General

[quote=Jake305]Scientific evidence, or sarcasm?
Can you provide a link, or source?[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnemidophorus

I've heard of more examples, some ants and different, but this was given on page two.

[quote=Jake305]Genetic Mutation, opinion-wise. Homosexuality is not natural, but that's not to be said in an offensive and disproving manor, as frequently believed, we were [in majority] born to reproduce, something homosexual couples can not naturally complete. [/quote]

Someone has given an example of a homosexual specie.

[quote=Mademoiselle]which helped develop viruses for warfare and caused population to increase dramatically
next example[/quote]

Can I have a source for that? :]

[quote=ReLaX]I gave the example with the molecular biologist Johan Olsen, who studies proteins, just for the sake of more information upon their structure and such. That knowledge wasn't suppose to give any specific results or be used for any product or anything at all. Later, some other scientists then used what he had found out to make anti-biotics.[/quote]

which helped develop viruses for warfare and caused population to increase dramatically
next example

[quote=Mademoiselle]sigh

i'm sorry, but please give me some examples where knowledge for the sake of knowledge was beneficial
especially since this entire time you've been saying that people who learn for the sake of learning don't do anything with it.[/quote]

I gave the example with the molecular biologist Johan Olsen, who studies proteins, just for the sake of more information upon their structure and such. That knowledge wasn't suppose to give any specific results or be used for any product or anything at all. Later, some other scientists then used what he had found out to make anti-biotics.

[quote=ReLaX]But the point was that knowledge is a good thing, even though it isn't meant for any apparant solution. There could be beneficial knowledge within it too.[/quote]

sigh

i'm sorry, but please give me some examples where knowledge for the sake of knowledge was beneficial
especially since this entire time you've been saying that people who learn for the sake of learning don't do anything with it.

[quote=HappyFaces]Ty, ty! Now I can finally sleep! <3[/quote]

Sleep tight & Sweet dreams :]

[quote=ReLaX]But the point was that knowledge is a good thing, even though it isn't meant for any apparant solution. There could be beneficial knowledge within it too.[/quote]

Ty, ty! Now I can finally sleep! <3

[quote=Mademoiselle]...well, with your comment about who ever said it would, many people do
or at least most people. a few people in this thread alone think that this will help eliminate ignorance, not completely, but that it will.
and you seem to realize that it won't. and we can agree on that.[/quote]

But the point was that knowledge is a good thing, even though it isn't meant for any apparant solution. There could be beneficial knowledge within it too.

[quote=ReLaX]Who said that it ever would? I specifically said that it did not erase ignorance, this is the same with hate.

We do not use science to erase hate or decide morality, science is about learning and knowledge.

That's why we have philosophers in the ethics department and scientist in the labs and in the telescopes and so on. It's two different realms.[/quote]

...well, with your comment about who ever said it would, many people do
or at least most people. a few people in this thread alone think that this will help eliminate ignorance, not completely, but that it will.
and you seem to realize that it won't. and we can agree on that.

[quote=HappyFaces]I don't find learning that it isn't a choice pointless.

Although I am not homosexual, I am heterosexual.
That is still an experience related to people who are homosexual.
Because they find their same sex attractive, while I find the opposite sex attractive without ever really choosing it.
Therefore, anyone have your so-call "personal experience."[/quote]

learning that it isn't a choice, that's not pointless.
learning why it isn't a choice by other heterosexual people however, is pointless. because they also don't know.
which is whyyy i said you should just take homosexual people's word for it, and just ask them.

and for the second thing that i quoted, you're right.
the experience is loving someone else. that's it. however, most people don't accept that there isn't a difference.
so accept it and move on. i don't see how getting opinions would help you if you realize that the experience is the same, which is what i've been getting at.
there isn't really a need to talk about it.

[quote=Ztarfish]There's plenty of rational people who believe homosexuality is a choice because there is no opposing theory that has any credibility. Yes most of them are religious nuts, but those religious nuts can promote and expand their ideas to other, less nutty people because they can't be disproved. This is my point: Without knowledge, people are free to come up with any nutjob idea they can come up with, and if they're persuasive enough then they can convince others of the same. And this false knowledge is the most dangerous thing known to man.[/quote]

i do believe that ignorant people are dangerous because other ignorant people believe their ignorance
but i'd say a muuuuch larger majority of those people are religious nuts. so we should be trying to teach our children that it isn't something that you even need to think of as anything or as being different, not explaining to the deadbeats that will be dying within the next 30 years why it's genetically or scientifically not a disorder.

