Homosexuality May Have Evolved In Humans Because It Helps Us...Bond?

If it was still classified as a mental disorder, would you also consider it wrong? And what about other disorders, like autism for example.

"Wrong" is a very absolute word, I think. Murder is wrong, or child abuse, or ripping off old ladies.

 

Raging homophobes get in a tizzy over the sexuality of others. It's a form of prurient, possibly vicarious, voyeurism.

Normal folks are just not so captivated by the predilections of consenting adults when they're not one of them.

 

no similar behaviour has been tracked in family members separated at birth with no contact until adulthood...everything about us is inherited, nuturing only modifies or adds to the final product...

 

what does homosexuality have to do with pedophilia? most pedophiles are heterosexual...

 

sodomy has been practiced for as long as there have been humans to do so, the original birth control method...it's approval or disapproval is just invented social convention...

 

Actually it's an objective reality, not an opinion.

But there's nothing unacceptable with homosexuality.

You not liking homosexuality is entirely irrelevant.

 

Debatable at best Chief problem is sample size. The only study I know of that claims that hasn't proven to be repeatable. The same behaviors often don't repeat between family members who weren't separated at Birth. Now there appear to be genes that magnify the impact of certain behaviors but have not been proven to cause the behavior themselves. For instance there according to one study is a gene that appears to worsen obesity in people who over eat but if but the same gene appears in people who do not overeat without causing them undo harm. There is also a gene that seems to worsen the impact of alcohol on your body making you more vulnerable to alcoholism if you drink, but there are people who do not have the gene and are alcoholics and people with the gene that are not.

 

it's not debatable, everything that makes up the person called "me" is inherited including behaviour...the only difficulty is determining what parts of the behaviour are genetic and to what degree the nurture modifications have had... and the sample base is enormous, separated twins were studied for decades until it became socially unacceptable to separate them for adoption...behaviour is not a blank slate at birth, your basic personality is inherited from your parents..

a wolf will still behave as a wolf and not a dog even if you separate it at birth from it's wolf family and raise it with dogs, basic behaviour is inherited...

I have a cousin who we discovered in an ancestry search, he didn't know we existed, his father(my uncle) still denies his existence but his behaviour fits in perfectly with other family members(half brothers and cousins) ...

 

Except the sample size is small twins are rare separated twins very rare. And behavioral similarities grossly overstated in any case.

 

The scientists are right but it didn't take to be that much learned to understand it, just read about history books. Before christianity it was common thing for the soldiers to solidarize and make up bonds of protection/affection between younger recruits and older ones. It could go well as far as to become a sexual relationship, and that's not only because the lack of women cause many soldiers were married. A famous teban strategos actally stated that deep bonds between soldiers was good for the moral of the army and and the will to protect the loved one helped much to keep the cohesion of the phalanx. Proof of it is the famously invincible " sacred band " which was composed of 300 couples of men in love with each other. So homosexual relationship was actually already used to improve bonds between males and keep them more united.

 

Absolutely I'd still consider it wrong. Just like when the APA declares that pedophilia is not a mental disorder but a sexual orientation just like they did with homosexuality, it will STILL be wrong.

You say that the idea of "wrong" is absolute... I personally would agree but what are the attributes of something that is "wrong"?

 

For me wrong is something that hurts or damages other people. I just don't see that in homosexuality as long as two consenting adults are involved.
How APA or any other organization classifies it doesn't change anything about that. I agree with you that if pedophilia was declared as an orientation, it would still be wrong because sexual activity would inevitably take the form of child abuse.

 

Well I'm going to address why homosexuality should be discriminated against because it DOES harm people... both those who engage in it and those who do not.

Homosexuality DOES bring harm to people. Homosexuals are representative of TWO-THIRDS of the new HIV cases in the USA in 2010 and that number is rising.

Homosexuals are 44 times more likely to contract AIDS than heterosexual males.

Not only does this harm the pocketbooks of everybody else in the country because we are now having to support that behavior and their disgusting diseases with our taxpayer dollars through healthcare but we also have our OWN healthcare costs increased because of the increased cost of providing for those homosexuals and their disgusting diseases.... but because even homosexuals are disgusted and ashamed of their behavior and they don't want to claim to be homosexuals (or in the case of bisexuals) they end up passing those diseases on to heterosexuals as well and cause real physical harm to others.

