Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:20 am
Greatest I am wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 10:58 pm Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

I think the answer is is quite important as it would show us the cause/source of homosexuality.

If God, as believers think, then why is God creating gays?

Regards
DL
WHY do you call 'it' "homosexual NATURES"?

If you want to refer to "homosexuality" as being NATURAL, then you would ALREADY HAVE 'your' answer.

If you asked are FAR MORE OPEN question like; 'Is homosexuality created by nurture or nature" (and removed the MIS/LEADING 'God' word), then my answer would be;

Both, OBVIOUSLY.
I serve my agenda, not yours.
But I do NOT have an agenda here.

And, what, EXACTLY, is YOUR agenda here?

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm Thanks for your reply.

Regards
DL
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:25 am

How, EXACTLY, could WANTING to have sex with a human body with the same sexual organs be a "genetic factor"?
Sexual organs aside, where does your own want of the opposite sex come from?
WHY would you ASSUME such a thing as this?

Saying, "sexual organs aside", SHOWS you did NOT FULLY understand what I was saying. And,

Where does my want, for what I want, come from, is the EXACT SAME place where 'yours' and EVERY one 'else's" wants come from, and from where I have ALREADY EXPLAINED, that is; from 'past experiences'.
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm Your DNA that controls your chemistry and thinking. Right?
LOL You could NOT be FURTHER from right.
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm Why would you think a gay would be any different?

Regards
DL
But I do NOT 'think' ANY thing here.

I ALREADY 'KNOW' what thee irrefutable Truth IS here.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 4:00 am
Greatest I am wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:29 am

I see more of a rise in freedom of expression than a rise in actual % of the numbers.

Mind you, we are giving our DNA a workout with all the electronic subatomic rays we are subjecting ourselves to.
And where EXACTLY are these 'electronic subatomic rays' coming from?
Greatest I am wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:29 am The roots or gayness are in our genes, and they are under DNA and chemical control.

Regards
DL
What are you basing this CLAIM on, EXACTLY?
On reality and knowing that chemistry controls our thinking.
And where did you get this 'knowing that chemistry controls your thinking from, EXACTLY?

Did the chemistry in that body tell you so?

And, is the chemistry in EVERY body DIFFERENT?

By the way, how do you define the 'reality' word, EXACTLY?
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm Think menopause and anthropause, or just having a few drinks.
This, literally, is saying NOTHING AT ALL.
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm Do you have an argument against?
Against 'what', EXACTLY?

Do you have an argument for what you are 'trying' so very hard to fight and argue for?

If yes, then what is that argument?
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm As to the increase of subatomic particles, think of the many cell phones and the warnings experts are giving as to use and the damage possible.

Regards
DL
What are you on about here?

Does what you say here have absolutely ANY thing AT ALL to do with what I ACTUALLY said and wrote here?

If yes, then 'what', EXACTLY?
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 7:02 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 4:24 am
Actually, thee Truly Peaceful and Harmonious life, which we ALL WANT and DESIRE, actually comes to fruition when a Truly 'self-governing' society is 'in full swing', as some say.
I doubt that we all want and desire that. I sure don't.
So, SINCE BIRTH you have NEVER wanted and desired to live in Peace and in Harmony with "others", correct?

If yes, then what is in that 'chemistry' and 'dna' of that body that since you were born makes you WANT and DESIRE to live in disagreement and to continually argue and fight with "others"?

Also, even your CLAIM does NOT logically follow.

If 'you', SURELY, do NOT want and desire to live in Peace and Harmony with "others", then there is NO 'doubt' AT ALL. There is absolutely SURETY that NOT EVERY one wants and desires to live in Peace and in Harmony with "others".

Now, WHY would that body been born SO DIFFERENT from "others" that it, literally, wants and desires to create war and disharmony, instead of peace and harmony, with "others"?
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm The fact that you like to argue should be seen as you rejecting your own rendering as you are here working against what you say you desire.
LOL
LOL
LOL

What do you think or BELIEVE I am 'arguing' about here?

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm You may not have noted this, but all animals stress or challenge themselves one way or another and that includes us.
But one can so-call 'stress' or 'challenge' "them" 'self' and STILL want and desire to live in Peace and Harmony with "others".
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm It is how we show our fitness.
You can REALLY side-track a discussion VERY QUICKLY.

