Jenson_Rules

Sexuality; What Are Your Views?

Sexuality   48 members have voted

  1. 1. Is Your Sexuality A Choice?

    • Yes
      24
    • No
      24
  2. 2. Should Homosexual Men And Women Have Equal Rights With Straight People?

    • Yes
      39
    • No
      9
  3. 3. Should Homosexual Couples Be Allowed To Adopt?

    • Yes
      24
    • No
      24

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

550 posts in this topic

I was wondering what everyones views of sexuality are. Do you think being a homosexual male or female is a choice that they take or do you believe it is something that can't be helped, that you are born gay or bi or whatever?

The reason I'm interested to know your views is because there has been a lot of talk about this recently due to a new Bill currently going through parliament that makes it illegal for someone to refuse gay people of something due to them being gay, for example being refused a room in a B&B if your gay cos the owners dont like it! Do you think this is a good idea? Do you think its good parliament are finally making gay people equal to straight people? Lets hear your views!

Also do you think Gay couples should be allowed to adopt. Catholic run agencies are against it and this new Act would make it illegal to refuse a couple on grounds of sexual orientation. They say it's unnatural and ''not right''. However I say that so long as the child is going to be living in a loving and caring home what should it matter?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Polls are easier to use and offer a majority view at the glimpse of an eye. thus polls are useful you forgot to add "NO opinion" to the poll cause my vote goes to that

Edited by goferrarigo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well just say you dont really ahve an opinion! I didnt think of that. can i change it so it can have no opinion? or is it too late. I dont understand these new changes on here lol. Im a bit computer illiterate, im much better with a pen and paper. and im 18 LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dude being 18 is not an excuse. i am 18 as well. click on edit the post and mostly you can add a option to the poll with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nah i cant. Im saying im 18 cos being 18 and not understanding computers is bad since ive grown up with computers all my life lol. Then again so long as i know all the basics im happy! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok then i'll just vote.

i think it is a choice and you should have equal rights. but about adoption i am kinda reserved thinking about the child when he goes to school, all the kids would make bad comments aboout him and bully him so. i'm kinda not sure thus voted no...

Edited by goferrarigo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do i think sexuality is by choice,no. Do I think gay or lesbiens should be afforded the same rights as male/female couples,yes. Do I think gay or lesbiens should be able to adopt,yes. I am not one to judge nor do I believe i have the right to judge someone's sexuality. This can actually offer a lot of the same comments possibly as the "where do you stand" forum. In that forum the term racism was used and I also used the racism word, but may be it's in the inability for people to recognize that people are different. Whether it be religion, color, sexuality, the list can go on. Homosexuality is a fact of life. Look, the way of the past for a man or woman was to hide their sexuality. In the past homosexuality was hidden, either you got married and hid your secret, or you joined the church. Look at all the religous leaders being convicted for sexual abuse, and I'm sure it's only the tip of the iceburg because of the social stigma of the times. My question is, why can't people accept the differances in people? I believe everyone has the right to lead a life of fullfillment, to live a life that may offer the slightest amount of happiness. It's what we all want! Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what doors i want to go through and which ones i would rather not. I know this instinctively. Some people put their key in the hole and turn the lock only to find that what's on the other side is not for them. Others, i guess find it quite nice on the other side of the door.

I am quite happy with my door key, as is my wife whos locks i keep lubricated as often as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was wondering what everyones views of sexuality are. Do you think being a homosexual male or female is a choice that they take or do you believe it is something that can't be helped, that you are born gay or bi or whatever?

The reason I'm interested to know your views is because there has been a lot of talk about this recently due to a new Bill currently going through parliament that makes it illegal for someone to refuse gay people of something due to them being gay, for example being refused a room in a B&B if your gay cos the owners dont like it! Do you think this is a good idea? Do you think its good parliament are finally making gay people equal to straight people? Lets hear your views!

Also do you think Gay couples should be allowed to adopt. Catholic run agencies are against it and this new Act would make it illegal to refuse a couple on grounds of sexual orientation. They say it's unnatural and ''not right''. However I say that so long as the child is going to be living in a loving and caring home what should it matter?!

No for the third - until gay couples are no longer a minority. Just a caring and loving home is not what a child needs to fit in to current society. There are norms to conform to for children. I see a damage to the psyche of an impressionable mind when the child sees that his or her parents are different from the majority of parents. I would feel really strange if I was adopted and brought up by gay parents. Being gay is, I believe is currently a choice, rather than hereditary and even if it was hereditary, at least one of the parents would need to be gay (or rather bisexual)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know what doors i want to go through and which ones i would rather not. I know this instinctively. Some people put their key in the hole and turn the lock only to find that what's on the other side is not for them. Others, i guess find it quite nice on the other side of the door.

