AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2008-11-08, 02:38   Link #5101
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
@Reckoner: Tolerating slave owners was the norm in the days leading up to the Civil War. The various compromises showed the enormous tension this issue generated, and of course, the devastation of the war meant that the slavery issue had to be settled once and for all.

"Separate but equal": Oh boy, this one took its time to be repealed.

The pro-gay fighters still have to fight their war in the days ahead. Seems that America is not quite ready in this aspect.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 02:52   Link #5102
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Reckoner: You really have no problem with Incest?

Pls go check a doctor.
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 02:57   Link #5103
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
Reckoner: You really have no problem with Incest?

Pls go check a doctor.
as long as it is between consenting adults and behind close doors. I don't care.
__________________
Xellos-_^ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:00   Link #5104
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xellos-_^ View Post
as long as it is between consenting adults and behind close doors. I don't care.
No need for closed doors from me, actually (at least, not more than what I'd politely ask others in terms of keeping their PDA under control), although society at large probably won't be nearly as tolerant.

But yes, the key lies in the consenting adults part. Things get really sticky (no pun intended) when it's youngsters in the household.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:05   Link #5105
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
Reckoner: You really have no problem with Incest?

Pls go check a doctor.
I seriously don't, though I would advise against the couple having kids. It has been mentioned in the forums somewhere that the risks are often overstated, but my advice for them would be not to take that risk.

As for the closed doors part, well if they don't mind me watching, I might hang around. If they do, I'll excuse myself.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:12   Link #5106
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xellos-_^ View Post
as long as it is between consenting adults and behind close doors. I don't care.
So you would do mom or sister as long as they closed the door behind them?

I can't believe what I'm reading...
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:14   Link #5107
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
So you would do mom or sister as long as they closed the door behind them?

I can't believe what I'm reading...
I think he meant to say that since he's not the one doing it, he doesn't care. Same with me. I won't do it. But, if a colleague and her brother decided to do it over at my apartment, I'll ask them not to mess up the place too much.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:20   Link #5108
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
So you would do mom or sister as long as they closed the door behind them?

I can't believe what I'm reading...
it is not something i would do, but if someone else wants to. where do i come of saying you can't, when it is between consenting adults? what gives me that kind of authority.
__________________
Xellos-_^ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:22   Link #5109
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
To those with heavy science background, pls prove me wrong. I hope to be proved wrong about the general belief that homosexuality is just a choice/preference. Is there a serious study that proves there really is a"gay" gene? And is it social-driven?

If yes, I (can) accept.......... that homosexuality is not preference, it's a minor disorder, and they’re welcome to get government benefits/handouts/vouchers.......... for the purpose of controlling the urges and curing it by taking medications.
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:30   Link #5110
ani_d
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sikvod00 View Post
First off, I wasn't talking exclusively about California, I was referring to the U.S. as a whole. Second: source, please? Because the article I cited had this to say:
Source.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...file=297-297.5

Spoiler for too long to read:


Another one. To clarify the ones that are unclear up there.

http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/faq/dompart.shtml


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ascaloth
Maybe the mods should split this into its own thread?
Yes, please. -_-

Spoiler for off topicness:


That's that. I'm off. x__x
__________________
ani_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:35   Link #5111
Tri-ring
The Censor Bat
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Land of the rising sun
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
To those with heavy science background, pls prove me wrong. I hope to be proved wrong about the general belief that homosexuality is just a choice/preference. Is there a serious study that proves there really is a"gay" gene? And is it social-driven?

If yes, I (can) accept.......... that homosexuality is not preference, it's a minor disorder, and they’re welcome to get government benefits/handouts/vouchers.......... for the purpose of controlling the urges and curing it by taking medications.
I believe there is a scientific study on mice that when placed in a confined environment they will start homosexuality and baby killing to contain the population within their confinements.
Humans are after all part of the animal kingdom so the reaction should be the same.
Tri-ring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:41   Link #5112
Fipskuul
τηε πιγητ ωατςη
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: τηè λαnδ of веагз αnδ дг
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
If yes, I (can) accept.......... that homosexuality is not preference, it's a minor disorder, and they’re welcome to get government benefits/handouts/vouchers.......... for the purpose of controlling the urges and curing it by taking medications.
Disorder? Shall we prepare the human ovens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tri-ring View Post
I believe there is a scientific study on mice that when placed in a confined environment they will start homosexuality and baby killing to contain the population within their confinements.
Humans are after all part of the animal kingdom so the reaction should be the same.
So, after being freed, do they continue the process, or do they change preference once again (unfaithful creatures!)?
__________________
Fipskuul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:47   Link #5113
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
OK where is the PROOF that gays are born rather than made? I've heard and read the arguments............. but I have seen NO PROOF, either way there just many CLAIMS.

