Sexuality is Not a Choice

[DeletedUser16008]

There is not two meanings, look at the definition again. And this time, do a search and pick a reputable dictionary sites instead of whatever fly by night piece you can find that that shows what you want it to. You can't substitute the definition of something with whatever suits your fancy then claim it is proof that it is not a choice. Otherwise it would be just as valid for flat earthers to claim flat means circular therefore the earth is actually flat.

and who cares about whether genetics plays a role in it or not. Even if gays are gentic mutations or freaks of nature designed to not reproduce or destined to remove their genes from the Human Gene Pool in some natural selective Darwinistic suicide ritual, they are still people. I find it somewhat offensive stating that gays are genetic freaks that nature destined to kill off from the gene pool.

but hey, by all means do not reproduce and spare us the insanity of dealing with the offspring who will no doubtfully be just as ridiculous.

Utter rubbish, This is getting ridiculous, to argue this topic by saying oo look in a dictionary what a word means like choice does not define if you are gay or not.

Of course it matters if genetics play a role or not because then it would make Choice irrelevant and thats the problem you have with the whole thing, you can't handle the fact its biological rather than mental.

Talking of using the word choice is all about accountability in the eyes of the church and god nothing else..... if its simply a concious choice then the bible brigade can persecute away, point the finger and say look... hes going to burn in hell as he made a choice to break gods law ... he has sinned.... blah blah 5000 hail marys etc.

If you are born the way you are and part of it is your sexual preference then god is out of the picture because he would not condone giving life to that which in the book he is supposed to reject ..... same old double talk the god squad uses to try and hold back real understanding and acceptance of the diversity of humanity.

To belittle the topic and reduce it to lawyer double talk is childish. Also comments such as I find it somewhat offensive stating that gays are genetic freaks that nature destined to kill off from the gene pool. is suggesting being in the gay community is abnormal in some way..IT IS NOT.... genetics are what they are, no one here has used the word freak or mutation apart from you but thanks for sharing how you see it.

There are many genetic combinations, it is what makes us humans diverse and there is nothing wrong with being gay least of all a freak of nature anymore than someone with blue eyes is a freak it is just a pigment gene difference. Like it or not genes have a lot to do with who and what you are. I know its not convenient to bible bashers but there it is.

This is simply nature at work not god and is perfectly normal.

you obviously have no understanding of genetics or genes and how they work so let me help you for a basic starting point.http://kidshealth.org/kid/talk/qa/what_is_gene.html

He did say homosexuality is a choice, then I 100% agree with what Willypete said.
When you only become a homosexual, hetrosexual or bisexual after sex, that is a choice so to be a homosexual you must have had sex and condoned it, making it a choice.

And sexuality is also about having sex (it is one word that describes 3 stages), not just the mental or physical side.
I totally agree with Sumdumass.

It is a word that can describe any of the "stages" as you put it

You do not need to have sex to be gay or straight. In fact there are many virgins all over the world of all ages, some die a virgin and there are others that do not engage in sex at all. What do you call them if sex has to be practised before you define your sexuality ?? undecided ?? no of course not, it would be based on their personal feelings not a sexual act. Most would already know their inner feelings and emotions and would care not a fig for looking in the dictionary. Ask any virgin teenager what they consider their sexuality to be and ill bet 90% will already know, they sure won't need to have had sex to decide who they are or how they feel.

Oh one more thing, Be very careful of people that always go on about specific meanings they are usually trying to spin something as there isnt any other way left to do it.A dictionary is not a place of research or facts it is just a place where people have determined the current meaning of a word... words can and are frequently used to try and spin an argument when all other options or available facts are missing and used as double talk all the time... it is seen best in lawyer BS on terms of conditions etc and can trap you in a court ... it dosnt mean the words used are accurate rather they are often just there to confuse people and worm out of a situation or responsibility when theres a problem... thats why your always told to read the small print very carefully... sumdum is doing precisely that. You will also notice he never answers a point with a solid factual counter but will doubletalk and detract from the point or spirit of the topic to suit. A clear sign of no substance and typical courtroom bs.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

Utter rubbish, This is getting ridiculous, to argue this topic by saying oo look in a dictionary what a word means like choice does not define if you are gay or not.

