Homosexuality is Against Nature
-
im not to sure but, i think homosexuals are born gay and it would be natural for them in that case to like members of their own sex.
-
Actually, they are not. Its just that they find people of their same sex more attractive. They can also become heterosexual if they feel like it. Its really a matter of choice.Originally posted by JennTS:im not to sure but, i think homosexuals are born gay and it would be natural for them in that case to like members of their own sex. -
I think that's still under research right? Nothing concrete yet.Originally posted by shade343:Actually, they are not. Its just that they find people of their same sex more attractive. They can also become heterosexual if they feel like it. Its really a matter of choice. -
yep
still being reserached. -
well im not homosexual so i wont argue about it.Originally posted by shade343:Actually, they are not. Its just that they find people of their same sex more attractive. They can also become heterosexual if they feel like it. Its really a matter of choice.
but i am transsexual, and im a hetrosexual guy as well as a hetrosexual gal, yet im not gay. wierd. -
cool.
er, really? -
well i like guys as a woman would, but not in the gay sense.
-
okay...
i wouldnt know...but yeh. -
Let me ask u again PRP. Do u actually read anything I post? Or do U choose to ignore it?Originally posted by PRP:Heng,
Good to hear that u have no hatred towards me.But how do u explain u said i was a fool with capital F?
I have given u reasons why i called u a liar but u seemed to ignor them.Then u said i have not evidence etc.
U've already ignored THIS post once. -
Heng said I didn't uphold to my principles of "fairness,righteousness & kindness".
Since i believe homo is wrong,it is righteous of me to say so.
When i see wrong opinion on this topic,i'm kind enuf to rebut it.Mind u, i've not duty do do so & i can keep my opinions to myself.I'm also kind enuf to offer my opinion on the right attitude towards sex.
All along, my stand is always not to discriminate against homo despite their wrong sexual behavior.So I'm fair. -
I think Earthlings is a gentlman who wanted to close his topic & would not talk about this topic in this forum.
-
Yes,some so called gays are actually bisexuals.Maybe they can't have heterosex,so they have homosex.Originally posted by shade343:Actually, they are not. Its just that they find people of their same sex more attractive. They can also become heterosexual if they feel like it. Its really a matter of choice. -
in my opinion, homosexuality is against nature but not against human rights,after all they have the right to choose their future.
-
Originally posted by PRP:
Did he close the topic as he would not talk about this topic in this forum, or did he find his position untenable in the manner that his position is being confronted - point by point ?
I think Earthlings is a gentlman who wanted to close his topic & would not talk about this topic in this forum.
You were right in what you had stated when you opened this thread, earthling73 took a parting shot at my last response to his postings and decided to close the thread by not giving me a right to reply to his selective misquote from my response.
Is eathlings73 a 'gentleman' or a 'gentle man', or even a 'Man' at all ? -
Whatever...it is clear that he is man of one issue and one issue alone...to defend and disseminate gay rights. I think the aggressive campaign launched by the gay community for greater acceptance has only served to alienate more of the moderate conservatives in society.Originally posted by Atobe:Is eathlings73 a 'gentleman' or a 'gentle man', or even a 'Man' at all ? -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Yes, he certainly did, and I felt it from the first few insistent postings that he made on nearly a daily basis, which highlighted events and issues related to the HOMOSEXUAL Communities.
Whatever...it is clear that he is man of one issue and one issue alone...to defend and disseminate gay rights. I think the aggressive campaign launched by the gay community for greater acceptance has only served to alienate more of the moderate conservatives in society.
Was his attempt merely 'to defend and disseminate gay rights' that seems quite innocuous on first appearance, or was his intention more subtly subversive ?
He had frequently and vocally lamented the unfairness of housing policy towards SINGLES, and extended this as unfairness specifically directed towards HOMOSEXUALS; and also to the fact that HOMOSEXUALS are not entitled to Public Housing, as MARRIAGE is an impossible condition for 'his kind' in Singapore; and that Automatic-INHERITANCE to Love Ones is not automatic for 'his kind' due to the same problem of no legal recognition to the HOMOSEXUAL Relationship; and the unfairness of the Law in preventing HOMOSEXUALS from ever forming a Family Nucleus with any possibility of Child Adoption.
