Freedom

[fakeitormakeit]

I agree with alot of the stuff of being free, pretty much if there can be one on each end of the scale BUT ONES FREEDOM SHOULD NOT OBSTRUCT ANOTHER'S FREEDOM OR THE LAW.

 

 

 

Ex:

 

Think abortion protesters are stupid? Go punch one out.

 

 

 

Obstructing the protestor's right to gather, the right to protest, the right to have no fear of another man, and causing phyiscal harm.

[Nom]

The needs of the group outweigh the needs of the individual.

 

 

 

I get why that's so, but I still don't think it's fair. There shouldn't be a 'group',

 

300 million people shouldn't be a 'group' they should just be 300 million individuals.

 

That way nobody could tell anyone else what to do.

 

 

 

No, the group came about from the needs of the individual, according to Lockean theory. Basically, what the Social Contract theory states is that man entered into a form of government in order to protect his own property. Face it, in a state of anarchy you are left to fend for yourself, and there is no one to say 'this is Kashi's house, you can't have it.' So goverment was formed, out of man's need for protection of his property. The governmental body was given the power to set moral and fair rules for society that would bring consequences if broken.

 

 

 

And let me add to what BlueLancer siad: You are entitled to say virtually anything you want, for example criticize the governement. Hell, you can even plot to overthrow it. But the second you take action OR encourage others to take action, your rights end. The government can now act against you, out of the interest of preserving its own existence, which is accepted as for the good of a society. Which brings us full circle to the rights of the individuals in the society.

[Powman3]

The Golden Rule? I'm not really sure what you mean by that. Do you mean which ethical stance subscribes to that view?

 

 

 

I mean how can you state

 

"I was under the impression that the basic freedoms came with the caveat that exercising your liberties should not negatively impact someone else's ability to do the same."

 

this as true? Why should expressing our freedoms not limit the freedoms of others?

 

 

 

Because if you were gay and I kept on giving you [cabbage] about it, wouldn't you get annoyed? I sure as hell would.

 

 

 

I love how people create threads that'll spark up arguments. It's either the attention they want or they just like hurting other people.

 

 

 

Freedom is limited, you're not free to do whatever the hell you want. That's why there are laws, to keep people from doing those things and to catch them if they choose do so.

[Lenin64]

Hell, you can even plot to overthrow it. But the second you take action OR encourage others to take action, your rights end. The government can now act against you, out of the interest of preserving its own existence, which is accepted as for the good of a society.

 

See, I always thought people were given the right to revolt if the government was unacceptable. Maybe that wasn't Locke, though....unless you're talking about actual government instead of Lockean theory.

[Zonorhc]

The needs of the group outweigh the needs of the individual.

 

 

 

I get why that's so, but I still don't think it's fair. There shouldn't be a 'group',

 

300 million people shouldn't be a 'group' they should just be 300 million individuals.

 

That way nobody could tell anyone else what to do.

 

 

 

They are individuals within the group. They waive some of their privileges as individuals in order to ensure that their other freedoms, such as the right to maintain their own and their families' safety and property, are not violated by others.

 

 

 

Just because they are part of the social contract doesn't instantly mean that they automatically lose all of their individuality. They can still be individuals within the bounds of society, but they have to accept the consequences if their individuality means that they have to perform aberrant acts.

 

 

 

And let's face it. People like being told what to do. Knowing that someone is in charge means that they don't have to think of everything for themselves.

[BlueLancer]

 

I love how people create threads that'll spark up arguments. It's either the attention they want or they just like hurting other people.

 

 

 

 

Arguments and challenging are the very things that make you into who you are. You can't accept everything which is spoonfed to you like a baby, as an universal truth & correct thing to do.

 

 

 

If you don't want to be argued with; Don't pick stances which are illogical or make no sense. You know, people in general tend to agree with opinions that make common sense. I could probably reason you out of most illogical stances such as racism, hatred towards minorities, contempt, narrow-mindedness...

 

 

 

Ok, maybe meat eating... I can't justify that, and ethically, eating meat is illogical. :lol: I know it can be very cruel to the animals in some cases, they can live in cages with no freedom whatsoever, and it's very questionable compared to vegetarianism... But I like the taste and I'm sort of addicted to it. Who doesn't like a big steak with fries?!

[llcoolguy972]

It's almost as bad as making fun out of people who are born blind, deaf e.t.c. People are born gay and I can't wait till science finally confirms this as stone fact.