AND what about the discovery by some English Scientist that they claimed was a cure for homo RAMS that so many sheep herders have been complaining about? (I Heard the Gays and Lesbians raised one hell of a commotion about it even being mentioned!) iirc Some Brit Scientist referred to a CHEMICAL imbalance? (guess I'll have to go find that article)
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:48   Link #5114
Tri-ring
The Censor Bat
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Land of the rising sun
One more thing concerning Incests.
Although it is not popular idea, the bible does not condemn this since if they did then the whole dogma will fall apart not being able to explain how humans were able to propagate from one couple and again from a family after the great flood.
Tri-ring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:56   Link #5115
Fipskuul
τηε πιγητ ωατςη
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: τηè λαnδ of веагз αnδ дг
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
OK where is the PROOF that gays are born rather than made? I've heard and read the arguments............. but I have seen NO PROOF, either way there just many CLAIMS.
You have to live to understand. Until then wait for the results of researches.

And, if you have not seen any proof, why are you so eager to reject any kind of possibility (just to be fair to you, otherwise, my opinion on this issue is clear)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tri-ring View Post
One more thing concerning Incests.
Although it is not popular idea, the bible does not condemn this since if they did then the whole dogma will fall apart not being able to explain how humans were able to propagate from one couple and again from a family after the great flood.
How exactly? If two were created by the God, then he could have easily created more, if propagation were to fail. And, weren't they the same in essence, one being created from the other's ribs. Strange. The more you think about it, the more you admire the other creatures.
__________________
Fipskuul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:59   Link #5116
Anh_Minh
I disagree with you all.
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
OK where is the PROOF that gays are born rather than made? I've heard and read the arguments............. but I have seen NO PROOF, either way there just many CLAIMS.
Is there proof that heteros are born rather than made? The truth is that there's much we don't know.

Does it matter, though? The question is, why should we discriminate against homosexuals? For the most part, they certainly didn't consciously choose to be so. You'd need a serious self-destructive streak for that. Also, did you consciously choose to be hetero? I didn't. Is there a form to file?

As for it being a chemical imbalance... We could say the same about anything. Being in love. Being Republican. Being muslim. You're going to medicate the hell out of those, too?
Anh_Minh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 03:59   Link #5117
Tri-ring
The Censor Bat
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Land of the rising sun
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
OK where is the PROOF that gays are born rather than made? I've heard and read the arguments............. but I have seen NO PROOF, either way there just many CLAIMS.

AND what about the discovery by some English Scientist that they claimed was a cure for homo RAMS that so many sheep herders have been complaining about? (I Heard the Gays and Lesbians raised one hell of a commotion about it even being mentioned!) iirc Some Brit Scientist referred to a CHEMICAL imbalance? (guess I'll have to go find that article)
If it is a chemical reaction triggered by stress then it means we may all show the same reaction.

Sea turtle's gender is dictated by temprature during incubation. You are just trying to deny the obvious.

Last edited by Tri-ring; 2008-11-08 at 04:02. Reason: to give relative scientific reference
Tri-ring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 04:01   Link #5118
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
[Off Topic]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ani_d
Spoiler for off topicness:
Those articles are a lot more reliable than the nutjob site you first posted, so I took the time to read them for real, and...

Pardon me if I misunderstand your position (in which case ignore this post), but I think the articles in question support our position and not yours. The first one is from a popular magazine rather than a peer reviewed journal, but nonetheless I will treat it as credible enough. What it says is not that there are "no gay genes" but rather that the biological makeup of an individual that predisposes one towards homosexuality is complex. Not having a single clear-cut gay gene is not the same as not having a biological predisposition whatsoever, and the article in fact talks a lot about the various findings and attempts to establish correlation between the statistics and the tendency for homosexuality.

In other words, it implicitly declares that "nature" is definitely there, just not some easy "cha-ching!" answer some demand to hear. One of the key phrases in that article is the concept of multiple biological pathways affecting sexual orientation. Multiple, not none. The researches are so far inconclusive, and no theory dominates, but that doesn't mean the facts behind them are nonexistent, or that the theories themselves are wrong.

I cannot access the second article so I cannot give a full opinion of it, but the key phrase in the excerpt you posted is "Research prior to 1990." Which leads to your third article...