You are right it is rubbish. It is because the question begged the controversy. Is a choice a choice is the question with a bunch of forum trolls rushing in to pounce on anyone who stated the obvious yes. They either wanted to manufacture a controversy in which they could somehow claim a moral high ground or somehow think this tactic of redefining everything and forcing it on people will somehow make homosexuality more accepted or something. At least that's how I see it and I would think that a normal person halfway intelligent would read it and probably leave wishing "they would just go back into the closet". And yes, that is what my Gay Neighbor said when I asked him to look over the posts.

Of course it matters if genetics play a role or not because then it would make Choice irrelevant and thats the problem you have with the whole thing, you can't handle the fact its biological rather than mental.

There is little to no evidence outside of wishful thinking that being gay is biological, but rather to the question presented in this thread it is pure choice. Sexuality and homosexuality is all about the sex and if there is not choice to sex, it becomes difficult to expect other sexual conduct to be illegal or not participated in (bestiality, pederasty, rape, public displays of sexual gratification with or without a partner, and so on). If you are talking about sexual preference or orientation, then create a thread that legitimately explores those concepts and don't use personal definitions not supported by the vast library of reference material available to the rest of us in an attempt to indoctrinate others into acceptance or chastise them for not following the blind pony.

Talking of using the word choice is all about accountability in the eyes of the church and god nothing else..... if its simply a concious choice then the bible brigade can persecute away, point the finger and say look... hes going to burn in hell as he made a choice to break gods law ... he has sinned.... blah blah 5000 hail marys etc.

So your objection is that choice is even mentioned surrounding anything gay because you fear it will lead to you not being allowed to continue being gay. But I have not brought the bible or religion up at all and in fact only used a dictionary to support my assertions.

If you are born the way you are and part of it is your sexual preference then god is out of the picture because he would not condone giving life to that which in the book he is supposed to reject ..... same old double talk the god squad uses to try and hold back real understanding and acceptance of the diversity of humanity.

Again, where have I brought this up? I know you are not stupid, so please limit your comments to what i have actually said and not what you imagine I am thinking.

To belittle the topic and reduce it to lawyer double talk is childish. Also comments such as I find it somewhat offensive stating that gays are genetic freaks that nature destined to kill off from the gene pool. is suggesting being in the gay community is abnormal in some way..IT IS NOT.... genetics are what they are, no one here has used the word freak or mutation apart from you but thanks for sharing how you see it.

Which way do you want it. I pointed out that people were intermingling definitions of words and to that end, you would never get a resolve to anything. Sexuality is a choice because by definition it involves sex.

And yes, it would make it abnormal according to our biological understanding of evolution. You cannot take it both ways and claim something is different in people as the cause of their desires to not reproduce because they are attracted to the same sex then turn around and say the different is normal. Again, grab a dictionary and look it up.

There are many genetic combinations, it is what makes us humans diverse and there is nothing wrong with being gay least of all a freak of nature anymore than someone with blue eyes is a freak it is just a pigment gene difference. Like it or not genes have a lot to do with who and what you are. I know its not convenient to bible bashers but there it is.

This is simply nature at work not god and is perfectly normal.

You are right, it is normal in evolution to discard undesirable changes to species by causing the population with those changes to not reproduce and pass them along. This is even called natural selection in most circles. The part about nature trying to kill off the mutations by creating a mechanism that stops you from reproducing (if you follow the urge and are only homosexual) is where the freak comes into play though.

That is of course if it is genetics and not other factors. I have not seen any proof that it is genetics. I've seen studies that claim it has to be but did not pinpoint a single mechanism causing it, I've seen research where they can turn female mice bisexual (to some extent) by manipulating a gene, but there seems to be some problems recreating the results reliably. In short, I've seen a lot of people trying to prove it is genetic and concluding it has to be, but none of them and shown it to be genetic.

It is probably for the better that it hasn't been proven genetic mechanism yet or we could permanently end the gay debate by testing and aborting fetuses showing the trait. Well, that would work for all but those religious nutters who think abortion is murder and would refuse to have them. But all the science smart guys could reject all their offspring with the gay gene just like they would the cancer gene and so on.

 

[DeletedUser]

So when "lesser" animals engage in homosexuality, are they making a choice?

1,500 animal species practice homosexuality

Homosexuality is quite common in the animal kingdom, especially among herding animals. Many animals solve conflicts by practicing same gender sex.

