Homosexuality

[Ned]

Originally posted by Pekka
Your med-student daughter?? Wait.. I thought you were about my age? Jeesh, you're an old fart!

But that's ok.

Nah, you are about the same age as my daughter. But, still, I don't hold your lack of experience against you.

[Ned]

Originally posted by MrFun
We do not have to rely on the "it's not a choice" argument to advocate for equal rights.


Peope choose their religious beliefs, for example, yet we affirm that people should have equal rights regardless of one's religion.



I am weary of relying too heavily on the "it's not a choice" argument for advocacy of equal rights regardless of sexual orientation. Yes, I believe that sexual orientation is NOT a choice, but until we know exactly how it develops . . . . . .

Well, I think we should study it, as the opponents of gay rights insist it is a choice or a mental disorder. From a theological point of view, such proof will go a long way to "converting" the religions.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MrFun
Until I know for certain how sexual orientation develops, I'm not going to rely exclusively on the argument, "it's not a choice" because there are other, and perhaps, even more effective, ways to advocate for equal rights.

Because gays have done such a bang up job of getting their civil rights recongized until now.

While a majority of Americans do not approve of homosexuality, you will not get them to agree to civil rights for gays if they think homosexuality is a choice. When people think gays have no choice but to be gay, they then agree it's wrong to discriminate, even if they don't approve of homosexuality.

This is a seperate question from whether or not we should find out the truth. I don't care one way or the other. I see homosexuality as something which is, and something which is beautiful, and that sex between consenting adults isn't a shameful thing. To me, it wouldn't matter whether people chose to be gay or not. I'm not in the majority.

[Ben Kenobi]

It was a gay researcher who first noticed the differences between gay and straight brains.

Precisely so. These differences are not trumpeted by the religious right, rather they are celebrated by the gay rights folks.

In the same way that we see folks who profit by assuming there are racial differences today.

[chequita guevara]

Well, the religious right are evil people motivated only by hatred towards humanity, so we can discount anything they have to say.

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, I think everyone ought to be listened to, regardless of how they are branded by others.

Even Communists can contribute to society on occasion.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Because gays have done such a bang up job of getting their civil rights recongized until now.

While a majority of Americans do not approve of homosexuality, you will not get them to agree to civil rights for gays if they think homosexuality is a choice. When people think gays have no choice but to be gay, they then agree it's wrong to discriminate, even if they don't approve of homosexuality.

This is a seperate question from whether or not we should find out the truth. I don't care one way or the other. I see homosexuality as something which is, and something which is beautiful, and that sex between consenting adults isn't a shameful thing. To me, it wouldn't matter whether people chose to be gay or not. I'm not in the majority.

Now I'm not sure who is sexier with the rolling eyes smilie -- you or JohnT.

Anyway, relying on only one means to advocate for equal rights just doesn't make sense to me, when we use other effective arguments as well. Yes, I understand what you're saying about the strength of the argument that if it's not a choice, then discrimination cannot be justified.

But to me, that is still not a completely solid ground to stand on, since our rights can continued to be denied until we can prove how sexual orientation develops, which will show that is not a choice. So in the meantime, I'm for effective arguments that can bring change sooner than when we have proven how sexual orientation develops.

[Ben Kenobi]

So in the meantime, I'm for effective arguments that can bring change sooner than when we have proven how sexual orientation develops.

Why the rush?

Are gays being beaten in the streets?

Are they denied education and representation?

Are they segregated and spat upon?

What is the pressing urgency behind this change, Mr. Fun?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Why the rush?

Are gays being beaten in the streets?

Are they denied education and representation?

Are they segregated and spat upon?

What is the pressing urgency behind this change, Mr. Fun?

That's funny . . . . .


some people who professed to have sympathized with Martin Luther King Jr. wrote letters to him while he was in prison, asking him what the rush was as well.


True . . . . .

blacks suffered much more violent forms of repression and discrimination that showed more obviously what the "rush" was.

But I did not know that there was a timetable that all civil rights movements had to abide by. What volume, chapter, section, and paragraph is this rule located in?

[Theben]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Are gays being beaten in the streets?

Are they denied education and representation?

Are they segregated and spat upon?

What is the pressing urgency behind this change, Mr. Fun?

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
He (we) is tired of it?

[MrFun]

I found the rule on the time thingy for civil rights movements . . . . . .





standard timetable for civil rights movement, vol. 3, chap. 7, section 9.3, paragraphs 1 - 3: the sooner the better

[chequita guevara]

Justice delayed is justice denied.

[MrFun]

While Ben is recuperating from my response, I think I'm going to google around for an avatar -- it's high time that I get one already.

[Theben]

Ben doesn't recuperate. Ben ignores then repeats.

[MrFun]

damn it -- you ruined my naive hope that he had changed