His efforts can only be seen as a very shrewd and subtle attempt to CONDITION and SUBVERT Singapore Society, so as to 'liberalize' the conservative thinking and social standards; so as to lead to the ultimate goal for legalized SAME SEX MARRIAGE and Child Adoption, as currently achieved by his similar 'bed-fellows' in Western Societies. -
Originally posted by PRP:
that is twisted logic. righteousness is absolute. If u're righteous in believing homo is wrong, then Hitler was also righteous in exterminating Jews because he also believed they were wrong.
Heng said I didn't uphold to my principles of "fairness,righteousness & kindness".
Since i believe homo is wrong,it is [b]righteous of me to say so.
When i see wrong opinion on this topic,i'm kind enuf to rebut it.Mind u, i've not duty do do so & i can keep my opinions to myself.I'm also kind enuf to offer my opinion on the right attitude towards sex.
All along, my stand is always not to discriminate against homo despite their wrong sexual behavior.So I'm fair.[/b]
Who are you to judge that other's opinion are wrong? Rebuttal to prove you are right is not kindness. Stop playing to your EGO and stop posturing. Its not going to work. Neither is offering your own opinion of what is the right attitude towards sex kindness. Don't twist logic.
If you do not discriminate against homosexuals, u'll stop saying they are wrong and accept there is no right or wrong in a person's sexuality. But on one hand u keep saying its wrong and on the other u say u're not discriminating? Not only are u not fair, u're also a hypocrite.
And u STILL haven't answered me. Do u read anything I post? And why can't u answer directly to me? Why do u need to answer indirectly? Because u know u can't win? Or because u don't have the GUTS? -
Countered point by point? From quoting Glossy News and quoting evidences that support a gay cause?Originally posted by Atobe:Did he close the topic as he would not talk about this topic in this forum, or did he find his position untenable in the manner that his position is being confronted - point by point ?
You were right in what you had stated when you opened this thread, earthling73 took a parting shot at my last response to his postings and decided to close the thread by not giving me a right to reply to his selective misquote from my response.
Is eathlings73 a 'gentleman' or a 'gentle man', or even a 'Man' at all ?
It goes to show that you do google search via keywords without even understanding what the articles are talking about.. And I usually take 2 to 3 times the amount of time (4-5 hours) to respond to your accusations simply because I need to read, both the aticles I quote and those articles you quote..
As mentioned in my final post in that thread.. It would be better if all gay issues are moved to a new forum.. However, if you insist on using speaker's corner to discuss this issue, I will kindly oblige..
Another fact, I am not a moderator in this forum.. After placing that post, I have to pm a mod to close.. And I wouldnt know exactly when he will do the closing.. Or unless you want to "imagine" and claim that I'm just a clone of one of the moderators..
I do not wish to address the last point.. At the end of the day, it's up to others to judge.. The only thing I can do is to make sure that I'm responsible in stating my stands, give evidences with good credentials, and make sure that I do not verbally abuse other people..
Just to let in on maybe a more personal reason to close the thread: I've signed up with AfA as a volunteer.. And I believe my time would be better spent to help others than to be engaged in such meaningless discussion..
Oxford Mushroom >> Nah, I'm not an activist.. I did not even participate in Indignation.. And I did participate occasionally in other threads too.. Until Atobe came ard to hurl those verbal abuses.. I'm against any forms of discrimination.. e.g., mental retards, ageism, etc.. Now that I have more time without the need to defend against accusations, I will definitely contribute more to the other threads.. -
Just some clarification:Originally posted by PRP:Yes,some so called gays are actually bisexuals.Maybe they can't have heterosex,so they have homosex.
Gays and bisexuals are 2 different things.. For first group, they are attracted to similar gender.. For bisexuals, they are attracted to both gender..