[quote=Mademoiselle]i just don't see how figuring out, genetically speaking for example, why homosexual people are homosexual will cause more acceptance.
and i've heard of that whole left handed thing, but it always sounded ridiculous lolol
though i'm curious to find out if genetic research is what caused that bias to disappear.
i also don't see how a lot of the biases of the past were solved with science.
there have been a lot of civilizations that completely accepted, or even supported homosexual relationships.
i don't think any of that had to do with science, just teaching people that it's just something natural.

that changes by perspectives changing by people who accept that it is what it is.
by accepting that it's just another thing, and that there's no need to explain it or study it with science because...well, there's no need.

alright
so if ever there was a time where people with blue eyes were hated, when did science step in to defeat this bias?

- Is it a choice?
- Can the choice be changed?

i'm sorry, i was just reading your thread.
there doesn't need to be a debate on whether or not it's a choice, because it isn't.
that's what i'm saying.
and learning that it isn't is pointless, because at the end of the day you won't understand it because you don't have personal experience with it.
because this is something that you can't explain without personal experience, and because of which...you should take the word of people who have experience.

simply put.[/quote]

I don't find learning that it isn't a choice pointless.
Because I learned something?
So what makes learning pointless?
And stop telling me that I have to have personal experience in order to understand this topic.
Although I am not homosexual, I am heterosexual.
That is still an experience related to people who are homosexual.
Because they find their same sex attractive, while I find the opposite sex attractive without ever really choosing it.
Therefore, anyone have your so-call "personal experience."

[quote=Mademoiselle]alright
so if ever there was a time where people with blue eyes were hated, when did science step in to defeat this bias?[/quote]

Who said that it ever would? I specifically said that it did not erase ignorance, this is the same with hate.

We do not use science to erase hate or decide morality, science is about learning and knowledge.

That's why we have philosophers in the ethics department and scientist in the labs and in the telescopes and so on. It's two different realms.

[quote=HappyFaces]Edit: Last question for above. So what are the experience you've been talking about in order to discuss anything about this topic? ow0[/quote]

being a homosexual. ahahahah

[quote=Ztarfish]It doesn't cause acceptance, it just takes away fuel from ignorant people. If the actual cause of homosexuality was deduced and it was determined to be inherent at birth and here's why and you can't change it and it was completely scientifically valid, the whole "homosexuality is a choice" camp would completely lose credibility.[/quote]

from what i've always heard, homosexuality was a choice made by sinners and was against god's will, because in the bible it says that homosexuality is a sin.
unless you plan to take the fuel away from the ignorant people and use it to set the bible on fire, i doubt that will change much.

credibility for religious people, or people who use this as an excuse, is non-existent.
and it most cases, someone who attempts to use the whole homosexuality choice thing ends their debate with god.
so...yeppp

I'm going to sleep. Thanks for everything guys.

Edit: Last question for above. So what are the experience you've been talking about in order to discuss anything about this topic? ow0

[quote=Ztarfish]I never said ignorance will be eliminated. No matter what we do as a species there will always been ignorance, prejudice, fear, and hatred. The point is with knowledge you can minimize the impact it has on society.
It's the same as why we want to figure anything out? So that wrong answers that could potentially have a harmful effect on people are eliminated.
Like the idea that left handed people were possessed by the devil, or any amount of ridiculous biases that existed in the past that were actually just harmless natural occurences.[/quote]

i just don't see how figuring out, genetically speaking for example, why homosexual people are homosexual will cause more acceptance.
and i've heard of that whole left handed thing, but it always sounded ridiculous lolol
though i'm curious to find out if genetic research is what caused that bias to disappear.
i also don't see how a lot of the biases of the past were solved with science.
there have been a lot of civilizations that completely accepted, or even supported homosexual relationships.
i don't think any of that had to do with science, just teaching people that it's just something natural.

that changes by perspectives changing by people who accept that it is what it is.
by accepting that it's just another thing, and that there's no need to explain it or study it with science because...well, there's no need.