From the middle of October until next summer the Norwegian Natural History Museum of the University of Oslo will host the first exhibition that focuses on homosexuality in the animal kingdom.

"One fundamental premise in social debates has been that homosexuality is unnatural. This premise is wrong. Homosexuality is both common and highly essential in the lives of a number of species," explains Petter Boeckman, who is the academic advisor for the "Against Nature's Order?" exhibition.

 

[DeletedUser]

A woman doesn't choose to be female, a man doesn't choose to be male, and a black man doesn't choose to be a dark-skinned phenotype. Heteros do not choose to be hetero, homosexuals do not choose to be gay/lesbian, and hermaphrodites do not choose to have both x & y chromosomes. Whether it is subtle or obvious, all of the information previously presented amply demonstrates it is not "choice."

Ignorance is no excuse for claiming choice, particularly when information has repeatedly been presented to remove the misnomer of "choice."

 

[DeletedUser30834]

So when "lesser" animals engage in homosexuality, are they making a choice?

Lesser animals rape each other, kill the offspring to make females mate sooner, molest their children and do a lot of other things. Are you saying it is not a choice?

Yes it is a choice. Although lesser animals might be operating more from instinct making the degree of choice less then what would be expected of a human. Some animals use homosexuality as a form of dominance (sort of like in prison when someone makes you their ). But it is most likely invalid to use animals other then humans to dictate how natural an action is and how it should be accepted in human society. Like I started off, animals do a lot of other things we find unacceptable for humans to do. If it is not a choice, then it becomes difficult to expect the pedophile to leave kids alone or to not go to the public swimming pool and wank off in the shallow end. It becomes difficult to expect the rapist to not rape.

The most intelligent animals have a mental capacity comparable to a 5 year old human. If an animal makes choices, it will be along the lines of that.

A woman doesn't choose to be female, a man doesn't choose to be male, and a black man doesn't choose to be a dark-skinned phenotype. Heteros do not choose to be hetero, homosexuals do not choose to be gay/lesbian, and hermaphrodites do not choose to have both x & y chromosomes. Whether it is subtle or obvious, all of the information previously presented amply demonstrates it is not "choice."

Ignorance is no excuse for claiming choice, particularly when information has repeatedly been presented to remove the misnomer of "choice."

being born and having sex are two distinctly different concepts. They are in fact so different, i figured even you wouldn't try to connect the two. Sexuality and homosexuality is a choice by definition. If it wasn't a choice, you could not choose to have or refrain from having sex with that harry backed HIV infected guy on the beach. But since you can choose who to have sex with or who not to have sex with, then the process of having sex, attempting to have sex, or already had the sex (sexuality and homosexuality) is a choice plain and simple.

 

[DeletedUser]

being born and having sex are two distinctly different concepts. They are in fact so different, i figured even you wouldn't try to connect the two. Sexuality and homosexuality is a choice by definition. If it wasn't a choice, you could not choose to have or refrain from having sex with that harry backed HIV infected guy on the beach. But since you can choose who to have sex with or who not to have sex with, then the process of having sex, attempting to have sex, or already had the sex (sexuality and homosexuality) is a choice plain and simple.

You are incorrect. Performing the act of sexual intercourse is separate from sexuality and you are attempting to blur the lines on this in an effort to win an argument as opposed to dealing with facts and evidence. In other words, you're being dishonest in your arguments because you have no facts or evidence to support your erroneous stance.

As previously indicated, one can be aroused or attracted to a person of the same or opposite gender, which is not a choice but due to a genetic and chromosomal differentiation. While you can be sexually stimulated by anyone and/or anything, irrelevant to your chromosomal/genetic build, this is not a discussion about your jeans rubbing against your organ, resulting in an erection. Attempting to transpose one for the other is deceptive and attempting to exploit the readers' confusion. It is not a choice to be hetero or homo. You are born that way and the act, or causal stimulant, does not define the gender.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

You are incorrect. Performing the act of sexual intercourse is separate from sexuality and you are attempting to blur the lines on this in an effort to win an argument as opposed to dealing with facts and evidence. In other words, you're being dishonest in your arguments because you have no facts or evidence to support your erroneous stance.

It's you who are incorrect. And I'm pretty sure you know it.

And what do I win with this argument? hmm, lets see, the question gets resubmitted using correct and non loaded terms... So I guess if I win, everyone does unless they are using this confusion as an attempt to troll like I think you and some others are doing.

