If there was a straight pill would homosexuals take it?

[EnemyPartyII]

You know so far, on a personal level I'd say I've been a lot less insulting as the homosexuals and pro gay people posting in this thread.
The homosexuals have shown the same amount of ignorance as any hetero I've seen, if not more.

How, specifically?

 

[Inviolable]

How, specifically?

You're back tracking. I explain what I think is not allowing people to be accepting of homosexuals and you pass it off as prejudice and move on.

How can you say you're not doing the exact same thing they are if you're not certain of what it is they're doing and have no excuse because all you can relate it to is prejudice?

 

[Crazy Liz]

You're back tracking. I explain what I think is not allowing people to be accepting of homosexuals and you pass it off as prejudice and move on.

How can you say you're not doing the exact same thing they are if you're not certain of what it is they're doing and have no excuse because all you can relate it to is prejudice?

We've asked you to explain exactly how it's different from prejudice. EP2 has asked you to explain again, indicating she still does not understand, but wants to. I'm in the same boat. I do not understand how one person's subjective feelings are sufficient to take a basic human right away from millions of others, without that feeling being viewed as prejudice.

I'm willing to acknowledge you are severely squicked by the thought of gay sex. I don't see how it logically flows from that to take away their rights out of consideration for one person's squicky feelings, rather than to ask the person with the squicky feelings to deal with them.

 

[Inviolable]

We've asked you to explain exactly how it's different from prejudice. EP2 has asked you to explain again, indicating she still does not understand, but wants to. I'm in the same boat. I do not understand how one person's subjective feelings are sufficient to take a basic human right away from millions of others, without that feeling being viewed as prejudice.

They're not subjective. It's something that makes me me. I have no control over it.
Telling me it's subjective is like saying love and hate dont actually exist. Well technically, they dont and if they dont prejudice doesn't either.
We cant have this discussion that way. You cant make the things that make me who I am subjective because you dont understand them.

I'm willing to acknowledge you are severely squicked by the thought of gay sex. I don't see how it logically flows from that to take away their rights out of consideration for one person's squicky feelings, rather than to ask the person with the squicky feelings to deal with them.

No, you didn't answer the question. You danced around it like I said you would.
Would you sleep with another woman? and if not why?

 

[OllieFranz]

They're not subjective. It's something that makes me me. I have no control over it.
Telling me it's subjective is like saying love and hate dont actually exist. Well technically, they dont and if they dont prejudice doesn't either.
We cant have this discussion that way. You cant make the things that make me who I am subjective because you dont understand them.

?????

What do you think subjective means? What you described is practically the definition of subjective. Subjective is the opposite of objective. If something is objective it is the same no matter what your personal feelings about it are. If it is subjective, then it is your feelings that determine what it is.

The only way to discuss something like this is to discuss where your feelings differ from those of (for example, since they are the others engaged in this discussion) EPII and Crazy Liz, and try to discover why it is different for you than it is for them. That seems to be exactly what they are asking.

 

[Crazy Liz]

They're not subjective. It's something that makes me me. I have no control over it.
Telling me it's subjective is like saying love and hate dont actually exist. Well technically, they dont and if they dont prejudice doesn't either.

What does subjectivity have to do with existence of emotions?

Love, hate and prejudice exist. They are also subjective.

We cant have this discussion that way. You cant make the things that make me who I am subjective because you dont understand them.

That is precisely why they are subjective. Homos4xual attraction is also subjective.

No, you didn't answer the question. You danced around it like I said you would.
Would you sleep with another woman? and if not why?

I didn't dance around it. I ignored it.

Would I? When I was in high school I did draft counseling. I prepared my male peers who wished to be classified as conscientious objectors to answer the standard "What would you do?" draft board questions, usually about someone threatening the lives of your loved ones or threatening to rape your grandmother.

Now, we also have an issue of what the question is designed to test. If it is designed to test whether an ethical value is held in good faith, then it is not a valid question. We counseled people to avoid the "What would you do?" question & rephrase it as "What do you hope you would do, if you were able to act consistently with your values, rather than your emotions?" You seem to be looking for the opposite type of response. IOW, you seem to want to know whether someone's emotional state might override their values.