[quote=ReLaX]Proteins and genetic material is what causes blue eyes, and a hypothesis says the same about homosexuality, therefore it is in the same realm. and didn't say anything about people will stop being ignorant, there will always be ignorance, that doesn't mean that knowledge is a bad thing.

How death works? depends how you define death. Someone considers some people to be dead when the heard stops, yet people have been revived or changed hearts, so I guess they're the new jebus. But generally it's just the body that stops functioning and starts to decompose.[/quote]

alright
so if ever there was a time where people with blue eyes were hated, when did science step in to defeat this bias?

[quote=HappyFaces]In this topic. We are not trying to learn if there is a cure or not for homosexuals. What we are looking for, or our purpose is to discover each other's opinions to agree or not agree upon with. You know, there are times people say a certain things and you agree upon it which influence your own belief. Like right now, I don't agree with you, but it helps me strengthen my own belief. Knowing that, that is not what I believe in. And blah blah blah is my point of view in this topic.[/quote]

- Is it a choice?
- Can the choice be changed?

i'm sorry, i was just reading your thread.
there doesn't need to be a debate on whether or not it's a choice, because it isn't.
that's what i'm saying.
and learning that it isn't is pointless, because at the end of the day you won't understand it because you don't have personal experience with it.
because this is something that you can't explain without personal experience, and because of which...you should take the word of people who have experience.

simply put.

[quote=Ztarfish]You're not understanding.
When we know how things work, it leaves no room for dumbass ideas for how things work to run rampant.
Like the ridiculous idea that sexuality is a choice. It's ridiculous and makes no sense but yet there are a large amount of people who accept it as truth because they have no reason not to believe it.[/quote]

"conversion" stories is what they base it on.

[quote=Mademoiselle]yet again, you've touched on one point of what i've said that i explained in that same post.
also knowing why black people are black didn't really change anything either, seeing as that's also a race, not a sexual orientation.
and as you said, [b]racism is still prevalent.[/b]
so as i've been saying...what difference is figuring any of this out?

because with these sorts of topics, it's definitely not nearly the same as figuring out how proteins or antibiotics and such work.

...actually, no. i think you just completely read wrong what i was saying.

and you're right. basilers tried to theorize when big bang came with little or no evidence. you know what that caused?
nothing positive. if anything, it made people worry more about a [i]game[/i]. which isn't nearly the same thing as what i'm talking about.
and it's related to everyone, but it's not really about anyone other than homosexuals thus far, is it?

i'm not trying to shut you up, all i'm saying is that it's pointless. all you're going to do is cause flaming and debating that at the end of the day, won't change the opinions of people who actually need a change of opinion. human beings are curious, yes.
and now because of our curiosity with how things work, we're freaking out about 2012, destroying all our forests for paper we can write on to 'learn more', drilling the earth for every last bit of oil, and desperately seeking to go to space in hopes to solve our population issues along with our own curiosity with finding faster and easier ways in which to save time SO THAT WE CAN LEARN MORE.

i'm just saying. a lot of things aren't benefited by curiosity, especially when it's something like this.
a cure for AIDS would be wonderful. that's not the same thing as a cure for hatred.[/quote]

In this topic. We are not trying to learn if there is a cure or not for homosexuals. What we are looking for, or our purpose is to discover each other's opinions to agree or not agree upon with. You know, there are times people say a certain things and you agree upon it which influence your own belief. Like right now, I don't agree with you, but it helps me strengthen my own belief. Knowing that, that is not what I believe in. And blah blah blah is my point of view in this topic.

[quote=HappyFaces]Gosh this is so frustrating.
He is basically saying that there is no need for science to figure out where homosexuality comes from because it would not solve anything.
When we seek for knowledge we don't always seek for certain things to be solved.[/quote]
The only thing wrong with homosexuality is the way people react to them.
People are making too big of a deal out of it and bringing unnecessary attention.
It really has nothing to do with anyone else if someone is a homo.
AND the gays are also making a big deal out of it...

If no1 cared that they are gay, then gays wouldnt make a big deal that they are gay, then there would be no problems.
everyone can move on with thier own lives.

Gosh this is so frustrating.
He is basically saying that there is no need for science to figure out where homosexuality comes from because it would not solve anything.
When we seek for knowledge we don't always seek for certain things to be solved.