As previously indicated, one can be aroused or attracted to a person of the same or opposite gender, which is not a choice but due to a genetic and chromosomal differentiation. While you can be sexually stimulated by anyone and/or anything, irrelevant to your chromosomal/genetic build, this is not a discussion about your jeans rubbing against your organ, resulting in an erection. Attempting to transpose one for the other is deceptive and attempting to exploit the readers' confusion. It is not a choice to be hetero or homo. You are born that way and the act, or causal stimulant, does not define the gender.

No, it is not. Absolutely no scientific evidence has shown any direct connection between homosexuality and genetic builds. There is evidence that we will likely find something, but nothing showing it exists. But you are talking about sexual preference and orientation now, not sexuality or homosexuality which is defined as pertaining to sex. And it is a choice to engage in sex or attempt to engage in it. Sexual orientation and preference may not be a choice, I never said that was, but the very difference between a heterosexual and homosexual is an act of sex.

Spend some time with a dictionary and then pose a proper question on this subject that doesn't invite confusion and conflict just to satisfy your trolling needs.

 

[DeletedUser]

The most intelligent animals have a mental capacity comparable to a 5 year old human. If an animal makes choices, it will be along the lines of that.

So the 62 species of insects listed here have the intelligence of a 5 y.o. version of a species of animal made in God's image?

 

[DeletedUser]

So I guess if I win, everyone does unless they are using this confusion as an attempt to troll like I think you and some others are doing.

Your error is in assuming this is about winning/losing, which it is not. It's about presenting facts and evidence to remove ignorance and counter bigotry.

You trying to "win" has demonstrated just how callous you are in this issue.

No, it is not. Absolutely no scientific evidence has shown any direct connection between homosexuality and genetic builds.

Once again, ignoring the evidence already presented. Reread the original post in this thread, chase the links provided. What is it with you and lying anyway?

 

[DeletedUser30834]

So the 62 species of insects listed here have the intelligence of a 5 y.o. version of a species of animal made in God's image?

why would you think that? I certainly never said anything like that. Obviously, all 62 species of insects displaying homosexuality can't be the most intelligent animals. Do you have a comprehension problem or something? Or did you think you could offend me by throwing the God's image comment in there. Perhaps you were trying to compare gays with insects? Sounds pretty lame to me.

Your error is in assuming this is about winning/losing, which it is not. It's about presenting facts and evidence to remove ignorance and counter bigotry.

actually, the error is yours. you are the one who inserted winning/losing into this. You are the one insisting that we ignore the definition of a word so you can troll a forum and create disdain strengthening bigotry. All I have said is that according to the definition of the word sexuality and homosexuality, there has to be a choice because it is about sex. I even suggested more appropriate terms to use if you were serious about it, but you are still trying to argue something that can be disproved with a simple dictionary look up.

You might also want to look up the word bigotry too. you are using it incorrectly as well.

Once again, ignoring the evidence already presented. Reread the original post in this thread, chase the links provided. What is it with you and lying anyway?

There has been no evidence presented showing any direct connection between homosexuality and genetic mAkeup. There have been opinions on the matter and opinions on the evidences we have available, but that isn't proof of a connection any more then claiming god made them gay to remind the rest of us to brush our teeth. As usual, you are overstating the research in an attempt to make it say what you want it to say. There simply is no evidence showing a direct connection between the two within the scientific community. So please stop lying.

 

[DeletedUser]

You are the one insisting that we ignore the definition of a word so you can troll a forum and create disdain strengthening bigotry.

Nope, the definition of said words were already presented and you ignored that which was presented. Once again you are attempting to avoid discussing the topic and instead attempting to derail the discussion by arguing definitions. A false argument.

