• Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

What Is Your Stance On Homosexuality?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mercutio

Galaxy Master Kush
Has absolutely nothing to do with the topic since we are talking the strict biological sense of the situation.

No I disagree. Your body's processes for doing anything are in one way or another affected by what you eat or drink (as well as many other factors). Therefore if you eat a food with little or no nutritional value, or in fact eat a food that is proven 'bad' for you you are at best wasting, at worst severely hindering your bodies ability to perform certain functions. The old joke that eating too many sugarfree polos lowers your sperm count would be a prime example here, as eating them would actually hinder your ability to reproduce (if you take it as fact that polos do that).

Again that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Sperm as well as Vaginal fluids is a infinite resource and thus "Practicing" does not adversely affect reproduction, infact and I am not absolutely sure, but practicing also helps increase a being's sexual potency. Either way it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. Try again.

My bad, I should have clarified that I meant 'assuming there is a problem with your reproductive organs'. Argument being that you may run out of motile sperm. Obviously if everything is fine down there then this is not a problem. But there's no need to be an *** about it ;)
 

The_Panda

恭喜發財
BigLutz, I have told you this many, many, many times. You simply do not understand what a disorder is. If you think you do, then please, define to me what a disorder is and then explain why homosexuality fits under it. Keep in mind that the vast majority of psychiatrists and sexologists, especially those whose field is the research and classification of mental disorders (psychiatric diagnostics), do not consider homosexuality a disorder.
 

BigLutz

Banned
No I disagree. Your body's processes for doing anything are in one way or another affected by what you eat or drink (as well as many other factors). Therefore if you eat a food with little or no nutritional value, or in fact eat a food that is proven 'bad' for you you are at best wasting, at worst severely hindering your bodies ability to perform certain functions. The old joke that eating too many sugarfree polos lowers your sperm count would be a prime example here, as eating them would actually hinder your ability to reproduce (if you take it as fact that polos do that).

Problem with that, is that the brain and body make no difference between eating a Hamburger from Mc Donnalds, or eating a slab of beef from a cow you just killed in the field. Eating alot of a specific greasy foods while unhealthy are really no different than eating unhealthy naturally made foods.

No matter what the discussion has nothing to do with the topic on hand.

My bad, I should have clarified that I meant 'assuming there is a problem with your reproductive organs'. Argument being that you may run out of motile sperm. Obviously if everything is fine down there then this is not a problem. But there's no need to be an *** about it ;)

Umm I am not being a '***' about it, you are throwing out abstract things, and things that are scientifically irrelevant.

The_Panda said:
BigLutz, I have told you this many, many, many times. You simply do not understand what a disorder is. If you think you do, then please, define to me what a disorder is and then explain why homosexuality fits under it. Keep in mind that the vast majority of psychiatrists and sexologists, especially those whose field is the research and classification of mental disorders (psychiatric diagnostics), do not consider homosexuality a disorder.

A: It used to be, mind you that was before Political Correctness took hold of the Psychological and Mental profession and they began to change a vast majority of names and definitions because it was not "Politically Correct". For example when the APA took Homosexuality off as a Mental Illness, it was during a time of heavy protest and political pressure by Gay Rights activists. So strictly speaking you could say it was done more to keep pressure off than for any scientific terms.

B: A Disorder is: A psychological or behavioral pattern that occurs in an individual and is thought to cause distress or disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture.

While Homosexuality wouldn't fit in distress, it would how ever fit under disability as well as various other Sexual Disorders, as it keeps a functional human being or animal from performing correct reproductive acts. It also is not a normal development inside of a human being, (if you classify normal development as developing the normal necessary mental functions to reproduce ) as I have said before, if it were the human race would have died off millions of years ago.
 
Last edited:

Mercutio

Galaxy Master Kush
Problem with that, is that the brain and body make no difference between eating a Hamburger from Mc Donnalds, or eating a slab of beef from a cow you just killed in the field. Eating alot of a specific greasy foods while unhealthy are really no different than eating unhealthy naturally made foods.

I'm picking up on your point about homosexual intercourse not doing what sex was meant for i.e. reproducing. This is related to my point that you should only eat 'good' (there's so much ridiculous speculation about what is healthy nowadays I won't even attempt to define 'good') food and drink 'good' drink because you should use your mouth, stomach and related areas of the body to consume nutrients and thats it. To borrow your phrase, eating is not a toy. My point is that your argument is based on the notion that sex is only for reproduction when in fact if it wasn't supposed to be pleasureable it wouldn't be; the body would have evolved a way to reproduce without having to resort to the method humans use today. I am pointing out the flaw in said notion by providing the similar argument that eating for pleasure is, accrding to your wording, not desireable.
 