[quote=Mademoiselle]
fairly easily seeing as both of my examples involve people, not proteins.
as i said, knowing why someone is a homosexual won't stop the ignorant hatred of homosexuals because of [i]religion and traditions.[/i]
science doesn't change ignorance. if anything, at this moment we're just expecting that the intolerance of these sorts of people will pass when those people [b]die[/b].
i don't think that has anything to do with science, unless you'd like to explain how death works.[/quote]

Proteins and genetic material is what causes blue eyes, and a hypothesis says the same about homosexuality, therefore it is in the same realm. and didn't say anything about people will stop being ignorant, there will always be ignorance, that doesn't mean that knowledge is a bad thing.

How death works? depends how you define death. Someone considers some people to be dead when the heard stops, yet people have been revived or changed hearts, so I guess they're the new jebus. But generally it's just the body that stops functioning and starts to decompose.

[quote=Ztarfish]...but people are different. I mean it's not like the knowledge that black people have dark skin as a response to more intense ultraviolet light conditions near the equator sparked up a worldwide effort to move people closer to the poles to eliminate dark skin, yet racism is still prevalent. You're giving the ignorant people who want to change other people more power than they actually have. Most people are educated and most people do not consider homosexuality a disease.
And the number 1 problem with diversity education is the fact that they try to treat people all the same when people are all fundamentally different.[/quote]

yet again, you've touched on one point of what i've said that i explained in that same post.
also knowing why black people are black didn't really change anything either, seeing as that's also a race, not a sexual orientation.
and as you said, [b]racism is still prevalent.[/b]
so as i've been saying...what difference is figuring any of this out?

because with these sorts of topics, it's definitely not nearly the same as figuring out how proteins or antibiotics and such work.

[quote=HappyFaces]So your point is that people who tend to explain certain things in theories are ignorant people?
Well, maybe that is why it is called "theories" because is it not proven yet.
Just like how most Basilers were creating theories about when the actual date Big Bang would come out on GMS with little or no evidence at all.
And your opinion about how people with no experience in this topic should not even express themselves is just too immature.
Again, the topic is related to heterosexuals, homosexuals, and bisexuals.
Not just homosexuals, porfavor.
And whatever happened to freedom of speech?
You can't shut people up just because they never "experienced" it.
And the whole argument about ignorance; ignorance will never go away.
Till the day we find out if there is really such thing as God, cures for HIV/AIDs, or even learn how to live on other planets, we are ALL still full of ignorance.
Because we will never get to know everything in this world.
Never.
And your whole opinion about "there's no need to know, or to try to know things like this" just because we're not so-call "experienced" in your opinion sounds so _______. [Fill in the blank]
We're all human beings.
We're all curious.
We don't need to know or gain any knowledge just for the sake of ever experiencing it.
And we relate to everything.
Even if we're homosexual or not.
Because we all live in the same world.[/quote]

...actually, no. i think you just completely read wrong what i was saying.

and you're right. basilers tried to theorize when big bang came with little or no evidence. you know what that caused?
nothing positive. if anything, it made people worry more about a [i]game[/i]. which isn't nearly the same thing as what i'm talking about.
and it's related to everyone, but it's not really about anyone other than homosexuals thus far, is it?

i'm not trying to shut you up, all i'm saying is that it's pointless. all you're going to do is cause flaming and debating that at the end of the day, won't change the opinions of people who actually need a change of opinion. human beings are curious, yes.
and now because of our curiosity with how things work, we're freaking out about 2012, destroying all our forests for paper we can write on to 'learn more', drilling the earth for every last bit of oil, and desperately seeking to go to space in hopes to solve our population issues along with our own curiosity with finding faster and easier ways in which to save time SO THAT WE CAN LEARN MORE.

i'm just saying. a lot of things aren't benefited by curiosity, especially when it's something like this.
a cure for AIDS would be wonderful. that's not the same thing as a cure for hatred.

