|
Post by Alex on Jul 5, 2010 20:54:31 GMT -5
Actually, I am. I understand it does have benifits and it a nessesity... but I dont support it myself. So what do you suggest we do with the hundreds of thousands of children that don't have homes? Kill them. Adoption is useless. All kids who don't have parents can fend for themselves or go die. No one cares about them. [In case you don't catch it, this is SARCASM]
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 5, 2010 21:31:01 GMT -5
So what do you suggest we do with the hundreds of thousands of children that don't have homes? Kill them. Adoption is useless. All kids who don't have parents can fend for themselves or go die. No one cares about them. [In case you don't catch it, this is SARCASM] Sean said himself he was just BSing.
|
|
|
Post by chelseeyuh on Jul 6, 2010 1:05:32 GMT -5
Chelsea, just for the sake of the argument ( coz I'm like that ), you are assuming a couple of things. 1. That all people after thinking about it would reach the same conclusion. This is simply impossible. 2. That there is only one debate about this topic going on. I would like to point out that I think the question " Are you okay with homosexuality? " is too large of an idea to simply anwser "yes" or "no". 3.That you MUST be right. This is a really ignorant position to take yourself. If you assume this position here, you may as well assume it everywhere. So what's the point of talking to us mortals? 4. That NO ONE (or at least majority) of people on the oposite side were really thinking about it before the discussion and none of them have any valid arguments. In that case, you may also go on and say that EVERYONE (or at least majority of people on your side of the argument) know what they are talking about, bring only valid points, and are experts on the topic (such as Alex, who doesn't have to argue, as an expert he rather just insult people). I don't think that the last one is actually valid, but I still added it for the sake of argument. 1 is fairly accurate. 2 is a fair point. 3 is fairly accurate. 4 is the point of my post. I'll start with 4. As I said before, people absorb the ideas/opinions of their environment without truly thinking things through logically. People believe silly things without having a reason behind them. Which brings me to numbers 1 and 3: I absolutely cannot fathom homophobia. I don't understand it. I try to understand it. I talk to homophobic people and try to understand their ideas. NEVER have I hear a legitimate reason for being homophobic. Never. When I think logically about the issue, I come to the conclusion that homosexuality is totally fine. I've explained why several times on this forum, so I'm not going to get into that again. But through all of my reasoning, I believe that I have a well-supported opinion, and yes, I believe that I am right. I generally stay out of discussions unless I am confident in my beliefs and have a valid reason for believing what I due. I wouldn't believe what I believe unless I thought it was right. That wouldn't make any sense. I'm not saying that it's impossible for someone else to make a valid point, but as of right now, I believe that I'm right.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 6, 2010 1:47:19 GMT -5
Just coming back to my 2nd point, you may have not gotten a valid reason against homosexuality in general, but I'm sure you meat people that argued at least parts of the concept with valid point. I have created a thesis and argued for it for the last 4 pages or so, even if you don't agree with my position I think you could at least agree that my arguments are reasonable ( you kind of dropped out in the middle of the debate so I haven't adressed your last post, but I can still do that if you would like me to.) If you were in so many conversations about it, I'm sure there were at least some examples of people bringing valid points, even if you don't agree with them.
Now let me move on to nr4. I do realize that many of people's ideas are created because they are in the envoriment that they are in, but we have to remember that this is most likely true for both sides of the argument, so this could be argued by both sides. The really hard work comes when one has to look at themselves, and accept that many of his ideas are not his own. I try to be critical of myself, but it is often hard to do. What actually helps is asking oneself "why this society developed such ideology in a first place."
|
|
|
Post by velvetdivorce on Jul 6, 2010 6:42:34 GMT -5
Yes I see that difference, and this is why I argued that homosexuals should have a right to marry. At the same time you can't use that as a standard to look for mental disabilities. Let me put it this way, if you for example accept Pedophelia as a disability of some sorts, and accept that in 100% of the cases, but you find 1 child that will make a clear decision to have sex with an older man, is that man healed? Or if a person wants to have sex with a chair, the chair will be fine but is that person mentally all right? If the child makes that choice, they obviously do not know what is going on or have been very mentally scarred. Well that child would still be being abused, and manipulated. Children cannot consent because they cannot grasp the gravity of situation. Any "consent" a child might give is null and void. (Perhaps they've been bribed, but they do not fully understand what is happening to them). It may not effect them straight away, but children who allow this to happen to them (though of course they can't be blamed) will feel the damage in later life, once realization hits. So: pedophilia is always destructive. This is not the case with homosexuality. ALSO! Regarding gay couples adopting: my theory is that any opposition to this was brought upon by Fruedian propagandists. They just weren't bothered reworking psychoanalysis. (Of course I'm not being serious, but this thought amused me).