BigLutz

Banned
I'm picking up on your point about homosexual intercourse not doing what sex was meant for i.e. reproducing. This is related to my point that you should only eat 'good' (there's so much ridiculous speculation about what is healthy nowadays I won't even attempt to define 'good') food and drink 'good' drink because you should use your mouth, stomach and related areas of the body to consume nutrients and thats it. To borrow your phrase, eating is not a toy. My point is that your argument is based on the notion that sex is only for reproduction when in fact if it wasn't supposed to be pleasureable it wouldn't be; the body would have evolved a way to reproduce without having to resort to the method humans use today. I am pointing out the flaw in said notion by providing the similar argument that eating for pleasure is, accrding to your wording, not desireable.

Well for one, sex is not pleasurable for every species, there are many species in which Sex just functions as a natural act for them

Second, Human beings are considered by and large to be "Omnivores", there is a biological programming in species that tell them "You can only eat this sort of food". Which is why you have so many in the Animal World that are Carnivores and Herbavores. Just as there is biological programming in humans and animals that says "You can only have sex with this Gender" or "You can only have sex with this species"

Going on that line of thought, there are some which suffer from "Disorders" in that as well, when you have people who are strictly Vegetarian instead of acting like Omnivores like most humans.
 

Gold.Silver

LOVE's The Best DRUG
I am gay myself and I live in Latin America and being gay 'round here is just so dangerous and I won't even say the country's name because it does not worth it. We are treated like witch-hunt, they look at us like a joke and they use The Bible to condemn us calling us so many names. We are all humans, we came from the same dust or whatever theory you believe, we are different but yet we are the same, I still do not get how hard is for people to just simply "respect".
I was born this way and honestly all of those straight Psycologist that bash us saying it's something learnt, that is something unnatural or all of that s**t I do not even get and do not pretend... I mean how they even know what it's like being gay?..they just give their opinion from outside.
It enrages me discrimination because we are humans and we should treat each other as humans not because our sexual orientation or what we believe in but just as a same core,but of course people who hates gay in every way will use every information, The Bible to prove that they are right.
I am saddened to be forbidden to hold my BF's hand, to marry my boyfriend , to kiss him and in a future have children , this world is cruel but we can only move forward trying to change their point of views bd by proving them that the way we love is the same as they love, with only difference that we love people from our same gender.
 

pocketmunster

munster in my pocket
Well for one, sex is not pleasurable for every species, there are many species in which Sex just functions as a natural act for them

Second, Human beings are considered by and large to be "Omnivores", there is a biological programming in species that tell them "You can only eat this sort of food". Which is why you have so many in the Animal World that are Carnivores and Herbavores. Just as there is biological programming in humans and animals that says "You can only have sex with this Gender" or "You can only have sex with this species"

Going on that line of thought, there are some which suffer from "Disorders" in that as well, when you have people who are strictly Vegetarian instead of acting like Omnivores like most humans.
Even if it is a "disorder", who cares? They still have a right to love whom ever they may. And you or anyone else has no right to say other wise.
 

BigLutz

Banned
Even if it is a "disorder", who cares? They still have a right to love whom ever they may. And you or anyone else has no right to say other wise.

You seem to be confused in that I actually care if they love eachother or not, I don't, but I don't want it to not be called what it is. Also the disorder classification allows those that want to seek mental help to deal with their homosexuality to seek it. Not that I think any Homosexual should seek mental help, but the option should be open.
 
BigLutz said:
While Homosexuality wouldn't fit in distress, it would how ever fit under disability as well as various other Sexual Disorders, as it keeps a functional human being or animal from performing correct reproductive acts.

A homosexual has the ability to reproduce but the fact that they are gay will mean that they merely will not choose too. There is a difference between a disability and not wanting to do something.

Many homosexuals have had children whilst 'in the closet' so I don't understand how you can class it as a disability.
 

BigLutz

Banned
A homosexual has the ability to reproduce but the fact that they are gay will mean that they merely will not choose too. There is a difference between a disability and not wanting to do something.

Many homosexuals have had children whilst 'in the closet' so I don't understand how you can class it as a disability.