What does the word 'fitness' here refer to EXACTLY?

What has you SHOWING your 'fitness' got to do with absolutely ANY thing here?
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:55 pm It is what has cause us to progress and grow.

Regards
DL
If you say so.

But I still wonder what the word 'fitness' here is referring to, EXACTLY.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 7:08 am But EVERY body is born with a desire to live and be kept alive.
Nope!
Okay. I MUST BE Wrong here, and, you MUST BE Right here, correct?
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm Except for the physical appetites, the ability to desire, like the mind, is completely blank at birth and must be learned and developed.
What is this 'mind' thing you talk of here?

What does 'it' do, and, how does 'it' work, EXACTLY?

But the 'desire' I am TALKING ABOUT is the 'physical appetites'. So, WHY say, "Nope!" Especially considering we are talking about the EXACT SAME 'thing'?

I even used the word 'body' here when I nearly ALWAYS use the word 'one' instead.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm One cannot desire anything until they first learn that it exists, what it is, and that it is something to be desired.
Did you NOT SEE I used the word 'body' here, and NOT the word 'one'?

WHY did you use the word 'one' when I was NOT talking about 'one'?
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm No one has a desire, "to live," until they know what life is, that they are living, and that it is something they have any choice about.
I said EVERY 'body', for the VERY SPECIFIC REASON that when one watches observes a ANY new born 'BODY' what can be CLEARLY SEEN is that will do ALL they can to GAIN ATTENTION so that will be, literally, LISTENED TO, RECOGNIZED, and ACCEPTED for 'who they are'. That is; a new born baby WANTING and DESIRING to STAY ALIVE. And this is WHY it keeps SEEKING out what 'it' NEEDS to live and survive.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm What do you think a desire is?
This is WHY asking CLARIFYING questions can VERY EASILY and VERY SIMPLY HELD the 'one' that they are posed to.

' a strong feeling of wanting, or a strong want or wishing, of or for some 'thing' '.

The word 'desire' although could probably be more in relation to a 'person', a 'you', than to a 'body', could it be said, or argued, that ''body', itself, can 'desire' 'things', then if not, then I will 'have to' change my sentence above; EVERY body is born with a desire to live and be kept alive and replace the word 'desire' with a word that works.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm I can send you link if you'd like to know.
Yes send me a link.

And, if you EVER do, and there is a definition for the word 'desire', then is that thee one and ONLY 'definition'?

And, I will ask ANY other CLARIFYING questions AFTER you send that link.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm For someone who styles himself, "Age," many of your views are very puerile.
But I do NOT 'style' thy 'Self' "age". I just used the word "age" as a label, name, or username ONLY.

As for "himself", what EXACTLY are you basing this ASSUMPTION on, EXACTLY?

And, if you think or BELIEVE that ANY of my views are "childish, silly, and/or immature", then just POINT them OUT and HIGHLIGHT them, and then EXPLAIN WHY you find them to be that way.

If you do NOT, then you are doing what most of the posters here do most of the time. That is; MAKE CLAIMS without EVER backing up and supporting them.

Also, WHY do so many of 'you', posters, here in this forum 'try' and do what 'you', "rcsaunders", just 'tried' to do and instead of just continue on with discussing, you turn your words into LOOKING AT the 'person', or 'their views, by making VERY childish, silly, and/or immature remarks ABOUT the 'other's views'?

If the views of "another", to you, are "immature", "childish", "silly", or ANY other thing, then INSTEAD of just saying, "they are", how about you EXPLAIN WHY?

This kind of behavior appears to happen, consistently, when what they were 'trying to' argue for is SHOWN to be False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect.

ATTEMPTS at DETRACTION is VERY COMMON in this forum.

If you do NOT want, nor desire, to use the word 'desire' to describe the ACTUAL actions or behaviors of the human body, itself, just after birth, when 'it' SEEKS OUT air, food, and/or attention, for 'its' ACTUAL continual survival, then what word would you say works MUCH BETTER?

How about instead of 'trying to' call my views "names", as though that would affect me, how about just TELLING us what is ACTUALLY and IRREFUTABLY True, INSTEAD?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by RCSaunders »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 1:06 am
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 7:08 am But EVERY body is born with a desire to live and be kept alive.
Nope!

