poet
Banned
According to the "thanks" I've been accumulating, apparently, it "does". LOL
Yours, not so much. LOL
Can Heterosexuality be Reversed?
- Thread starter tekkychick
- Start date
Yours, not so much. LOL
Sorry, Mott. Pedophilia is a disease, not a learned behavior. The act of sexual abuse, which is what pedophiles desire, is a criminal act.
Yeah...just give up on him, tekky. It's fun to laugh at him and point out his incessant lies, bigotry, and ignorance, but it's not worth the effort to pay him much attention.
tekkychick
New member
Well, actually, yes. The Heritage Foundation laid the basis for it, then ran the other way when Pres. Obama proposed it.
Not sure I'd call it an aristocratic oligarchy though.
But I'm sure there are many threads on Obamacare on this site if you want to discuss it in them.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
I understand that silly "theory" and have exposed it as a lie many times.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Like that matters...
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
This is a fun thread. LOL
I'm watching it weave back and forth from right to left and touch on all sorts of presumptions that either aren't supported or don't much relate to making straight people gay or visa/versa.
Take "Republicans sponsored all five civil rights acts" for example... I'm guessing Damn Yankee posted that waiting for someone to challenge him on it. But he didn't specify WHICH civil rights act. The one of 1866, 1957, or 1964? I think any student of political history would tell you the Republican Party of Lincoln is just about diametrically opposite the one of today. I know... off topic, but I couldn't just pass it by without comment.
What is "natural" and what is learned? I would refer you to ancient Sparta. If a warrior culture could have such a high degree of homosexuality, one would think is just might be a learned behavior. Although many of my gay friends would not welcome that view, preferring to think instead it is hardwired - sort of like old fashioned hot or cold water faucets. My personal opinion is that human sexuality is more like modern single lever water faucet that can be pushed back and forth across the entire spectrum. Although certain of them might "tend" to come to rest on one spot or another and not be as happy if they are forced to stay in some other position. But, if a human being can be sexually gratified by him/herself, then of course they could also be gratified by someone else of the same sex as long as they aren't taught it is wrong and perverted.
Sex is basically a fairly simple mechanical activity. I look forward to the day we have advanced anatomically correct robots and (assuming I survive that long) listening to this same argument regarding having sex with them. Like if a male human has sex with a male robot, is that homosexuality or bestiality or just using a sex toy for self gratification? What if you then take the same computer brain and put it in a female robot? What then? The whole question, regarding humans OR robots is kind of funny, don't you think? And, unless someone is making YOU do something you don't want to do, who should really care?
Well... except for those guardians of our society's "correctness" that have taken it on themselves to guard us against ourselves.
Anyway, will we "fall in love?" Now that's an entirely different question, isn't it?
I'm watching it weave back and forth from right to left and touch on all sorts of presumptions that either aren't supported or don't much relate to making straight people gay or visa/versa.
Take "Republicans sponsored all five civil rights acts" for example... I'm guessing Damn Yankee posted that waiting for someone to challenge him on it. But he didn't specify WHICH civil rights act. The one of 1866, 1957, or 1964? I think any student of political history would tell you the Republican Party of Lincoln is just about diametrically opposite the one of today. I know... off topic, but I couldn't just pass it by without comment.
What is "natural" and what is learned? I would refer you to ancient Sparta. If a warrior culture could have such a high degree of homosexuality, one would think is just might be a learned behavior. Although many of my gay friends would not welcome that view, preferring to think instead it is hardwired - sort of like old fashioned hot or cold water faucets. My personal opinion is that human sexuality is more like modern single lever water faucet that can be pushed back and forth across the entire spectrum. Although certain of them might "tend" to come to rest on one spot or another and not be as happy if they are forced to stay in some other position. But, if a human being can be sexually gratified by him/herself, then of course they could also be gratified by someone else of the same sex as long as they aren't taught it is wrong and perverted.
Sex is basically a fairly simple mechanical activity. I look forward to the day we have advanced anatomically correct robots and (assuming I survive that long) listening to this same argument regarding having sex with them. Like if a male human has sex with a male robot, is that homosexuality or bestiality or just using a sex toy for self gratification? What if you then take the same computer brain and put it in a female robot? What then? The whole question, regarding humans OR robots is kind of funny, don't you think? And, unless someone is making YOU do something you don't want to do, who should really care?
Well... except for those guardians of our society's "correctness" that have taken it on themselves to guard us against ourselves.
Anyway, will we "fall in love?" Now that's an entirely different question, isn't it?
christiefan915
Catalyst
Nothing and none. "Strawman" was on his word-a-day calendar and he's been beating it to death.
christiefan915
Catalyst
I think it's learned. It's a type of paraphilia. Acting on it is criminal.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
I specified all five: 1868, 1875, 1957, 1960, 1964. The Party principles have remained the same.
I guess we'll have to disagree...
christiefan915
Catalyst
That's okay. Friends do that sometimes.
Last edited:
I guess you know more about it than Bob Dole or most political historians. I bow to your superior knowledge.
Bob Dole no longer recognizes the Republican Party that he helped lead for years. Speaking over the weekend on “Fox News Sunday,” he said his party should hang a “closed for repairs” sign on its doors until it comes up with a few positive ideas, because neither he nor Ronald Reagan would now feel comfortable in its membership. (And that's not a very long time.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/opinion/bob-dole-misses-his-republican-party.html?_r=0
But what would Dole know? After all, he only ran for President representing the Republican Party. I'm SURE your knowledge base must be better than his.
Pssst... Is my sarcasm leaking through?
See! There someone goes getting me off topic! It's NOT MY FAULT! If they would just stop chumming I'd stop biting!
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
From your link:
This doesn't sound like hyperbole form the NYT Opinion Pages, does it?
Since when is McCain considered to be a conservative? I say good riddance to these old compromisers.
poet
Banned
Moron. You have not. Cite where you have. The "truth" cannot be exposed as a lie. Find a present day KKK'er who claims to be a Democrat. I'll wait. Idiot.
poet
Banned
Bitch. And you think your opinion matters? To whom? You're a laughing stock, in case you hadn't noticed. LOL