Either way, a direct answer to your question will not prove anything, as far as I can see. Assuming a person's values and emotions might be in conflict, the question only tests a person's prediction of which would most strongly affect their behavior.

Now, if your question is intended to find out whether I'm squicked by the thought of sex with a woman, why don't you just ask that?

But first may I ask you what significance you would find in my response that I am squicked or that I am not squicked? If I am squicked (and there certainly are things that squick me), why should that lead me to the conclusion that I should make laws against what squicks me, rather than leading me to the conclusions that there probably are things I like (eating calamari, for instance) that squick other people. I don't want laws prohibiting restaurants from serving calamari just because calamari squicks some people. Now, if someone told me the sight of a plate of fried rings and tentacles on the table makes them sick, I think if I wanted to go out to dinner with that person, I might choose a Mexican restaurant, rather than a seafood restaurant. But I wouldn't want them trying to shut down all the seafood restaurants just because of their subjective reaction to calamari.

 

[Inviolable]

What does subjectivity have to do with existence of emotions?

Love, hate and prejudice exist. They are also subjective.



That is precisely why they are subjective. Homos4xual attraction is also subjective.



I didn't dance around it. I ignored it.

Would I? When I was in high school I did draft counseling. I prepared my male peers who wished to be classified as conscientious objectors to answer the standard "What would you do?" draft board questions, usually about someone threatening the lives of your loved ones or threatening to rape your grandmother.

Now, we also have an issue of what the question is designed to test. If it is designed to test whether an ethical value is held in good faith, then it is not a valid question. We counseled people to avoid the "What would you do?" question & rephrase it as "What do you hope you would do, if you were able to act consistently with your values, rather than your emotions?" You seem to be looking for the opposite type of response. IOW, you seem to want to know whether someone's emotional state might override their values.

Either way, a direct answer to your question will not prove anything, as far as I can see. Assuming a person's values and emotions might be in conflict, the question only tests a person's prediction of which would most strongly affect their behavior.

Now, if your question is intended to find out whether I'm squicked by the thought of sex with a woman, why don't you just ask that?

But first may I ask you what significance you would find in my response that I am squicked or that I am not squicked? If I am squicked (and there certainly are things that squick me), why should that lead me to the conclusion that I should make laws against what squicks me, rather than leading me to the conclusions that there probably are things I like (eating calamari, for instance) that squick other people. I don't want laws prohibiting restaurants from serving calamari just because calamari squicks some people. Now, if someone told me the sight of a plate of fried rings and tentacles on the table makes them sick, I think if I wanted to go out to dinner with that person, I might choose a Mexican restaurant, rather than a seafood restaurant. But I wouldn't want them trying to shut down all the seafood restaurants just because of their subjective reaction to calamari.

You ignore it so you can dance around it, youre bi or homosexual yourself aren't you?
The point is there is a difference between how I feel about a lot of things and it should be that way for everyone. I dont have the same views on food as I do sex. The "squick" whatever that is... Isn't the same from one topic to the next. Seeing bad food may make me want to vomit, while seeing a form of sex I dont agree with.. would be totally different then wanting to vomit.
The point is, you don't recognize these differences or choose not to so you can label something it isnt.

So the question is important in that there are differences.
Would you have sex with another woman and if not why not?

 

[Crazy Liz]

You ignore it so you can dance around it, youre bi or homosexual yourself aren't you?
The point is there is a difference between how I feel about a lot of things and it should be that way for everyone. I dont have the same views on food as I do sex. The "squick" whatever that is... Isn't the same from one topic to the next. Seeing bad food may make me want to vomit, while seeing a form of sex I dont agree with.. would be totally different then wanting to vomit.

You want people to understand how you feel, but you only tell us what your feelings are not like.

The point is, you don't recognize these differences or choose not to so you can label something it isnt.

I can't tell from your words what it is that I'm supposed to recognize.

So the question is important in that there are differences.
Would you have sex with another woman and if not why not?

I already told you how impossible it really is to answer "would you ever...?" questions. As to the why not part, since I'm in a committed relationship right now (married 35 years) I'm not looking for anyone to have sex with other than my husband. I try to follow the Sermon on the Mount, which means I don't try to think about having sex with anyone else, either. Are you purposely asking me to sin? Why or why not?