Except for the physical appetites, the ability to desire, like the mind, is completely blank at birth and must be learned and developed. One cannot desire anything until they first learn that it exists, what it is, and that it is something to be desired.

No one has a desire, "to live," until they know what life is, that they are living, and that it is something they have any choice about.

What do you think a desire is? I can send you link if you'd like to know. For someone who styles himself, "Age," many of your views are very puerile.
Do you have any evidence for anything that you spout? Or does it all just come out of your arse?
No, I just make things up to irritate gullible neurotics. It's fun to watch them squirm.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by RCSaunders »

Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:38 am
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm I can send you link if you'd like to know.
Yes send me a link.
This is the link: "Desires." Since desires are a subset of emotions, the article, "Emotions," will provide background for the desires article.
Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:38 am ... how about just TELLING us what is ACTUALLY and IRREFUTABLY True ...?
Ignoring the redundancy ("actually and irrefutable"), I only tell the truth. You don't have to agree with it. You may not understand it. You may not like it. I have no obligation to make you understand it. I'm sorry if you don't.
User avatar
Greatest I am
Posts: 2964
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Greatest I am »

Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 7:38 am
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:20 am

WHY do you call 'it' "homosexual NATURES"?

If you want to refer to "homosexuality" as being NATURAL, then you would ALREADY HAVE 'your' answer.

If you asked are FAR MORE OPEN question like; 'Is homosexuality created by nurture or nature" (and removed the MIS/LEADING 'God' word), then my answer would be;

Both, OBVIOUSLY.
I serve my agenda, not yours.
But I do NOT have an agenda here.

And, what, EXACTLY, is YOUR agenda here?

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm Thanks for your reply.

Regards
DL
You lie, then you want to chat.

PPfff

If for no purpose, why are you here?

What else do you do without a purpose or agenda.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Posts: 2964
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Greatest I am »

Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 10:16 am
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:25 am

How, EXACTLY, could WANTING to have sex with a human body with the same sexual organs be a "genetic factor"?
Sexual organs aside, where does your own want of the opposite sex come from?
WHY would you ASSUME such a thing as this?

Saying, "sexual organs aside", SHOWS you did NOT FULLY understand what I was saying. And,

Where does my want, for what I want, come from, is the EXACT SAME place where 'yours' and EVERY one 'else's" wants come from, and from where I have ALREADY EXPLAINED, that is; from 'past experiences'.
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm Your DNA that controls your chemistry and thinking. Right?
LOL You could NOT be FURTHER from right.
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm Why would you think a gay would be any different?

Regards
DL
But I do NOT 'think' ANY thing here.

I ALREADY 'KNOW' what thee irrefutable Truth IS here.
Such a stupid mind.

Past experience may have a value, sure.

We all experiment and there are many out there that swing either which way, --- and all points in between where the rubbing of flesh can happen.

"you did NOT FULLY understand what I was saying"

Because you are a poor communicator.

"Where does my want, for what I want, come from, is the EXACT SAME place where 'yours' and EVERY one 'else's" wants come from, and from where I have ALREADY EXPLAINED, that is; from 'past experiences'.

So your first desire for sex, came from past experience.

Ok.

We should end here.

Regards
DL
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 5:51 pm
Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:38 am
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 10:38 pm I can send you link if you'd like to know.
Yes send me a link.
This is the link: "Desires." Since desires are a subset of emotions, the article, "Emotions," will provide background for the desires article.
At what age do 'emotions' begin in human bodies? And, that link you provide for the word 'desires' works PERFECTLY with what I SAID and WROTE above.

So, thank you for this. It just adds MORE proof for my CLAIM here.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 5:51 pm
Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:38 am ... how about just TELLING us what is ACTUALLY and IRREFUTABLY True ...?
Ignoring the redundancy ("actually and irrefutable"), I only tell the truth.
Okay. I will take MORE NOTICE of this from now on.

And, let us NOT FORGET that one's OWN 'truth' is NOT necessarily what is thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things'. As PROVED True countless times ALREADY throughout human history.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 5:51 pm You don't have to agree with it.
LOL But WHY would I or ANY one else NOT agree with some 'thing' if it was ACTUALLY and IRREFUTABLY True.

And, if you think the words 'actually and irrefutable' are 'redundant', especially in regards to philosophical discussion, then you STILL have a LOT MORE to LEARN and UNDERSTAND.