 

 

 

Glad to see your believing things before they're stone fact - as you put it. And we ask how people could think the world was flat 600 years ago. StrOwez's your answer.

So you're honestly telling me that you could "turn" gay right now? No? Then it's not a choice.

 

 

 

I accept your opinion, you can accept mine. I don't discriminate openly against homosexuals, them sticking their bodily organ into other same sexed humans is their own business - I don't care what they do in private. Though I am allowed to have an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow. Rather than actually backing up your opinion, you started personally attacking me. Questioning my sexuality, making fun of my name, then telling me to get therapy. Because no one has EVER thought of that before. :roll:

 

 

 

And even if it was a choice, I'd still choose to be gay, without second thought. Coming out has really helped me distinguish my actual friends.

 

[Flames were edited out -BlueLancer]

[Guest]

It's almost as bad as making fun out of people who are born blind, deaf e.t.c. People are born gay and I can't wait till science finally confirms this as stone fact.

 

 

 

Glad to see your believing things before they're stone fact - as you put it. And we ask how people could think the world was flat 600 years ago. StrOwez's your answer.

So you're honestly telling me that you could "turn" gay right now? No? Then it's not a choice.

 

 

 

I accept your opinion, you can accept mine. I don't discriminate openly against homosexuals, them sticking their bodily organ into other same sexed humans is their own business - I don't care what they do in private. Though I am allowed to have an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow. Rather than actually backing up your opinion, you started personally attacking me. Questioning my sexuality, making fun of my name, then telling me to get therapy. Because no one has EVER thought of that before. :roll:

 

 

 

And even if it was a choice, I'd still choose to be gay, without second thought. Coming out has really helped me distinguish my actual friends.

 

[Flames were edited out -BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Talk for yourself hypocrite. Its an opinion I have no reason to back it up, neither do I care enough about homosexuality to want to try and convince a gay guy that he's made a choice. And I'm not surprised in the slightest, I hadn't even known that you were gay and just by judging from your gay pride hate-felt earlier post (which bluelancer had to sensor) I could tell straight away that you were gay.

 

 

 

Go away seriously, sort out your own problems in life instead of attacking me when I hadn't even attacked you in the first place - especially considering it was my own personal opinion.

[Nom]

Eh, never mind. None of my business.

[Zealot]

Hell, you can even plot to overthrow it. But the second you take action OR encourage others to take action, your rights end. The government can now act against you, out of the interest of preserving its own existence, which is accepted as for the good of a society.

 

See, I always thought people were given the right to revolt if the government was unacceptable. Maybe that wasn't Locke, though....unless you're talking about actual government instead of Lockean theory.

 

 

 

The Declaration of Independance makes the claim that people of good quality hold some obligation to rebel against an evil regime... yet when the Civil War was over the Executive branch concluded that the South's sepperation was illegal (and impossible) so no action was needed to reinstate the southern states' collective rights as members of the union.

 

 

 

I think that the big issue that people forget when it comes to rights is that every right carries the responsibility to not abuse it. For example, the right to free expression carries with it an implicit responsibility to not use such a right to cause or encourage harm to others. (yet if one were to have the absolute right to free expression that would say that it is that person's right to use that to cause or encourage harm to others). If one has the right to possess weapons of some sort then that person also has the responsibility to not use those weapons to deprive rights to other people and to take reasonable safeguards against those weapons causing unneccessary harm.

 

 

 

Aristotle's views on goodness seem to apply directly here. Goodness for any trait or quality forms a bell-curve. Too much or too little of a quality are both forms of non-goodness, and the point on the bell-curve which possesses the greatest positive value is the point of perfection in relation to that quality. So this is to say that too little right to freely express oneself would be a baddness called oppression and too much right to freely express oneself would be a baddness called encroaching on other people's rights. The happy medium in between these extremes is hard to see, but must be there somewhere. The same applies to absolutely any trait or quality that is not mathematical in nature.

[yomom1919]

The Declaration of Independance makes the claim that people of good quality hold some obligation to rebel against an evil regime... yet when the Civil War was over the Executive branch concluded that the South's sepperation was illegal (and impossible) so no action was needed to reinstate the southern states' collective rights as members of the union.

 

 

 

Har har har, if you're equating the Revolutionary War to the Civil War, you have a lot to learn.

[Nom]

Hell, you can even plot to overthrow it. But the second you take action OR encourage others to take action, your rights end. The government can now act against you, out of the interest of preserving its own existence, which is accepted as for the good of a society.