I am quite happy with my door key, as is my wife whos locks i keep lubricated as often as possible.

HAHAHAHA! I hear ya, but to each his or her own. It's not a perfect world we live in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gay, transvestite, psychopath is that programmed in DNA...or is it a learned behaviour (choice). :eusa_think:

i don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote yes to all. The first one should really have an option for "due to a combination of genetics, life experiences and choice", for which I would have voted instead. The second question is a bit of a no-brainer as they say. Regarding the third, gay couples should have to pass the same stringent tests as straight couples, but if they do I see no reason for dismissing them. To argue otherwise is to admit that those tests aren't good enough anyway.

The debate with the Catholics is a bit more subtle than the third question imho. They were arguing for an opt out of the new rules, not that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt at all. I think this is a really tricky issue. On reflection, it seems to me that the Catholics are arguing that religious convictions are unique and that they provide a special reason for treating someone differently as a result of their sexuality. That's OK in purely religious circumstances, such as Church services, because everyone is consenting there. It's not clear that the same applies when you're providing a service to the general community. On balance I would say that the Catholics have a fairly weak case, especially as they allow atheists for example to adopt, but it's very difficult. I mean, what about faith schools - should they be allowed to "discriminate" on the basis of a child's religion? Or doctors who oppose abortion - should they be allowed to refuse to perform them (another doctor in the same hospital will do it) as they are now? Or clubs and societies who have "women-only nights" or nightclubs that offer women cheaper entry?

It's so complicated. Discrimination implies that there is no good reason for a choice/preference. For instance, if I only allow beautiful women to work as my secretary then I'm discriminating because her looks have nothing to do with the job, whereas if I'm looking to employ a stripper for my new brothel then it's not discrimination because her looks are now relevant. Imho, in that light, Catholics would need to show that there was some direct connection between the sexuality of the parents and the experience the child got, but only according to Catholic beliefs.

It must be direct, in that gay people couldn't possibly do the job, if we want to ban them outright from adopting in any circumstances, as in the fact that "women-only nights" provide a different environment that couldn't possibly be achieved with men present. Simply saying on average traditional couples are better isn't good enough, because for instance rich, smart parents are better on average probably, but no one excludes poor, stupid parents automatically. I can't think of anything that only straight couples can possibly provide, even according to Catholic beliefs, so I feel their case is weak here. If the child gets the same experience then it is discrimination to not help gay folks just because you disagree with their lifestyle. Even the Catholics wouldn't refuse someone's right to adopt on the basis of whether the person has tasteful fashion sense or not, because it doesn't directly affect the child. Also this is controversial but if it is proven that, just like being poor and being stupid, being gay means that on average you are likely to be a worse parent, then I think being gay should count against you just like being poor or stupid, though I would in no way equate those things. This wouldn't mean you could rule gay people out from the start, but rather that they would have to be particularly committed or promising in other ways.

I'm open to suggestions on what it is that only straight parents can possibly provide for the child. One thing might be a "sin-free up-bringing or environment". But this can't be right, for what environment is sin-free? And how can the child be held to account by God for the sins of his parents in any case? Another suggestion might be "contact with adults of both sexes". But again, contact with a responsible adult of the right sex can easily be arranged these days on a regular basis. Children get too much contact with women now in school, so that might even be a positive thing about being brought up by two men! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gay, transvestite, psychopath is that programmed in DNA...or is it a learned behaviour (choice). :eusa_think:

i don

Edited by jaq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No for the third - until gay couples are no longer a minority. Just a caring and loving home is not what a child needs to fit in to current society. There are norms to conform to for children. I see a damage to the psyche of an impressionable mind when the child sees that his or her parents are different from the majority of parents. I would feel really strange if I was adopted and brought up by gay parents. Being gay is, I believe is currently a choice, rather than hereditary and even if it was hereditary, at least one of the parents would need to be gay (or rather bisexual)

You make a reasonable point that there should perhaps be the extra requirement that the gay potential parents be better in other ways to account for the difficulties you foresee and also they must convince the selectors that they will be able to deal with the situation for the child. However I don't think it's impossible for the problems to be successfully dealt with. Feeling "really strange" is not good enough imho. People would only feel that way due to discrimination. After all most families are non-traditional in some way now, normally the father leaves, but the kids cope just fine in the main. Any adopted child will feel strange about it anyway.

Also, regarding your choice theory, I'm totally confused by this argument. Are you saying that actually having gay sex is the choice or that having a sexual preference for the same sex in itself is the choice? Doesn't the first imply that you are attracted to men too? And I don't think the second makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, regarding your choice theory, I'm totally confused by this argument. Are you saying that actually having gay sex is the choice or that having a sexual preference for the same sex in itself is the choice? Doesn't the first imply that you are attracted to men too? And I don't think the second makes sense.

