Obama Affirms Support for Same-Sex Marriage

[Doc Holliday904 1]

Good for votes as previously stated.

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Homosexuality is a choice. Some people may be more predisposed to it than others due to genetic factors, but I'd be hard-pressed to make a statement that all people who are homosexual, or really, any person who is homosexual, has no more choice in the matter than whether or not one is born a guy or a girl.

 

I applaud your ability to say something while say absolutely nothing at all.

 

The American Psychological Association describes sexual orientation as “a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors.” There is considerable evidence to suggest that biology, “including genetic or inborn hormonal factors,” plays a significant role in a person’s sexuality.

 

Literally every single major medical organization, including the APA and the AMA, have discredited the claim that homosexuality is a choice.

[Milla4Prez63 678]

The argument of whether homosexuality is a choice or not just has to many factors in it. If someone was in a homosexual relationship, and then moves on to a heterosexual relationship or vice-versa, that person was likely bisexual and just trying to discovere which gender they preferred. Or they could've been truly gay but afraid to accept it because of how society would view them. Some people just natrually are attracted to the same sex at an early age, others get it over time. All gay people, and even straight or bi people, are not the same. I don't get why we all need to generalize them all by saying homosexuality is a choice or not. It changes from person to person.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Milla4Prez63

[Thanatos 2,847]

I applaud your ability to say something while say absolutely nothing at all.

 

The American Psychological Association describes sexual orientation as “a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors.” There is considerable evidence to suggest that biology, “including genetic or inborn hormonal factors,” plays a significant role in a person’s sexuality.

 

Literally every single major medical organization, including the APA and the AMA, have discredited the claim that homosexuality is a choice.

 

I do love how you bring insults to what was a pretty civil debate.

 

Just as a point here, the APA once described homosexuality as a mental disorder. Just because an organization claims something does not equal proof of that claim.

 

This particular blurb seems to support my point, not go against it. Sure it plays a role. I completely agree that genes predispose people towards certain things. That doesn't mean its inevitable. The person can still make a choice. There are too many cases against that thesis to make a blanket statement that no one is homosexual by choice. Are you really saying that we're merely the product of our genes and our environment, and that we really have no choice in the matter? That's rather fatalistic.

 

Biology and sexual orientation is the subject of research into the role of biology in the development of human sexual orientation. No simple, single cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated. Various studies point to different, even conflicting positions, such as a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences,[1] with biological factors involving a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment,[2] or no genetic influence.[3] Biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or asexual orientation include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure.

 

1: Frankowski BL; American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence (June 2004). "Sexual orientation and adolescents". Pediatrics 113 (6): 1827–32. doi:10.1542/peds.113.6.1827. PMID 15173519.

2: Royal College of Psychiatrists: Submission to the Church of England’s Listening Exercise on Human Sexuality.

3: a b c This work was published in the American Journal of Sociology (Bearman, P. S. & Bruckner, H. (2002) Opposite-sex twins and adolescent same-sex attraction. American Journal of Sociology 107, 1179–1205.) and is available only to subscribers. However, a final draft of the paper is available here – there are no significant differences on the points cited between the final draft and the published version.

 

Twin studies have received a number of criticisms including self-selection bias where homosexuals with gay siblings are more likely to volunteer for studies. Nonetheless, it is possible to conclude that, given the difference in sexuality in so many sets of identical twins, sexual orientation cannot be purely caused by genetics.[9]

 

9: Schacter, Daniel L., Gilbert, Daniel T., and Wegner, Daniel M. (2009) "Psychology". Worth Publishers: 435.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Maverick 791]

You know there's actual scientific proof explaining it's not a choice, right? Like, this part of homosexuality isn't even up for debate anymore.

 

You do know that scientists are some of the most atheistic people out there and using them to try and prove the Bible wrong is laughable?

 

Save your liberal thoughts for another member or sign up at Democratic Underground.