Oh I am not arguing they have the ability to reproduce, it is just that the "disability" has it where they find their own sex desirable, while the opposite sex not. To go at it as if they simply have a choice to do so or not as if they are deciding if they want Pizza or a Hamburger for lunch is simply wrong. If we were to follow your logic, most if not all sexual disabilities would not be classified as such. Pedophiles have the ability to reproduce with a healthy adult, they simply do not want to. Zoophiles have the ability to reproduce with a healthy adult they simply do not want to. Hell, a Serial Killer has the ability to not kill, they simply do not want to.

Now while many Homosexuals do have children, they also have done it while trying to deny what they sexually are. Usually because of some outside pressure from family or another source to keep them in the closet and to find a life style that is accepted by those that are pressuring them.
 
Last edited:

pocketmunster

munster in my pocket
Confused? No. I just dont think it matters what you call it. Its the way some people are and it should be tolerated. Its not like it would hurt the person in anyway if it was a disability, so why would the seek "help"? Let me guess, so they can be "normal" as defined by you?
 

Aeron

Bum Eyes
We only have one life, live it how you want to. Noone has anyright to pass judgement in the world on you, we're equal. It may take years, it may take hours, but sooner or later, we're sprouting flowers.
 

BigLutz

Banned
Confused? No. I just dont think it matters what you call it. Its the way some people are and it should be tolerated. Its not like it would hurt the person in anyway if it was a disability, so why would the seek "help"? Let me guess, so they can be "normal" as defined by you?

You seem to be putting words in my mouth again. I don't care what you call it, as long as we define it as what it is, and not try to suger coat it in a Politically Correct way. As for why they would seek help? That is up for the person to decide, if they are scared, unsure, or do not wish to persue a Homosexual life style they may want to seek help. It is a very scary thing in a Young Adult's life, especially with the pressure that can be placed upon them by family and friends at school, as well as societal pressures.

To say that it is my personal view and should be written off only as such, shows a lack of understanding on your part, and a lack of sympathy to many of those that are homosexual and do not want to be.
 
Last edited:
Oh I am not arguing they have the ability to reproduce, it is just that the "disability" has it where they find their own sex
desirable, while the opposite sex not.

I just don't understand how you can say that they have the ability to reproduce yet, at the same time, say they are disabled to do so.

To go at it as if they simply have a choice to do so or not as if they are deciding if they want Pizza or a Hamburger for lunch is simply wrong.

The fact that they are homosexual means that they are more likely to not choose to reproduce. It does not however change the fact that they have a mental choice to do so.

If we were to follow your logic, most if not all sexual disabilities would not be classified as such. Pedophiles have the ability to reproduce with a healthy adult, they simply do not want to. Zoophiles have the ability to reproduce with a healthy adult they simply do not want to. Hell, a Serial Killer has the ability to not kill, they simply do not want to.

Yes, it means that they are not disabled in terms of reproduction. I'm sure we could come up with several other reasons why they're conditions that are classed as disabilities though.

Now while many Homosexuals do have children, they also have done it while trying to deny what they sexually are. Usually because of some outside pressure from family or another source to keep them in the closet and to find a life style that is accepted by those that are pressuring them.

Yes, I agree with you that will be the truth in the majority of cases. The problem is that I don't see how someone can be called disabled in terms of reproduction if they're sperm/eggs works just as well as a straight person's and there is living evidence (they're children) to prove it.
 
Last edited:

BigLutz

Banned
I just don't understand how you can say that they have the ability to reproduce yet, at the same time, say they are disabled to do so.

They have the ability to reproduce, but mentally they are unable to do so because of their sexuality. Physically they can reproduce, but Sexual Disorders do not just cover the physical which is where you are getting confused.

The fact that they are homosexual means that they are more likely to not choose to reproduce. It does not however change the fact that they have a mental choice to do so.

Except they do not have a mental choice, Homosexuality is not a choice there has been tons of scientific research to support that.

Yes, it means that they are not disabled in terms of reproduction. I'm sure we could come up with several other reasons why they're conditions that are classed as disabilities though.

You still do not get it, while physically they can reproduce, by producing sperm and eggs, mentally their sexuality is toward some one of their own sex, or a child, or a animal. That is a mental, or if you want to get technical, sexual disorder.

Yes, I agree with you that will be the truth in the majority of cases. The problem is that I don't see how someone can be called disabled in terms of reproduction if they're sperm/eggs works just as well as a straight person's and there is living evidence (they're children) to prove it.

Because you continue to think of things in the physical workings of the body, and not the mental and sexual workings of the brain.
 
Last edited:
BigLutz said:
Except they do not have a mental choice, Homosexuality is not a choice there has been tons of scientific research to support that.