 

See, I always thought people were given the right to revolt if the government was unacceptable. Maybe that wasn't Locke, though....unless you're talking about actual government instead of Lockean theory.

 

 

 

Yes, Locke did maintain that the people hold the right to overthrow the government and start over if it strayed beyond the reasonable limits of its power. But even Locke would agree that such an idea in modern society is entirely unfeasible. A radical change in government, perhaps, but certainly not a complete disestablishment. Government is too deeply ingrained into humanity for that to happen.

[Powman3]

 

I love how people create threads that'll spark up arguments. It's either the attention they want or they just like hurting other people.

 

 

 

 

Arguments and challenging are the very things that make you into who you are. You can't accept everything which is spoonfed to you like a baby, as an universal truth & correct thing to do.

 

 

 

If you don't want to be argued with; Don't pick stances which are illogical or make no sense. You know, people in general tend to agree with opinions that make common sense. I could probably reason you out of most illogical stances such as racism, hatred towards minorities, contempt, narrow-mindedness...

 

 

 

Ok, maybe meat eating... I can't justify that, and ethically, eating meat is illogical. :lol: I know it can be very cruel to the animals in some cases, they can live in cages with no freedom whatsoever, and it's very questionable compared to vegetarianism... But I like the taste and I'm sort of addicted to it. Who doesn't like a big steak with fries?!

 

 

 

Lemme rephrase that: I don't like it when people spark up illogical (or in other words, stupid) arguments.

[assassin_696]

The Golden Rule? I'm not really sure what you mean by that. Do you mean which ethical stance subscribes to that view?

 

 

 

I mean how can you state

 

"I was under the impression that the basic freedoms came with the caveat that exercising your liberties should not negatively impact someone else's ability to do the same."

 

this as true? Why should expressing our freedoms not limit the freedoms of others?

 

 

 

Ah, right. Well it's basically the libertarian view which I believe in. If you start from the premise that everyone's life is their own, then what right do we have to tell them what they should do with it? You also start with the premise that some rights are more fundamental than others, the right to life, the right to health etc. And because everyone's equal, you cannot prioritize someone else's exercised freedoms over those of others.

[llcoolguy972]

It's almost as bad as making fun out of people who are born blind, deaf e.t.c. People are born gay and I can't wait till science finally confirms this as stone fact.

 

 

 

Glad to see your believing things before they're stone fact - as you put it. And we ask how people could think the world was flat 600 years ago. StrOwez's your answer.

So you're honestly telling me that you could "turn" gay right now? No? Then it's not a choice.

 

 

 

I accept your opinion, you can accept mine. I don't discriminate openly against homosexuals, them sticking their bodily organ into other same sexed humans is their own business - I don't care what they do in private. Though I am allowed to have an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow. Rather than actually backing up your opinion, you started personally attacking me. Questioning my sexuality, making fun of my name, then telling me to get therapy. Because no one has EVER thought of that before. :roll:

 

 

 

And even if it was a choice, I'd still choose to be gay, without second thought. Coming out has really helped me distinguish my actual friends.

 

[Flames were edited out -BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Talk for yourself hypocrite. Its an opinion I have no reason to back it up, neither do I care enough about homosexuality to want to try and convince a gay guy that he's made a choice. And I'm not surprised in the slightest, I hadn't even known that you were gay and just by judging from your gay pride hate-felt earlier post (which bluelancer had to sensor) I could tell straight away that you were gay.

 

 

 

Go away seriously, sort out your own problems in life instead of attacking me when I hadn't even attacked you in the first place - especially considering it was my own personal opinion.

 

 

 

You never attacked me?... How about you take a step down off of that pedestal and think about what your original post was. And you have no reason to back your opinion up? So you basically came here just to say that gays made a choice, and that anything else is wrong, even if there's proof. How about you crawl back under that rock. -.-

[raven_gaurd0]

Hell, you can even plot to overthrow it. But the second you take action OR encourage others to take action, your rights end. The government can now act against you, out of the interest of preserving its own existence, which is accepted as for the good of a society.

 

See, I always thought people were given the right to revolt if the government was unacceptable. Maybe that wasn't Locke, though....unless you're talking about actual government instead of Lockean theory.