Of course, they are married gays too.. The group who's so closeted that they decide to deny their homosexuality.. Married the opposite gender.. But then, they had difficulty performing in bed simply because they cannot get their male apparatus to perform in the face of the opposite gender.. Of course, some of these gays might simply mental conjuring up images of the same gender while have sex with his/her spouse.. But then, how long will such a relationship last? -
Originally posted by earthlings73:
Ha... so you are back ?
Countered point by point? From quoting Glossy News and quoting evidences that support a gay cause? It goes to show that you do google search via keywords without even understanding what the articles are talking about.. And I usually take 2 to 3 times the amount of time (4-5 hours) to respond to your accusations simply because I need to read, both the aticles I quote and those articles you quote..
As mentioned in my final post in that thread.. It would be better if all gay issues are moved to a new forum.. However, if you insist on using speaker's corner to discuss this issue, I will kindly oblige..
Another fact, I am not a moderator in this forum.. After placing that post, I have to pm a mod to close.. And I wouldnt know exactly when he will do the closing.. Or unless you want to "imagine" and claim that I'm just a clone of one of the moderators..
I do not wish to address the last point.. At the end of the day, it's up to others to judge.. The only thing I can do is to make sure that I'm responsible in stating my stands, give evidences with good credentials, and make sure that I do not verbally abuse other people..
Just to let in on maybe a more personal reason to close the thread: I've signed up with AfA as a volunteer.. And I believe my time would be better spent to help others than to be engaged in such meaningless discussion..
Oxford Mushroom >> Nah, I'm not an activist.. I did not even participate in Indignation.. And I did participate occasionally in other threads too.. Until Atobe came ard to hurl those verbal abuses.. I'm against any forms of discrimination.. e.g., mental retards, ageism, etc.. Now that I have more time without the need to defend against accusations, I will definitely contribute more to the other threads..
Regardless of when any Moderator decide to close the thread that you started, it was dis-ingenious of you to claim ignorance as to when the thread will be closed, as the fact remain that you had PROBABLY 'PM' the Moderator almost IMMEDIATELY after writing your last response.
That action by itself had assured you that any further response to your new postings will have been effectively shut out, and you had the satisfaction of putting in the last punch.
All the same, it was good riddance for such a thread that should not have existed in this place - as your effort was entirely to provide publicity to your pet cause of HOMOSEXUALITY.
Your supposed inocuous actions were simply to condition Singaporeans by SUBVERSION by highlighting the supposed plights of HOMOSEXUALS, but all your efforts are to lead to your ultimate goal of getting Singaporeans to accept and approve the idea of SAME SEX MARRIAGE, and the opportunity of creating a FAMILY by means of Child Adoption. -
Same sex marriage doesn't work for EVERYONE, to be honest. Even within such a union, there might be irreconciliable differences. It was documented that in Canada, there were lesbians who filed for divorce.Originally posted by Atobe:Your supposed inocuous actions were simply to condition Singaporeans by SUBVERSION by highlighting the supposed plights of HOMOSEXUALS, but all your efforts are to lead to your ultimate goal of getting Singaporeans to accept and approve the idea of SAME SEX MARRIAGE, and the opportunity of creating a FAMILY by means of Child Adoption.
I say again as I did in the locked topic, that marrying one's true love is a BASIC human right. It doesn't matter what the gender of both parties are. -
I've been around everyday.. Mostly at the new GLBT Support forum and EH forum.. I did know the start of this thread, but then, I did not bother coming in since there's a new forum devoted to discussing gay issues.. Until of course, your hurling of more verbal abuses.. No worries, I'm as much a man as you are, if not more.. Since I'm described as the "gentleman" who reasons things out instead of hurling abuses..Originally posted by Atobe:Ha... so you are back ?
Regardless of when any Moderator decide to close the thread that you started, it was dis-ingenious of you to claim ignorance as to when the thread will be closed, as the fact remain that you had PROBABLY 'PM' the Moderator almost IMMEDIATELY after writing your last response.
That action by itself had assured you that any further response to your new postings will have been effectively shut out, and you had the satisfaction of putting in the last punch.
All the same, it was good riddance for such a thread that should not have existed in this place - as your effort was entirely to provide publicity to your pet cause of HOMOSEXUALITY.
