ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
right, you could easily have supported it if you had wanted to :chuckle:
Study: Homophobes Might Be Hidden Homosexuals
- Thread starter zoo22
- Start date
right, you could easily have supported it if you had wanted to :chuckle:
I did support it, which you'd know if you had the capacity to read with that much blood in your eye.
Capacity, which you need to give consent, requires that you understand the nature and consequence of your agreement/actions relating. We bar certain decisions at law because it's been demonstrated that children don't meet the standard. And where we once thought it a matter of experience, we now understand that want is further accentuated by a biological component.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
not persuasively :idunno:
and where is the support for your implied contention that a sixteen year old, for example, cannot understand the nature and consequence of their agreement/actions relating?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Quetzal
New member
I am not surprised. :chuckle:
Quetzal
New member
Just because you lack the ability to understand a topic does not mean others share in that difficulty.
genuineoriginal
New member
The whole idea of a fixed "sexual orientation" is source of the bovine scatterings you are smelling.
Maybe you are looking at "choosing" in the wrong way?
Do you ever choose what you are going to eat or who you are going to have sex with? (If you are human, the answer is probably yes).
Are you assuming that your sexual preference is similar to your food preference, in that you never consciously chose what your food preference is? (Again, the answer is probably yes).
Are you assuming that your sexual preference is fixed from birth, but that your food preference changes over your lifetime? (From your participation in this thread, I assume you will answer yes).
I submit that a person's sexual preference (falsely called a sexual orientation) is something that changes over the course of a person's lifetime in much the same manner that a person's food preference changes over the course of a person's lifetime.
In Australia, a common snack is the Vegemite sandwich. The preference for a Vegemite sandwich is not a genetic preference, but a cultural one.
The Australian did not choose to have a food preference for a Vegemite sandwich, nor did the non-Australian choose to have a food aversion to a Vegemite sandwich.
It is extremely rare for a non-Australian to acquire a food preference for a Vegemite sandwich, and they never know if they have a food preference or a food aversion to it if they never try one.
Many Asians have a food aversion to cheese. This is so pronounced in some Asians that they will order pizza without cheese. There appears to be both a cultural and a biological non-genetic reason for this food aversion. Cheese is not a food staple in Asian foods, creating a cultural aversion. Because cheese is not a food staple, many Asians are lactose intolerant, creating a biological non-genetic aversion. Asians brought up in a society where cheese is a food staple end up eating cheese as children and never get the cultural aversion or the biological non-genetic aversion to cheese.
Torah observant Jews have an food aversion to pork. This is a cultural aversion that can be overcome by choice. There are many Jews that have chosen to eat pork, usually bacon, and have discovered that they like it, creating a food preference for pork to replace the cultural food aversion to pork.
I see you are starting the person's sexual preferences at adolescence instead of at birth.Find me someone historically heterosexual say from perhaps having an involuntary "strange" reaction to seeing naked pictures of the opposite sex, as an adolescent, who could now choose not to have a similarly inspired reaction and then somehow magically now gets that very same reaction to the same sex.
It simply doesn't happen!
That is good, since nobody is born heterosexual or homosexual at birth, but develop their sexual preferences according to the society they grow up in, much like the Australian and the Vegemite sandwich.
With sexual preferences, the key factors appear to be whether a person believes that they could experience sexual pleasure from a particular sex act or from a particular set of physical characteristics.
People who learn that they can experience sexual pleasure from pain or humiliation (shades of gray) are not able to unlearn this, so they will always display a sexual preference for sex acts that other people have an aversion to, whether it is a minor sexual preference or a major one.
In the same way, people that learn that they can experience sexual pleasure from same gender sex will never be able to unlearn this.
All mammals have a biological sexual preference for opposite gender sex (heterosexuality). Mammals that develop an aversion towards opposite gender sex are biologically dysfunctional (this is seen mostly in human homosexuals).
Many mammals have the ability to experience sexual pleasure from something other than opposite gender sex acts (you may have seen this from monkeys in the zoo or a dog on a person's leg), but their main sexual preference is for opposite gender sex instead. This is a normal and natural ability, but should never be mistaken for a sexual preference (orientation) the way we are currently doing.
Humans are able to learn that they can experience sexual pleasure from many different things other than opposite gender sex, but since they are not able to unlearn one after experiencing it, there is no way to "cure" someone from having an aberrant sexual preference that has been learned. A homosexual can never unlearn that he can experience sexual pleasure from same gender sex, a pedophile can never unlearn that he can experience sexual pleasure from sex with minors, etc.