[quote=Mademoiselle]ah
so when we've discovered why some people have a preference towards their same sex rather than the opposite sex, ignorance will go away.
because that information won't be, in some way, seen as a form of elitism and later used to possibly 'cure' homosexuality
because idiots haven't already tried to do that with their absolute ignorance as it is [b]already[/b], and not being ignorant and knowing more will help change this.

all i'm saying is, some things can't be explained by a theory. nor can they be explained without experience.
and because of which, there's no need to know, or to try to know things like this. at least that's my opinion.[/quote]

So your point is that people who tend to explain certain things in theories are ignorant people?
Well, maybe that is why it is called "theories" because is it not proven yet.
Just like how most Basilers were creating theories about when the actual date Big Bang would come out on GMS with little or no evidence at all.
And your opinion about how people with no experience in this topic should not even express themselves is just too immature.
Again, the topic is related to heterosexuals, homosexuals, and bisexuals.
Not just homosexuals, porfavor.
And whatever happened to freedom of speech?
You can't shut people up just because they never "experienced" it.
And the whole argument about ignorance; ignorance will never go away.
Till the day we find out if there is really such thing as God, cures for HIV/AIDs, or even learn how to live on other planets, we are ALL still full of ignorance.
Because we will never get to know everything in this world.
Never.
And your whole opinion about "there's no need to know, or to try to know things like this" just because we're not so-call "experienced" in your opinion sounds so _______. [Fill in the blank]
We're all human beings.
We're all curious.
We don't need to know or gain any knowledge just for the sake of ever experiencing it.
And we relate to everything.
Even if we're homosexual or not.
Because we all live in the same world.

It actually has to do with chem and biology.
Sexual desire is triggered by a chemical in your body produced by hormones.
These hormones react to other chemicals created in your body.
These other chemicals are created when you see/smell/thing about something arousing.

Your sexual orientation is purely based on the reactions that happen between these chemicals and your hormones.

[quote=Ztarfish]Um, I'm pretty sure most educated people have stopped considering homosexuality a psychological disorder, thus rendering any need to "cure" it unnecessary and ultimately unethical. So your fears are unfounded.[/quote]

you touched on one point that i stated.
that's not a fear, it just seems like a possibility. as i said, a lot of this hatred stems from traditions and religion.
how on earth would 'scientific education' help?
acceptance to me comes from knowledge about how a person isn't different.
attempting to find out why someone is a homosexual is exemplifying why they [i]are[/i] different.
no good can, or will come from that.
the only good that can come out of anything is simply accepting that it's natural, and accepting that there's no need to theorize it.

i highly doubt that there will be a time where anyone will see homosexuality as something as common as eye color, especially if it's scientifically stated.
i think that eye color has always just been 'that person has that eye color, and who cares'
not 'well, because of the proteins that were formed when they were in the basic growth of their cells, blahablaah'

and your video about the sprinklers was because she thought she was being poisoned or her water supply was tainted AHAHA
i don't see many people reacting the same way with homosexuals. and if they did, they'd probably be asking 'the lawd almighty', not their government.
doesn't really help with that whole science and religion mixin' thing.

[quote=RedWolf]No, you just don't have the motivation to try.[/quote]

Imagine you, a heterosexual human being, trying to become gay.

You can't, because you aren't attracted to men.

It's the same situation when gay men/lesbian women try to become straight, they're attracted to their same gender, as you are attracted to the opposite gender.

[b]They can't help it[/b].

[quote=Ztarfish]absolutely false. the more we know about how the world works, the less ignorance can run rampant, promoting false ideas.[/quote]

ah
so when we've discovered why some people have a preference towards their same sex rather than the opposite sex, ignorance will go away.
because that information won't be, in some way, seen as a form of elitism and later used to possibly 'cure' homosexuality
because idiots haven't already tried to do that with their absolute ignorance as it is [b]already[/b], and not being ignorant and knowing more will help change this.

all i'm saying is, some things can't be explained by a theory. nor can they be explained without experience.
and because of which, there's no need to know, or to try to know things like this. at least that's my opinion.

[quote=ReLaX]How the hell can you compare that?

The point is that knowledge is a good thing and doesn't devaluate any person in any way. We might not be able to use the knowledge currently, but the more knowledge the more possibilities opens up. This is clearly shown by those scientists who does such kind of work.

Johan Olsen, a molecular biologist

Grundforskning
"Johan laver det, man kalder grundforskning. Det vil sige, at han undersøger nogle grundlæggende ting, som ikke nødvendigvis fører til et bestemt resultat eller produkt."