I seem to confuse you a lot :D .

I'm saying that being gay is a matter of choice - or rather I believe that is the current popular theory. I don't believe that it is something one inherits. I am not too keyed in to gene theory and that kind of stuff but I remember reading an article that being gay is written in ones genes.......Anyway that is beyond my comprehension and understanding.

I don't know if I can answer your question - I don't know if you can answer it either - why do some people like chocolate, or some guys prefer blondes over brunettes, or some people don't like chicken...is that a choice or is it some chemical in your brain, or some gene ? Is it a question that can be answered ? Do I like chocolate because I prefer it, yes, is the preference a choice or something inbuilt ? - i don't konw

edit: I don't think drawing a parallel to a single parent family works, for me

Obviously your latter question is a precursor to second one. One should have a sexual preference for something before one actually indulges in it I think.

Edited by mock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I vote yes to all. The first one should really have an option for "due to a combination of genetics, life experiences and choice", for which I would have voted instead. The second question is a bit of a no-brainer as they say. Regarding the third, gay couples should have to pass the same stringent tests as straight couples, but if they do I see no reason for dismissing them. To argue otherwise is to admit that those tests aren't good enough anyway.

The debate with the Catholics is a bit more subtle than the third question imho. They were arguing for an opt out of the new rules, not that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt at all. I think this is a really tricky issue. On reflection, it seems to me that the Catholics are arguing that religious convictions are unique and that they provide a special reason for treating someone differently as a result of their sexuality. That's OK in purely religious circumstances, such as Church services, because everyone is consenting there. It's not clear that the same applies when you're providing a service to the general community. On balance I would say that the Catholics have a fairly weak case, especially as they allow atheists for example to adopt, but it's very difficult. I mean, what about faith schools - should they be allowed to "discriminate" on the basis of a child's religion? Or doctors who oppose abortion - should they be allowed to refuse to perform them (another doctor in the same hospital will do it) as they are now? Or clubs and societies who have "women-only nights" or nightclubs that offer women cheaper entry?

It's so complicated. Discrimination implies that there is no good reason for a choice/preference. For instance, if I only allow beautiful women to work as my secretary then I'm discriminating because her looks have nothing to do with the job, whereas if I'm looking to employ a stripper for my new brothel then it's not discrimination because her looks are now relevant. Imho, in that light, Catholics would need to show that there was some direct connection between the sexuality of the parents and the experience the child got, but only according to Catholic beliefs.

It must be direct, in that gay people couldn't possibly do the job, if we want to ban them outright from adopting in any circumstances, as in the fact that "women-only nights" provide a different environment that couldn't possibly be achieved with men present. Simply saying on average traditional couples are better isn't good enough, because for instance rich, smart parents are better on average probably, but no one excludes poor, stupid parents automatically. I can't think of anything that only straight couples can possibly provide, even according to Catholic beliefs, so I feel their case is weak here. If the child gets the same experience then it is discrimination to not help gay folks just because you disagree with their lifestyle. Even the Catholics wouldn't refuse someone's right to adopt on the basis of whether the person has tasteful fashion sense or not, because it doesn't directly affect the child. Also this is controversial but if it is proven that, just like being poor and being stupid, being gay means that on average you are likely to be a worse parent, then I think being gay should count against you just like being poor or stupid, though I would in no way equate those things. This wouldn't mean you could rule gay people out from the start, but rather that they would have to be particularly committed or promising in other ways.

I'm open to suggestions on what it is that only straight parents can possibly provide for the child. One thing might be a "sin-free up-bringing or environment". But this can't be right, for what environment is sin-free? And how can the child be held to account by God for the sins of his parents in any case? Another suggestion might be "contact with adults of both sexes". But again, contact with a responsible adult of the right sex can easily be arranged these days on a regular basis. Children get too much contact with women now in school, so that might even be a positive thing about being brought up by two men! ;)

For once maybe you and i agree about something. It is so true that over time the world has changed. If we think of the world of yesterday and it's attitude towards interracial relationships or marriage it has now become the norm. Religion and in fact society couldn't stop the evolution of people, but i'll argue your point about about being poor and being gay. There are many hetrosexual relationships that are poor and provide a stable enviroment for children, and there are so many middle to high income families that are unstable.

Edited by jaq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I seem to confuse you a lot :D .

I'm saying that being gay is a matter of choice - or rather I believe that is the current popular theory. I don't believe that it is something one inherits. I am not too keyed in to gene theory and that kind of stuff but I remember reading an article that being gay is written in ones genes.......Anyway that is beyond my comprehension and understanding.

