P.S. if there is something known as WPA, which gie us the link. Cos, it seems to evade us entirely.
Thanks.

I totally disagree with the fact that you mention that homosexuals are mostly preverts and what-so-ever. (Check out newspapers please.) List down how many such crimes are actually committed by heterosexuals? Or are you simply running away from such facts and making up your own facts to promote “heterosexaulity”?

If being homo is a crime, then i guess everyone should be eating not just healthy food (ban junk food), but too be eating meals specially planned in case they overdose themselves with “vitamins, iron, and all the other nutrients (or junkies)”.

Afterall,
“It is all about proper uses and abuses that causes a harmless substance to turn deadly.”

The harm/non-harm principle is only convincing to liberal (classical) and libertarian types, unfortunately. Will need additional ‘splaining to use in a debate.

Shoestring,
Google is my friend, and research is a skill anyone can pick up. Just try, and be amazed at what you find/learn in the process.

I’m a divergent thinker too, so I can sympathize. Setting specific criteria helps A LOT, trust me, and do more good than harm if set properly. If you are really unsure, then pretend that you are sure for once (e.g. gays don’t deserve rights or gays deserve rights). Gay rights is a fairly simple topic to investigate, actually, and investigating it helps to kick many of your own unjustified prejudices/assumptions out of the door.

If you hate the finality of being certain, like me, you can always leave it an option to revisit the issue later (under a different set of criteria if you want).

Needless to say, homosexual rights is one of the issues I am glad to stand firm on. (Now, why is it that I keep making all sorts of bad puns when discussing this issue? um.. fnord.)

There are good reasons for my view, but that’s another story. From my observations, you don’t have to worry about children/imitator adults. 1) They outgrow it. 2) As far as science is concerned, homosexuality isn’t contagious 3) homosexuality isn’t as bad as most of us think 4) most young children are way smarter than we give them credit for. In fact, many homosexuals make excellent role models.

Plus, there are plenty of places where homosexuals do as they please, and I have not heard about it affecting children in those places. Believe me, if it ever did, plenty of people would be trumpeting and exaggerating each and every incident.

I think it is too simplistic to categorize only children of certain ages as vulnerable to influences. Even adults are and you’ll be surprised how many are actually asking questions. Even if they ask, many children and youngsters are a rebellious and experimental lot. It may not necessarily be bad, but what are the implications?

And as I have mentioned, it is an example to illustrate my approach to the problem, kind of like convergent vs divergent modes of thinking and problem solving. I am basically a divergent thinker, in particular when the issue at hand is a complex one like this.

Also, I think it is easier to lay out the a set of criteria to be satisfied when I want something, but no so easy and advisable when I am not sure whether I want it or not.

Christians and the conservative tend to see homosexuality as either “wrong” or “unnatural” based on religious doctrine or on societal norms, but there are also people – myself included, who don’t see why a normative judgment has to be put on homosexuality. I don’t claim to speak for everyone, or for Ben for that matter, but I personally see homosexuality as a natural phenomenon. To me, it’s genetic.

And this is because Science has disproved that it is a psychological problem, but through studies involving people and aninmals, have come to the conclusion that it recurs naturally and therefore cannot simply be psychological. Not to doubt the power of the human mind, but I honestly don’t believe that people actually want to convince themselves into being gay.

Life isn’t easy when you’re gay. I know of people who date people of the opposite sex to fit in, or people who repress their sexuality no matter how unhappy they are, or people who commit suicide, because they cannot come to terms with the fact that they are gay. The internal struggles by many people are not helped by discrimination against them based on outdated arguments or religious dogma.

In Science, you never conclusively prove anything. All you start off with is a theory, that you subsequently disprove. That is what it is like with homosexuality. There was a theory that it was a psychological problem, and it was a theory that through years of study by Dr. Adams and the like, was finally accepted as disproved by the APA and other authorities on psychological health.

Thus seeing that homosexuality is a natural state and not putting any moral implications on it at all, I don’t see why children seeing gay people hold hands on the street or kiss or anything like that is a problem. There is no problem. Seeing 2 gay people kissing on the street will probably be as well… indecent… if it were 2 straight people kissing on the street. That just means too much public display of affection, and have nothing to do with sexuality per se.

Perhaps it’s because I’ve been to Canada. I loved being in the Gay Villages. I’ve seen and talked to gay and lesbian couples who hold hands and kiss and who are very much in love with each other. There are people in domestic partnerships who love each other, and the common conception in Singapore that gays only want to fuck your ass is completely warped and outdated. Perhaps the whole community has been tarnished by the few black sheep who have hit on straight guys sexually, or who have committed rape on the unconsenting.

But that to me, is not reason enough to condemn homosexuals as wrong or unnatural. Frankly speaking, I’d be perfectly okay if my child were gay. His or her sexuality will not affect the way I look at him or her. I’d honestly be much more horrified if he or she were a fundy, actually.

Darling *looks at Ben*, perhaps we should move to Canada if we do decide to have kids. At least our children will definitely be happy and accepted there. Lol.

What wider impact are you talking about?

Wait ah, Ben, I am confused about your reference to whybegay’s comment referring to points I have supposedly brought up. Don’t see any connection or reference in whybegay’s comment attributing my comments to you.

??? Anyway, hope it’s been resolved.

RSE, I think you are an encyclopedia of sorts. Thanks again for the references. I am not a student (so no privileges ), neither do I have the time to do extensive research, so you have been pretty helpful.

Regarding shifting posts and allowing rights when there is no reason to withhold it, well, I am here to clarify my thoughts, not to win any arguments or annihilate opponents, so, I should in fact be allowed to shift my positions in the process of finding answers, do you think?

I can see your point when you say rights should be given where there is no reason to withhold. That is from your perspective, based on your values, disposition and personal guiding philosophy. Unfortunately, mine differ from yours and I do not make decisions that way. When in doubt (e.g. what rights are we talking about?), I prefer to to mull things over instead of issuing a blank check. Something like the “look before you leap” principle, especially when it is something that may have repurcussions on a wider scale.

For instance, and please bear in mind that I am only giving an example, if we say gays have the right (meaning it is legal) to kiss in public, just like heterosexuals, what are the implications? Will we feel it is okay for our children to witness those acts and mimick them or think it is cool to do so? Because it signals to them that it is normal for a man to kiss another man passionately if we accept that kind of acts in public. In this situation, I am not objecting to what they are doing to each other but the wider impact on society as a whole.

I hope you get what I mean.