I'm a fairly conservative guy, but I am still flabergasted by people who think gay is a choice

[mechanixis]

Well the only people who have ever called it a 'choice' are straight people who have never spoken with a homosexual person. No gay individual has ever assented to their orientation being a 'choice'.

Perhaps calling it a choice is just how biologically-homosexual conservative extremists cope with their own homosexual urges, so they can fit in to their own demanding worldview. "I'm not born gay! I'll just refuse to make that choice! I'm sure if I choose hard enough, my marriage will go right back to normal!"

 

[TragicHero84]

Meh, why do you even bother to care about it? Such lines of thought are largely inconsequential.

There are only two answers to the question, and either should make anti-gay people happy.
1) It's a choice, so they can rail about it all they want.
2) It isn't a choice, so we can fix it when our knowledge of genetics gets high enough.

We should reserve until we know which is true, however. Making decisions that you can easily put off making when you don't have enough information to make a good one is idiotic.

Fix it? Wait...are you saying gay people need to be fixed? Really?

 

[mechanixis]

I refuse to share the belief that as the species with the highest psychological evolution on the planet we lack the ability to choose the aspects of our lives. If I decided today that I wanted to be gay even without any physical attraction to other men, I could. Likewise, any homosexual person could choose to be heterosexual. There is always a level of choice, even if outside or internal factors influence the decision.

If I was to put a gun to someone's head and told them to flip a switch, killing another; or die, they would claim they had no choice even though they could have taken the heroic path and chosen the self-sacrifice. The excuse "I have no choice" when it comes to personal decisions is not nor will not be a valid reason.

Right, well, I have a choice to shoot staples into my hand all day long, but that would be just as needlessly cruel and miserable as forcing a homosexual person to lead a heterosexual life.

This may be wandering into a separate argument - about whether or not being gay is 'right' (and I'm not sure if you actually were actually being anti-gay) - but it's a point I'd like to make. While the man in your example does have a choice between killing another and sacrificing himself, you're the one pointing the gun at his head and forcing him to choose in the first place, which is a far worse crime. And that's pretty comparable to the anti-gay "Just say No" argument: telling homosexuals to choose between suffering persecution or living lives of perpetual regret and unfulfillment.

 

[TragicHero84]

Well the only people who have ever called it a 'choice' are straight people who have never spoken with a homosexual person. No gay individual has ever assented to their orientation being a 'choice'.

Perhaps calling it a choice is just how biologically-homosexual conservative extremists cope with their own homosexual urges, so they can fit in to their own demanding worldview. "I'm not born gay! I'll just refuse to make that choice! I'm sure if I choose hard enough, my marriage will go right back to normal!"

Wow. Talk about missing the point.

 

[Daedalus1942]

There are people who choose to have their penises surgically splayed in half. I don't accept the idea that people choose to be gay, I'm just sayin...

Well...when you put it like that it does seem quite painful, but we're put under anaesthetic and afterwards we have a nice warm vagina that more or less in indistiguishable to the uninformed from a cisborn woman's.
-Tabs<3-

I'm assuming that posting or linking pictures to be sure you understand what I am talking about is out of the question in this board, but I was not referring to a sex change operation. I was referring to literally what I described.

But another better comparison might be the several people who joined the Communist Party in America during the McCarthy era.

Oh god.... in that case, oww.
I can send you pictures in a private message if you'd like?
Warning though, it's graphic and not really pleasant to look at.
The finishing result is though.
And once again... Owww!
-Tabs<3-

 

[warm slurm]

Homosexuality is not a choice. If you think it is, you're an idiot. Sorry.

 

[XzarTheMad]

I won't start a huge post of trying to defend my opinions. I think it's a part of your nature, but I don't know if it's genetics or societal influence. Frankly, I don't care.
One thing that irks me, though, is how it's seemingly okay to still think of bisexuality as a choice. I don't feel persecuted, and this ain't a rant. Just saying, I'm bisexual, and I didn't choose anything. If people mean that we choose what gender we wanna be with, that's still missing the point; You don't choose who you fall in love with or fancy. Being bisexual, like being straight or gay, is about who you fall in love with. Me, I can appreciate both genders, both sexually and romantically. I don't choose shit about who I develop feelings for, who I find interesting. Just like a straight guy doesn't choose which girls he fancies. The notion of choice in this matter is ridiculous.

My former best friend is gay. Sadly, I moved away and we lost contact. It was hard for him to come out to me and the rest of our friends, and we kept it a secret when he asked us to. I doubt very many choose to be gay, at least not if we're talking real gay, and not just "experimenting".