This is probably the point we're stuck on.

I am not saying that someone has a choice to be homosexual. The way I see it is that reproduction is a choice and that homosexuality is just a (very strong) influence on this choice which causes most of them to choose not to reproduce.

The bottom line is that 'being unable to do something' and 'having a very good reason not to make a concious choice do something' are two very different things.
 

BigLutz

Banned
I am not saying that someone has a choice to be homosexual. The way I see it is that reproduction is a choice and that homosexuality is just a (very strong) influence on this choice which causes most of them to choose not to reproduce.

The bottom line is that 'being unable to do something' and 'having a very good reason not to do something' a two very different things.

Except many Homosexuals will rightly argue with you that they do not have a choice with reproduction, they just are not attracted to those of the opposite sex. A body can physically reproduce a child, but homosexuality prevents the chemical attraction to those of the opposite sex. Thus it is a dysorder or disability or what ever you wish to call it.

Mind you the same thing has been used to classify many other sexual disorders, from Pedophilia to Beastiality, some one wishing to have sex with another person, animal, or object, that isn't a sexual mature adult is considered a disorder. If you wish to throw Homosexuality out as not being a disorder because they have a choice, you have to also throw out any other sexual disorders, in which some one finds something that isn't the norm for the reproductive habits of a healthy adult creature.

We can either classify all of them as what they are, or classify none of them, this picking and choosing because it is PC for one group but not the other is just wrong.
 
Except many Homosexuals will rightly argue with you that they do not have a choice with reproduction, they just are not attracted to those of the opposite sex. A body can physically reproduce a child, but homosexuality prevents the chemical attraction to those of the opposite sex. Thus it is a dysorder or disability or what ever you wish to call it.

Yes there is no chemical attraction. The fact that it isn't there to 'encourage' you to reproduce means that you might just much rather engage with the same sex. This is one factor however and I don't see how you can prove that it is an inability over just an influece on a decision. Especially since there are influences that can cause a homosexual to reproduce such as family pressure or even a preference of the heterasexual lifestyle to the homosexual lifestyle.

Mind you the same thing has been used to classify many other sexual disorders, from Pedophilia to Beastiality, some one wishing to have sex with another person, animal, or object, that isn't a sexual mature adult is considered a disorder. If you wish to throw Homosexuality out as not being a disorder because they have a choice, you have to also throw out any other sexual disorders, in which some one finds something that isn't the norm for the reproductive habits of a healthy adult creature.

Homosexuality is with a sexually mature adult though.

My point is that choice means you are mentally able to do something, thus making it not a disability, thus (since it does not cause distress) not making it a disorder.

We can either classify all of them as what they are, or classify none of them, this picking and choosing because it is PC for one group but not the other is just wrong.

I'm not picking and choosing because it's PC but because I don't think homosexuality can be classified as what you're saying it is. I see nothing wrong with that.
 

BigLutz

Banned
Yes there is no chemical attraction. The fact that it isn't there to 'encourage' you to reproduce means that you might just much rather engage with the same sex.

Of course Homosexuals also have a chemical attraction to reproduce with those of the same sex, something already proven in this thread.

Aeron said:
Especially since there are influences that can cause a homosexual to reproduce such as family pressure or even a preference of the heterasexual lifestyle to the homosexual lifestyle.

Which is a outside influence, and not a mental or sexual influence. Again using that logic, family pressure or even a preference for a heterosexual life style could cause Pedophiles or Zoophiles not to be classified as a sexual disorder even though they suffer from such disorder.

Aeron said:
Homosexuality is with a sexually mature adult though.

Yes, and I have kept out because many Pedophiles choose those of the opposite sex, just at a younger age. If you want to get specific it would be Sexually Mature Adult of the opposite sex.

Aeron said:
My point is that choice means you are mentally able to do something, thus making it not a disability, thus (since it does not cause distress) not making it a disorder.

Except as proven Homosexuals by and large are mentally unable to have sex with a person of the opposite sex, with out significantly repressing their own chemical and sexual desires. Thus by your own logic it is a disorder.

Put it this way, is a Homosexual, with out any outside pressure, with out any desperate want for a Heterosexual Lifestyle, able to mentally be attracted to a person of the opposite sex? Chemically the evidence suggests that they are not.

Aeron said:
I'm not picking and choosing because it's PC but because I don't think homosexuality can be classified as what you're saying it is. I see nothing wrong with that.

You may see nothing wrong with it, but if we go by the language of what a disorder is, or even by your own definition from above, it is a disorder.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top