I'm not sure why I'm on the list explicitly. Any of the first 4 rules would be sufficient to bar my entry. barfo
Anyone can say anything they want, but what I'm saying is informed by scientific consensus: Although scientists favor biological models for the cause of sexual orientation, they do not believe that it is the result of any one factor. They generally believe that it is determined by biological and environmental factors; they state that most people's sexual orientation is determined at an early age, and sexual orientation development involves a complex interplay between nature and nurture. The biological factors are genetic and hormonal, both of affect the fetal development of the brain, while environmental factors may be sociological, psychological, or involve the early uterine environment. Scientists generally do not believe that sexual orientation is a matter of choice. Link There are plenty of sources linked there, if you want to read more in depth. There may be some environmental factors involved, but one doesn't choose one's environment anymore than one chooses one's genetics. And no, scientific consensus doesn't mean something is 100% fact, but it means a lot more than "I think it's a cultural decision." Not to mention, homosexuality has been observed in other animals, as well--animals that presumably don't have the chance to "experiment in college." That also strongly implies that it's not a choice based on culture. You're misstating that. Reproduction is achieved through eggs and sperm (penises and vaginas aren't even necessarily required anymore). Penises and vaginas are "meant for" a lot more than reproduction. I mean, where do you currently urinate from? Not to mention sex is no longer (and probably never was) just for reproduction. Saying that sex is only for reproduction is A. probably not something you practice yourself, and B. also rules out usage of human faculties for other things that aren't necessary for survival, only pleasure, like art. So yes, penises and vaginas are meant for more than reproduction. You're free to believe what you like, of course, but the scientific evidence and the knowledge of humans actually work (not as pure survival/procreation robots) don't really support your belief, in my own opinion.
I made some inputs to your post I quoted, but you cant see them without expanding. NO were not robots and no I'm not Christian, so lets put this another way...... The nose. It is used for breathing. Its also used to smell and some could say to help drain mucus. Take away the mucus and the smell and its still meant to breath... So take away urination. Take away sexual arrousal. The Penis is still used for reproduction and its my belief that was its primary use per the creator. Yes it is used for more ,but oh my god those who are saying its not used for reproduction? LMAO. Sorry. Cant continue this conversation.. its not reasonable. You put words in my mouth and twisted my intent.
But no one is saying the penis or vagina isn't used for reproduction. Why would we "take away" urination and sexual pleasure? Those are things it's used for and meant for, as well. When gay men and women get pleasure from using their genitals with people of the same sex, they're using their genitals for one of its intended uses. So when you say that "the penis (or vagina) is meant for reproduction and therefore gay people aren't using it for its intended function," you're wrong--they are using it for one of its intended functions. You can still not like homosexuality, I just don't think there's anything logical about your stance, that's all.
I just want to say, Orion Bailey, that I don't regard you as some kind of enemy--the fact that you believe that LBGT shouldn't have any rights abridged is creditable. I just think your basis for disapproval of homosexuality could use a bit more examination. Having strict definitions for how parts of the human body are "intended" to be used doesn't fit with the wide diversity to which humans have applied their bodies (and minds) for eons.
The real solution is to just hand out shovels, toilet paper and very large umbrellas and require each establishment to have a garden with squatting benches ..NO TOILET SEGREGATION....this would end perversions like stall peeping or even eye contact in public....better yet...make laws that allow only people I trust to use any public facility..that'll show em'!
You're all as dumb as ever. The place is named Charlotte. That is a GIRL'S name. The whole place is probably anxious to prove how not gay they are. If Portland were named Melissa or Jennifer you'd understand. I agree with homosexuality by the way. I wonder if I was cloned 100 times if I'd ever grow up gay. My mom says she knew I was straight when I was 3 because I'd find the Sears catalog and look at the bra ads.
I dated a girl named Portland, so there's no need for a name change..she was great and she was from Portland...parents needed a name, seemed to fit the bill..why are bills given a man's name then?
Duh, men pay em they get the name. I never met a girl named dishes or vacuum before but it isn't a rule for everything.
There's still time...you need to mingle with more Northern Cali intentional communities...you'll find dishes at the hot springs or bagpipe festival
There is always room for growth and evolution. My disagreement with it is based on the inability to reproduce. For a society to maintain we can't evolve into homosexuals or we will die off. Thqt is really the only basis I find for my disagreement. Other than that, I honestly don't care whether it is a deamed as a physical or homonal imbalance... not imbalance... difference? or whether its a psychological one. I personally believe its a bit of both and cant be generalized, but only examined on an individual basis. The first Charlotte I ever knew was a spider... but then.. she was female to no? My mother asked me if I was gay once when I was 19. IT happens when you are able to let walls down and be an openly friendly person without a regard to who you are interacting with.