 

 

 

That would be Thoreau. He was more of an anarchist, but his belief that the people have the right to overthrow a corrupt or unacceptable government is widely accepted. Locke also stated it...I think it was Locke's Social Contract, Section 171 to be precise. :D

 

 

 

But yes, society formed out of needs of humans. Sometimes we need to think for the good of society over the good of an individual.

 

 

 

But N0m An0r is also right in the sense that it's illogical today. Government has simply evolved too much.

 

 

 

And for all you other people talking about inciting hateful posts, you're kinda getting off topic. -.-

[raven_gaurd0]

It's almost as bad as making fun out of people who are born blind, deaf e.t.c. People are born gay and I can't wait till science finally confirms this as stone fact.

 

 

 

Glad to see your believing things before they're stone fact - as you put it. And we ask how people could think the world was flat 600 years ago. StrOwez's your answer.

So you're honestly telling me that you could "turn" gay right now? No? Then it's not a choice.

 

 

 

I accept your opinion, you can accept mine. I don't discriminate openly against homosexuals, them sticking their bodily organ into other same sexed humans is their own business - I don't care what they do in private. Though I am allowed to have an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow. Rather than actually backing up your opinion, you started personally attacking me. Questioning my sexuality, making fun of my name, then telling me to get therapy. Because no one has EVER thought of that before. :roll:

 

 

 

And even if it was a choice, I'd still choose to be gay, without second thought. Coming out has really helped me distinguish my actual friends.

 

[Flames were edited out -BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Talk for yourself hypocrite. Its an opinion I have no reason to back it up, neither do I care enough about homosexuality to want to try and convince a gay guy that he's made a choice. And I'm not surprised in the slightest, I hadn't even known that you were gay and just by judging from your gay pride hate-felt earlier post (which bluelancer had to sensor) I could tell straight away that you were gay.

 

 

 

Go away seriously, sort out your own problems in life instead of attacking me when I hadn't even attacked you in the first place - especially considering it was my own personal opinion.

 

 

 

You never attacked me?... How about you take a step down off of that pedestal and think about what your original post was. And you have no reason to back your opinion up? So you basically came here just to say that gays made a choice, and that anything else is wrong, even if there's proof. How about you crawl back under that rock. -.-

 

 

 

Too many quotations!

 

 

 

How 'bout YOU go check out this and get yourself educated so you don't sound like an arrogant moron (which you do right now. Trust me, I'd know :anxious: ) You can't be stating things like that without proof, especially since:

 

 

 

A: You're neither right nor wrong, so you can't state either.

 

B: This is the wrong thread for this

 

C: Without any proof over such a controversial issue, I can disregard your opinion. So can eeeverybody else.

 

 

 

EDIT: P.S. Dude, I never saw any form of attack in anybody's argument. Hell, he was even putting you on even ground by saying it's your opinion, and I have my own, too. You threw the first punch, so don't whine (unless he edited it out or something, or a mod did, but I doubt it )

[llcoolguy972]

[hide]

It's almost as bad as making fun out of people who are born blind, deaf e.t.c. People are born gay and I can't wait till science finally confirms this as stone fact.

 

 

 

Glad to see your believing things before they're stone fact - as you put it. And we ask how people could think the world was flat 600 years ago. StrOwez's your answer.

So you're honestly telling me that you could "turn" gay right now? No? Then it's not a choice.

 

 

 

I accept your opinion, you can accept mine. I don't discriminate openly against homosexuals, them sticking their bodily organ into other same sexed humans is their own business - I don't care what they do in private. Though I am allowed to have an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow. Rather than actually backing up your opinion, you started personally attacking me. Questioning my sexuality, making fun of my name, then telling me to get therapy. Because no one has EVER thought of that before. :roll:

 

 

 

And even if it was a choice, I'd still choose to be gay, without second thought. Coming out has really helped me distinguish my actual friends.

 

[Flames were edited out -BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Talk for yourself hypocrite. Its an opinion I have no reason to back it up, neither do I care enough about homosexuality to want to try and convince a gay guy that he's made a choice. And I'm not surprised in the slightest, I hadn't even known that you were gay and just by judging from your gay pride hate-felt earlier post (which bluelancer had to sensor) I could tell straight away that you were gay.

 

 

 

Go away seriously, sort out your own problems in life instead of attacking me when I hadn't even attacked you in the first place - especially considering it was my own personal opinion.

 

 

 

You never attacked me?... How about you take a step down off of that pedestal and think about what your original post was. And you have no reason to back your opinion up? So you basically came here just to say that gays made a choice, and that anything else is wrong, even if there's proof. How about you crawl back under that rock. -.-

[/hide]

 

 

 

Too many quotations!