[WindyCitySports 407]

The argument of whether homosexuality is a choice or not just has to many factors in it. If someone was in a homosexual relationship, and then moves on to a heterosexual relationship or vice-versa, that person was likely bisexual and just trying to discovere which gender they preferred. Or they could've been truly gay but afraid to accept it because of how society would view them. Some people just natrually are attracted to the same sex at an early age, others get it over time. All gay people, and even straight or bi people, are not the same. I don't get why we all need to generalize them all by saying homosexuality is a choice or not. It changes from person to person.

I agree with much of this. I think that there are more bi-sexual people than society sometimes realizes. Just because someone identifies as heterosexual or homosexual doesn't mean that they do not also have underlying feelings for members of the other gender.

[Thanatos 2,847]

You do know that scientists are some of the most atheistic people out there and using them to try and prove the Bible wrong is laughable?

 

Save your liberal thoughts for another member or sign up at Democratic Underground.

 

Where does the Bible claim that homosexuality is a choice? o_O.

 

This isn't about whether or not the Bible says something. The homosexual movement originally was making their argument on the basis of it being a choice. This is simply a discussion.

[BucD+ 648]

You do know that scientists are some of the most atheistic people out there and using them to try and prove the Bible wrong is laughable?

 

Save your liberal thoughts for another member or sign up at Democratic Underground.

 

Where was Phail trying to prove the Bible wrong in that post you quoted?

 

He's responding and debating the idea of homosexuality being a choice.

 

Also, that was suppose to be a "-" not a "+". Lolme

Edited May 10, 2012 by BucD

[WindyCitySports 407]

Where does the Bible claim that homosexuality is a choice? o_O.

 

This isn't about whether or not the Bible says something. The homosexual movement originally was making their argument on the basis of it being a choice. This is simply a discussion.

From my knowledge, the Bible says that homosexuality is a method that Satan uses to test/tempt humans, like pretty much all sins. This could be interpreted both ways. You could say that this means that homosexuals are choosing whether they want to give in to those temptations. This means that it is not a homosexual's choice to have those lusts, but just their choice on whether to give in to them.

 

Romans 1:26-27 - "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."

[JetsFan4Life 542]

You do know that scientists are some of the most atheistic people out there and using them to try and prove the Bible wrong is laughable?

 

Save your liberal thoughts for another member or sign up at Democratic Underground.

 

So scientists are the laughable ones? I guess I've been doing life all wrong...

[blotsfan 2,112]

The Old Testament provides an impossible standard to which we should aspire, but one which we inevitably cannot meet.

Yeah, Christians aren't capable of actually following those laws. Jews on the other hand...

[Guest Phailadelphia]

I do love how you bring insults to what was a pretty civil debate.

 

Just as a point here, the APA once described homosexuality as a mental disorder. Just because an organization claims something does not equal proof of that claim.

 

This particular blurb seems to support my point, not go against it. Sure it plays a role. I completely agree that genes predispose people towards certain things. That doesn't mean its inevitable. The person can still make a choice. There are too many cases against that thesis to make a blanket statement that no one is homosexual by choice. Are you really saying that we're merely the product of our genes and our environment, and that we really have no choice in the matter? That's rather fatalistic.

 

Sorry, I wasn't trying to insult you. I was just a little annoyed by your logic at the time but I think I understand it better now.

 

The only difference here in what we're saying is that you believe homosexuals act on homosexual urges as a choice. Well, duh. I fuck girls because I'm acting on heterosexual tendencies as a choice, not because it's inherently required for my survival. That's kind of a given. To the extent that homosexuals have a CHOICE on whether to have sex with guys or girls, sure I'll give you that much. But the fact that the disposition towards homosexuality is there kind of proves it goes beyond something as simple as a choice. I didn't say it was purely genetics and the articles we both posted reinforce that. I'm merely pointing out out that there is a degree of biology and genetics involved in how homosexuals behave.

 

I think we both have a similar idea of homosexuality here, we're just expressing them differently. Communications breakdown.

 

You do know that scientists are some of the most atheistic people out there and using them to try and prove the Bible wrong is laughable?