Anyway, let's address this directly, instead of having you gameplay with various dictionary definitions (picking and choosing whichever you wish to accommodate your arguments whilst ignoring the ones that disagree with your stances). In society, psychology, and modern application of sexuality, it is as presented here <Sex & Sexuality>. Included is an excerpt:

What do you know about sex? What do you know about sexuality? We hear about sex and sexuality almost every day, but much of what we hear is inaccurate and can be confusing. A basic understanding of sex and sexuality can help us sort out myth from fact and help us all enjoy our lives more.
We are all sexual. We are sexual from the day we are born until the day we die. Our sexuality affects who we are and how we express ourselves as sexual beings.
Our sexuality includes:

• our bodies, including our sexual and reproductive anatomy
• our biological sex — male, female, or intersex
• our gender — being a girl, boy, woman, man, or transgender
• our gender identities — our comfort with and feelings about our gender
• our sexual orientations — straight, lesbian, gay, bisexual
• our sex drives
• our sexual identity — the way we feel about our sex, gender, and sexual orientation

The ways we experience and express our sexuality include:

• our body image — how we feel about our bodies
• our desires, thoughts, fantasies, sexual pleasure, sexual preferences, and sexual dysfunction
• our values, attitudes, beliefs, and ideals about life, love, and sexual relationships
• our sexual behaviors — the ways we have sex including masturbation

​

The professional position presented by the American Psychoanalytic Association (APSA) is as follows:

• As with any societal prejudice, anti-homosexual bias negatively affects mental health, contributing to an enduring sense of stigma and pervasive self-criticism in people of same-gender sexual orientation through the internalization of such prejudice.
• As in all psychoanalytic treatments, the goal of analysis with homosexual patients is understanding. Psychoanalytic technique does not encompass purposeful efforts to "convert" or "repair" an individual's sexual orientation. Such directed efforts are against fundamental principles of psychoanalytic treatment and often result in substantial psychological pain by reinforcing damaging internalized homophobic attitudes.

​

According to the University of California, Santa Barbara, sexuality refers the way someone is sexually attracted to another person, whether it is to the opposite sex (heterosexuality), to the same sex (homosexuality), to either sex (bisexuality), to all gender identities (pansexuality), or not being attracted to anyone in a sexual manner (asexuality).

According to the modern slang use of "human sexuality," it is referred to as, "the ways in which people experience and express themselves as sexual beings; the awareness of themselves as males or females; the capacity they have for erotic experiences and responses." Note that it does not exclusively refer to the act of sexual intercourse, instead referring to capacity, identity, and expression.

Sexuality, whether defined professionally or in modern slang, clearly does not corroborate with your definition. It addresses evolutionary, biological, psychiological, psychological, sociocultural, and behavioral aspects. So, put away your Playboy magazines, debate what is on the table and stop weaseling about with word games.

There has been no evidence presented showing any direct connection between homosexuality and genetic mAkeup. There have been opinions on the matter and opinions on the evidences we have available, but that isn't proof of a connection any more then claiming god made them gay to remind the rest of us to brush our teeth. As usual, you are overstating the research in an attempt to make it say what you want it to say. There simply is no evidence showing a direct connection between the two within the scientific community. So please stop lying.

I can't friggin' believe you're going to try that "gay gene" argument. How incredibly desperate and deceptive. This "gay gene" argument is based on a study made in 1993 (19 years ago!) by Dean Hamer and ignores all research since.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

Nope, the definition of said words were already presented and you ignored that which was presented. Once again you are attempting to avoid discussing the topic and instead attempting to derail the discussion by arguing definitions. A false argument.

The definition of said words are as the dictionary define them, not as you or other agenda driven organizations want them to be.


Sexuality:

noun 1. sexual character; possession of the structural and functional traits of sex.

2. recognition of or emphasis upon sexual matters.

3. involvement in sexual activity.

4. an organism's preparedness for engaging in sexual activity.

Here is one from the Websters medical dictionary
Definition of SEXUALITY

: the quality or state of being sexual: a : the condition of having sex b : sexual activity c : expression of sexual receptivity or interest especially when excessive

hmm.. Both definitions say the same thing and refer us to sexual. Let's see what the definition of sexual says..

Sexual:
adjective 1. of, pertaining to, or for sex: sexual matters; sexual aids.

2. occurring between or involving the sexes: sexual relations.

3. having sexual organs or reproducing by processes involving both sexes.

and again from the websters medical dictionary
sexual:
1: of, relating to, or associated with sex or the sexes <sexual differentiation> <sexual conflict>

2: having or involving sex <sexual reproduction>

Again, you are wrong.

According to the University of California, Santa Barbara, sexuality refers the way someone is sexually attracted to another person, whether it is to the opposite sex (heterosexuality), to the same sex (homosexuality), to either sex (bisexuality), to all gender identities (pansexuality), or not being attracted to anyone in a sexual manner (asexuality).

