccupation or attachment; a fixation
That's my point. Society labels certain things as alright and others
not. Some they call illnesses, others they are born that way but can't
change.
Are peadophiles born like that? Are homosexuals? Heterosexuals? Are
people destined to obtain certain fetishes? Who are we to say that
someone that gets turned on by overweight people that smoke are weird?
The way society labels these sexual preferences is that the further
away from heterosexuality it is, the more wrong or weird it is. Over
time however society forgets that it is wrong, and so it is generally
accepted.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Can Homosexuals Change? |
10 Mar 2005 08:02:19 AM |
|
|
robin wrote:
Is the topic still alive?
Don't you mean, "Is the topic still based on the wrong argument?"
There is no proof that non-heterosexual behaviour is a choice.
This is false until proven true.
There is no proof that non-heterosexual behaviour is genetic.
This is false until proven true.
There is no proof that only one of these arguments can be true.
Both can be true simultaneously.
Work with facts, not supposition and superstition. Until proof
exists, non-heterosexuals are people, first, foremost, and only.
Any other definition is ignorance, and any legal status other
than having equal human rights is hate.
Bob Dog
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
