It's Official - Stand and Shout the Gays are Out (link)

[Guest]

I invite you to, just once, defend your bigotry against gays using reasoning and data based on credible scientific information. I've yet to see you even attempt it.

He is engaging in "principled opposition". Who needs reasoning and data when you have religious "principles" on your side?

[_Drifting]

subgenius wrote

Consider my claim that LGBT is a genetic abnormality

Didn't Packer clear this up at Conference by explaining that LGBT were a choice not a genetic condition?

And wouldn't that make subgenius's position...well...against what the Church teaches?

[_just me]

subgenius wrote

Consider my claim that LGBT is a genetic abnormality

Didn't Packer clear this up at Conference by explaining that LGBT were a choice not a genetic condition?

And wouldn't that make subgenius's position...well...against what the Church teaches?

The leaders have said conflicting things so he is fine. They have also likened it unto being disabled.

I'm wondering if ol' subby here is against all people with 'genetic abnormalities' getting married...

[_Droopy]

You really, really need to read your posts either out loud to yourself or to someone else before hitting submit. "Principled opposition" - LOL! My new favorite euphemism for bigotry....

Why not just admit, and join Bluffalo, that you have not the slightest intellectual or philosophical basis for your beliefs here beyond the classic, textbook leftist moral self congratulation for being fashionably PC (depending upon the decade and cause pro tempore of the moment) that drives, for the most part, the shallow, anchorless leftist mind.

[_Droopy]

Didn't Packer clear this up at Conference by explaining that LGBT were a choice not a genetic condition?

It is a complex, subtle, developmental set of choices eventuating in a conscious awareness of choice. It is most definitely not a "genetic condition," although, at least for some, genetics may play a predisposing role.

[_Chap]

Didn't Packer clear this up at Conference by explaining that LGBT were a choice not a genetic condition?

It is a complex, subtle, developmental set of choices eventuating in a conscious awareness of choice. It is most definitely not a "genetic condition," although, at least for some, genetics may play a predisposing role.

So if Droopy is speaking the same language I use in daily life, that underlined bit must mean that people with same-sex preferences end up being aware that they chose to be that way.

So when such people way they did not make this choice, then either:

1. They are lying

or:

2. The awareness has not yet 'eventuated'.

Right.

[_Droopy]

So if Droopy is speaking the same language I use in daily life, that underlined bit must mean that people with same-sex preferences end up being aware that they chose to be that way.

So when such people say they did not make this choice, then either:

1. They are lying

or:

2. The awareness has not yet 'eventuated'.

Right.

Most likely, they are rationalizing and struggling to find explanations for something that they, themselves, do not really understand as to origins and development.

Many are also motivated to preserve a lifestyle of gross sexual hedonism and irresponsibility they are loath to give up. They didn't once call it Gay "liberation" for nothing, but I would hardy expect posters who have no conception of anything that occurred before the day of their birth to be interested in that sort of thing.

[_Buffalo]

So if Droopy is speaking the same language I use in daily life, that underlined bit must mean that people with same-sex preferences end up being aware that they chose to be that way.

So when such people say they did not make this choice, then either:

1. They are lying

or:

2. The awareness has not yet 'eventuated'.

Right.

Most likely, they are rationalizing and struggling to find explanations for something that they, themselves, do not really understand as to origins and development.

Many are also motivated to preserve a lifestyle of gross sexual hedonism and irresponsibility they are loath to give up. They didn't once call it Gay "liberation" for nothing, but I would hardy expect posters who have no conception of anything that occurred before the day of their birth to be interested in that sort of thing.

You don't understand that to heterosexuals, your viewpoint has no appeal. We never chose to be attracted to women. It just happened. Perhaps your experience has been more fluid.

I'm not sure, however, why anyone would choose to be treated like a second-class citizen in adulthood and be subjected to endless harassment in childhood. And all to be able to sleep with other men? Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me. But then again, I'm straight. :)

[_Chap]

So if Droopy is speaking the same language I use in daily life, that underlined bit must mean that people with same-sex preferences end up being aware that they chose to be that way.

So when such people say they did not make this choice, then either:

1. They are lying

or:

2. The awareness has not yet 'eventuated'.

Right.

Most likely, they are rationalizing and struggling to find explanations for something that they, themselves, do not really understand as to origins and development.

Yup, like I said, the awareness has not yet 'eventuated'. I do seem to have the gift of conveying Droopy's thoughts in a form adapted to the meanest understanding, don't I?

Many are also motivated to preserve a lifestyle of gross sexual hedonism and irresponsibility they are loath to give up.

So they are lying - gottit.

They didn't once call it Gay "liberation" for nothing, but I would hardy expect posters who have no conception of anything that occurred before the day of their birth to be interested in that sort of thing.

It is likely that I am aware of things that happened before Droopy's birth. And no, they didn't call it Gay liberation for nothing. I am not gay, by the way.

[_Droopy]

You don't understand that to heterosexuals, your viewpoint has no appeal. We never chose to be attracted to women. It just happened. Perhaps your experience has been more fluid.

Exclusive homosexuality, at perhaps 3% or less of the general population, is so minority in its presence as a psychosexual mode of development and expression, and so disproportionately destructive to the individual who practices this lifestyle, that it positively cries out for some explanation beyond the infantile "It just is..."

I'm not sure, however, why anyone would choose to be treated like a second-class citizen in adulthood

Homosexuals? What are you smoking, octane booster? Homosexuals are among the most successful group in the culture, economically and socially.