Also, I seem to remember reading in a science magazine a couple years back about how homosexuality has been confirmed in both ducks and wolves. I view it as a kind of "natural control" to keep a race from becoming too dominant. Not that I'm overly serious about that view; It's the only reason I could give for homosexuality existing, though. Not that I care to discuss that. It's here, and let those who need to deal with it have their space.

Stop crampin' gay people's style, yo.

 

[BabySinclair]

snip

Right, well, I have a choice to shoot staples into my hand all day long, but that would be just as needlessly cruel and miserable as forcing a homosexual person to lead a heterosexual life.

This may be wandering into a separate argument - about whether or not being gay is 'right' (and I'm not sure if you actually were actually being anti-gay) - but it's a point I'd like to make. While the man in your example does have a choice between killing another and sacrificing himself, you're the one pointing the gun at his head and forcing him to choose in the first place, which is a far worse crime. And that's pretty comparable to the anti-gay "Just say No" argument: telling homosexuals to choose between suffering persecution or living lives of perpetual regret and unfulfillment.

My point is that there is always another option, inaction is an choice as is action. True, the act of making someone choose is the worse sin but that's what society does and so the blame lies really on the societal pressure to conform to the concept of what is "straight" or "gay" in a limited perspective from which many people base their decisions.

 

[Mikkaddo]

Well in a certain way it very well can be a choice. I went to highschool with a guy who has tendencies toward homosexuality that he would deny so strongly you'd have to say he's scared to admit it. And then he would make jokes and act homophobic enough that honestly, he was choosing to try to not "be gay." so yes . . . it can be a choice. A person doesn't necessarily choose to become gay, but they can sure as hell choose to accept that they are or aren't.

 

[Something Amyss]

I have had a few friends that are gay or transgendered or both and had talks with them about the human condition and such. And so I convinced gay is not a choice.

As one of those friends, I'm going to point out you're not all that conservative. Sorry.

People are ignorant and mistrustful of things they don't completely understand. That relates to absolutely everything. Human nature I suppose, if they don't need to think about lgbt issues, then they'll come to an easy, ill-informed decision

There's also power in the notion that if someone wants something to be true, they will find a way to rationalise it. If you accept homosexuality as something other than a choice, then you're limited in the ways you can treat them "ethically." If it's inconvenient, it's ignorable.

It's still not proven why some people are gay (I don't think); any theory could be correct.

That's asinine. "any" theory could not be correct. Since we can demonstrate hormonal and genetic effects on sexuality, any concept that relies on choice as the foundation is flat out wrong. There are a lot of X factors, but not knowing everything does not validate every theory as possible.

Does it matter ?

Either it is not a choice, in that case it has to be accepted and respected, because it can´t and shouldn´t be changed.
Or it is a choice, in that case it has to be accepted and respected, because every person on this planet has the right to make such a decision (seeing how it doesn´t really concern anyone but the person him/herself).

I always found this entire debate kind of weird.

It's bad enough being hated, ostracised, etc. Being hated, ostracised, etc. based on a flat-out lie adds insult to injury.

 

[Slimshad]

Snip.

Technically, its posible to be born without these so called wings...
[it could be called a mutation]
(so saith the migthy lord darwin, hitler of jeans, researcher of the evolution)

can a bird not be, uh, perverted, untill it doesnt fly anymore?
can it not?

(here is a thoery; its posible to be born, without any type of sexuall atraction.Probably not, but hell, how would we know?)

Technically, it's possible to be born without a penis.
[It could be called a mutation.]

Are you saying that being sexually active is pervasive in nature? Sex is a natural part of life. Having sex does not make you perverted, good sir, it makes you a human being. (Not holding anything against virgins, we were all like that once.)

And with your last comment and its theory could very well be correct. Through the miracle of genetics, one could possibly be born without sexual attraction, but that would most readily be called a 'hormone deficiency', which can be very lethal if not treated. My question is why is that relevant to my post? It's a very good point to make I suppose, that some people are hormone deficient.

 

[xdom125x]

I believe that being gay isn't a choice. I think it is based on genetics, your upbringing and a few other factors.
I also think that a persons sexuality is a fluid sort of thing, where it is often changing without their control.

 

[Thundero13]

What are our feelings on what, exactly?

1. Gay being a choice/not being a choice?

or

2. People who think gay is a choice?

Which ever, I think either could be interesting subjects.

1. Gay obviously isn't a choice just like straight isn't. Being gay/straight/whatever is like preferring strawberry icecream over vanilla. You either like one flavour more or the other flavour more, you can't help what you like.

2. I think those people are responding to the issue ideologically, not logically.

There, I've just exhausted this thread's discussion value (for me, anyway).