The Toronto Star is hardly an expert publication on psychology, but the article in question does primarily two things: first, it clarifies your second example, as it clearly points out that there has been major developments in the study of homosexuality and genetics after the 1990 date. And second, it questions the very purpose of the need to find the gay gene. The question it posts very much supports my and others' position in that it asks, quite clearly, on why must gays need to justify their orientation biologically to be able to achieve equal rights in the first place.

They don't. I don't need to figure out the Democratic gene to favor President-Elect Obama over Senator John McCain, right? Do I need to find out the magic anime gene to fight for my right to free expression involving this particular medium? No?*

Then why must gays go through all that crap just to be able to legally legitimize their relationship and enjoy the benefits that come with it like other people do?

Because of someone's prejudice?

[/Off Topic]

P.S. I find that one of the distinguishable aspects of people who really need to go back and understand science is when one demands absolute, irrefutable proof to accept the plausibility of something. Scientific knowledge doesn't work that way, sorry. To those who question this, go read Stephen Jay Gould. The late biologist/defender of scientific knowledge was a far more eloquent man than I can hope to be, and he explained himself and the sciences he work for very well indeed.

*These examples are somewhat far-fetched, and in fact a bit fallacious, though they contain the same idea and help illustrate the irrelevancy of the dilemma. A similar biological example also exists, though; is there a single introvert-extrovert gene? No, right? Are introversion and extroversion biologically predefined? No either, right? Are introversion and extroversion biologically predisposed? Many would say so. Interesting researches about the brain differences put the idea on the board, but it is likely that the predisposition results from more than one genetic influence. Can this natural tendency -- keyword being tendency -- be suppressed culturally, by "nurture?" Possibly.

Last edited by Irenicus; 2008-11-08 at 04:14.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 04:26   Link #5119
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
To those with heavy science background, pls prove me wrong. I hope to be proved wrong about the general belief that homosexuality is just a choice/preference. Is there a serious study that proves there really is a"gay" gene? And is it social-driven?

If yes, I (can) accept.......... that homosexuality is not preference, it's a minor disorder, and they’re welcome to get government benefits/handouts/vouchers.......... for the purpose of controlling the urges and curing it by taking medications.
1) There is no "general belief" that homosexuality is a preference. That's a proposal pushed by religious groups that abhor homosexuality but the research no longer finds credible.

2) Stop using the term "gay gene". There was some speculation about there being some combination of DNA that led to homosexuality but its been found that DNA is simply the "BIOS" of an extremely complicated set of reactions expressed by RNA, enzymes, biomolecular reactions, and chemical processes that go into fetal development. All sorts of variation can occur during those processes.

3) It is noted in the animal kingdom that high population tends to exaggerate homosexual activity. Period. It is not known whether the stress factors trigger chemical changes or if so, whether the changes are fetal or later. That's why the scientists still study.

4) Many decades ago, psychologists labeled homosexuality as a disorder.... well, psychology is a soft science (unlike, say, neuroscience) and is prone to be tainted by social views of the day (like anthropology and sociology). They no longer list it as a disorder. Therefore, no "cure" is being sought. Obsession can be a disorder... there is medication for that.

5) There is research that indicates brain structure of homosexuals is different than that of heterosexuals. I've not followed up to see if that line of thought has been extended.

6) Science is an evolving model of the world based on research and data collection. A biology book of today makes the biology I took high school 30+ years ago look like stone tablets and voodoo. Its a good idea to keep up with the current model of reality.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 04:38   Link #5120
bayoab
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
The fun in Alaska continues as the left starts to suggest something more is going on... electoral fraud since the numbers don't add up?

(538 runs an estimated extrapolation and basically comes up with the answer: "It completely depends on how the remaining ballots split, but it should favor Begich.")

This all may not matter because the republicans are talking about getting rid of Stevens if he wins.

There is a 221 vote difference (<.01%) for the Minnesota senator spot between Coleman and Franken. Coleman is saying Franken should concede so that the state does not have to incur the expense of a recount. Your "democracy" at work.

There is just too much Palin stupidity to ignore this:
First the county where Palin gave her famous "real america" speech went blue...
Now she claims:
Quote:
“I know that I know that I know that there was nothing done wrong in the campaign,” she said. Palin complained that the other 49 states “aren’t quite there” like Alaska because they don’t allow the same “equal opportunities and equal treatment.”
After that Newsweek article, I can buy that McCain's campaign people are basically making her the scape-goat, but she really seems to have it coming to her.

Last edited by bayoab; 2008-11-08 at 04:51.
bayoab is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
debate, elections, news, politics, united_states

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.