 

 

 

How 'bout YOU go check out this and get yourself educated so you don't sound like an arrogant moron (which you do right now. Trust me, I'd know :anxious: ) You can't be stating things like that without proof, especially since:

 

 

 

A: You're neither right nor wrong, so you can't state either.

 

B: This is the wrong thread for this

 

C: Without any proof over such a controversial issue, I can disregard your opinion. So can eeeverybody else.

 

 

 

EDIT: P.S. Dude, I never saw any form of attack in anybody's argument. Hell, he was even putting you on even ground by saying it's your opinion, and I have my own, too. You threw the first punch, so don't whine (unless he edited it out or something, or a mod did, but I doubt it )

 

 

 

A: I know I'm right. (go to C before you explode on me for being arrogant)

 

B: I know it is, but I pointed out that he was wrong, and he personally attacked me (which he later edited out)

 

C: Being gay is NOT a choice, not anymore than being straight is. I don't get how people don't understand this. You don't get to choose your sexuality! Any straight person can't turn gay at a moments notice, and a gay person won't turn straight either. (Bluelancer said what I was trying to say, and a lot better than I could've said it. : )

[BlueLancer]

You don't need studies to tell you the sky is blue or the sun rises every morning.

 

 

 

It's obvious people don't choose their sexuality, that has nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with your brain chemistry and hormone levels.

 

 

 

I'm more of a woman person. Someone can go for both genders. Someone exclusively likes his/her own gender. Did they choose it?

 

 

 

If a person gravitates towards his or her own gender even since he/she is a child who barely is capable of cognitive thinking, it's a biological feature just like eye color, hair/skin color, voice, genes, it's not a "choice".

[Guest]

[hide]

It's almost as bad as making fun out of people who are born blind, deaf e.t.c. People are born gay and I can't wait till science finally confirms this as stone fact.

 

 

 

Glad to see your believing things before they're stone fact - as you put it. And we ask how people could think the world was flat 600 years ago. StrOwez's your answer.

So you're honestly telling me that you could "turn" gay right now? No? Then it's not a choice.

 

 

 

I accept your opinion, you can accept mine. I don't discriminate openly against homosexuals, them sticking their bodily organ into other same sexed humans is their own business - I don't care what they do in private. Though I am allowed to have an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow. Rather than actually backing up your opinion, you started personally attacking me. Questioning my sexuality, making fun of my name, then telling me to get therapy. Because no one has EVER thought of that before. :roll:

 

 

 

And even if it was a choice, I'd still choose to be gay, without second thought. Coming out has really helped me distinguish my actual friends.

 

[Flames were edited out -BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Talk for yourself hypocrite. Its an opinion I have no reason to back it up, neither do I care enough about homosexuality to want to try and convince a gay guy that he's made a choice. And I'm not surprised in the slightest, I hadn't even known that you were gay and just by judging from your gay pride hate-felt earlier post (which bluelancer had to sensor) I could tell straight away that you were gay.

 

 

 

Go away seriously, sort out your own problems in life instead of attacking me when I hadn't even attacked you in the first place - especially considering it was my own personal opinion.

 

 

 

You never attacked me?... How about you take a step down off of that pedestal and think about what your original post was. And you have no reason to back your opinion up? So you basically came here just to say that gays made a choice, and that anything else is wrong, even if there's proof. How about you crawl back under that rock. -.-

[/hide]

 

 

 

Too many quotations!

 

 

 

How 'bout YOU go check out this and get yourself educated so you don't sound like an arrogant moron (which you do right now. Trust me, I'd know :anxious: ) You can't be stating things like that without proof, especially since:

 

 

 

A: You're neither right nor wrong, so you can't state either.

 

B: This is the wrong thread for this

 

C: Without any proof over such a controversial issue, I can disregard your opinion. So can eeeverybody else.

