Thread: 'Homosexuality cure' and secular studies?

You ever watch South Park? lol

They were just a little bicurious!

There is no cure for something that is not a disease, homosexuality is visible in many different animals. If the gay conversion workshop is anything like normal christian philosophy, you either become straight or burn in hell.

On another note, it must not be too effective, Bruno overcame the words of the gay conversion priest :p

Technically you can cure anything. Hitler managed to cure tolerance to jews. It's called brainwashing. You can program a person to think anything.

No you can't. The persecution of Jews is a concept on a much higher cognitive level, and even then there were some who did not buy it. Sexual identity is an instinctive trait programmed very deep in the brain and is hence not a plastic thing; can you brainwash somebody to multiply ten digit numbers together in their head, or to have synaesthesia?

Somebody should ask Ted Haggard how 'curing' homosexuality worked out for him.

Originally Posted by C-Fonz

homosexuality is visible in many different animals

So is rape, and yet we try pretty hard to avert that.

Saying there is a cure for homosexuality is to me like saying there is a cure for being an optimist. Like someone said, you cannot cure that which is not a disease. Even if you can change a homosexual into a straight person, the process would be akin to brainwashing.

Originally Posted by Lëzen

So is rape, and yet we try pretty hard to avert that.

And the difference being that one act physically and mentally harms people where the other doesn't. In any case, rape is sexualized violence, and has nothing to do with sexual identity.

^Wasn't really intended to be a serious argument, but rather intended to show the invalidity of that particular argument. "Ooh, [insert random animal here]s sometimes have gay sex, so it must be alright for the rest of us." Makes sense, right?

Whether homosexuality is right or wrong isn't the issue with me; it's the fact that people use the habits of other species to justify our own habits. That, I believe, is wrong on all levels.

Invalid argument is invalid.

...Perhaps I could go on to say something in regards to it being hypocritical to give homosexuals so much sympathy because they are "born the way they are" when rapists are also predisposed to be the way they are - some of them really can't control their actions, but does that mean they should be absolved of all blame? Of course not. But, I'll leave that topic alone...with the exception of that passing mention, of course.

I see. That's a good point. I guess people bring up that argument in response when others claim something like homosexuality is unnatural.

But yeah. I can think of a ton of examples to support your point.

Originally Posted by Lëzen

^Wasn't really intended to be a serious argument, but rather intended to show the invalidity of that particular argument. "Ooh, [insert random animal here]s sometimes have gay sex, so it must be alright for the rest of us." Makes sense, right?

Whether homosexuality is right or wrong isn't the issue with me; it's the fact that people use the habits of other species to justify our own habits. That, I believe, is wrong on all levels.

Invalid argument is invalid.

...Perhaps I could go on to say something in regards to it being hypocritical to give homosexuals so much sympathy because they are "born the way they are" when rapists are also predisposed to be the way they are - some of them really can't control their actions, but does that mean they should be absolved of all blame? Of course not. But, I'll leave that topic alone...with the exception of that passing mention, of course.

This only brings us to the question; what blame exactly should be applied to homosexuality? In the case of rape, it is clear what the person is guilty of whether they are predisposed to it or not. What is a homosexual guilty of?

Even then, why would you want to "cure" yourself if you were homosexual. I don't see why anyone would want to change the way they are in such a drastic manner.

Originally Posted by Lëzen

^Wasn't really intended to be a serious argument, but rather intended to show the invalidity of that particular argument. "Ooh, [insert random animal here]s sometimes have gay sex, so it must be alright for the rest of us." Makes sense, right?

Whether homosexuality is right or wrong isn't the issue with me; it's the fact that people use the habits of other species to justify our own habits. That, I believe, is wrong on all levels.

Invalid argument is invalid.
P

My fact about other species was not intended to be used for argument, it was simply just a fact to show it is a natural occurrence. Also, homosexuality is also not always synonymous with "gay sex", you can be homosexual and never actually have sex. The rape reference was a good point, if I was trying to use that fact as an argument, but pulling quotes out of your ass and comparing them to what I say is unnecessary.

A penis is made for a vagina, not for another penis and vice versa for a vagina. I don't get how people can be gay, no logic in it at all.

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

A penis is made for a vagina, not for another penis and vice versa for a vagina. I don't get how people can be gay, no logic in it at all.

Are you kidding? :l

Originally Posted by Xei

Are you kidding? :l

No, this is my belief and i could care less what people think my stance on gays are.

If it's not natural then why are there homosexuals in nature, throughout the animal kingdom? Do you think homosexuals are secretly straight or something? And do you think animals are consciously sinning?

There is actually an evolutionary advantage, it's not degenerate.

Originally Posted by Xei

If it's not natural then why are there homosexuals in nature, throughout the animal kingdom? Do you think homosexuals are secretly straight or something? And do you think animals are consciously sinning?

There is actually an evolutionary advantage, it's not degenerate.

My thought on the whole thing is you can't make babies doing it the gay way, but i am not a moron about it and go bash them as much as possible, it's their choice so who am i to judge them? i may disagree with it, but it's really their choice.


Do the animals in the animal kingdom really understand though? they just wanna hump something, hump anything. I guess it does not really matter, if it was "supposed to be", then i presume it would be hardwired into their brains from birth '"you only hump the males/females", instead of the opposite sex.

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

My thought on the whole thing is you can't make babies doing it the gay way, but i am not a moron about it and go bash them as much as possible, it's their choice so who am i to judge them? i may disagree with it, but it's really their choice.


Do the animals in the animal kingdom really understand though? they just wanna hump something, hump anything. I guess it does not really matter, if it was "supposed to be", then i presume it would be hardwired into their brains from birth '"you only hump the males/females", instead of the opposite sex.

There is no logic in human sexual attraction or human emotions. At least not on a conscious level.

Originally Posted by Lëzen

Invalid argument is invalid.

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

My thought on the whole thing is you can't make babies doing it the gay way

Not everyone who has sex wants babies.

And if it's a matter of "these body parts were made for such and such", I can think of plenty of body parts I use in ways that they weren't technically developed for.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Not everyone who has sex wants babies.

And if it's a matter of "these body parts were made for such and such", I can think of plenty of body parts I use in ways that they weren't technically developed for.

No but the whole point of sex besides plessure is to spread your seed and help keep humanity alive. It should be 1 baby per family, because getting more is just asking for trouble. We are over populated as it is.

There is no logic in human sexual attraction or human emotions. At least not on a conscious level.

It's not invalid, it's just different then yours.

Sexual attraction is not a low-level brain function; it's fairly high-level and can be very complex in mammals, which is why homosexuality can occur.

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

No but the whole point of sex besides plessure is to spread your seed and help keep humanity alive. It should be 1 baby per family, because getting more is just asking for trouble. We are over populated as it is.

To be gay should be fine then, they won't contribute to any overpopulation, that is for sure.

What is the problem then?

Originally Posted by Xei

There is actually an evolutionary advantage

Which is what?