Liberal Forum

I have always maintained that homosexuality is not a choice. I say that for a few reasons:

1. I personally never chose to be straight. I just always was and still am. There was never any conscious effort that I made to commit to heterosexuality. Therefore, it seems logical that homosexuals didn't make a conscious effort to commit to their sexuality either. 

2. If social environment does indeed persuade one to choose one or the other, then it would seem reasonable to observe that the siblings of gay people should also be gay, given that they were all brought up in the same environment. However, this is not the case. Yes, there are examples of course, but it is rare. 

3. If we take 'attraction' on a general level, just broadly speaking, it is hard to nail down why we are attracted to certain physical traits, be it for straight or gay people. I love redheads, but not blondes for some reason. I don't know why, redheads get my dick hard, but blondes don't really do it for me. Yet, some love blonds but find red heads disgusting. Some men love 'asses' more than 'tits', some don't. Some women love broad shoulders, some don't. Some like tall, thin, others like thick and curvy. Whatever. The point is that with all the variables that come with attraction, we have a difficult time nailing down why. Thus, it would be reasonable to say the same about sexual orientation. 


 

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm

I have always maintained that homosexuality is not a choice. I say that for a few reasons:

1. I personally never chose to be straight. I just always was and still am. There was never any conscious effort that I made to commit to heterosexuality. Therefore, it seems logical that homosexuals didn't make a conscious effort to commit to their sexuality either. 

2. If social environment does indeed persuade one to choose one or the other, then it would seem reasonable to observe that the siblings of gay people should also be gay, given that they were all brought up in the same environment. However, this is not the case. Yes, there are examples of course, but it is rare. 

3. If we take 'attraction' on a general level, just broadly speaking, it is hard to nail down why we are attracted to certain physical traits, be it for straight or gay people. I love redheads, but not blondes for some reason. I don't know why, redheads get my dick hard, but blondes don't really do it for me. Yet, some love blonds but find red heads disgusting. Some men love 'asses' more than 'tits', some don't. Some women love broad shoulders, some don't. Some like tall, thin, others like thick and curvy. Whatever. The point is that with all the variables that come with attraction, we have a difficult time nailing down why. Thus, it would be reasonable to say the same about sexual orientation.

An uninformed narcissist shares his feelings.

Riveting.

Consequential.

Daring.

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:25 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:25 pm

@R. Suave  notice no copy/paste. My thoughts only. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with it, it's about the fact that I am capable of coming up with thoughts of my own. 

You aren't. 

Die.

Deep.


Cheese.
 

sootedupCyndi » 27 Jan 2024, 1:14 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 1:14 pm

well come on Bv? what's your thoughts... step up to the plate dear?

As interesting as "Perspectives Regarding Heterosexuality"

Who cares?

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:25 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:25 pm

@R. Suave  notice no copy/paste. My thoughts only. It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with it, it's about the fact that I am capable of coming up with thoughts of my own. 

You aren't. 

Die.

Consider the fact that I am consistently right, for reasons I can consistently articulate, while you are always wrong for reasons you can't.
 

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 1:25 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 1:25 pm

        Prove it. Not a **** chance. 

Here comes "cheese." 1/1000s is hardly 'consistent.

Post your definition of "survivorship bias".

Name the POTUS in 2008.


Look at your poll regarding gasoline prices.


Read your media comment.

Acknowledge that you're a moron.
 

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 1:35 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 1:35 pm

  

1. 500 greenies to do your work. 
2. Still entertaining your same lie, I see. Desperate. 
3. Post where I ever claimed that all of my predictions are correct. I only have 100% accuracy on you because you are so **** easy. 
4. Refute it for once. 

Should I post all of your gems? List is too long, but I can post some samples if you would like.

Do it.....but first explain how a year over year decline suggests a positive growth rate.

Don't lie...
 

R.Suave » 27 Jan 2024, 1:12 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 1:12 pm

An uninformed narcissist shares his feelings.

Riveting.

Consequential.

Daring.

You left out bold and piquant.