As I said, according to the dictionary... Not everyone has went to the University of California, Santa Barbara to get this specialized definition that is counter to what the dictionaries say. So lets stick with what everyone has access to.

I know it will be difficult for you because your intent is to maintain confusion in order to perpetuate your trolling. I mean you know that I'm only trying to make it clear to everyone reading and yet here you are attempting to pull arbitrary definitions from sources not even a dictionary and claim they are the definition instead of what is in all the dictionaries everyone else has access to.

It is also interesting that you are now using the term "human sexuality" as if it is interchangeable with "sexuality". You will find they are not the same.

Sexuality, whether defined professionally or in modern slang, clearly does not corroborate with your definition. It addresses evolutionary, biological, psychiological, psychological, sociocultural, and behavioral aspects. So, put away your Playboy magazines, debate what is on the table and stop weaseling about with word games.

Look dude, I'm not the one sitting here trying to say that almost all the dictionaries in the world is wrong in order to create a definition you want just so you can troll some more. Sexuality as defined by the dictionary is a choice. There are plenty of other words that can be used that expresses what you want sexuality to mean. I suggest using them instead of insisting on things not supported by the dictionary.

I can't friggin' believe you're going to try that "gay gene" argument. How incredibly desperate and deceptive. This "gay gene" argument is based on a study made in 1993 (19 years ago!) by Dean Hamer and ignores all research since.

lol.. You mean the gay gene argument you made and I replied to? Are you really that deranged to attempt to turn this against me now..

As previously indicated, one can be aroused or attracted to a person of the same or opposite gender, which is not a choice but due to a genetic and chromosomal differentiation. While you can be sexually stimulated by anyone and/or anything, irrelevant to your chromosomal/genetic build,

Or do you troll with so many different approaches you forgot you wrote that? Either way, no genetic mechanism has been identified that causes people to be gay. There is speculation that there will be and opinions about it, but nothing presented by you or the scientific community to date has shown any specific link in humans. BTW, when you brought it up, I thought you were talking about the FucM link in female mice that is having problems being recreated in other labs and has not been correlated with humans yet either.

 

[DeletedUser]

....... But all the science smart guys could reject all their offspring with the gay gene just like they would the cancer gene and so on.

You are not well. Get help.
Victor, HS and I normally fight like cats and dogs, but on this one you have brought us all into complete agreement.
(And you have a gay neighbour who actually speaks to you? That guy must be a saint.)

 

[DeletedUser30834]

(And you have a gay neighbour who actually speaks to you? That guy must be a saint.)

Why would you think that? Not all gay people are disturbed internet forum trolls focusing more on what they want to think was said rather then what has actually been said. Not all gay people get insanely upset and frothing at the mouth over the concept of being gay being a choice. And for some, it is completely a choice- take Cynthia Nixon for example. Of course she has publicly spoken against the "it's not a choice bigots" within the gay community when they tried to force her to remove remarks about her choice.

I'm not intolerant of gays, I'm intolorant of people claiming it has to be one way- their way regardless of what the facts are as so many people presented in this and other threads in this forum. I'm intolorant of people using vague definitions of words in order to invite controversy for their own trolling amusment. I'm intolerant of the religion bashing based around personal phobias as this forum seems to be concentrating on.

 

[DeletedUser]

The problem with using the dictionary definition is that the meaning of a word can change over time. The oldest dictionary I still have is from 1864, and many words have been added or changed since it was written.

Homosexual and lesbian are not in it.
Sexuality means the quality or state of being sexual, the condition of having sex, sexual activity, expression of sexual interest
Gay means merry, exuberant or bright in color.
Queer means counterfeit, suspicious, mildly insane, or obsessed.
Car means a 2 wheeled vehicle, usually pulled by one horse...

You really can't go with a dictionary definition of a word that is almost always used in a different way today. The original meanings may still fit in some cases, but many times (if not most) the word is used to describe something else.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

On the same note, dictionary references are there for a reason, to make communications understandable across the board. In modern times, you really need to use a dictionary from modern times. However, the changes recorded or omitted as you noted is helpful when trying to understand the definitions used at the time of a communication. This is helpful in attempting to understand the entire communication as it was meant to be understood.