 

[Inviolable]

You want people to understand how you feel, but you only tell us what your feelings are not like.



I can't tell from your words what it is that I'm supposed to recognize.



I already told you how impossible it really is to answer "would you ever...?" questions. As to the why not part, since I'm in a committed relationship right now (married 35 years) I'm not looking for anyone to have sex with other than my husband. I try to follow the Sermon on the Mount, which means I don't try to think about having sex with anyone else, either. Are you purposely asking me to sin? Why or why not?

There are some vegetables I dont like. That doesn't mean I'd stick my penis in the ones I do like. I dont associate food with sex because of how I feel differently I feel about food from sex. So my disgust for food is a lot different then my disgust for sex.
Someone else may not be able to recognize the difference from just writing in a post. Like you say.
So I'm asking you to examine the difference for yourself.
Maybe through your answer we can come to an understanding.

But, you dont seem to want to do that. You keep dancing around the answer.
So, I'll ask to adjust to your dance.
If you were not married would you presently sleep with another woman?
If not why?

 

[Crazy Liz]

There are some vegetables I dont like. That doesn't mean I'd stick my penis in the ones I do like. I dont associate food with sex because of how I feel differently I feel about food from sex. So my disgust for food is a lot different then my disgust for sex.
Someone else may not be able to recognize the difference from just writing in a post. Like you say.
So I'm asking you to examine the difference for yourself.

I'm afraid I can't crawl inside your head or inside your body and feel the way you feel. You can't feel the way someone else feels, either. That is the nature of subjectivity.

What I do understand is what the word "disgust" means. I understand that because I know how to speak English. Is it possible for me to know the difference between your feelings of disgust for certain kinds of food and your feelings of disgust for certain kinds of sex? No. Probably not. Perhaps some neuroscientist sometime will be able to develop a methodology by which one person would be able to feel another person's subjective feelings, but I'm pretty sure nothing like that exists yet. All I can do is take your word for it that you feel disgust for certain things, and you feel different kinds of disgust for different things.

Maybe through your answer we can come to an understanding.

And maybe you could rephrase the question so it doesn't sound so much like the kind of trap the draft boards used to set to make people doubt the sincerity of their own ethical beliefs by flooding them with strong emotions.

But, you dont seem to want to do that. You keep dancing around the answer.
So, I'll ask to adjust to your dance.
If you were not married would you presently sleep with another woman?

Didn't I tell you in the last post that I do not wish to play that sort of fantasy game? Didn't I tell you I think engaging in that sort of fantasy game is not something I think God wants me to do?

Fantasizing what I might do if I were not married is something I have found in the past has not been a helpful thing to my life overall, or to my real-life relationships. Why do you keep pressing that issue?

If not why?

I think I made a comment earlier that it seemed your level of disgust might perhaps have arisen from indulging your fantasies to an unhealthy degree. To me, one rational response to that might perhaps be that you might want to consider the alternative of trying to discipline your own fantasy life, rather than dictating how others should behave or what rights others should have. You still have not responded to that. If you are unable to discipline your own fantasy life, then there may be some other solution. However, my personal philosophy and ethic is that I should at least try to discipline myself before asking others to adjust to my personal feelings.

My personal solution is exactly the opposite of yours. Instead of asking others to indulge in sexual fantasies they or I find disgusting, I think the teachings of Jesus tend more toward trying to discipline one's own sexual fantasies so they will not lead to either sin or disgust. That works for me. If that prevents me from understanding you, I'm not quite sure how to deal with that. Do you have any alternative proposals?

 

[Crazy Liz]

You know so far, on a personal level I'd say I've been a lot less insulting as the homosexuals and pro gay people posting in this thread.
The homosexuals have shown the same amount of ignorance as any hetero I've seen, if not more.
Letting their personal bias pose a threat to the moral standards they're claiming to uphold.

It's different in that I don't care who has sex and how they have it.