Translated
Ground/basis research
"Johan does, what you call ground research. That means that he research and discover basic things, which doesn't neccecarily result in any kind of product"

Later he writes about how he worked with a protein that he had nothing in mind with, just learned about its structure and such, which he later found out that his research had let to some new antibiotics.[/quote]

fairly easily seeing as both of my examples involve people, not proteins.
as i said, knowing why someone is a homosexual won't stop the ignorant hatred of homosexuals because of [i]religion and traditions.[/i]
science doesn't change ignorance. if anything, at this moment we're just expecting that the intolerance of these sorts of people will pass when those people [b]die[/b].
i don't think that has anything to do with science, unless you'd like to explain how death works.

@Mademoiselle: How the hell can you compare that?

The point is that knowledge is a good thing and doesn't devaluate any person in any way. We might not be able to use the knowledge currently, but the more knowledge the more possibilities opens up. This is clearly shown by those scientists who does such kind of work.

Johan Olsen, a molecular biologist

Grundforskning
"Johan laver det, man kalder grundforskning. Det vil sige, at han undersøger nogle grundlæggende ting, som ikke nødvendigvis fører til et bestemt resultat eller produkt."

Translated
Ground/basis research
"Johan does, what you call ground research. That means that he research and discover basic things, which doesn't neccecarily result in any kind of product"

Later he writes about how he worked with a protein that he had nothing in mind with, just learned about its structure and such, which he later found out that his research had let to some new antibiotics.

[quote=Codykins]I agree with everything else you said except this. As much as there's nothing to prove with the knowledge, there's nothing wrong with the knowledge[/quote]

there's nothing wrong with the actual knowledge, but i see it as...there's no point wasting the time and energy to find this out when you could be changing the perspectives of the idiots around you that dislike homosexual people because they're different.
what's the point of figuring anything out if you can't help people? the knowledge isn't bad, but if anything this will just make people hate homosexual people more.

[quote=ReLaX]Why should we only try to gain knowledge to solve anything? You do know that there is alot of scientists who actually do work, just to gain knowledge, not to use it or anything else.[/quote]

which solves and changes nothing.
what's your point? there are also psychopaths who kill people for fun, or assassins who get paid for it. i'm not endorsing that either.

[quote=Mademoiselle]knowledge for the sake of knowledge doesn't really solve anything though, now does it?[/quote]

Why should we only try to gain knowledge to solve anything? You do know that there is alot of scientists who actually do work, just to gain knowledge, not to use it or anything else.

Homosexuality is perfectly natural and has been proven advantageous to the survival of species. I don't have any sources and I can't remember the specifics, so I may seem like a loon who's just going off crap she made up, but wasn't there a study that showed that family members had better chances at reproducing if one family member was homosexual?

also sexuality is fluid stop being stupid
no one has a single sex they're attracted to
if you do not believe me and think you are exclusively attracted to one sex
well, that's what you think and I can't change your mind with measly words.

[quote=ReLaX]Just because they're humans, doesn't mean we can't figure out what causes homosexuality. I consider blue eyed humans as people, that doesn't mean we cannot study what causes this eye colour. Having a theory regarding aspects of a human, doesn't make it less of a human, it just gives us a better understanding.[/quote]

knowledge for the sake of knowledge doesn't really solve anything though, now does it?

@ above; though your topic will be, and has only really been about homosexual people.
and since that's going to be the center of this topic, your thread should be only asking people who know what they're talking about
and it shouldn't anyone who decides to refute or attempt to explain things that these people have already explained.

i don't know why saying 'it's not a choice' for some reason needs to be debated.
you're not homosexual, so unless you somehow have an epiphany or have always been gay but in the closet, you're just going to have to take our word for it.
it's not something that needs to be debated, and you shouldn't need anyone else's point of view. if that makes any sense.
it's not offensive to me really.

[quote=Mademoiselle]because science, pseudo-intelligence, and ignorance can't, and will not give you the answers you're looking for.
simply put, you'll never understand why. eventually you'll establish some sort of...i don't know, 'theory'
because apparently homosexuals aren't human, and they need to be theorized
but since you're not a homosexual, i don't see why this holds any relevance to you, and i especially don't see why you would need to talk about it.[/quote]

Because I'm curious.
And because I don't want to be a narrow-minded person.
I'm sorry if it offends you in any sort of way just because I want talk about a topic that is somewhat related to homosexuals.
Because the question of this topic is asking for people's point of view of people's preferred sexuality.
Which can refer to heterosexuals, homosexuals and bisexuals.