It isn't exactly like preferring strawberry ice-cream over vanilla because straight women & gay men don't like every single man and straight men & gay women don't like every single woman, also you don't have to have tried both kinds to know what kind you like more.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Until there is science evidence to prove what causes sexuality there isn't a lot of land to stand on in any argument. I like to think its defined by the subconscious which is in term shaped by a person's environment more then active choices.

 

[Cooperblack]

In fact it is completely irrelevant if it's a choice or not, People have a right to live their lives any way they want as long as they don't hurt anybody else by doing so.

 

[BonsaiK]

What are our feelings on what, exactly?

1. Gay being a choice/not being a choice?

or

2. People who think gay is a choice?

Which ever, I think either could be interesting subjects.

1. Gay obviously isn't a choice just like straight isn't. Being gay/straight/whatever is like preferring strawberry icecream over vanilla. You either like one flavour more or the other flavour more, you can't help what you like.

2. I think those people are responding to the issue ideologically, not logically.

There, I've just exhausted this thread's discussion value (for me, anyway).

It isn't exactly like preferring strawberry ice-cream over vanilla because straight women & gay men don't like every single man and straight men & gay women don't like every single woman, also you don't have to have tried both kinds to know what kind you like more.

True, it's not exactly the same but it's close enough for illustrating my argument. Aslo, there's both good and bad strawberry icecream.

 

[bdcjacko]

I have had a few friends that are gay or transgendered or both and had talks with them about the human condition and such. And so I convinced gay is not a choice.

As one of those friends, I'm going to point out you're not all that conservative. Sorry.

The 3 best presidents we ever had are Harry S Truman, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush. I'm pro gun, pro death penalty and a hawk, also I'm fiscally conservative, hate what Obama has done with the country, blame the democrats for everything, and still think USA is #1. I'm just more open minded and will actually listen to other people's argument. Shows what kind of friend you are.

 

[ExaltedK9]

It IS a choice. Humans are attracted to the opposite sex by instinct. Any deviation IS a choice.

I have nothing against gays, but their sexual orientation is voluntary.

Thank you for your completely groundless assumption.

Hi. I'm a homosexual. I did not choose this.

Please do tell me again how you know better than me, I am riveted.

Not much I can do but restate what I've already said. Being humans, our minds are hard-wired to want to procreate. If you're attracted to the same sex, then it is by your own choice.

I don't see how that is baseless (the base for my statement being right there, for all to see) or an assumption, because no assuming was involved.

I never said that I knew better than you, but thanks for jumping the over-sensetive gun. Yea, you do know more about your sexual orientation than me... Because you've chosen it.

Please don't be mad at me though, I don't really care which gender you've chosen to pursue.

 

[bdcjacko]

Not much I can do but restate what I've already said. Being humans, our minds are hard-wired to want to procreate. If you're attracted to the same sex, then it is by your own choice.

I don't see how that is baseless (the base for my statement being right there, for all to see) or an assumption, because no assuming was involved.

I never said that I knew better than you, but thanks for jumping the over-sensetive gun. Yea, you do know more about your sexual orientation than me... Because you've chosen it.

Please don't be mad at me though, I don't really care which gender you've chosen to pursue.

So, that is a fact, a person can be born blind, deaf, without an arm, or a million other thing could go wrong, but there is absolutely no chance that a "wire" could across and make them want to not make babies but could be gay by birth.

*I should mention I'm not saying being gay is a birth defect anymore than say have a predisposition to having a preference for vanilla over chocolate is birth defect.

 

[ExaltedK9]

Not much I can do but restate what I've already said. Being humans, our minds are hard-wired to want to procreate. If you're attracted to the same sex, then it is by your own choice.

I don't see how that is baseless (the base for my statement being right there, for all to see) or an assumption, because no assuming was involved.

I never said that I knew better than you, but thanks for jumping the over-sensetive gun. Yea, you do know more about your sexual orientation than me... Because you've chosen it.

Please don't be mad at me though, I don't really care which gender you've chosen to pursue.

So, that is a fact, a person can be born blind, deaf, without an arm, or a million other thing could go wrong, but there is absolutely no chance that a "wire" could across and make them want to not make babies but could be gay by birth.

*I should mention I'm not saying being gay is a birth defect anymore than say have a predisposition to having a preference for vanilla over chocolate is birth defect.

Nature doesn't make people gay. Its not genetic, its nurture.

But just to rival your analogy:
A person who is born without an arm cannot decide to grow one. Even if someone were to be born with an inclintion towards the opposite sex, it would become a choice when they chose to act upon it, and identify themselves as gay.