If you don't care, then what exactly is it you are trying to get people to understand? The statement that you don't care seems to contradict most of your other posts here. I need an explanation because your statements of extreme disgust and statements that gays should not be allowed to marry seem to contradict your statement that you don't care & demands for other people to engage in sexual fantasy. What piece am I missing here that will make all these things fit into the same picture?

 

[Inviolable]

I'm afraid I can't crawl inside your head or inside your body and feel the way you feel. You can't feel the way someone else feels, either. That is the nature of subjectivity.

What I do understand is what the word "disgust" means. I understand that because I know how to speak English. Is it possible for me to know the difference between your feelings of disgust for certain kinds of food and your feelings of disgust for certain kinds of sex? No. Probably not. Perhaps some neuroscientist sometime will be able to develop a methodology by which one person would be able to feel another person's subjective feelings, but I'm pretty sure nothing like that exists yet. All I can do is take your word for it that you feel disgust for certain things, and you feel different kinds of disgust for different things.


And maybe you could rephrase the question so it doesn't sound so much like the kind of trap the draft boards used to set to make people doubt the sincerity of their own ethical beliefs by flooding them with strong emotions.



Didn't I tell you in the last post that I do not wish to play that sort of fantasy game? Didn't I tell you I think engaging in that sort of fantasy game is not something I think God wants me to do?

Fantasizing what I might do if I were not married is something I have found in the past has not been a helpful thing to my life overall, or to my real-life relationships. Why do you keep pressing that issue?



I think I made a comment earlier that it seemed your level of disgust might perhaps have arisen from indulging your fantasies to an unhealthy degree. To me, one rational response to that might perhaps be that you might want to consider the alternative of trying to discipline your own fantasy life, rather than dictating how others should behave or what rights others should have. You still have not responded to that. If you are unable to discipline your own fantasy life, then there may be some other solution. However, my personal philosophy and ethic is that I should at least try to discipline myself before asking others to adjust to my personal feelings.

My personal solution is exactly the opposite of yours. Instead of asking others to indulge in sexual fantasies they or I find disgusting, I think the teachings of Jesus tend more toward trying to discipline one's own sexual fantasies so they will not lead to either sin or disgust. That works for me. If that prevents me from understanding you, I'm not quite sure how to deal with that. Do you have any alternative proposals?

Wait...

You mean to tell me, you wouldn't be able to define your heterosexuality with out having to fantasize about sex?
That sounds pretty insecure.

If that were true then what the heck are you doing having this discussion?
Wouldn't you think reading, my answer defining my heterosexuality would pretty much put you over that line you dont want to cross.

So, go away.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Wait...

You mean to tell me, you wouldn't be able to define your heterosexuality with out having to fantasize about sex?
That sounds pretty insecure.

If that were true then what the heck are you doing having this discussion?
Wouldn't you think reading, my answer defining my heterosexuality would pretty much put you over that line you dont want to cross.

So, go away.

I'm interested in how my neighbors are treated by society, how my fellow citizens are treated by the government, and how my brothers and sisters are treated by our common faith communities. I don't have to engage in sexual fantasy to care about that.

 

[Inviolable]

If you don't care, then what exactly is it you are trying to get people to understand? The statement that you don't care seems to contradict most of your other posts here. I need an explanation because your statements of extreme disgust and statements that gays should not be allowed to marry seem to contradict your statement that you don't care & demands for other people to engage in sexual fantasy. What piece am I missing here that will make all these things fit into the same picture?

You're cracking me up.

What are the missing pieces?

What makes a homosexual different from other people in the first place?

 

[Inviolable]

I'm interested in how my neighbors are treated by society, how my fellow citizens are treated by the government, and how my brothers and sisters are treated by our common faith communities. I don't have to engage in sexual fantasy to care about that.

Nope, but to understand it you need to understand yourself. Or be able to and you ... never mind.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

100 posts in and still no explanation as to why homosexuals should want to take this pill

 

[Inviolable]

100 posts in and still no explanation as to why homosexuals should want to take this pill

As funny as it sounds I want to say, that's right, change the subject.

Yeah, that's funny.

Hey let me ask you a question I dont think I have.

Would you have sex with someone of the opposite sex?

If no why?

 

[OllieFranz]

You've asked the question of Liz, and now of EPII. I'll assume that that opens it up to others on this forum and presume to answer for myself.