[quote=Mademoiselle]because science, pseudo-intelligence, and ignorance can't, and will not give you the answers you're looking for.
simply put, you'll never understand why. eventually you'll establish some sort of...i don't know, 'theory'
because apparently homosexuals aren't human, and they need to be theorized
but since you're not a homosexual, i don't see why this holds any relevance to you, and i especially don't see why you would need to talk about it.[/quote]

Just because they're humans, doesn't mean we can't figure out what causes homosexuality. I consider blue eyed humans as people, that doesn't mean we cannot study what causes this eye colour. Having a theory regarding aspects of a human, doesn't make it less of a human, it just gives us a better understanding.

[quote=HappyFaces]Why can't [i]anyone[/i] talk about this topic?[/quote]

because science, pseudo-intelligence, and ignorance can't, and will not give you the answers you're looking for.
simply put, you'll never understand why. eventually you'll establish some sort of...i don't know, 'theory'
because apparently homosexuals aren't human, and they need to be theorized
but since you're not a homosexual, i don't see why this holds any relevance to you, and i especially don't see why you would need to talk about it.

[quote=Mademoiselle]why are people who aren't homosexual attempting to talk about this topic
i never understand why people who have no actual experience, personal or otherwise, attempt to analyze things they don't understand and [b]never[/b] will.
if you think homosexuality is unnatural, look at all of the animals that develop homosexual relationships. doesn't seem very unnatural to me.[/quote]

Why can't [i]anyone[/i] talk about this topic?

[quote=RedWolf]I'm fairly convinced that if you never show it or embrace it in your mind, or fantasize or act upon it, there is no trace to the world outside.
Yes, heterosexuality is right. What is natural? If homosexuality was natural, then why didn't evolution continue with myosis with the same sex?

Or, you could also say that the original was Adam and Eve. But of course, atheists never listen to this.[/quote]

Do you think animals embrace it in their minds, or fantasize it?

Because there is restraints within what changes can happen. But that doesn't mean that homosexuality isn't beneficial in anyway.

@Codykins: well with the nurture aspect, i feel like it's something that is socialized earlier in life or at least subconsciously. so it wouldn't be very easy to notice or reverse, hence the lack of success of ex-gay.

why are people who aren't homosexual attempting to talk about this topic
i never understand why people who have no actual experience, personal or otherwise, attempt to analyze things they don't understand and [b]never[/b] will.
if you think homosexuality is unnatural, look at all of the animals that develop homosexual relationships. doesn't seem very unnatural to me.

[quote=RedWolf]Above: It also mean that you are trying to get people to recognize it as another branch, not a deviancy.[/quote]

which it is. human sexuality doesn't have just one facet.

[quote=Ztarfish]it was a joke. The fact is that love is a concept, not a claim and therefore needs no logic to rationalize.
If your claim was, say love does not exist, you could use logic to rationalize it, but you cannot rationalize concepts, that's nonsensical.[/quote]

Concept: Pointers in C++

Logic: A sign "pointing" to a memory address. Rationalize it to the human mind by using a simile.

Above: It also mean that you are trying to get people to recognize it as another branch, not a deviancy.

[quote=RedWolf]I'm fairly convinced that if you never show it or embrace it in your mind, or fantasize or act upon it, there is no trace to the world outside.
Yes, heterosexuality is right. What is natural? If homosexuality was natural, then why didn't evolution continue with myosis with the same sex?

Or, you could also say that the original was Adam and Eve. But of course, atheists never listen to this.[/quote]

it's plenty natural to assume that homosexuality developed as a counterbalance to overpopulation. thus it serves a perfectly natural purpose.
just because people are gay doesn't mean we're trying to justify homosexuality OVER heterosexuality as the one true way. it's just a different branch of human sexuality.

[quote=Ztarfish]Explain how you know how death feels. And the dictionary does a good enough job explaining love. Those require no logic. Once again you fail to grasp the concept of what logic actually is.[/quote]

I think everyone have their own definition of a certain topic, such as love.

