GAY PROTEST AND FALLEN SOLDIERS FUNERAL

[Les]

Genetics or Choice...

Choice consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action.

Genetics, a discipline of biology, is the science of heredity and variation in living organisms.

So, KL, if a person's sexual orientation is not something they are born with (genetics), then that person decides (choice) their sexual preference, and this can be reversed, since they could change their mind at will.



However, you also state, "most of the world embraces the concept of eugenics".

Eugenics is "the study of, or belief in, the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)."

This implies that the world embraces the concept that if sexual orientation is genetically predisposed, and is unacceptable, it should be controlled by "discouraging reporduction by persons having this genetic defect".

 

[Bill V]

Ha ha. Glad to hear someone kicked those Baptist whackos ass. Which I could.

They're not Baptist. Don't criticize the Baptist church because some whacko falsely uses the word "Baptist" in the name of his organization.



From one of the articles linked in this thread:

Phelps' church is not affiliated with a larger denomination and is made up mostly of his extended family.

 

[Kevin Lang]

Les, I said "embraced".



Genetics controls MANY aspects of our live--no one likes to have someone else pulling the strings, so people (in power) took it upon themselves to try and control genetics.



Of course, this all ended in the 1930s, but some countries continued it until the 1970s.

So, KL, if a person's sexual orientation is not something they are born with (genetics), then that person decides (choice) their sexual preference, and this can be reversed, since they could change their mind at will

Les, what point are you trying to make here? It's like your insinuating something, like you're on the pro-genetics standpoint, but I just can't be sure. To respond to what I quoted from you, Yes if sexual orientation is by choice, then it can be changed at will.



With that past participle, my post did not insinuate anything. Your post, however, tries to make a thinly veiled attack against my "position", but yet it does not have that past participle.



So you had to alter my post to make your ambiguous point? I feel cheapened.

 

[EddieS'04]

JerryA, very well said. I didnt dare say what you did. I wanted to. Just afraid it would lead me to another bann.

 

[Les]

my post did not insinuate anything.

Actually it does, but spin it any way you want...

 

[Kevin Lang]

No it doesn't. So you misquote me and then cop out?



What is that?



EDIT: I too, agree with JerryA's post. After all the countlessly long arguments that have been on this board, the best they ever end with is the "I see your point". And many, especially the ones that I'm in, don't even get that.



Les, how about I un-insinuate what I think you think I was insuating (that's a mouthful). I do not like how genetics gives people traits for life that they cannot change. I also do not believe that gays should be euthanized simply because they are gay. I hope that clears things up.

 

[Jerry Abson 3]

My 20's on KL, any odds?



I think we all have veered from the original reason for this post. Paratigger was informing us of how he feels regarding some protestors at a fallen soldiers funeral. He was not making any comment other than that.



I agree that they also make my blood boil. They have tried it here in WA, and never got close to the activities. We tend to handle things a little 'redneck' style when needed!



So we can all 'debate' the rights, wrongs, choices, genetics, or other big fancy college words, but the post was a soldiers complaint.



Lets all stand beside him, let him know that we will not tolerate that kind of behavior, and thank him for his continued service, and our condolences to his fallen brother in arms.

 

[Les]

No it doesn't. So you misquote me and then cop out?

:huh:

 

[Thomas Rogers]

KL,



In my opinion "choice", like "control" is often an illusion. We like to think that we have choice, that we get to choose one option or another, but more often then not what we choose is based on our "programming", whether that be environmental or genetic.



TJR

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Jerry A said:

So we can all 'debate' the rights, wrongs, choices, genetics, or other big fancy college words, but the post was a soldiers complaint.



Lets all stand beside him, let him know that we will not tolerate that kind of behavior, and thank him for his continued service, and our condolences to his fallen brother in arms.

Consider this...



if we believe in what our soldiers are dying for, then we should agree with people's right to peacefully protest. We may not LIKE when and where they protest, but of they do so peacefully (even if not tastefully) then we have to accept "crap" like this.