While I can't predict exactly how I'll react to any event in the future, much less a hypothetical event that may never happen, I can look back on my 50 some-odd years of life and say that I can't imagine the circumstances that would cause me to engage in gay sex. Because I find the process "messy" (I prefer that word to "icky" or "squicky"). But I can't imagine the circumstances that would cause me to engage in straight sex, either, and for the same reason.

But I understand that different people have different standards and different things that creep them out, and most people are not grossed out by the thought of sex, but only the thought of particular people (not themselves) having sex. And I have no problem with that. As long as they don't kidnap me and drag me somewhere (like for instance a brothel) against my will, I have no problem with them at all. a person's life is more than just his/her "sexual lifestyle" (whatever that is). What they do when they are alone does not affect me. (I'm talking about healthy loving sex with a committed lifemate -- adultery, promiscuity, etc have tangible negative effects whether gay or straight, and are rightly classified sins and should be discouraged.)

 

[Inviolable]

I'm starting to like you. Don't let that go to your head

You've asked the question of Liz, and now of EPII. I'll assume that that opens it up to others on this forum and presume to answer for myself.

While I can't predict exactly how I'll react to any event in the future, much less a hypothetical event that may never happen, I can look back on my 50 some-odd years of life and say that I can't imagine the circumstances that would cause me to engage in gay sex. Because I find the process "messy" (I prefer that word to "icky" or "squicky"). But I can't imagine the circumstances that would cause me to engage in straight sex, either, and for the same reason.

But I understand that different people have different standards and different things that creep them out, and most people are not grossed out by the thought of sex, but only the thought of particular people (not themselves) having sex. And I have no problem with that. As long as they don't kidnap me and drag me somewhere (like for instance a brothel) against my will, I have no problem with them at all. a person's life is more than just his/her "sexual lifestyle" (whatever that is). What they do when they are alone does not affect me. (I'm talking about healthy loving sex with a committed lifemate -- adultery, promiscuity, etc have tangible negative effects whether gay or straight, and are rightly classified sins and should be discouraged.)

Given that you dont have sex or are otherwise inclined to have sex with anyone, one way or the other.
Why don't you?

See the answer lies in how we see it. Doesn't matter if people are having it or not. It's a psychological understanding that is controlled by ignorance.
Answer two questions actually, if you would please?

One, why wouldn't you have sex.
And two, if a persons psychological profile could scare you, what would it be?
What would it take for you to completely not want to be around a total stranger?
The last two are kind of one in the same.

 

[Bamboo_Chicken]

Well she is a friend of the family, my mom was a lesbian and she was a friend of my mothers. I've known her for a long time and she never seemed to be afraid of being who she was.

I cant really argue the rest with you. You could be right, Susan Cochran certainly agrees with you.

Interesting...I also know a few women who have been married and had children, only to discover later that what they'd pinned as 'normal' was thrown on it's head when they met someone in later life (of the same sex) who they actually felt attraction to and ended up falling in love with. Some of these women have been divorced for 20 years, some are married, some have taken other roads...but I'm not sure I could say with confidence that any of them were completely confident in who they were.

You think homosexuals don't regard heterosexuals as regular, ordinary people?

I dont know, do they?

That wasn't the point, the point was kind of more like your cynical thing.
It's not about being seen as ordinary every day people. It's about understanding each other. Which I dont see you even remotely trying, so maybe you're right. The pill would be forced on people.

Well, I'll put the vote in to regard heterosexuals as normal people too .

And we are trying to understand you, honestly. I understand that when some of my friends ask me how I could live so undeniably in sin they only have my best interests at heart...that they care for me and would rather I didn't burn in Hell for an eternity. I understand that some of my friends aren't so comfortable with displays of affection (hugs, hand holding) in front of them...so I don't flaunt it. I can understand and respect others and they are more than welcome to their own opinions, but I have a problem with it when they want to make rules about my life because they just don't like it.

Would you have sex with someone of the opposite sex?

If no why?

You're still failing to answer the circumstances under why any of us would have sex with anyone else, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. I agree with Crazy Liz's point too...what's the point? How will it determine anything at all?