I'm fairly convinced that if you never show it or embrace it in your mind, or fantasize or act upon it, there is no trace to the world outside.
Yes, heterosexuality is right. What is natural? If homosexuality was natural, then why didn't evolution continue with myosis with the same sex?

Or, you could also say that the original was Adam and Eve. But of course, atheists never listen to this.

Logic: C++ programing requires a high use of logic.

#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

unsigned int cNo = -1;
signed int end = 1;
unsigned int endRestart = 0;

int restart ()
{ cout << "Would you like to restart?1. Yes0. No." << endl;
cin >> end;
if (end == 0)
return 0;
}

int endGame ()
{ cout << "The true point of this program was to be a test program to test the author's text-based programming skills." << endl;
cout << "It is simply a short game. The program will now restart." << endl;
cin >> cNo;
}

int main()
{ cout << "Welcome to the program: Save the Princess!. Play the game. Made by Thsotus Games." << endl;
while (end == 1) {

cout << "Hello. There are two roads. You must save a princess. Will you go to the cave or to the castle?" << endl;
cout << "Please enter 1 or 0 for the selection you would like to make." << endl;
cout << "1. The castle.0. The cave." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
{
cout << "You have been eaten by a dragon in the cave." << endl;
restart();
}

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "Congratulations! You have saved the princess and won the game!" << endl;
cout << "1. And what else?0. Okay, I'm quitting." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
restart();

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "Erm... Well... That's the end of the game." << endl;
cout << "1. But the program hasn't ended yet!0. Oh, okay." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
restart();

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "So what?" << endl;
cout << "1. So the game isn't over yet!0. Wait, never mind." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
restart();

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "But you rescued the princess already! Isn't that enough for you?" << endl;
cout << "1. No!0. Actually, yes." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
restart();

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "Why not?" << endl;
cout << "1. Because it was boring!0. J-just never mind." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
restart();

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "Well, I'm sorry, because there is no more of the game." << endl;
cout << "1. Then what is this?0. Well, then I quit!" << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
restart();

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "This is the game." << endl;
cout << "1. Then this IS the game.0. I'm leaving." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 0)
restart();

else if (cNo == 1)
{
cout << "This is barely a game. It's about this conversation which has only one way to go forward." << endl;
cout << "2. Wait, so the game isn't about the princess?1. So what's the purpose of this program?0. Bye." << endl;
cin >> cNo;

if (cNo == 2 || 1)
{
if (cNo == 2)
{
endRestart++;
if (endRestart >= 2)
{
endGame();
}
}

else if (cNo == 1)
{
endRestart++;
if (endRestart >=2)
{
endGame();
}
}

if (cNo == 0)
restart();
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}

return 0;

}

I'm fairly convinced that it is not a choice.

@RedWolf: i'm just saying, if a child somehow picks it up it would be just as hard to change it considering they are oblivious to the sexual aspects of life. you'd have to rush them into that and at that point you'd be forcing heterosexuality upon them too (is that really right?).

could care less about the rest of that stuff.

[quote=TheElemental]@Redwolf : you couldnt be more wrong. Its not a choice, you cant "turn" someone gay and you cant change your sexual orientation. We are who we are and trying to "stamp" these things into one form or another is simply impossible.[/quote]

No, you just don't have the motivation to try.

[quote=RedWolf]No, it starts from early age, to who you focus on in movies, to what movies you watch, and to what you do and what is encouraged.
In later life, things take shape. Things are set in, and only life-shaking events will change it.

Accepting it isn't the answer. There is a reason why. God is mine, and God is the only reason why.

God affects so much in life. So much can be saved and lost depending on what you choose.[/quote]

You sorta killed any reasoning at the god part.
I may believe in god, but I also believe in logic.

[quote=HolyMythos]If top scientists can't figure it out then I'm pretty sure that no one on Basil knows.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PooEhBxh0NY]BTW[/url][/quote]

I'm not asking for an answer.
I'm just asking for people's point of view.
Because I want to establish my own.
But before leaning toward my own belief, I want to know what are some other beliefs out there.

[quote=Ztarfish]You seem awfully certain for someone who can't rationalize their beliefs with actual logic.[/quote]

Really?
Explain the empty feeling when death happens? Explain love.
Then ask if these things are explainable through logic.