tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2654455663519806899.post4447289177442749549..comments2023-11-09T02:43:59.293-08:00Comments on Christian Medical Comment: Matthew Parris, iconoclast once more. But will the gay rights lobby like it?Peter Saundershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17222354018504253042noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2654455663519806899.post-72503833345800057502012-10-03T13:30:27.125-07:002012-10-03T13:30:27.125-07:00Orlando
-it may become recognised through the scie...Orlando<br />-it may become recognised through the science of chromosome analysis<br />that homosexual orientation, which fulfils no evidemt biological purpose<br />is in fact a genetic abnormality transmittied unchanged in a small percentage of the population through the maternal mitochondrial DNA, which allows it to bypass the normal eradication by natural selection - as is the case of various medical conditions which are transmitted in this same manner as has been recently demonstrated.<br />If this proves to be the case,it would have two effects:<br />1) it would pull the rug from under fundamentalists by demonstarting that homosexuality is in fact 'natural'<br />2) it would shoot the gay 'rights'fanatic's fox by invalidating their claim that homosexual relationships are 'equivalent and equal in every way' to the heterosexual, since homosexuality would be demonstrated to be a heterosexuality with a genetic disability.<br /><br />The demands, rights and protections for homosexuality could then be treated on the same basis as people with other disabilities are. <br />Yours sinecerely,<br /> <br />andy.andys@btinternet.com<br /><br /><br /><br />Colonel Prestonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12816942970825357743noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2654455663519806899.post-25085929981347876622012-05-02T02:19:22.481-07:002012-05-02T02:19:22.481-07:001) Human relationships were long ago characterized...1) Human relationships were long ago characterized by four main components: libido, eros, philia and agape. A relationship can have more influence of one of the four, but cannot be free of all of them. <br /><br />2) Science cannot define ethics. Responsibility is a non-scientific matter. The idea of “moral responsibility” resides uniquely upon subjective experiences. Science only figures out actions determined by laws of nature; it does not conceive neither autonomy, nor subject, nor conscience, nor responsibility. Ethics belongs to metaphysics which is characterized by lack of “objective basis”. <br /><br />Therefore, any scientific study intending to define ethics and moral — as for example the Kinsey “scientific” theory — should be considered void. <br /><br /><br />3) When science intends to influence ethics, responsibility becomes a determined factor. One serial killer could, then, say to the judge: <i>“I am sorry, Your Honour, but I am not guilty! My genes should be blamed for the killings!” </i><br /><br />4) The search for the truth must not be considered a “political agenda”. People should not be shut up because they have logical arguments that rationally contradict the correct ideas of the Zeitgeist.Orlando Bragahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16891839091944416605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2654455663519806899.post-53241716210980248962012-05-01T14:30:48.019-07:002012-05-01T14:30:48.019-07:00i think the problem with the fixed vs fluid argume...i think the problem with the fixed vs fluid argument about sexuality is that it isn't solely based on sexual desire. <br /><br />personally, i can not fall in love with a person of the opposite sex, and could not spend my life with a member of the opposite sex because i'm not emotionally attracted to men on any level. so my sexuality is fluid in terms of the fact i could choose to sleep with men but beyond that, for me my attraction to the same sex is something i have not chosen and that i cannot change. <br /><br />i think his qualifying statements say it all. i think rarely is it in anyone's best interest to deny their sexuality, and although it may be possible to 'change' your sexuality on the outside, i don't think a genuine orientation can be altered. but that's coming from me, i think people only have a right to judge their own situation and so if someone thinks they have changed orientation then let them without trying to enforce a blanket rule on all sexuality saying it is changeable.<br /><br />my other observation, is that by the logic that gay people can become straight, then straight people can surely become gay. yet pretty much every one of my straight friends has no desire to be with, or sleep with, someone of the same sex, some are even disgusted by the idea... how does that factor in?<br /><br />and lastly, having read these blogs for a while, i am genuinely interested in what Dr Saunder's vested interest is in questions of sexuality? is there an agenda behind them or is it simply an interest in expressing what you feel is truth, or is it for the sake of debate?lesbihonestyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05526326400655576888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2654455663519806899.post-69876761592663351492012-05-01T05:12:33.211-07:002012-05-01T05:12:33.211-07:00This reasoning is based upon the assumption of the...This reasoning is based upon the assumption of the principle that the homosexual act is not a sexual deviation. However, as Aristotle tough us, when a principle is wrong all reasoning is wrong too. <br /><br />Imagine a guy who says:<br /><br /><i>“In-spite of having sexual experiences with my dog and with my goat, I am not a zoophile, because I realized that having sex with my goat and dog was not a good experience. Therefore, I could say that there are some people whose sexuality naturally fluctuates between a normal behavior and a zoophile behavior”. </i><br /><br />This guy's discourse would be absolutely logical from the day APA takes out zoophilia out of the sexual deviations.Orlando Bragahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16891839091944416605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2654455663519806899.post-69445692960541205562012-05-01T04:35:34.815-07:002012-05-01T04:35:34.815-07:00I think this is a new strategy coming out from the...I think this is a new strategy coming out from the gay political lobby. They are facing real problems now — problems that emerge from reality and menacing the continuity of society —, and therefore they are switching the discourse. This is another way, a clever one, towards culturally normalizing homosexuality avoiding the logical problems put by the logical categories inherent to reality itself. <br /><br />A knew a gay men who told me: “This is a club; once you entered in it, you'll never get out”. There's no such thing as “an heterosexual with homosexual experiences”: an heterosexual who entered the club is a gay. <br /><br />One thing is for sure: the gay political lobby is anything but stupid.Orlando Bragahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16891839091944416605noreply@blogger.com