We agree that you don't know.
I haven't implied anything. I've spoken to the law as it applies to children, both in terms of the standard, the elevation of the standard over time and in opposition to the larger legal course relating to the expression of human sexuality and the legally permissible for adults, and I've noted that in relatively recent times we've understood that biology plays a role as well, that kids are (into their early twenties, to some degree) doing math with a bad calculator, using impaired judgment on both counts noted.
No one would suggest that an 18 year old is as impaired as a twelve year old, but even a twenty year old isn't free from the problem. As a matter of law and practical necessity the bar has been set, in modern times, at the point where we recognize children will be taking responsibility for many important life decisions by necessity, but even then they're not well equipped for it and the mistakes they make at that age are legion and documented. The most obvious example involves the divorce rate for that group, which is comparatively staggering.
Unsurprisingly, around the mid twenties, when people reach the age where they're thinking is occurring where it should and they've had a decent amount of life experience, those rates are cut in half.
genuineoriginal
New member
There is some truth in that, but it is hidden is such large lies that the truth is difficult to find.
It is more reasonable to assume that these people have learned that they can experience sexual pleasure from same gender sex, usually from being molested as children, sometimes from merely being susceptible to the suggestions about same gender sex, and are fighting against this knowledge, and the desires it brings, as hard as they can.
Your insistence that they are closet homosexuals is not helping their fight.
genuineoriginal
New member
That is why parents are able to give consent for their children, right?
Otherwise we would have no child actors in Hollywood.
That too.
The hope is that adults with legal authority and responsibility will exercise it intelligently and with consideration.
So you're arguing against?
I wish we had laws that precluded that possibility, given how infrequently that appears to work out well for the children involved. Or maybe it does and it's only that we see the train wrecks and not the rule.I wonder if there's been a study on it. :think:
Quetzal
New member
Well, you have the Macaulay Culkin train wrecks and the Daniel Radcliffe successes. I think it goes both ways.So you're arguing against?
I wonder if there's been a study on it. :think:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
i don't know why you, who claim to be educated in a field that should have taught you to argue persuasively, appear to lack that ability
genuineoriginal
New member
I suppose we can just ignore that whole Equus thing?
genuineoriginal
New member
Since my beliefs are the Biblical ones that sex should only be done in a marriage and between a husband and his wife, I see no problem with allowing the parents to give consent for their children to get married.
Makes me wonder. I'm going to see what I can dig up.
I not only claim it, I put a permanent ban challenge to you against production of credentials the last time you beat that goofy drum. You ran like Jesse Owens at the starting gun. But then, extrapolating from your larger collection of posts here, you mostly excel at showing your backside.
Where I'd say that parents who do so, at this point in time, are evidencing worrisome judgement on the whole, though I understand the historical limitations and necessity in some cases, along with the exceptional among children nearing their legal adulthood...as a rule those children shouldn't marry.
Or, as the National Center for Health Statistics has it: "60 percent of marriages for couples between the ages of 20 and 25 end in divorce."
It's worse if you factor in those under twenty.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
right, because that's a counter to your inability to do something that you should be able to do, given your claims about your training :chuckle:
genuineoriginal
New member
How many of those were marriages arranged by the parents instead of the couple that got divorced?
It may be an indication that the couple themselves mad poor choices that would not have been made by the parents.
How many of those marriages were supported by a society that does not permit no-fault divorce?
It may be an indication that our society supports divorce so much that it is causing the marriages to fail.
And then there is this utter failure that comes from the idea that sexual orientation is fixed from birth:
Proud parents from San Diego have shared their story of having a transgender son who became a boy aged just 5-years-old.
zoo22
Well-known member
Wow, folks sure do manage to change the subject around here.
And look, it's TH and his special buddy rolling around together over TOL again! I can't figure out if their obsession is with one other or with themselves. We ought to have some sort of TOL pool, "how long can a thread last at TOL before TH and his infatuation crash through it like a couple of teenagers tickling one another."
And look, it's TH and his special buddy rolling around together over TOL again! I can't figure out if their obsession is with one other or with themselves. We ought to have some sort of TOL pool, "how long can a thread last at TOL before TH and his infatuation crash through it like a couple of teenagers tickling one another."