*I find this stance of yours especially troubling and hypocritical given your utterly fanatical belief in autonomy and self-making one's life. Really man, you're a living, breathing pile of stupid contradictions and I almost wonder how you convince yourself of all of the baseless, disturbingly anti-human/sociopathic shit you believe.
I am curious, how does his statement show nothing but contradictions? And yes, I understand that you are using a quote, however, you felt that it was appropriate to use towards him to prove whatever point that it was that you were trying to prove. I'm saying this because of the fact that Dakryn's posts show that he does not feel that homosexuality, or any other controversial subject of the sort (according to what is controversial to the left-right),should be illegal. He merely disagrees with it based on a logical and rational manner. Personally I'm completely ok with homosexuality (Hell, in the heat of the moment, I could take penetration and find it completely ok, in the standards in which most do not considerate it, given the circumstances). However, that does not mean that it is not irrational in a lifetime view of perspective. How does this really effect anything? It is merely an abstract illusion on a practicing person's part. Or, it is just a thing and some stuff, which is all that anything boils down to from an individual perspective.
However, that does not mean that it is not irrational in a lifetime view of perspective.
I take you to be saying that homosexuality isn't rational because it doesn't contribute to the reproduction of species (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm glad that both you and Dak are willing to "allow" homosexuality; but the homosexual drive isn't any more unnatural than a heterosexual drive. If we concern ourselves merely with the sexual drive, it's all the same.
A lot of arguments seem to circle around the idea that people "become" gay because of some circumstances of their upbringing. This argument is tiresome and flawed because gays emerge from all strata of society and from all different kinds of households. Furthermore, plenty of straight people have emerged from absolutely horrible upbringings. There are no set parameters by which we can gauge whether or not a child will be gay. Saying that specific circumstances contribute to homosexuality suggests that we are able to do so.
The reason this doesn't work is because sexuality is determined by a plethora of objects, sensations, and experiences that take on completely different meanings for different subjects. This process is the same, whether one is gay or straight. There is no wrench that has been thrown into the sexual development of someone who is gay; it occurs just as naturally as one who is straight.
I'm pretty sure Dak would file this under his "junk science" category, but I would suggest that everyone read Freud's 3 Essays on Sexuality, especially "Infantile Sexuality."
Marriage shouldn't have anything to do with government/laws/taxes anyway, regardless whether its hetero or homo sexual.
Will the military collapse immediately? No. Will performance further degrade? Based on personal observations of closeted gays performance in the military, quite confident that it will.
Will performance further degrade? Based on personal observations of closeted gays performance in the military, quite confident that it will.
If this is true, it has nothing to do with the essence of "gayness" and everything to do with the ways homosexuals are treated in this country and the controversy they know awaits them within institutions such as the military.
I don't care if such views are considered irrational or illogical, I am just sick of the tired song of "disagreement = hate".
Mathiäs;9696609 said:It's also not true. Dakryn observed like four gay people. I remember him talking about it in earlier discussions.