Your supposed inocuous actions were simply to condition Singaporeans by SUBVERSION by highlighting the supposed plights of HOMOSEXUALS, but all your efforts are to lead to your ultimate goal of getting Singaporeans to accept and approve the idea of SAME SEX MARRIAGE, and the opportunity of creating a FAMILY by means of Child Adoption. More evidences? Go to EH..
Nope.. I'm not devine.. I do not know when you will come around to spread further misconceptions about gays and I do not know when the mod when come in to help close the thread..
Ironic isn't it? First you claim such a thread has nothing to do with politics.. And now, your inability to resist posting in this new thread, which incidentally, was not started by me.. Do you still want this conversation to go on? -
Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist Urges
End To Sexual Reassignment Surgery
December 2, 2004 - Dr. Paul McHugh, University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University, urges that psychiatrists put an end to sexual reassignment surgery (SRS) for individuals with gender identity confusion.
McHugh's remarks were published in the November, 2004, issue of First Things. Writing in "Surgical Sex," the professor notes that Johns Hopkins University was a pioneer in SRS beginning in the early 1970s. The prevailing theory at the time was that while sex was genetically determined at birth, the concept of gender was culturally shaped and malleable and that being female or male were interchangeable.
Dr. McHugh became psychiatrist-in-chief at the university in 1975 and decided that it would be useful to have follow-up studies on individuals who had undergone SRS at the facility. He wanted to test the claim that men who had undergone SRS had found a resolution for their general psychological problems and wanted to see if male infants with ambiguous genitalia who were raised as girls could easily settle into the female identity chosen for them by the surgeons.
To accomplish these two goals, he encouraged a fellow psychiatrist, Jon Meyer, to follow up on those having sex change operations. He found that most of the patients were content and only a few regretted it, but their psychological condition was little changed.
A study of similar subjects at Clark Institute in Toronto had found that many of these men described themselves as lesbians to psychiatrists because they were sexually attracted to women. "... I concluded that to provide a surgical alteration to the body of these unfortunate people was to collaborate with a mental disorder rather than to treat it," said McHugh.
Another psychiatrist, William G. Reiner, conducted follow-up studies on boys who were raised as girls. Reiner found that these re-engineered males were almost universally uncomfortable with the female role assigned them and many wished to revert to male status once they discovered the truth about themselves. Reiner's findings were published in the January 22, 2004 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.
Dr. McHugh says that his research led Johns Hopkins to stop offering SRS for its patients, "... much, I'm glad to say, to the relief of several of our plastic surgeons who had previously been commandeered to carry out the procedures." He observes: "Having looked at the Reiner and Meyer studies, we in the Johns Hopkins Psychiatry Department eventually concluded that human sexual identity is mostly built into our constitution by the genes we inherit and the embryogenesis we undergo."
McHugh says "I have witnessed a great deal of damage from sex-reassignment. The children transformed from their male constitution into female roles suffered prolonged distress and misery as they sensed their natural attitudes. ... We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it."
He urges that psychiatrists discourage individuals from seeking sexual reassignment surgery. -
http://www.narth.com/index.html
NARTH Position Statements
1. Right to Treatment
NARTH respects each client's dignity, autonomy and free agency.
We believe that clients have the right to claim a gay identity, or to diminish their homosexuality and to develop their heterosexual potential.
The right to seek therapy to change one's sexual adaptation should be considered self-evident and inalienable.
We call on our fellow mental-health association to stop falsely claiming to have "scientific knowledge" that settles the issue of homosexuality. Instead, our mental-health associations must leave room for diverse understandings of the family, of core human identity, and the meaning and purpose of human sexuality.
2. Gay Advocacy in Public Schools
When schools offer information on sexual orientation, the facts should be presented in a fair and balanced manner.
Groups such as the American Psychological Association currently recommend that schools censor all "ex-gay" materials, and prohibit discussion about those who have chosen to change their orientation. Respect for diversity, however, requires teaching about all principled positions. We live in a multi-cultural society where tolerance for differences is essential.