This is why using words defined by the dictionary properly is important. If in 100 years, someone attempts to read this message board or perhaps your private journal after you became rich and famous and dead, they will understand your communications to what the dictionary at the times of the writing meant. So if you are talking about sexuality as in sexual orientation, and the definition is different down the road, they will look back and find that you focused a lot on having sex because the definition does not support sexual preference.

Lets explore this concept some more, suppose you great grandfather was instrumental in discovering some major crime and the apprehension of the criminals because he observed and reported queer men participating in queer acts in or about 1918. Lets suppose that it was recorded in that way. Now, 100 years later, would he have been watching homosexual men doing homosexual things or suspicious men doing suspicious things? Well, if we pull up your dictionary from 50 years before, we would know it is suspicious men doing suspicious things.

Fast forward to today. Suppose it is you who reported the suspicious people doing the suspicious behavior and used the term suspicious. Are you reporting something out of the ordinary or using the slang definition of a nun doing pushups in a cucumber field? Well, in 100 years, they will look at the dictionary definition at the time and know it was something out of the ordinary.

This communication is especially important when holding conversations about something being a choice or not when the primary understood definition is a choice. It is asking if a choice is a choice then claiming it is not and everyone is wrong because the definition which isn't supported or recorded by a modern dictionary is being used. Do you see the logic problem there? It is not a legitimate debate, just an excuse to troll.

 

[DeletedUser]

Why would you think that? Not all gay people are disturbed internet forum trolls focusing more on what they want to think was said rather then what has actually been said. Not all gay people get insanely upset and frothing at the mouth over the concept of being gay being a choice .

That's not what I said and you know it, you little twister, but troll away to your heart's content if that's what gets you through the day.

 

[DeletedUser]

On the same note, dictionary references are there for a reason, to make communications understandable across the board. In modern times, you really need to use a dictionary from modern times. However, the changes recorded or omitted as you noted is helpful when trying to understand the definitions used at the time of a communication. This is helpful in attempting to understand the entire communication as it was meant to be understood.

This is why using words defined by the dictionary properly is important. If in 100 years, someone attempts to read this message board or perhaps your private journal after you became rich and famous and dead, they will understand your communications to what the dictionary at the times of the writing meant. So if you are talking about sexuality as in sexual orientation, and the definition is different down the road, they will look back and find that you focused a lot on having sex because the definition does not support sexual preference.

Lets explore this concept some more, suppose you great grandfather was instrumental in discovering some major crime and the apprehension of the criminals because he observed and reported queer men participating in queer acts in or about 1918. Lets suppose that it was recorded in that way. Now, 100 years later, would he have been watching homosexual men doing homosexual things or suspicious men doing suspicious things? Well, if we pull up your dictionary from 50 years before, we would know it is suspicious men doing suspicious things.

Fast forward to today. Suppose it is you who reported the suspicious people doing the suspicious behavior and used the term suspicious. Are you reporting something out of the ordinary or using the slang definition of a nun doing pushups in a cucumber field? Well, in 100 years, they will look at the dictionary definition at the time and know it was something out of the ordinary.

This communication is especially important when holding conversations about something being a choice or not when the primary understood definition is a choice. It is asking if a choice is a choice then claiming it is not and everyone is wrong because the definition which isn't supported or recorded by a modern dictionary is being used. Do you see the logic problem there? It is not a legitimate debate, just an excuse to troll.

Back of the net my son

 

[DeletedUser]

I completely agree with Hell on this one.

SHOCKING!

As I stated in another Religion thread,

The Bible says in Leviticus that we are not to have sex with members of the same sex and God calls it abomination (ie; a sin). The same Bible ALSO says that God hates the sin, but loves the sinner. We're all sinners and in His eyes we're all pretty much in the same boat headed down crap creek without a paddle.

As for me, I'll stick with God's view on the topic and hate the sin but continue to love those that sin. Which means all of you whether you be gay or not.

 

[DeletedUser]

SHOCKING!

As I stated in another Religion thread,

The Bible says in Leviticus that we are not to have sex with members of the same sex and God calls it abomination (ie; a sin). The same Bible ALSO says that God hates the sin, but loves the sinner. We're all sinners and in His eyes we're all pretty much in the same boat headed down crap creek without a paddle.

As for me, I'll stick with God's view on the topic and hate the sin but continue to love those that sin. Which means all of you whether you be gay or not.

Yeah, they will still call you a bigot insist you are out to kill all gays, I have already been down this road...