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 6, 2010 10:48:36 GMT -5
velvetdivorce, I went into it on page 4, re-read that page if you want to understand my reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Jul 6, 2010 11:53:00 GMT -5
Remember, homophobia is usually brought on by either a severe religious upbringing or self-hating.
|
|
|
Post by zAkAtAk on Jul 6, 2010 12:06:32 GMT -5
Remember, homophobia is usually brought on by either a severe religious upbringing or self-hating. or misinformation.
|
|
|
Post by velvetdivorce on Jul 8, 2010 7:02:46 GMT -5
velvetdivorce, I went into it on page 4, re-read that page if you want to understand my reasoning. I read your definitions. It was wasn't helpful, apart from what you quoted from. And I'm arguing with what I've quoted you on. Remember, homophobia is usually brought on by either a severe religious upbringing or self-hating. or misinformation. Yeah; misinformation, religious upbringing. Same thing. Lololololol.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 8, 2010 13:20:34 GMT -5
Have you read the whole page, or just my first post on it? I have to admit that what you quoted me on was poorly put together. Here is a better one: Copy+paste "I addressed your arguments before I believe (given by a different person). First of all, I see the difference between those two cases, I just use pedophilia as an example of another sexual disorder, that's all.
Now to your agrument, you assume that morality is a guide to mental disorders, but they are two different things. Lets take a pedophile in a test envoriment. We consider him to have some kind of a dissorder, but if he makes love to a child that has nothing agains that (remember, its a test envoriment so for the sake of argument child does not have emotions of feeling), is the pedophile healed now? My point is that mental disorders should not be classified based on how society reacts to it, and this is what we have here. "
Anwser the question above.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Jul 8, 2010 13:34:12 GMT -5
But it's not a mental disorder. There is no credible medical organization that classes it as such. And unless you are some revolutionary professional, what say do you have in it?
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 8, 2010 14:20:37 GMT -5
But it's not a mental disorder. There is no credible medical organization that classes it as such. And unless you are some revolutionary professional, what say do you have in it? Alex, its like saying "there is someone somewhere that would beat you in this argument". I know I'm no expert, at least in this topic, but this is a debate area of the forum so this is what we do here, debate. +If you are right, then you should have no trouble supporting your point of view.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Jul 8, 2010 14:26:11 GMT -5
here: psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.htmlNo credible medical organization supports the idea that Homosexuality is a mental disorder. So unless you are some sort of expert, you cannot classify it as one -- the classification of mental disorders is done by professionals. If you aren't a professional, you cannot look at the evidence that they do not consider it to be a disorder and still say "Well, I THINK it's a disorder." -- no it's not. It isn't classified as a disorder, therefore it isn't a disorder.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 8, 2010 15:06:55 GMT -5
here: psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.htmlNo credible medical organization supports the idea that Homosexuality is a mental disorder. So unless you are some sort of expert, you cannot classify it as one -- the classification of mental disorders is done by professionals. If you aren't a professional, you cannot look at the evidence that they do not consider it to be a disorder and still say "Well, I THINK it's a disorder." -- no it's not. It isn't classified as a disorder, therefore it isn't a disorder. Iw was taken off the list of disorders because the gay community , and they supporters got together and did some good old lobbying, this is how the western world works. If I am wrong you should still be able to correct me, I don't see how this is so hard to do, I bet you I could better argue your point of view then you are doing it. One more thing, In ancient greece Pedophilia was something very common, it was a part of their culture one may even say. Does that makes them right, or is it that it was all right back then but not now?
