California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

Are green eyes normal? Are freckles? Does understanding what cause these things make them more or less normal? Understanding homosexuality is certainly a thing people will be fascinated with for ages, but it should not be the test for normality. Besides, whiskey tango foxtrot is normal? I suspect the answer is conveniently inclusive of yourself, but exclusive of others.

A
R
T

Your interest into looking into homosexuality as something abnormal tells me all I need to know about where you are coming from. Have you ever looked into why you are a heterosexual? Why not?

The only logical argument is for you to determine that homosexuality is abnormal. What difference does it make if it is genetically imposed? Most in the animal kingdom practice homosexuality. That tells me, it's normal animal behavior.

Homo sapiens emerged from the great apes. What animals do is normal, until humans put a negative label on it.

What makes you think or believe heterosexual behavior is superior? Never heard of rape, incest, or porn?

failures art wrote:

Are green eyes normal? Are freckles? Does understanding what cause these things make them more or less normal? Understanding homosexuality is certainly a thing people will be fascinated with for ages, but it should not be the test for normality. Besides, whiskey tango foxtrot is normal? I suspect the answer is conveniently inclusive of yourself, but exclusive of others.

A
R
T

I did not understand your last two sentences?

Regardless, the emphasis should not be whether homosexuality is normal, even though, I thought, the lgbt community has claimed it is not abnormal (making it normal).

I would just think homosexuality, and all non heterosexual variations, should be descerned as to cause (we know the effect).

I believe society may not want "to go there," since parents, relatives, etc. could then think they are to blame in some way for a child being "gay," and then it becomes a spreading source of discontent in families, more so than it may be now.

Similar to the "Manhattan Project," where many resources were deployed to achieve an end, a similar effort to descern homosexuality's cause can be deployed. The question might be what would it be named?

I believe society may not want "to go there," since parents, relatives, etc. could then think they are to blame in some way for a child being "gay," and then it becomes a spreading source of discontent in families, more so than it may be now.

I don't think this is a huge concern. Your kid turning out to be gay is not the end of the world nor anything worth guilt.

Most in the animal kingdom practice homosexuality. That tells me, it's normal animal behavior.

But there can be no doubt that the sex instinct is normally so organised as to be susceptible to, or responsive to, the physical characters of the opposite sex. This is certainly true of the animals; if it were not, their sex impulse would rarely, if ever, acheive its biological function of procreation; and the various sex-recognition marks, which take the form of odours and peculiarities of voice and form and colour of the two sexes, would have no significance or raison d'etre. And, if it is true of the animals, there is no reason to doubt that it is true of the human species.

List of animals displaying homosexual behavior
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Roy and Silo, two Central Park Zoo male Chinstrap Penguins similar to those pictured, became internationally known when they coupled and later were given an egg that needed hatching and care, which they successfully did.[1]

This list includes animals (birds, mammals, insects, fish etc.) for which there is documented evidence of homosexual or transgender behavior of one or more of the following kinds: sex, courtship, affection, pair bonding, or parenting, as noted in researcher and author Bruce Bagemihl's 1999 book Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity.

Bagemihl writes that the presence of same-sex sexual behavior was not 'officially' observed on a large scale until the 1990s due to possible observer bias caused by social attitudes towards LGBT people making the homosexual theme taboo.[2][3] Bagemihl devotes three chapters; Two Hundred Years at Looking at Homosexual Wildlife, Explaining (Away) Animal Homosexuality and Not For Breeding Only in his 1999 book Biological Exuberance to the "documentation of systematic prejudices" where he notes "the present ignorance of biology lies precisely in its single-minded attempt to find reproductive (or other) "explanations" for homosexuality, transgender, and non-procreative and alternative heterosexualities.[4] Petter Bøckman, academic adviser for the Against Nature? exhibit stated "[M]any researchers have described homosexuality as something altogether different from sex. They must realise that animals can have sex with who they will, when they will and without consideration to a researcher's ethical principles". Homosexual behavior is found amongst social birds and mammals, particularly the sea mammals and the primates.[3] Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms, even within the same species and the motivations for and implications of their behaviors have yet to be fully understood. Bagemihl's research shows that homosexual behavior, not necessarily sex, has been observed in close to 1500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them.[5][6] Homosexuality in animals is seen as controversial by social conservatives because it asserts the naturalness of homosexuality in humans, while others counter that it has no implications and is nonsensical to equate animal behavior to morality.[7][8] Animal preference and motivation is always inferred from behavior. Thus homosexual behavior has been given a number of terms over the years. The correct usage of the term homosexual is that an animal exhibits homosexual behavior, however this article conforms to the usage by modern research[9][10][11][12] applying the term homosexuality to all sexual behavior (copulation, genital stimulation, mating games and sexual display behavior) between animals of the same sex.

Why people must try to "prosecute" gay-lesbian people by trying to deny them equal legal rights only shows how insecure they are of their own sexuality.

McDougal puts sexual abnormalities, fetishism, homosexuality, masochism and sadism, down as neuroses created by conditioning of the Pavlovian type during the period of the first stirrings of the sexual instinct at a time when it was too little matured to seek and find its normal object which is a person of the opposite sex in roughly the same age group.

But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom.

William McDougal, FRS, Professor of Psychology at Duke University, wrote in his famous book An Outline Of Abnormal Psychology--

That your opponents are "insecure" about their own sexuality is just a nice little straw man which enables you to go on spouting your inane drivel and which you have invented for yourself or, more likely, read in the silly reading material you engage with where it was invented for the same stupid, circular reasons.

Nope. It's 100% true that the worst homophobes, such as yourself, are scared re: their own sexuality.

Quote:

Nope. It's 100% true that the worst homophobes, such as yourself, are scared re: their own sexuality.

Bollocks. Freud tried that one because he knew, like you do, that it is unanswerable. I could just as easy say that homosexuals are scared of heterosexuality. I referred to that in the post you can't answer.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, which is what I assume you referred to, is published by the American Psychiatric Association and can safely be presumed to be a business venture which has a great interest in promoting psychiatric disorders as, indeed, do "Modern psychologists". And being pseudo-scientists they have a need to toe the party line of the left-wing wingbats.

The purpose of Fellowship of the Royal Society is to weed out suchlike subjectivity or even a suspicion of it.

Do you think homosexuality is normal in the animal world Cyclo as ci. asserted it is. Which was the subject of my post.

To cut a long story short Cyclo you are engaged in "grooming".

Quote:

Why people must try to "prosecute" gay-lesbian people by trying to deny them equal legal rights only shows how insecure they are of their own sexuality.

Your answer is here from my last post--

Quote:

McDougal puts sexual abnormalities, fetishism, homosexuality, masochism and sadism, down as neuroses created by conditioning of the Pavlovian type during the period of the first stirrings of the sexual instinct at a time when it was too little matured to seek and find its normal object which is a person of the opposite sex in roughly the same age group.

They see in homosexual acceptance an increased chance of that Pavlovian conditioning during adolescence taking place and, because orgasm is a very powerful positive conditioner, more homosexuals being produced and exponentially. Such an obvious effect is reinforced by the convenience of avoiding the very real difficulties which young people of opposite sex find in dealing with each other.

That your opponents are "insecure" about their own sexuality is just a nice little straw man which enables you to go on spouting your inane drivel and which you have invented for yourself or, more likely, read in the silly reading material you engage with where it was invented for the same stupid, circular reasons.

Why should homosexuals be denied equal rights?

To cut a long story short Cyclo you are engaged in "grooming".