 

Save your liberal thoughts for another member or sign up at Democratic Underground.

 

Well for starters, what I posted has zero relevance to the bible. Second, if siding with scientists, even if they may be atheists, makes me wrong (or liberal...lol) then I don't want to be right.

 

Fact of the matter is, gay rights in 10-20 years will be looked back on the same way we look back on slavery and racism from the 1950s back. Those fighting so hard against gay rights now are on the wrong side of history.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Phailadelphia

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

You are passing judgement on honosexuals by making laws against their marrying. I am a religious person and I know what the Bible says about homosexual marriage. However, it doesn't say that it is the responsibility of the people and their governments to stop people from sinning. It says that God will decide in the end and that humans are not to make those judgments. Since when is it the responsibility of the government to stop people from going against the Christian religion. We aren't a theocracy. If you believe that homosexuals are sinning through their acts, then shake your head and wave your fist, but don't mobilize the government to stop people from sinning in the privacy of their homes. To each their own, and in the end God will judge, not you.

 

I honestly don't know where you are going with this one. lol.

 

I have already said that I would never force my religion on others. As well as I have said nor should Obama.

 

All I am saying is that he PERSONALLY has made the decision to support gay marriage, and as a Christian, that's something you can't do.

[WindyCitySports 407]

I honestly don't know where you are going with this one. lol.

 

I have already said that I would never force my religion on others. As well as I have said nor should Obama.

 

All I am saying is that he PERSONALLY has made the decision to support gay marriage, and as a Christian, that's something you can't do.

So you are saying that you are personally against gay marriage, but you would be completely fine with it being legal in the United States? Thank you, then. I had misinterpreted your position.

[KiLaSix9+ 398]

He has to make decisions and choices for what he believes is better for the country and its progression. Him coming out and saying he supports gay marriage is nothing more than a political stand point. Hes not going to come out and say "look guys, I don't believe its right for gays to be married because I'm a Christian but I'm going to go ahead and support it anyways".

 

We don't know what he truly PERSONALLY believes in.

[blotsfan 2,112]

You do know that scientists are some of the most atheistic people out there and using them to try and prove the Bible wrong is laughable?

 

Save your liberal thoughts for another member or sign up at Democratic Underground.

Yeah you're right. It's jus big scientific conspiracy. You see, even though everything scientists publish is reviewed by other scientists who test their findings, literally every scientist is in on it. Any scientist who proved that homosexuality was a complete choice would become incredibly famous bit he just hates god so much that he wants to do everything he can to discredit the bible.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble, but in general it's probably the safer bet to go with the people whose works are backed with transparency.

 

Also dmac when same sex marriage was passes on new York one of the main voters that swung the vote said that while he was a devout catholic and thought it shouldn't be done, as a lawyer and politician he saw no reason why it shouldn't be legal. I don't want a president whos making decisions from a Christian perspective. I want it to be someone who understands America and how this country works.

Edited May 10, 2012 by blotsfan

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

So you are saying that you are personally against gay marriage, but you would be completely fine with it being legal in the United States? Thank you, then. I had misinterpreted your position.

 

 

well... You might not of. lol....

 

I absolutely would not be fine with it being legal. Had I a saying in the matter, i'd do whatever I could as long as it doesn't clash with any other of my religious beliefs to make sure it doesn't happen.

 

But how I feel about it doesn't matter because my thoughts are irrelevant to anybody outside of myself, other Christians (if they care) or anybody else who cares. Really.

[WindyCitySports 407]

well... You might not of. lol....

 

I absolutely would not be fine with it being legal. Had I a saying in the matter, i'd do whatever I could as long as it doesn't clash with any other of my religious beliefs to make sure it doesn't happen.

 

But how I feel about it doesn't matter because my thoughts are irrelevant to anybody outside of myself, other Christians (if they care) or anybody else who cares. Really.

Yeah, I kind of guessed that I hadn't. Therefore, that is exactly what I was getting at with the whole, "the federal government should have no say in this matter" thing. It is fine if you think that homosexuality is a sin, but it isn't fine when the government starts telling people when they can sin. God will decide that in the end.

