Alan Keyes, the only true conservative in the race

[Florestan]

To label it as deviant, abnormal, etc, is a manifestation of crude thinking worthy of a cave man, not someone who lives in an advanced society.

Really? Let's check the dictionary.

abnormal:

# S: (adj) abnormal, unnatural (not normal; not typical or usual or regular or conforming to a norm) "abnormal powers of concentration"; "abnormal amounts of rain"; "abnormal circumstances"; "an abnormal interest in food"

You admitted yourself that, biologically speaking, homosexual behavior is "infrequently ocurring", i.e. not typical or regular or usual, ergo abnormal.

[scarpia]

Really? Let's check the dictionary.

abnormal:

# S: (adj) abnormal, unnatural (not normal; not typical or usual or regular or conforming to a norm) "abnormal powers of concentration"; "abnormal amounts of rain"; "abnormal circumstances"; "an abnormal interest in food"

You admitted yourself that, biologically speaking, homosexual behavior is "infrequently ocurring", i.e. not typical or regular or usual, ergo abnormal.

I know what abnormal means.  You have missed the point.  Given the statistical nature of genetics it is normal for the population to manifest variation.  If you deal a hand of cards getting a flush is a relatively infrequent event, that does not make it "abnormal."  To label an individual who has a characteristic which is latent is all humans and which manifests itself with a certain frequency "abormal" or "deviant" is cruel.

[Kullervo]

Everyone's tough online, but this is amazing.

It's so easy to be objective when you have nothing at stake.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Really? Let's check the dictionary.

abnormal:

# S: (adj) abnormal, unnatural (not normal; not typical or usual or regular or conforming to a norm) "abnormal powers of concentration"; "abnormal amounts of rain"; "abnormal circumstances"; "an abnormal interest in food"

You admitted yourself that, biologically speaking, homosexual behavior is "infrequently ocurring", i.e. not typical or regular or usual, ergo abnormal.

You're being disingenuous here. As frequently used, and especially in the context of homosexuality, the connotations of the word "abnormal" are far more pejorative - implying not just "atypical" but such things as "disgusting," "perverted," "sick," etc.

[Bulldog]

You seem to be a bit confused on this issue. There's a difference between arguing that homosexuals are normal people (as opposed to sexual deviants) while also arguing that the act of homosexuality is as normal a sexual function as heterosexuality. I don't see the logic in that.

There's a lot that you don't see.  I didn't say that homosexuals are normal; nor did I say that heterosexuals are normal.  Each group can have respect for the other and possess a "live and let live" attitude (just like in religion).

Do you want homosexuals put in jail or identified as deviants?  Do you want to deny homosexual couples the same legal rights as heterosexual couples?
If our answer is no, we are on the same page.  

[drogulus]

I know what abnormal means.  You have missed the point.  Given the statistical nature of genetics it is normal for the population to manifest variation.  If you deal a hand of cards getting a flush is a relatively infrequent event, that does not make it "abnormal."  To label an individual who has a characteristic which is latent is all humans and which manifests itself with a certain frequency "abormal" or "deviant" is cruel.

     I don't think you can say homosexuality is either normal or abnormal without being more specific about what the meaning of normal is. Are you talking about frequency, or is it a question of certain types of behavior that only a small proportion engages in. Most of the time abnormality has a very negative connotation, so the protestations of innocence by the abnormalists ring hollow to me. If only 2.8% of the population has green eyes, are they abnormal? No one would say so, they would say it's part of normal variation, though comparatively rare. Why not say the same for gays, and leave the abnormality out of it? It's only purpose here is to stigmatize without cost to the accuser: "Hey, I'm just pointing out the facts." No, you're spinning them in a negative direction. That's why you say "abnormal" instead of "rare".

[greg]

If only 2.8% of the population has green eyes, are they abnormal

Mine are green......

[adamdavid80]

So wait...is oral sex between heterosexuals also abnornal?  Foot fetishes?  What about people who are into toys and whatnot, outfits?  

Sexuality is so amazingly diverse and has so many different forms - and each persons hot-rocket thing is SO specific, you could be into your partner dressing up as a nurse, but policewoman?  Heck, wtf is up with that? - that  - and this is specifically addressed to florestan - that the only thing that shouldn't be tolerated is intolerance.

