tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post6500020252990990381..comments2024-02-24T19:42:39.876+05:30Comments on Bill the Butcher: Homophobia and all thatBill the Butcherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08436195659154078021noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post-28181988157089130962012-11-12T08:44:27.009+05:302012-11-12T08:44:27.009+05:30Great. Pretty much agreed. Those religious twits, ...Great. Pretty much agreed. Those religious twits, again...<br />. Most of them probly should be isolated from the gene-pool.Paperinen Puskistahuutelijahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12215398052449221072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post-2852213028441408682011-07-27T19:48:49.377+05:302011-07-27T19:48:49.377+05:30It's well enough known that homosexuality is g...It's well enough known that homosexuality is genetically determined, but if you want a source, it's here, Frances:<br /><br />http://www.skeptictank.org/gaygene.htm<br /><br />I don't think religion has anything to do with morality. Non-religious people can be as moral as religious people, and religious people can use their religion as cover to be immoral (look at the Crusades). Nor can I even begin to accept an intelligent design or creationist hypothesis.Bill the Butcherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08436195659154078021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post-88951419239379291722011-07-23T23:58:48.727+05:302011-07-23T23:58:48.727+05:30Sexuality is a term that covers not only our orien...Sexuality is a term that covers not only our orientation, but also many other preferences involving sexual fulfillment. Whether humans wish to copulate with same sex or opposite, or indeed with other species altogether, is only one aspect of their sexual natures. Consider also libido, conservative versus experimental preference, the practice other than homosexuality of acts which have been labeled perversion such as pedophilia, necrophilia, sadism, oh need I go on? If there is something that can be done with the human body in the pursuit of pleasure, humans have thought of it. Why have we decided that some are moral and others not? What have we used as the yardstick for our decisions? <br />Religion has served as the foundation for our legal systems, governing systems, and moral values. As we slowly undermine those morals, we also dismantle the very foundation of our societal systems. The family unit itself has been the lynchpin of the structure of our culture, one that is set up to protect children, democratic rights and moral principle. But..is it true? That human desires are set by genes? Of course it is. We are genetically predisposed to want pleasure. The more we get, the more we need. If we excuse the indulgence of one desire, how can we deny the others? Where is accountability for self control or moral circumspection? I do agree with one point you made, Bill. I think that human beings are naturally attracted to other human beings regardless of gender. Label that bi-sexuality if you will. We have, I believe been created with an enormous capacity and need to love and touch other humans. But we also have a nature that will relentlessly pursue satisfaction, and that’s why sex gets mixed in with the definition of relationship. Take a quick look if you will at less ‘civilized’ times where folk lived in small villages in daily fear of rape, pillage and looting by the next village that had stronger warriors. Without the constraints of a morally founded belief system, humans took what they could get. Did I say less civilized times….? this sounds a lot like what happens to the losing side of conflicts in modern day Africa.<br />Organized religions don’t even need to be brought into the discussion. Today’s institutions are too easily picked full of holes for their problems. I don’t think it’s wise though, to throw the moral baby out with the holy bathwater. Corruption within these various institutions has no bearing on the discussion of whether homosexuality is morally wrong. <br />I have to say, I like your style of argument, Bill. Friendly but with a glint of steel. I was eager to check your research sources..and then a little disappointed. Where is your reference to an article supporting your most important point? Is there in fact no evidence for this claim that homosexuality is in the genes? Where are the headlines that herald the discovery of the ‘off the hook’ genome that makes it ok to succumb to the dark side? (personally I am hoping for discovery of the one that lets me eat dessert before mains without guilt)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post-53673095958366443922011-07-23T23:55:43.684+05:302011-07-23T23:55:43.684+05:30Homophobe..is such an ugly word. It brings to mind...Homophobe..is such an ugly word. It brings to mind all those other irrational phobias..of spiders and tiny places and poor harmless peanut butter sandwiches. People who hate gays?..are irrational too. Woah, before I get carried away, why don’t we cut the emotive labels and get down to the real discussion. The sexuality of human beings is, I believe, the topic of the day. Recapping the points brought forward so far: 1. humans evolved from simple ‘cave-man’ societies, in which sexuality was the primary motivation to form relational bonds. 2. Sexuality is determined by genetic selection. 3. Organized religion considers homosexuality a threat to the coffers. Leaving aside other less central but nevertheless eloquently expressed side issues such as anti-imperialism and feminism, I will take a look at the problems I see in those three main points. <br />I like science. It’s logical to a fault, unemotional and unforgiving. Science relies heavily on provable fact, and the absence of evidence to support the origins of mankind means that the theory of evolution must take its place alongside the beliefs of creationism and alien intelligence. Each of these theories has its own stories to suggest how mankind has come to this highly civilized or at least technologically advanced state. In addition to the example already given of cave-men, I would like to offer the creationist explanation of man beginning as an already very intelligent and socially capable being. Not only was he able to form bonds based on familial ties, but also on a spiritual love and commitment to another. In this case sex, rather than the chain that bound, was the icing on the cake..so to speak. While there is much debate over how humans came to populate the earth and form our different cultures, there is no evidence to support any claims, and although some would cite the pyramids with their Egyptian cryptographs as proof of alien intervention…none of the theories cited above has conclusive proof of fact.<br />....continued in next post. I seem to be limited to 4,096 characters ~FrancesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post-19986329447717107192011-07-22T23:14:29.038+05:302011-07-22T23:14:29.038+05:30BTW. Anonymous above is me, Vickie Collins. I am ...BTW. Anonymous above is me, Vickie Collins. I am not a member of blogspot so dont have a profile.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post-26673761821102012482011-07-22T23:13:43.774+05:302011-07-22T23:13:43.774+05:30Bill, your argurment makes sense. To say it more ...Bill, your argurment makes sense. To say it more abstractly, I think that a certain degree of intimacy is necessary to trust, and sexual relations is one way of establishing said intimacy.<br /><br />Wonderful article.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7826101215822428783.post-34700236835500332402011-07-22T22:54:05.267+05:302011-07-22T22:54:05.267+05:30Yes, your evolutionary argument makes sense Bill.Yes, your evolutionary argument makes sense Bill.Delbor Greebieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05955422610650834976noreply@blogger.com