I don't know if I can answer your question - I don't know if you can answer it either - why do some people like chocolate, or some guys prefer blondes over brunettes, or some people don't like chicken...is that a choice or is it some chemical in your brain, or some gene ? Is it a question that can be answered ? Do I like chocolate because I prefer it, yes, is the preference a choice or something inbuilt ? - i don't konw

edit: I don't think drawing a parallel to a single parent family works, for me

Obviously your latter question is a precursor to second one. One should have a sexual preference for something before one actually indulges in it I think.

Yes but no one would say that we choose to prefer chicken, blondes or chocolate. We might choose to indulge our desires but we don't choose the desires themselves. They arise as a result of our genes and our life experiences up to that point. The same must be true of sexual preference.

Now, in that case, either one accepts that gay people are inherently different to straight people in a way not of their own conscious choosing, or one accepts that we're all the same and that we are all attracted to members of the same sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think that being homosexual is good or right and my religion agrees... BUT I dont have anything against Gay people and dont judge them.

The one issue I do however have is homosexuals adapting children... That makes me sick!!!

Imagine a poor kid growwing up their entire life not knowing if their mom is their dad or both or visa versa or what ever.... Its not natural and not fair on any kid!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For once maybe you and i agree about something. It is so true that over time the world has changed. If we think of the world of yesterday and it's attitude towards interracial relationships or marriage it has now become the norm. Religion and in fact society couldn't stop the evolution of people, but i'll argue your point about about being poor and being gay. There are many hetrosexual relationships that are poor and provide a stable enviroment for children, and there are so many middle to high income families that are unstable.

We only disagreed over a minor thing. I seem to remember you were very PC about something. Oh yeah you think it's racist to say that Indians on average write differently to westerners. Well I honestly think it's not. I mean it's well documented that women write differently to men for instance. But anyway.... On the point at hand, I didn't say that being poor ruled you out of adopting: quite the opposite. I said that poor, working class families are probably not as good as rich ones on average. However the relevance of that comes from precisely the fact that no one would forbid poor people from adopting automatically. Therefore, even if on average gay couples for instance split up more often than straight ones, we should not rule them out automatically from adopting. However all things being equal a wealthier family would probably get the kid, and by extension, if gay couples are worse parents on average, so should a straight couple over a gay one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think that being homosexual is good or right and my religion agrees...

Presumably religion is just about the only reason to think it's not good or right?

I think there's a tension between the next two statements.

BUT I dont have anything against Gay people and dont judge them.
The one issue I do however have is homosexuals adapting children... That makes me sick!!!

Imagine a poor kid growwing up their entire life not knowing if their mom is their dad or both or visa versa or what ever.... Its not natural and not fair on any kid!

If gay couples are just as loving and just as good parents then there is no reason to say it's not "natural" or fair imho. It might be less common, but so are many things, like being a black kid in the UK for instance. Being less common is not necessarily going to destroy a child's life. With sufficiently good parenting it shouldn't be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Presumably religion is just about the only reason to think it's not good or right?

Not only religion, nature shows the way it should be man and woman, male and female, there is no other way, if two man can naturaly have children then I would have to say that is ok, but they can not have then because is against nature first and against religion too. IMO only a sick man can have sex with another man.

About adopting, nature didn't aloud them to have children, so we should think about that, they shouldn't adopt either, they should wait until they can have children by natural ways, not adopting a child who came to this world from a man and a woman so, no they should not adopt, they should not get married and they should not have the same rights and no, sexuality is not a choice for healthy people, but it is for those who are sick but just because of their sickness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If gay couples are just as loving and just as good parents then there is no reason to say it's not "natural" or fair imho.

Well they should have their own children if there is no reason to say is not natural, if this is natural they are supose to have their own children by nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Presumably religion is just about the only reason to think it's not good or right?

I think there's a tension between the next two statements.

If gay couples are just as loving and just as good parents then there is no reason to say it's not "natural" or fair imho. It might be less common, but so are many things, like being a black kid in the UK for instance. Being less common is not necessarily going to destroy a child's life. With sufficiently good parenting it shouldn't be an issue.

You need to go watch the movie "The bird Cage"... Although the movie does at times put a funny twist on things it shows the problems with a kid having gay parents... Its wrong, end of story!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well they should have their own children if there is no reason to say is not natural, if this is natural they are supose to have their own children by nature.

That sums it up perfectly!

Anyone who says Homosexuals adopting kids is fine needs to think to themselves, Imagine if both your parents were gay... It would not be normal.

Firstly the kid would be ridiculed throughout their youth and secondly its just not natural!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now