Obama and dem congress cause resurgance of Republican core values.

Southern Man said:
Actually, you did in post 160.
Click to expand...

lmao

If you want gays not to be able to teach, then you are wanting to place restrictions on them. So that was a perfectly reasonable connection.



Dance, little man, dance all you want. I find it very amusing.

You have obviously stopped wanting to discuss facts. Let me know when you plan on telling us about this great truth.

I am pretty sure I already know what your truth is.
 
But let me ask you something, SM.

If people are born gay (whether its a defect or not), do you believe they can be "cured"?

If, for the sake of this discussion, homosexuality cannot be cured, should we tell children that homosexuality is abnormal, immoral and unhealthy??

Also, if a % of the population has been gay since the beginning of recorded history, isn't it "normal" that a % of the population be gay?

And what, pray tell, is unhealthy about it?
 
Solitary said:
According to whom? The APA and AMA have a different view.

But I am sure you have lots of evidence to back you up?
Click to expand...
The APA's official view was shaped by political expediency, not science. I've provided several arguments in this forum that you are unable to dispute; no need to go over them again and again.
 
Southern Man said:
Again, little man, cum hoc ergo propter hoc. *shrug*
Click to expand...

Cum Hoc is the fallacy committed when one jumps to a conclusion about causation based on a correlation between two events, or types of event, which occur simultaneously.

Now, when you say you do not want gays to teach, you are wanting them to be restricted. So I did not jump to any conclusion. I accepted what you said and explained a logical result of what you want.

If you want gay men to be unable to teach, then the logical result is that you are restricting them.
 
Southern Man said:
The APA's official view was shaped by political expediency, not science. I've provided several arguments in this forum that you are unable to dispute; no need to go over them again and again.
Click to expand...

The arguments you provided were of a select few (in fact, only one?) who disagreed.

And based on that, you claim the entire organization is making false claims?

And the AMA is just following them? lol
 
Southern Man said:
Born gay is your position, apparently. I'm not sure how you get two gay parents to procreate, but hey that's just me (and logic).
Click to expand...

So all your attributes are directly from one of your parents?

No, that is not logic, that is bad science.





If it is not a characteristic from birth, then you are proposing that people choose to be gay? That people have chosen to be gay throughout history? Even though, for most of history, being gay meant being ostracised, hated, disowned, beaten, and often executed??

Is that your position?
 
Southern Man said:
Argumentum ad numerum.
Click to expand...

No, I am not saying that the more popular idea is the correct one. I am saying denial from a single source does not invalidate the findings of the APA and its members.

If 50 scientists perform experiments. And 49 get the same results, but one disagrees, unless there is profound evidence to the contrary, the 49's results will be the one most accepted.

Given the choice of accepting one malcontent over an entire field of professionals, I will listen to the field of professionals.

Simply because someone uses numbers does not make it a fallacy.





And if you argument is the truth, then doesn't it strike down your "the majority of americans don't want gays to marry" or similar statements you have made?
 
Lets see if you can answer all the questions, without selecting tiny portions that you prefer to answer.


If people are born gay (whether its a defect or not), do you believe they can be "cured"?

If, for the sake of this discussion, homosexuality cannot be cured, should we tell children that homosexuality is abnormal, immoral and unhealthy??

Also, if a % of the population has been gay since the beginning of recorded history, isn't it "normal" that a % of the population be gay?

And what, pray tell, is unhealthy about it?
 
Southern Man said:
That are from a combination. Attributes that result in a genetic dead end never get passed on. It's simple evolution, actually.
Click to expand...

If homosexuals were incapable of procreation, you would be correct.

But due to the societal pressures, many, many of them try to live "normal" lives. Which includes having children.

Also, there are many genetic traits that are not apparent in either parent but show up in the child. Surely you know this? Recessive and dominant genes? Ring any bells?
 
Southern Man said:
Once you commit a fallacy, the remainder of your argument isn't with responding to.
Click to expand...

So, since I started out with homosexuality being something a person is born with, you refuse to answer whether or not homosexuality can be cured?

And since I started out with homosexuality being something a person is born with, you refuse to answer why you say its unhealthy?


Ok, lets separate them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top