Are people born gay or do they choose to be gay?

Temujin said:
That decision has been made. By those whose job it is to do so. If you object their decision, take it up with them. Personally, I think that real life has far more variables than your simplistic logic exercise allows, and that in practice, only a system that allows the particulars of each case to determine the outcome, will be workable.
Click to expand...

“That decision has been made”? What decision? By whom?

I’m pointing out the absurdity of allowing children to make these enormous life decisions without their parents’ involvement, when they are not yet mature enough to consent to sex or get a tooth pulled.
 
Temujin said:
I am drawing a distinction between parenting and controlling. You assume that I think that they are the same thing. I just said that they are not.
Click to expand...

Well it’s not at all clear to me what you think that distinction actually is or when “parenting” becomes “controlling”.
 
Temujin said:
No. I am arguing that judgement applies in medical as well as judicial cases. Ultimately, courts may have to decide the case. As there are cases in which judges have approved the judgement of medics that treatment should be withdrawn and a child allowed to die, against the wishes of the parents, I think that abortion is well within their competence. Gender reassignment is a different matter, since unlike abortion, it is reversible unless radical surgery is performed, and there's no reason why that should happen with a child. Whatever the scaremongers of the Right say.
Click to expand...

Abortion is within whose competence? Do you think that a judge is better suited to decide whether a teenager should or should not get an abortion, more than that child’s parent is? By what criteria?
 
Crazy Ivan said:
“That decision has been made”? What decision? By whom?

I’m pointing out the absurdity of allowing children to make these enormous life decisions without their parents’ involvement, when they are not yet mature enough to consent to sex or get a tooth pulled.
Click to expand...
I know that is what you care saying. And I am pointing out that the comparison is simplistic, doesn't consider the relevant issues and is not in tune with the real world.
 
Crazy Ivan said:
Abortion is within whose competence? Do you think that a judge is better suited to decide whether a teenager should or should not get an abortion, more than that child’s parent is? By what criteria?
Click to expand...
In some circumstances, yes. Using the criteria of the best interests of the child.
 
Eightcrackers said:
Absolutely not - the idea of a parent forcing their child to carry to term, is abhorrent to me.
Click to expand...

Why aren't you just a blooming flower in the middle of the dessert....

So you abhor human beings? Seems like hatred you will not allow others to express themselves. Must be nice to be so "special".
 
Temujin said:
In some circumstances, yes. Using the criteria of the best interests of the child.
Click to expand...

What would you know about the "best interests" of the child?????

Lets play this out a little......

1. What if that "child".... later in life is unable to have more children because some stupid doctor scared her for life? Is that in the best interest of the child?
2. What if that "child".... later in life realize they were complicit in ending a precious life?
3. What if that "child".... later in life finally realizes her parents know her better than some idiot that only cares about their precious "golden calf" of abortion rights?

You don't care about the child. You care about you.
 
Eightcrackers said:
Yes.
You went from this, to "abhor human beings" - how?
Click to expand...

I know you probably have a difficult time understanding this.... but people are "made up" of the things they believe. You can't separate what a person believes from what they ARE.....

Imaginary or not, what a person believes is exactly what they are. So. You can try to make a separation but it doesn't really exist. It is fabricated nonsense.

Eightcrackers said:
Not for me to allow - if he exists and hates is enemies, not a thing I can do about it.

Though, an all-powerful being having enemies, makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...

You have so hated the concept of God, you've never even considered what such a condition entails....

My "bet" is... if you somehow attained "all power", your "now" self.....would "hate" your future self.

Just how does God make someone like Himself? If freewill is a requirement of Divinity, then He must allow such in His Creation. God desires the willing.
 
christ_undivided said:
What would you know about the "best interests" of the child?????

Lets play this out a little......

1. What if that "child".... later in life is unable to have more children because some stupid doctor scared her for life? Is that in the best interest of the child?
2. What if that "child".... later in life realize they were complicit in ending a precious life?
3. What if that "child".... later in life finally realizes her parents know her better than some idiot that only cares about their precious "golden calf" of abortion rights?

You don't care about the child. You care about you.
Click to expand...
Oh goody, let's play what if.

What if the child in later life is able to have more children, which she is now in a better position to care for. They grow up and discover a cure for cancer.

What if the child in later life is empowered by the support given her by the state and used her experience to support and advise other children in similar circumstances, enabling them too to live happy and fulfilled lives discovering the cure for diabetes.

What if the child in later life realises the power of good government to shape lives for the better, so free from the responsibilities of an unwanted child, she takes a career in politics, becomes Secretary General of the United Nations, bringing world peace and reconciliation to all nations and discovers a cure for the common cold.
 
Temujin said:
Oh goody, let's play what if.

What if the child in later life is able to have more children, which she is now in a better position to care for. They grow up and discover a cure for cancer.
Click to expand...

Why avoid my "if"?

I presented a real world scenarios that happen frequently. "Cure cancer"? Yeah. You're amazing.

Temujin said:
What if the child in later life is empowered by the support given her by the state and used her experience to support and advise other children in similar circumstances, enabling them too to live happy and fulfilled lives discovering the cure for diabetes.
Click to expand...

If the state is supporting her, why not have the child and give it up for adoption? IF... .this person is some wonderfully kind... HOW ABOUT BEING KIND TO HER OWN?

Temujin said:
What if the child in later life realises the power of good government to shape lives for the better, so free from the responsibilities of an unwanted child, she takes a career in politics, becomes Secretary General of the United Nations, bringing world peace and reconciliation to all nations and discovers a cure for the common cold.
Click to expand...

Too sad. Never will happen. Her mother didn't want her ether. That "child" you imagined ended up in a trash can or a toilet.
 
christ_undivided said:
You assumed "all". I never said "all". If I would have meant "all".... I would have said "ALL"....
Click to expand...
When you say, "you abhor human beings" that implies all. To say otherwise is sophistry. A typical reaction to getting caught out. Double down instead of saying " sorry, I should have said some." This place really shows up the difference between theory and practice .
 
Eightcrackers said:
You said

This means "all".

"I hate dogs" means "I hate ALL dogs".

Your backpedalling is pathetic.
Click to expand...

Then why does the word "all" even exist? If what you say is true, then "all" wouldn't be necessary. Only "some".....

Your understanding of grammar is pathetic. Which is something I thought Englishmen enjoyed.

Try again.,...... It is okay to be wrong.
 
Temujin said:
When you say, "you abhor human beings" that implies all. To say otherwise is sophistry. A typical reaction to getting caught out. Double down instead of saying " sorry, I should have said some." This place really shows up the difference between theory and practice .
Click to expand...

Like I said to the "other guy".... Then why does the word "all" exist?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top