Why? Because the potential scam about holograms in bracelets, wristbands of chains, should now FINALLY come to an END!

Support us, visit http://www.stophologramscam.com/en/

        DV82XL said:

Homosexuality is by definition, a behavioral trait. Behavioral traits are a social concern in two cases: where behavior is causing the individual manifesting it to suffer and in the other instance, where it is causing harm to those around the individual manifesting it. Beyond that it is no one’s affair.

Homosexuals are not harming themselves, and they are not harming the rest of us in any real way.

We should just leave them alone. Their sex-lives are simply none of our business – which is exactly what the rest of us demand for ourselves.

I guess I could agree with both sides on this. Yeah, it’s their buisiness and not really of any consequence. On the other hand, there are sociologists and behavioral scientists who research behavior and stuff just for the pure research aspect.

Sexual behavior research though, yeah, I mean, it has it’s legitimate side and there’s something to be said for understanding how reproductive biology plays into who we are and how humans work, but at the same time it gets taken too far too easily to the point of being very questionable. It seems like there was some really some things of questionable ethics and stuff that went on, all the way back since the 1970’s.

Some of those who started off saying they were researching sexual development in the early years and it just got really creepy where they went with it.

So I don’t know, it’s just a place I’m not sure we need to consider a big scientific priority.

        drbuzz0 said:

One of my friends is a psychologist and took several classes with a professor who spends her time researching what kinds of kink various individuals like and what it has to do with their cultural background.

Do you happen to have a picture of her? She sounds like fun. Why don’t I ever get a professor like that?

        drbuzz0 said:

One of my friends is a psychologist and took several classes with a professor who spends her time researching what kinds of kink various individuals like and what it has to do with their cultural background.

And there was a time the Inquisition would have had them burnt outright as well for doing so.

        DV82XL said:

We should just leave them alone. Their sex-lives are simply none of our business – which is exactly what the rest of us demand for ourselves.

There are actually professionals who spend their career researching the sex lives and sexual development of heterosexuals. One of my friends is a psychologist and took several classes with a professor who spends her time researching what kinds of kink various individuals like and what it has to do with their cultural background.

I’m serious.

Homosexuals are not harming themselves, and they are not harming the rest of us in any real way.

We should just leave them alone. Their sex-lives are simply none of our business – which is exactly what the rest of us demand for ourselves.

        Finrod said:

I believe the balance of evidence is that homosexuality is a trait determined by the organic structure of the brain, rather than a matter of choice (and my internal mental state confirms this… like Doc, I couldn’t be gay even if I decided I wanted to be). This reality is an anathema to Christians, who need to believe that it’s a matter of free will so that the designation of homosexual behaviour as a sin can be justified.

Yeah, I really don’t know what determines what someone’s orientation is, but I would generally guess it’s probably more complex than any one factor. I don’t think it’s genetic, at least not entirely, because there’s no evidence of any greater or lesser likelihood in isolated groups and if it were purely genetic it may tend to work its way out of the population anyway.

There seem to be a number of variations. Some who say they always knew they were gay. Others seem to have been confused until after puberty etc etc etc. Hence, I tend to think it’s more than one factor. Possibly a combination of pre-natal combined with very early development. The fact that it seems to have an organic side does not preclude neural plasticity and development playing into it.

It’s a legitimate scientific question as to what factors determine sexual orientation and the greater issue of how this relates to human sexual and social development.

However, this is a rare issue in science that is so taboo, most researchers won’t touch it. You just plain can’t research it because almost any result you discover is guaranteed to bring villagers with torches. Anything which could possibly be twisted to make it seem that there’s some element of enviornment involved will have you branded a homophobe and possibly have religious groups looking to lift you on their shoulders. If you indicate that it appears to be random and probably not environment based, you’ll get the opposite… or maybe the same… or maybe both.

It’s just such a taboo subject that it can’t be researched.

My theory is these right-wing Christian zealots are using the gays exactly like the Nazis used the Jews; as whipping stock to incite hatred and for the same reasons.

        drbuzz0 said:

It wasn’t really a decision I made. I could not be gay even if for some reason I wanted to be.

I believe the balance of evidence is that homosexuality is a trait determined by the organic structure of the brain, rather than a matter of choice (and my internal mental state confirms this… like Doc, I couldn’t be gay even if I decided I wanted to be). This reality is an anathema to Christians, who need to believe that it’s a matter of free will so that the designation of homosexual behaviour as a sin can be justified.

        Carletes said:

Hahahaha! My favorite homophobic response! How dare gays ‘indulge’ in homosexuality! How come they get to have more sex?! One who is righteous would not allow themselves the pleasure! And to top it all off, linking this with atheism. This made my morning. Thank you Ben.

I think he might be thinking of being bisexual, as opposed to gay. That would theoretically “double” the number of people for you to have sex with – if your goal was simply to have sex with as many people as possible.

Actually, though, being gay would not increase the number of perspective mates, it would decrease it. Since the majority of people are straight and thus would not go for it, you’d be limited to a fairly small subset of your own gender.

“As an atheist” … I’m neither bi nor gay. I’m straight. It wasn’t really a decision I made. I could not be gay even if for some reason I wanted to be. I find the idea of being with another man highly unappealing and I feel attracted to women. There’s no way I could just decide to change that… despite being an atheist.

Also, regarding the sex life of an atheist: speaking only for myself, I can say it’s considerably more boring and less active than Ben seems to think.