So yes, they do harm other people. And I'm not even going to go into the question of how a homosexual male father informs his adopted female daughter how to deal with her period or how to deal with girls when his adopted son asks. I'm not even going into the issue of homosexuals attempting to force churches to shutdown by taking revenue that they've used for hundreds of years to support their church. I'm not going into the issue that homosexuals are pushing their lifestyle on children as young as kindergarten in school.

 

I doubt those numbers but won't argue against them for the sake of an honest discussion.
What you're basically saying is that homosexuals are taking unnecessary risks and thereby increasing your healthcare costs.
What do you think about people who eat unhealthy food or smoke? Because I'm sure they take a toll on the healthcare costs, too. Are they wrong?

Those are problems every single parent with a kid of the opposite gender has to deal with.

That's the sort of political implications I wanted to avoid in my question to you. We would probably be in agreement on a couple of specific cases about the difference between equal and special rights, but I think the whole notion of gays forcing their "lifestyle" on children is grossly exaggerated.

 

No need to doubt.
2/3 of new HIV cases:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/HIVFactSheets/Epidemic/Transmission.htm

44x more likely to have HIV:
The data, presented at CDC’s 2010 National STD Prevention Conference, finds that the rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) is more than 44 times that of other men and more than 40 times that of women.

The range was 522-989 cases of new HIV diagnoses per 100,000 MSM vs. 12 per 100,000 other men and 13 per 100,000 women.

The rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men and more than 71 times that of women, the analysis says. The range was 91-173 cases per 100,000 MSM vs. 2 per 100,000 other men and 1 per 100,000 women.

That's partially what I'm saying but yes. I think people who are unhealthy or smoke are discriminated against by our society. They are forced to pay more for their healthcare because of the higher risk and dangers that they represent.

But it's more than that, a fatass who eats too much fatty food doesn't actually physically harm anybody else. I don't believe that smoking does either however many people point to the dangers of second hand smoke... and see how we treat that? Smoking is banned in basically every building, they're relegated to standing in specific smoking areas outside, in some places they can't even smoke in their own car and in some places they're trying to outright ban smoking.

Why should homosexuals and bisexuals, who spread their diseases to others, be immune to that same type of discrimination?

Right but they didn't go into it attempting to be a single parent. They were having a child with someone else who DID have the ability to explain those things to their child... for whatever reason, death or divorce or whatever... they've lost that other option.

But homosexuals go into the situation KNOWING that neither of the individuals involved can provide certain things which are needed for the optimum development of a growing child. Huge difference.

That's fine if you don't want to talk about it... but when you say it's grossly exaggerated, there are examples from essentially every state in the union of gay people pushing their agenda on school children.... and for sure every state in the union that legalized gay marriage more than a couple months ago.

 

OP have you ever had any gay friends?

I promise they are not the paragon of nastiness you think they are.

Many people base their opinions off the ones they see protesting on TV and that is a shame. Those are the fringe just like any other politically active group.

I currently have two close gay friends and somewhere between 6 or 7 in my life, that I know of course.

I have yet to meet one that wasn't truly an amazing person, even though I know they are out there too

 

statistically everyone has gay friends and gay family members many aren't aware of it because of their openly bigoted vocalizations has kept those gays in hiding...

 

Touché

 

Absolutely. Its wrong from a religious perspective, and its deviant from a biological perspective.

In our society we try when possible to accommodate various deviations in people but we do not typically set them up as superior and we certainly do not waive our common sense and our own rights to accommodate their deviation. Except for the gays, who have managed through a successful PR campaign to gain political power which they use to force themselves upon the rest of society.

A psychopath is "natural", so is cyanide. Being "natural" means nothing.

 

What about those of us who aren't your brand of religious?

What if I am Buddist? Zoroastrianism? What if I pray to Zues?

 

Then there are plenty of other reasons to be against homosexuality.

 

I was answering a specific question requesting an individual perspective, not a global perspective. If you want to answer it from your perspective then go right ahead.

My perspective is that homosexuality is wrong, its deviant, the gay "rights" movement has morphed from desiring equality to wanting revenge and punishment, and I should not be forced to accommodate it.

 

No it's just bigoted intolerant ignorant hatred...its those types of people the world needs to rid itself of not the gays and lesbians...

 

All perverts make that same argument.

It's not [Incest/Homosexuality/Minor-attracted persons/bestiality/etc] that have something wrong... its the people who don't like them that are the problem.

 

the op is about homosexuality and you turn that into incest, pedophilia and bestiality...I fear for your neighbours safety...

i'm no MD but I suspect someone here has mental health issues