SEE, absolutely ANY one could just say and make the CLAIM, "I only tell the truth", just like you did here. But, if this CLAIM is NOT ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLY True, then it is just ANOTHER 'lie' that 'you', adult human beings, KEEP TELLING "yourselves" and also KEEP BELIEVING is true.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 5:51 pm You may not understand it. You may not like it. I have no obligation to make you understand it. I'm sorry if you don't.
Here is ANOTHER one that TURNS TO 'condescending' remarks when it has been POINTED OUT and SHOWN when they have said some 'thing', which is False, Wrong, or Incorrect, EXACTLY like the one known as "immanuel can" does.

Absolutely ANY one can ALSO SAY to you; "You may not understand it. You may not like it. I have NO obligation to make you understand it. And, I am sorry if you do not."

But there is absolutely NOTHING AT ALL to SHOW that 'it' is even True, Right, or Correct to begin with.

You ALSO do NOT have to agree with ANY thing I say. Full stop.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

Greatest I am wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:10 am
Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 7:38 am
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm

I serve my agenda, not yours.
But I do NOT have an agenda here.

And, what, EXACTLY, is YOUR agenda here?

Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm Thanks for your reply.

Regards
DL
You lie, then you want to chat.

PPfff
I am getting SICK and TIRED of 'you', posters, here MAKING CLAIMS, without ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' AT ALL SUPPORTING the CLAIM.

WHERE have I EVER 'lied' in this forum?

If you do NOT provide ANY thing, AND ALLOW a Truly OPEN discussion to take place, then it is 'you', so-called, "greatest I am" who is the LIAR here now.

And, let us NOT FORGET I asked POLITELY to CLARIFY, What is YOUR agenda here "greatest I am"?

Did you answer this?

If no, then WHY NOT?

What, EXACTLY, have 'you' got to HIDE here?
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm If for no purpose, why are you here?
WHERE is 'here'.

In Life?

On earth?

In this forum?

In this thread?
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:45 pm What else do you do without a purpose or agenda.

Regards
DL
LOL This question coming from one who does NOT even KNOW what THEIR OWN 'purpose' IS.

If you want to have a REAL discussion about 'purpose', then PLEASE let us DO THIS.

I AWAIT your CLARIFICATIONS FIRST.
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Age »

Greatest I am wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:24 am
Age wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 10:16 am
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm

Sexual organs aside, where does your own want of the opposite sex come from?
WHY would you ASSUME such a thing as this?

Saying, "sexual organs aside", SHOWS you did NOT FULLY understand what I was saying. And,

Where does my want, for what I want, come from, is the EXACT SAME place where 'yours' and EVERY one 'else's" wants come from, and from where I have ALREADY EXPLAINED, that is; from 'past experiences'.
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm Your DNA that controls your chemistry and thinking. Right?
LOL You could NOT be FURTHER from right.
Greatest I am wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:47 pm Why would you think a gay would be any different?

Regards
DL
But I do NOT 'think' ANY thing here.

I ALREADY 'KNOW' what thee irrefutable Truth IS here.
Such a stupid mind.
Here is ANOTHER adult human being who uses the word 'mind' but when QUESTIONED about what is this 'mind' thing, which they speak of, they COMPLETELY and UTTERLY FAIL to CLARIFY.

As WILL BE PROVED True ONCE AGAIN.
Greatest I am wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:24 am Past experience may have a value, sure.

We all experiment and there are many out there that swing either which way, --- and all points in between where the rubbing of flesh can happen.

"you did NOT FULLY understand what I was saying"

Because you are a poor communicator.
I KNOW.

And, I KNOW the VERY REASON WHY ALSO.
Greatest I am wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:24 am "Where does my want, for what I want, come from, is the EXACT SAME place where 'yours' and EVERY one 'else's" wants come from, and from where I have ALREADY EXPLAINED, that is; from 'past experiences'.

So your first desire for sex, came from past experience.

Ok.

We should end here.

Regards
DL
If this is ALL you CAN SAY here, then we WILL, LITERALLY and OBVIOUSLY, END here.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Iwannaplato »

RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:56 pm There is no such thing as, "sexuality." It's a made-up concept to excuse any practice one chooses by claiming their nature made them do it.
That does not look like the origin of that usage of the term when I look at the etymology. But if you have sources that show that the term was intended in this political way from the beginning let me know.