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Jul 8, 2010 15:19:23 GMT -5
here: psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.htmlNo credible medical organization supports the idea that Homosexuality is a mental disorder. So unless you are some sort of expert, you cannot classify it as one -- the classification of mental disorders is done by professionals. If you aren't a professional, you cannot look at the evidence that they do not consider it to be a disorder and still say "Well, I THINK it's a disorder." -- no it's not. It isn't classified as a disorder, therefore it isn't a disorder. Iw was taken off the list of disorders because the gay community , and they supporters got together and did some good old lobbying, this is how the western world works. If I am wrong you should still be able to correct me, I don't see how this is so hard to do, I bet you I could better argue your point of view then you are doing it. One more thing, In ancient greece Pedophilia was something very common, it was a part of their culture one may even say. Does that makes them right, or is it that it was all right back then but not now? Let's not get into paedophilia. Truthfully, I don't have a problem with paedophiles -- there's a clear difference between a paedophile and a child molester. One is okay, the other is not. But it is very different from the situation of homosexuality where it is two consenting adults (unless, we are talking about homosexual youth). But I'd like YOU to stop switching the burden of proof onto me. Please, show me the evidence, the brain scans, the test results that have led you to believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder. Don't try to get me to prove a negative -- it doesn't work that way. And buddy, if you're such an expert, how about you start conducting some of these tests yourself. This is not a mental disorder, this is a preference. You might as well be saying that not liking the taste of broccoli is a mental disorder, because a vast majority of people might like it -- or tell you that they like it. It's like your saying "you don't like the same thing as the rest of us, therefore you aren't normal, therefore you are mentally ill!" Your 'logic' is ludicrous.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Jul 8, 2010 15:51:17 GMT -5
I just started reading this thread, I am disappointed in all of you. Every argument that has ensued from this topic has resulted in name-calling and disrespect. This might just be in the poll's section, but it's still a debate and should be treated like one. If you disagree with what someone says - you get evidence against it and post, you don't take it as an insult, you don't lash back, and you don't name-call. Cmon guys - you're better than this. Homosexuality is not a mental illness - Source: hereTo those who think homosexuality is unnatural - It occurs in animals other than humans
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 8, 2010 17:22:30 GMT -5
Alex, you still didn't anwser this question. "One more thing, In ancient greece Pedophilia was something very common, it was a part of their culture one may even say. Does that makes them right, or is it that it was all right back then but not now?" Its not that hard. I never said I'm an expert, why do you keep saying that I did. So we should't ask questions? Why do we even have a debate part of the forum if we are no expersts. Ok then, majority must be right, no questions asked. I am sorry, homosexuality is not a disorder. On the other hand, it is a sin. www.allaboutgod.com/is-homosexuality-a-sin.htmChange or you will go to hell.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Jul 8, 2010 17:27:25 GMT -5
Alex, you still didn't anwser this question. "One more thing, In ancient greece Pedophilia was something very common, it was a part of their culture one may even say. Does that makes them right, or is it that it was all right back then but not now?" Its not that hard. I never said I'm an expert, why do you keep saying that I did. So we should't ask questions? Why do we even have a debate part of the forum if we are no expersts. Ok then, majority must be right, no questions asked. I am sorry, homosexuality is not a disorder. On the other hand, it is a sin. www.allaboutgod.com/is-homosexuality-a-sin.htmChange or you will go to hell. Your sarcasm isn't needed. I already answered your question. "Let's not get into paedophilia. Truthfully, I don't have a problem with paedophiles -- there's a clear difference between a paedophile and a child molester. One is okay, the other is not. But it is very different from the situation of homosexuality where it is two consenting adults (unless, we are talking about homosexual youth)." Please read next time. My point is that you're asking for us to prove a negative. It cannot be done. If you're asserting that homosexuals are mentally ill, then we are demanding evidence. I want the brain scans, I want the tests, I want the diagnostics, and most of all, I want the explanation of how all of those point to the conclusion of the theory being postulated by you that homosexuals are mentally ill. Unless you have that, there is no argument. There is no credibility. And don't try to turn the tables on us and ask us to prove that homosexuality ISN'T a mental disorder. If you make and outlandish claim, you HAVE to back it up. Whether or not it is a mental disorder is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact -- facts that you have NOT presented.
|
|
|
Post by velvetdivorce on Jul 8, 2010 17:57:55 GMT -5
*clap clap clap*. Give this dude a can of coke. His coherent debating makes me want to shower him in gifts. (This enthusiasm sounds sarcastic, but I just want to give kudos to how much he has his head screwed on right.)
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jul 8, 2010 19:09:09 GMT -5
Alex, what's so hard about that question? Can't you just anwser it?
I think I backed up my claim, but just for you I will do it one more time. Here is a definition of a mental disorder : "•(psychiatry) a psychological disorder of thought or emotion; a more neutral term than mental illness"
Now what is the difference between a homosexual and a heterosexual? The difference is that a homosexual is looking for a pertner of the same sex, heterosexual is looking for someone of an opposite sex. Both of them do it for the same to reproduce.
Now what is the point of having sex? Its to reproduce. Pleasure is just what gets us to do it, but the point is to reproduce. As a homosexual, you will most likely never end up reproducing as opposide sex is not what you desire. How is that not a disorder of thought or emotion? This is going agains what keeps a given species alive.
This brings me to one more point if this is not a dissorder, then what would happen if everyone on the planet would be homosexual? We would die out, and this is not something that is considered normal.
It may not be a brain scan, but how can you say this is not a valid point that I'm making here?
If you are right, you should have no trouble adressing this. And don't play the not-an-expert card again, if I was to go around and do that every time someone said something radical on this forum I would get banned a long time ago. And stop taking it so personally, its just a studip debate.
|
|