My opinion...and I voice it here.



TJR

 

[Les]

Les, how about I un-insinuate what I think you think I was insuating (that's a mouthful). I do not like how genetics gives people traits for life that they cannot change. I also do not believe that gays should be euthanized simply because they are gay. I hope that clears things up.

Actually it does, however you should note only you used the term "gay" in this discussion, I never did...

 

[Kevin Lang]

Les, you never did, but seeing as how this whole discussion tangented into a discussion on the origins of gayness, I interpreted that your rather vague post was stating that I wanted gays to be euthanized, along the lines of Turing. To save typing down the road, though I appreciate the practice, yes that does mean that I have made an assumption.



So in a worst-case scenario, you ensnared me with words. I know that TJR and I have been doing that for a while now, and neither one of us has been too scarred by it, so I'm hoping I can survive another word trap. They're kinda like mouse traps rather than bear traps



Gayness being genetic has far flung ramifications, moreso than choice, the way I see it

 

[Shaun Tucker]

Jerry A is 2 for 2 in this thread.



Its about respect for the fallen that have paid the ultimate sacrifice so that protestors MAY protest.



Without the soldiers who are over there doing a fantastic job at clearing up an awful mess, these yuppies wouldn't be afforded half the freedoms they have today.



I can understand that they feel the need to push their message out to others, but to do so at a funeral, especially at a fallen soldier's funeral is selfish and ignorant. They got what they deserved.



IMO this post has NOTHING (zero, zilch, nadda) to do with homosexuality. If you want to start a controversial thread about that, click the "New Message" button at the top of the page. We'll see how long till THAT thread gets deleted. :wacko:

 

[Todd Z]

How about this...



Forget the man is a soldier( No disrespect)........ Now let his family grieve in peace as I am sure the wackos from the church would like it if they are burying a family member of their own..



Let the man have his final right to a peaceful family funeral...



These sickoes need to be wiped off the earth..



Todd Z

 

[Johnny O]

I have yet to make the connection between dead soldiers and gay people.

Phelps and his church are whack jobs, plain and simple.

 

[TomT]

Phelps and his church are whack jobs, plain and simple

They are and if the stupid media would quit giving them publicity than maybe the retards would go away.

 

[Jerry Abson 3]

Yea, were back on trac!:banana::banana:

 

[Bill V]

Without the soldiers who are over there doing a fantastic job at clearing up an awful mess, these yuppies wouldn't be afforded half the freedoms they have today.

Shaun, in general I agree with your post--but I need to take issue with your use of the term "yuppies" here. These people are the FARTHEST thing from being yuppies. The "YUP" in the term "yuppies" stands for "Young Urban Professional. They're typically thought of as young (20's to 30's), single, financially-secure/affluent, and socially-liberal but fiscally-conservative. In recent years, the stereotype usually connotates self-centeredness, excessive concern with image and spending to maintain that image (clothing, vehicles, etc.), narcisism, and a naivity associated with youth.



These protesters don't fit that category in any way whatsoever. They are, for the most part, not young; they're not urban (they're from Kansas, for crying out loud), and they and their actions most definitely can not in any way be described as "professional". These people (I use that term loosely) aren't concerned with their image. (No one having such a concern would ever participate in such a protest because the resulting damage to their image is so obviously predictable.) They're about as non-socially-liberal as you can get.



If you don't care for the actions and lifestyles of people who can more accurately be described as "yuppies", that's fine--there's plenty about that lifestyle worth criticizing. But just because you happen to feel "yuppie" is a derogatory term, don't just go throwing it at groups to which it clearly doesn't apply.

 

[Gavin Allan]

They are and if the stupid media would quit giving them publicity than maybe the retards would go away.

Are you intentionally dis'sing the disabled/cognitively challenged? If so, I think that is totally sick and uncalled for.

 

[Kevin Lang]

Gavin, is that sarcastic?