Would you say you chose to be attracted to the sex(es) you are attracted to? Do you remember choosing that attraction? What were your criteria?
All so-called, "attractions," are entirely psychological resulting in physical responses to what one thinks and believes. No one is born with any specific physiological desire for anything.
Not milk, contact with mother. Why does the baby suckle? Babies do, generally, move toward the nipple. You also say that 'attractions' are entirely psychological, physical responses to what one thinks or believes. But bables are vastly more interested in their mother's faces that other things (as are other mammals who are also to young to think they have beliefs). They are also more attracted to other phenomena: they are attracted by bright light, primary colours, stripes, dots and patterns. They are even attracted to what are considered more attractive faces (by adults humans) than other faces.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566458/
While human brains are far more neuroplastic than other mammalian brains, the tabula rasa idea of our minds does not hold. And if you take away or refuse them access to things they are attracted to, they can get irritated. We on the very plastic end of the neurobiological spectrum, but we are still mammals with some stuff inborn.
No one is born with a desire for a cheeseburger with fries--they have to learn what those things are and have some experience with them before having such desires
Come on, that's a terrible example. Desires need not be so specific. are born with a desire for combinations of protein and carbohydrates. They will immediately stop sucking if all sorts of iquids are presented to them - non-organic, etc. Some babies will refuse the pumped milk of mothers with high levels of lipase, because it changes taste. They do not desire that, but do desire the milk from their mother's nipples.
No one is born with any particular sexual proclivity--they have to learn what all those things are and have some experience before having any such desires. Then they must evaluate their feelings (which cannot tell them what is best for them) and choose whether to let their desires determine their choices (have the burger even though they are overweight and already diabetic) or choose what is best for their own long-term benefit.
I never chose to like the foods I preferred as a child. i never chose to be attracted to girls in a different way I was attracted to boys. I had different (though overlapping) desires in relation to girls and boys my age. One could argue I was influenced by images in movies and my parents body language or whatever. But I never made a choice to have more cuddly romantic feeling about girls. Nor did I later choose to be sexually attracted to them. I certainly may have been influenced by movies, peers, etc. But I never though about it or rejected homosexual attractions because of the negative consequences. There was no conscious process.
You can't have it both ways. Either human beings are volitional creatures who must consciously choose their behavior and are therefore totally responsible for all they choose to think and do, or something else (their gene's, society, inborn desires, etc.) determines what they do. If the latter, all discussion of what anyone ought to do becomes silly, because they don't have any choice about it. Either one chooses their behavior or they don't, but, it cannot be both.
Then if ALL behavior is chosen, which seems to be your position, this means things that I don't think hold, certainly with babies. I don't think there is any support for babies being completely tabula rasa and then deciding when born to be more attracted to faces than other things. To the taste of milk and the taste of other liquids. To be more interested in having mouth to nipple interactions than mouth to mother's shoulder interactions. They are even attracted to certain colors more than others. I am not sure what 'both ways' it seemed I wanted it. I am responding to your beliefs. I haven't mounted a general position.

And there are many things that came later, when my body changed in puberty, where certain desires came forward and not others. I never weighed consequences. I certainly may have been influenced by culture, but there was no decision.

Perhaps that leads to determinism, perhaps not. That's another issue. But you are seeing total free choice and decisions around issues where I do not see them.

And then, as I said earlier, some very large studies have shown that there are genetic markers that predict for homosexulity. It is not the only source of the proclivity, but one.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by RCSaunders »

Iwannaplato wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 12:25 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:56 pm There is no such thing as, "sexuality." It's a made-up concept to excuse any practice one chooses by claiming their nature made them do it.
That does not look like the origin of that usage of the term when I look at the etymology. But if you have sources that show that the term was intended in this political way from the beginning let me know.