Who is ANYONE to say what is normal or abnormal?  So long as its between consenting adults and no one is being exploited, hey, there's a seventh time for everything.  And, besides, who's counting, huh?  

Yes, I'm paying lip-service for diversity.  And as I said at the end of that post, I definitely respected Jos. forthrightness in making those statements, but, yeah, it IS pathetic in this day and age that people can't see past their own nose.

But Flor, I can see your point: you're interpreting that I expect someone like Jos. to "conform" to my POV, and that I'm standing in judgement of them bc they have a different angle..  Fair enough.  But, for me, the difference is, I believe that my POV is "I may not think like someone else (in terms of their sexuality, in this specific instance), but that's their thing.   We are who we are.  I didn't vow bodily harm - as one pther poster did (wrongly) - or say they're behavior is sinful, heinous, abominable, or abnormal.

[drogulus]

Mine are green......

      GGGGRRREEG, it's nothing to worry about. Even if such perversions are rare, you can live an almost normal life.

[adamdavid80]

      GGGGRRREEG, it's nothing to worry about. Even if such perversions are rare, you can live an almost normal life.

Why bother getting his hopes up?  Be honest with him.  Tell him the truth about green-eyed people.  And how they're going to Hell.

[Jay F]

Mine are green......

So are mine. Is it true that only 2.8% of the population has green eyes?

[(poco) Sforzando]

So are mine. Is it true that only 2.8% of the population has green eyes?

Maybe the two of you "green eyes" should hook up . . .

[drogulus]

So are mine. Is it true that only 2.8% of the population has green eyes?

    Even if it was 28%, it would still be immoral. 

[Guido]

Where's the definition of immoral or abnormal coming from? Surely not nature - Nine years ago, Bruce Bagemihl counted 470 species that were known to indulge in same-sex activity - these come from all major animal groups, not just primates and mammals - found in insects, birds etc. etc. Though this is still a small amount of animals, the fact that it has arisen so many times separately rather strengthens the case for it being able to be explained by evolutionary theory... I am assuming that we all are rational enough thinkers to believe in evolution here.

[Homo Aestheticus]

(even though many of them are trying their darn best to prove eitherwise)

That is one of the most revolting things I've ever seen.

I am very much a libertarian but jesus christ folks, will you please take that kind of behavior behind closed doors... 

[greg]

Why bother getting his hopes up?  Be honest with him.  Tell him the truth about green-eyed people.  And how they're going to Hell.

My weekends extended for eternity? That doesn't sound too good. Might as well get the eye-color changing contacts.

[Bulldog]

That is one of the most revolting things I've ever seen.

Best to get used to it, for it's coming to your town soon.

[Kullervo]

That is one of the most revolting things I've ever seen.

Same here, but according to Saul, Josquin Depressed and others, this is the sort of thing I enjoy (apparently).

Think about this: "For every action there is an equal or opposite reaction."

Those who try to use things like photos of fat biker men urinating on each other to demonstrate the "depravity" of homosexuals fail to realize that this brazenness and exhibitionism wouldn't happen (or at least, it would happen only in private situations) if homosexuality wasn't seen as "disgusting, decadent, etc." The same way that harpies like Al Sharpton and Gloria Allred wouldn't exist if there was no racism or feminism, respectively. Radical ideology hurts everyone.

[(poco) Sforzando]

That is one of the most revolting things I've ever seen.

And yet you looked . . .

[adamdavid80]

Well, it's a false equation in the first place:

John is married to a girl named Sally.  John rides Harley Davidson motorcycles.  Therefore, all men named John who are married to women named Sally ride Harley Davidson motorcycles.

Just bc THESE particular individuals are engaging in something that appears pretty gross doesn't mean they represent the whole of the group by any measure.  (and besides, any of our sexual exploits would probably appear fairly depraved if it were filmed and viewed by people other than ourselves)(And if it doesn't appear, depraved, than it probably appears boring)

Hitler was German.  Hitler wanted to eradicate the Jews.  Therefore, all Germans want to eradicate the Jews.

Beethoven was deaf.  Beethoven was a master composer.  Therefore, all deaf people are profound musicians.

Rubbish, isn't it?