 

 

 

EDIT: P.S. Dude, I never saw any form of attack in anybody's argument. Hell, he was even putting you on even ground by saying it's your opinion, and I have my own, too. You threw the first punch, so don't whine (unless he edited it out or something, or a mod did, but I doubt it )

 

 

 

A: I know I'm right. (go to C before you explode on me for being arrogant)

 

B: I know it is, but I pointed out that he was wrong, and he personally attacked me (which he later edited out)

 

C: Being gay is NOT a choice, not anymore than being straight is. I don't get how people don't understand this. You don't get to choose your sexuality! Any straight person can't turn gay at a moments notice, and a gay person won't turn straight either. (Bluelancer said what I was trying to say, and a lot better than I could've said it. : )

 

 

 

Excuse Me!? I never edited my post - if it was it was for grammar. I speak my opinion I don't have to edit my posts. The posts which were edited was YOURS by Bluelancer which was the 'first punch thrown' which got me angry. Don't start lieing just because you've been shown to be an arrogant [puncture], who takes out his life problems concerning your sexuality on other people who don't agree with you. Take your problems somewhere else, I don't care to fight with someone like you anymore. I'm only replying here, because you told a lie to back up your point. Pathetic really. :roll:

 

 

 

Plus its my own personal opinion, I can say what I like, without people like you trying to tell me otherwise. Especially when its not hate-felt but merely a judgment on my behalf of another person's decisions. I don't care whether at the age of 2 you had feelings for another guy, or whether you choose to swing that way when you were 13 - I seriously don't care what you personally do behind closed doors. It's your choice you have to deal with, not mine!

 

 

 

BUT DON'T go attacking me telling me to shut the ["bleep"] up (that was the original comment Bluelancer had to edit - which I got annoyed about - yes you threw the 'first punch' as Raven has backed me up in). I'm entitled to my opinion, especially since it wasn't even directed at you. I hadn't even learnt that you were a homo until you later came in and attacked me. I'm not in the wrong here you are, I'm allowed to speak my personal opinions and defend myself - especially after you threw the 'first punch'. In fact my first statment which you jumped on (directed at Str0wez - yes - not you!), was barely even about the topic at hand. You just came in to pick a fight. Incredibly pathetic.

[Rebdragon]

C: Being gay is NOT a choice, not anymore than being straight is. I don't get how people don't understand this. You don't get to choose your sexuality! Any straight person can't turn gay at a moments notice, and a gay person won't turn straight either. (Bluelancer said what I was trying to say, and a lot better than I could've said it. : )

 

First, obligatory ^owned. Change your attitude or get lost, please.

 

 

 

Second, I know plenty of people that have 'switched'. Although the majority of homo/bisexuals that I know were born with their sexuality set (as far as they can tell), there are still plenty of anomalies [if that's what you want to call it] where people appear to switch, or become bi.

 

 

 

Again, little about this matter is set in stone right now, so try and keep an open mind about it.

[llcoolguy972]

[hide]

It's almost as bad as making fun out of people who are born blind, deaf e.t.c. People are born gay and I can't wait till science finally confirms this as stone fact.

 

 

 

Glad to see your believing things before they're stone fact - as you put it. And we ask how people could think the world was flat 600 years ago. StrOwez's your answer.

So you're honestly telling me that you could "turn" gay right now? No? Then it's not a choice.

 

 

 

I accept your opinion, you can accept mine. I don't discriminate openly against homosexuals, them sticking their bodily organ into other same sexed humans is their own business - I don't care what they do in private. Though I am allowed to have an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Wow. Rather than actually backing up your opinion, you started personally attacking me. Questioning my sexuality, making fun of my name, then telling me to get therapy. Because no one has EVER thought of that before. :roll:

 

 

 

And even if it was a choice, I'd still choose to be gay, without second thought. Coming out has really helped me distinguish my actual friends.

 

[Flames were edited out -BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Talk for yourself hypocrite. Its an opinion I have no reason to back it up, neither do I care enough about homosexuality to want to try and convince a gay guy that he's made a choice. And I'm not surprised in the slightest, I hadn't even known that you were gay and just by judging from your gay pride hate-felt earlier post (which bluelancer had to sensor) I could tell straight away that you were gay.

 

 

 

Go away seriously, sort out your own problems in life instead of attacking me when I hadn't even attacked you in the first place - especially considering it was my own personal opinion.

 

 

 

You never attacked me?... How about you take a step down off of that pedestal and think about what your original post was. And you have no reason to back your opinion up? So you basically came here just to say that gays made a choice, and that anything else is wrong, even if there's proof. How about you crawl back under that rock. -.-

[/hide]

 

 

 

Too many quotations!

 

 

 

How 'bout YOU go check out this and get yourself educated so you don't sound like an arrogant moron (which you do right now. Trust me, I'd know :anxious: ) You can't be stating things like that without proof, especially since:

 

 

 

A: You're neither right nor wrong, so you can't state either.