[KiLaSix9+ 398]

Yeah you're right. It's jus big scientific conspiracy. You see, even though everything scientists publish is reviewed by other scientists who test their findings, literally every scientist is in on it. Any scientist who proved that homosexuality was a complete choice would become incredibly famous bit he just hates god so much that he wants to do everything he can to discredit the bible.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble, but in general it's probably the safer bet to go with the people whose works are backed with transparency.

 

Also dmac when same sex marriage was passes on new York one of the main voters that swung the vote said that while he was a devout catholic and thought it shouldn't be done, as a lawyer and politician he saw no reason why it shouldn't be legal. I don't want a president whos making decisions from a Christian perspective. I want it to be someone who understands America and how this country works.

Amen.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

Also dmac when same sex marriage was passes on new York one of the main voters that swung the vote said that while he was a devout catholic and thought it shouldn't be done, as a lawyer and politician he saw no reason why it shouldn't be legal. I don't want a president whos making decisions from a Christian perspective. I want it to be someone who understands America and how this country works.

 

 

I'm not a person in power nor would I ever want to be, at least not in charge of a city/country/etc.

 

But should I aspire to be, i'd let everyone know where I stand, what i'd support and what I'd be for and against, and that's that. If they dont like it, then don't vote for me. That's really all to it.

 

But if you are going to be in position of power, claim to be a Christian, then make a move -a personal one at that- that goes against what you are supposed to believe, maybe you are following the wrong religion?

[blotsfan 2,112]

Or maybe you understand that one of the main principles of this country is separation of church and state. When you are in power, you have a responsibility to represent everyone, not just yourself.

[WindyCitySports 407]

I'm not a person in power nor would I ever want to be, at least not in charge of a city/country/etc.

 

But should I aspire to be, i'd let everyone know where I stand, what i'd support and what I'd be for and against, and that's that. If they dont like it, then don't vote for me. That's really all to it.

 

But if you are going to be in position of power, claim to be a Christian, then make a move -a personal one at that- that goes against what you are supposed to believe, maybe you are following the wrong religion?

As I have alluded to already, believing that gay marriage is immoral and believing that it should be illegal do not mean the same thing.

 

Not to mention that an opposition to gay marriage isn't exactly a founding belief in the Bible, but rather something that is mentioned. Kindness and acceptance of all is definitely a founding principal, though.

Edited May 11, 2012 by WindyCitySports

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

Winners of this thread:

GA_Eagle

Thanatos

blots

WindyCity

Phail

 

Losers of this thread:

DMac (Agree with you on everything you've ever said except Blake Griffin and religion)

Mav

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

As I have alluded to already, believing that gay marriage is immoral and believing that it should be illegal do not mean the same thing.

 

Not to mention that an opposition to gay marriage isn't exactly a founding belief in the Bible, but rather something that is mentioned. Kindness and acceptance of all is definitely a founding principal, though.

 

Opposition to anything involving loving people of the same sex is EXTREMELY CLEAR in the Bible. Anytime something is mentioned in the Bible in both testaments, and have words oriented with them all over the Bible as much as marriage and it's sanctity between man and woman, it's a founding belief. From being gay, to being in a relationship with another homosexual, to being "married" to one.

 

From the book of Genesis, the creation of mankind where God creates a woman because he doesn't like man sleeping by himself -- Can't recall the verse, it's somewhere in Genesis Ch.2, and I am positive he uses the term "woman" to sleep with the man. To all the mentions of MAN AND WOMEN in marriage, and nothing more, in Ephesians, Romans, Corinthians, Peter, etc, it's everywhere in the Bible, idk how you can't consider it contradicting to a founding belief if the Bible mentions the sanctity of marriage so much.

[NaTaS+ 958]

So scientists are the laughable ones? I guess I've been doing life all wrong...

 

Bro, the earth is flat and there is no such thing as gravity. Bro, srsly.