Would you say you chose to be attracted to the sex(es) you are attracted to? Do you remember choosing that attraction? What were your criteria?
All so-called, "attractions," are entirely psychological resulting in physical responses to what one thinks and believes. No one is born with any specific physiological desire for anything.
Not milk, contact with mother. Why does the baby suckle? Babies do, generally, move toward the nipple. You also say that 'attractions' are entirely psychological, physical responses to what one thinks or believes. But bables are vastly more interested in their mother's faces that other things (as are other mammals who are also to young to think they have beliefs). They are also more attracted to other phenomena: they are attracted by bright light, primary colours, stripes, dots and patterns. They are even attracted to what are considered more attractive faces (by adults humans) than other faces.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566458/
While human brains are far more neuroplastic than other mammalian brains, the tabula rasa idea of our minds does not hold. And if you take away or refuse them access to things they are attracted to, they can get irritated. We on the very plastic end of the neurobiological spectrum, but we are still mammals with some stuff inborn.
No one is born with a desire for a cheeseburger with fries--they have to learn what those things are and have some experience with them before having such desires
Come on, that's a terrible example. Desires need not be so specific. are born with a desire for combinations of protein and carbohydrates. They will immediately stop sucking if all sorts of iquids are presented to them - non-organic, etc. Some babies will refuse the pumped milk of mothers with high levels of lipase, because it changes taste. They do not desire that, but do desire the milk from their mother's nipples.
No one is born with any particular sexual proclivity--they have to learn what all those things are and have some experience before having any such desires. Then they must evaluate their feelings (which cannot tell them what is best for them) and choose whether to let their desires determine their choices (have the burger even though they are overweight and already diabetic) or choose what is best for their own long-term benefit.
I never chose to like the foods I preferred as a child. i never chose to be attracted to girls in a different way I was attracted to boys. I had different (though overlapping) desires in relation to girls and boys my age. One could argue I was influenced by images in movies and my parents body language or whatever. But I never made a choice to have more cuddly romantic feeling about girls. Nor did I later choose to be sexually attracted to them. I certainly may have been influenced by movies, peers, etc. But I never though about it or rejected homosexual attractions because of the negative consequences. There was no conscious process.
You can't have it both ways. Either human beings are volitional creatures who must consciously choose their behavior and are therefore totally responsible for all they choose to think and do, or something else (their gene's, society, inborn desires, etc.) determines what they do. If the latter, all discussion of what anyone ought to do becomes silly, because they don't have any choice about it. Either one chooses their behavior or they don't, but, it cannot be both.
Then if ALL behavior is chosen, which seems to be your position, this means things that I don't think hold, certainly with babies. I don't think there is any support for babies being completely tabula rasa and then deciding when born to be more attracted to faces than other things. To the taste of milk and the taste of other liquids. To be more interested in having mouth to nipple interactions than mouth to mother's shoulder interactions. They are even attracted to certain colors more than others. I am not sure what 'both ways' it seemed I wanted it. I am responding to your beliefs. I haven't mounted a general position.

And there are many things that came later, when my body changed in puberty, where certain desires came forward and not others. I never weighed consequences. I certainly may have been influenced by culture, but there was no decision.

Perhaps that leads to determinism, perhaps not. That's another issue. But you are seeing total free choice and decisions around issues where I do not see them.

And then, as I said earlier, some very large studies have shown that there are genetic markers that predict for homosexulity. It is not the only source of the proclivity, but one.
I do not have time to explain what volition is here. I'll only point out, volition only pertains to conscious behavior. Whatever a human being is conscious of doing, i.e. can consciously identify, is chosen behavior. Volition does not pertain to the biological/physiological behavior of the organism, such as reflexes, the autonomic nervous system, and the endocrine system, for example. All of those can occur with or without human conscious awareness. (A baby's sucking, and your breathing do not have to be chosen.)

Everything else, from getting out of bed and dressing oneself, eating and working, and all other behavior must be consciously chosen. The easy way to understand it is, animals breath and suckle but neither can or need to choose to do so. Only human being dress themselves, prepare their own meals, and go to work and must choose to do so.

If your interested, I've addressed most of the issues of volition in my article, "Volition."

I will not address the rest of your comments which I regard as depending on spurious psycho-babble.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8536
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Post by Sculptor »

RCSaunders wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:25 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 12:25 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:56 pm There is no such thing as, "sexuality." It's a made-up concept to excuse any practice one chooses by claiming their nature made them do it.
That does not look like the origin of that usage of the term when I look at the etymology. But if you have sources that show that the term was intended in this political way from the beginning let me know.