And when homosexuality is discussed, it must not cross the line into lifestyle advocacy. Ultimately, sexual lifestyle decisions hinge on matters of deeply held values. Schools should respect the right of families to convey their own social values to their children.
3. Pedophilia
Early sexual experiences with an older, same-sex person are commonly reported by our homosexual clients. And some studies do suggest that such experiences may be more common among homosexuals than heterosexuals; in proportion to their numbers, that is, homosexuals may be more likely to sexually abuse a same-sex minor.
However, the data remains inconclusive for several reasons.
Studies have not always been able to determine the sexual orientation of the same-sex molester (was he a heterosexual man crossing over into same-sex behavior? a bisexual? or a homosexual?) Also, clinical reports suggest that a very substantial proportion of homosexual molestation is not reported to adults or legal authorities because the child was ashamed, fearful or considered the same-sex contact with an older person to have been "consensual."
For these and other reasons, it is difficult to come to a conclusive answer on the basis of the evidence now available.
4. Homophobia
The term "homophobia" is often used inaccurately to describe any person who objects to homosexual behavior on either moral, psychological or medical grounds. Technically, however, the terms actually denotes a person who has a phobia--or irrational fear--of homosexuality. Principled disagreement, therefore, cannot be labeled "homophobia."
5. Same-Sex Marriage
Social science evidence supports the traditional model of man-woman marriage as the ideal family form for fostering a child's healthy development.
6. On the Meaning of Tolerance and Diversity
"Tolerance and diversity" means nothing if it is extended to activists and not traditionalists on the homosexual issue.
Tolerance must also be extended to those people who take the principled, scientifically supportable view that homosexuality works against our human nature.
7. On the Causes of Homosexuality
NARTH agrees with the American Psychological Association that "biological, psychological and social factors" shape sexual identity at an early age for most people.
But the difference is one of emphasis. We place more emphasis on the psychological (family, peer and social) influences, while the American Psychological Association emphasizes biological influences--and has shown no interest in (indeed, a hostility toward) investigating those same psychological and social influences.
There is no such thing as a "gay gene" and there is no evidence to support the idea that homosexuality is genetic or unchangeable.
Numerous examples exist of people who have successfully modified their sexual behavior, identity, and arousal or fantasies.
--------------------------------- -
Originally posted by earthlings73:
Ironic ? Should there be any irony ?
I've been around everyday.. Mostly at the new GLBT Support forum and EH forum.. I did know the start of this thread, but then, I did not bother coming in since there's a new forum devoted to discussing gay issues.. Until of course, your hurling of more verbal abuses.. No worries, I'm as much a man as you are, if not more.. Since I'm described as the "gentleman" who reasons things out instead of hurling abuses.. More evidences? Go to EH..
Nope.. I'm not devine.. I do not know when you will come around to spread further misconceptions about gays and I do not know when the mod when come in to help close the thread..
Ironic isn't it? First you claim such a thread has nothing to do with politics.. And now, your inability to resist posting in this new thread, which incidentally, was not started by me.. Do you still want this conversation to go on?
Was this thread started by PRP similar to the publicity stunt that you had intended with the HOMOSEXUAL thread that you had closed ?
Or was this thread started by PRP, to protest the sneaky manner in which you prevented others from having a right to respond after slipping in your own twisted piece of selective reply ?
Was there any further development of the issues - that were found in your closed thread - being repeated in this thread started by PRP ?
Or were my two postings in this thread merely in support of PRP's remarks of the sneakiness in your approach to prevent others from posting a response ?
You as much a man as I am - when you are a declared HOMOSEXUAL ?
A 'gentleman' - when you slipped in your twisted post and closed your thread to prevent any further response ?
Will it even be correct to address you as being 'half a Man' ?
Did any expect you to be 'divine' ? You are certainly not 'devine' but more recognisable as a 'sexual deviant' from most ordinary Singapore society.
Why do HOMOSEXUALS feel so easily abused, when they themselves have abused nature's arrangement, and also abusing their own physical and psychological well being with their HOMOSEXUAL leanings ?
Do we need to converse any further, or are you not concerned of being further 'abused' ?