 

B: This is the wrong thread for this

 

C: Without any proof over such a controversial issue, I can disregard your opinion. So can eeeverybody else.

 

 

 

EDIT: P.S. Dude, I never saw any form of attack in anybody's argument. Hell, he was even putting you on even ground by saying it's your opinion, and I have my own, too. You threw the first punch, so don't whine (unless he edited it out or something, or a mod did, but I doubt it )

 

 

 

A: I know I'm right. (go to C before you explode on me for being arrogant)

 

B: I know it is, but I pointed out that he was wrong, and he personally attacked me (which he later edited out)

 

C: Being gay is NOT a choice, not anymore than being straight is. I don't get how people don't understand this. You don't get to choose your sexuality! Any straight person can't turn gay at a moments notice, and a gay person won't turn straight either. (Bluelancer said what I was trying to say, and a lot better than I could've said it. : )

 

 

 

Excuse Me!? I never edited my post - if it was it was for grammar. I speak my opinion I don't have to edit my posts. The posts which were edited was YOURS by Bluelancer which was the 'first punch thrown' which got me angry. Don't start lieing just because you've been shown to be an arrogant [puncture], who takes out his life problems concerning your sexuality on other people who don't agree with you. Take your problems somewhere else, I don't care to fight with someone like you anymore. I'm only replying here, because you told a lie to back up your point. Pathetic really. :roll:

 

 

 

Plus its my own personal opinion, I can say what I like, without people like you trying to tell me otherwise. Especially when its not hate-felt but merely a judgment on my behalf of another person's decisions. I don't care whether at the age of 2 you had feelings for another guy, or whether you choose to swing that way when you were 13 - I seriously don't care what you personally do behind closed doors. It's your choice you have to deal with, not mine!

 

 

 

BUT DON'T go attacking me telling me to shut the ["bleep"] up (that was the original comment Bluelancer had to edit - which I got annoyed about - yes you threw the 'first punch' as Raven has backed me up in). I'm entitled to my opinion, especially since it wasn't even directed at you. I hadn't even learnt that you were a homo until you later came in and attacked me. I'm not in the wrong here you are, I'm allowed to speak my personal opinions and defend myself - especially after you threw the 'first punch'. In fact my first statment which you jumped on (directed at Str0wez - yes - not you!), was barely even about the topic at hand. You just came in to pick a fight. Incredibly pathetic.

 

 

 

I'm pathetic? I AM? You come in here basically saying that being gay is a 100% choice, and when I told tell you you're wrong, you insult me, (which you did edit out, feed someone else that bs) and then blatantly lie about it. I admit, maybe I shouldn't have told you to "shut the [bleep] up," but that was definitely not the 'first punch.' If anything, it was a poke. What you EDITED OUT was the first punch. And in this post you attacked me multiple times. Way to go Mr. Hypocrite.

[baron8000]

The argument in this thread = the worst advert for freedom of speech ever :lol:

[raven_gaurd0]

Nobody ever said that it's a 100% choice. But it's not genetic.

 

 

 

Once again, the National Association of Research and Therapy for Homosexuality (NARTH) states that there is no genetic evidence that people are simply gay. As Sigmund Freud put it, it's a subconscious response to your environment or a conscious psychological choice.

 

 

 

Either way, it's not genetic, so I would suggest either pulling evidence out of your head or your head out of your [wagon].

[yomom1919]

Nobody ever said that it's a 100% choice. But it's not genetic.

 

 

 

Once again, the National Association of Research and Therapy for Homosexuality (NARTH) states that there is no genetic evidence that people are simply gay. As Sigmund Freud put it, it's a subconscious response to your environment or a conscious psychological choice.

 

 

 

Either way, it's not genetic, so I would suggest either pulling evidence out of your head or your head out of your [wagon].

 

 

 

Again, as Warrior said, I think you should stop misrepresenting it. Yes, it is not fully genetic [or genetic at all, as proven thus far], but that doesn't mean it's a fully conscious choice, which I'm sure you realize.

 

That said, the only problem I have with your statement is that you seem to misrepresent it, especially by using the word 'choice', which I [and many other people for obvious reasons] are obviously aware that the full factor is most definitely not a completely conscious choice. Right now, the field consensus is mostly that a myriad of factors determines the outcome, which, by reading your debate I'm sure you already know. However, by phrasing things as such, you seem to make it out to be something it's not, and I don't think that's too helpful to anyone.