Would you say you chose to be attracted to the sex(es) you are attracted to? Do you remember choosing that attraction? What were your criteria?
All so-called, "attractions," are entirely psychological resulting in physical responses to what one thinks and believes. No one is born with any specific physiological desire for anything.
Not milk, contact with mother. Why does the baby suckle? Babies do, generally, move toward the nipple. You also say that 'attractions' are entirely psychological, physical responses to what one thinks or believes. But bables are vastly more interested in their mother's faces that other things (as are other mammals who are also to young to think they have beliefs). They are also more attracted to other phenomena: they are attracted by bright light, primary colours, stripes, dots and patterns. They are even attracted to what are considered more attractive faces (by adults humans) than other faces.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566458/
While human brains are far more neuroplastic than other mammalian brains, the tabula rasa idea of our minds does not hold. And if you take away or refuse them access to things they are attracted to, they can get irritated. We on the very plastic end of the neurobiological spectrum, but we are still mammals with some stuff inborn.
No one is born with a desire for a cheeseburger with fries--they have to learn what those things are and have some experience with them before having such desires
Come on, that's a terrible example. Desires need not be so specific. are born with a desire for combinations of protein and carbohydrates. They will immediately stop sucking if all sorts of iquids are presented to them - non-organic, etc. Some babies will refuse the pumped milk of mothers with high levels of lipase, because it changes taste. They do not desire that, but do desire the milk from their mother's nipples.

Just because there are autonomic causes, does not mean that they are completely separate from volition, motivation or personal choice.
In fact without all these autonomic processes there were would no life at all. It is simply not possible to separate these things out.

No one is born with any particular sexual proclivity--they have to learn what all those things are and have some experience before having any such desires. Then they must evaluate their feelings (which cannot tell them what is best for them) and choose whether to let their desires determine their choices (have the burger even though they are overweight and already diabetic) or choose what is best for their own long-term benefit.
I never chose to like the foods I preferred as a child. i never chose to be attracted to girls in a different way I was attracted to boys. I had different (though overlapping) desires in relation to girls and boys my age. One could argue I was influenced by images in movies and my parents body language or whatever. But I never made a choice to have more cuddly romantic feeling about girls. Nor did I later choose to be sexually attracted to them. I certainly may have been influenced by movies, peers, etc. But I never though about it or rejected homosexual attractions because of the negative consequences. There was no conscious process.
You can't have it both ways. Either human beings are volitional creatures who must consciously choose their behavior and are therefore totally responsible for all they choose to think and do, or something else (their gene's, society, inborn desires, etc.) determines what they do. If the latter, all discussion of what anyone ought to do becomes silly, because they don't have any choice about it. Either one chooses their behavior or they don't, but, it cannot be both.
Then if ALL behavior is chosen, which seems to be your position, this means things that I don't think hold, certainly with babies. I don't think there is any support for babies being completely tabula rasa and then deciding when born to be more attracted to faces than other things. To the taste of milk and the taste of other liquids. To be more interested in having mouth to nipple interactions than mouth to mother's shoulder interactions. They are even attracted to certain colors more than others. I am not sure what 'both ways' it seemed I wanted it. I am responding to your beliefs. I haven't mounted a general position.

And there are many things that came later, when my body changed in puberty, where certain desires came forward and not others. I never weighed consequences. I certainly may have been influenced by culture, but there was no decision.

Perhaps that leads to determinism, perhaps not. That's another issue. But you are seeing total free choice and decisions around issues where I do not see them.

And then, as I said earlier, some very large studies have shown that there are genetic markers that predict for homosexulity. It is not the only source of the proclivity, but one.
I do not have time to explain what volition is here. I'll only point out, volition only pertains to conscious behavior. Whatever a human being is conscious of doing, i.e. can consciously identify, is chosen behavior. Volition does not pertain to the biological/physiological behavior of the organism, such as reflexes, the autonomic nervous system, and the endocrine system, for example. All of those can occur with or without human conscious awareness. (A baby's sucking, and your breathing do not have to be chosen.)

Everything else, from getting out of bed and dressing oneself, eating and working, and all other behavior must be consciously chosen. The easy way to understand it is, animals breath and suckle but neither can or need to choose to do so. Only human being dress themselves, prepare their own meals, and go to work and must choose to do so.

If your interested, I've addressed most of the issues of volition in my article, "Volition."

I will not address the rest of your comments which I regard as depending on spurious psycho-babble.
Post Reply