Society

[kroner]

you're asking me to start taking wild guesses into a question i niether know nor can know the answers to. why are you so intent on having an answer that you would settle for one despite the overwhelming probability that what ever you choose will be wrong?
i'll give you an example: i roll a 100000 sided die, but don't show you the result. then i ask you what number i rolled and you say, "i'm absolutely certain it's 43987." of course it's possible you're right, but it's also ridiculous to jump to a conclusion like that.

[Chrissy]

I don't believe this is the same scenario. This is not a math problem. I'm not intent on having an answer. I'm content to not know. I know what I feel though. You guys are so technical about everything. All your answer to life are not going to be in neat little statistics found in books. I guess my advice to a non believer would be just be close your eyes for a moment, and open your heart. It's been interesting discussing it with you though. I've never heard such clinical opinions on life. It was interesting.

[Jos Elkink]

I'm not even sure how to answer you guys as far as the religion subject goes. Let's try, what do you believe created all of this? What do you believe created the very first dot of existance?

The discussion on racism was actually more interesting to read, but alas, let me try to give some comments on this one ...

First of all, very standard argument: if there is something/someone that is so intelligent/complex that it can create the complexity of the universe, who or what created that something/someone?

Secondly, I think modern versions of chaos and evolution theory fully explain how things became as complex as they are. The human body is an incredibly complex machine which works miraculously well, but this can be fully explained by the human body having random deviations where some deviations survive and others don't. I see no reason why this complexity must have been 'designed' by someone/-thing. In fact, I find it much easier to comprehend the idea that a coincidence of factors created such complexity than that a designer could conceive of this.

Ah well, that's a really, really short explanation of an alternative to having a creator, but I just mean that I don't see any reason at all why there *must* be a creator.

The discussion whether homosexuality is genetic is kind of interesting. Is there any scientific proof yet that anyone knows about? I'm not overtly convinced by just personal family experiences, and we don't have a very good idea of what percentage is gay anyway. I like Nick's argument, though, that if it were genetic, it should decrease over time. I mean, many, many gay people are married and/or have children, but you would also expect a larger proportions of gays than of straight people never to get children during their life, so you would expect it to decrease, indeed. At least after it was common to have gay sex even if you were married, like the ancient Greeks ...

In any case, even if it is genetic, it is of course also to a serious extent shaped by society and personal experiences.

Oh, and Pirog, I am really impressed with your arguments in the discussion on racism ... I hold similar opinions, but find it always hard to win debates with people that try to explain to me how foreigners destroy my country etc. (the Netherlands). But your arguments will help, next time ...

[Pirog]

SekoETC>

As others have pointed out...you can't compare humans to apples.
All apples of a special kind tastes the same and has the same features...

Sometimes I wonder how you racists see the world, to come up with such thoughts. You must have a view of people as some kind of genetically designed robots, that given the same "blueprint" acts, looks and speak in the same way.
Just look around yourselves...all people are unique.

Jos>

Thanks.
I have always found it easy to debate with racists, but it sometimes feels like a hopeless case since many of them doesn't seem to want to change their minds even if they meet arguments that makes them falter in their belief.
But if I will just get one single racist to change their mind I could grow old and die feeling that I accomplished something important.

[Pirog]

About religion>

What do you believe created the very first dot of existance?

I think the question about eternity is a concept the human brain can't fully grasp. Both a creating god and a big bang needs something to create them...and if we find what that source is something in turn must have created that, and so on.

It's the same with trying to grasp that the universe is endless.
I don't think anyone can trully grasp what endless means...

Let's try, what do you believe created all of this?

The Big Bang theory seems possible, and in my view a lot more realistic than that of a creating God.
The good thing with having a scientific approach to things instead of a religious one is that we don't have to feel bad if a new theory comes up that we buy...in science you never have to have faith, it is perfectly allright to just drop your earlier beliefs and take a new perspective.

God is fact . I'm not sure what his actual name is, no one really knows, but we all know something or someone created all of this and all of us.

Well, by putting God as a name on for example Big Bang you would get away with that statement...but that also hollows out the meaning of the word God.

I don't rule out the possibility of a God existing.
But I have no reason to believe it so far...and I hope God doesn't exist.

Although far from an expert I'm interested in religion and the God I see is petty and vendictive one....a divine force more interested in having people fear, obey and praise him than actually doing good.
If God existed he could just reveal himself to all humankind, saying "Here I am. Now stop killing each other over me." I know the arguments for him not to...that life is a test of faith etc. But that is both childish and cruel...how can he as a divine and all-knowing force just stand by while people who doesn't know better ruin their lives (and afterlife) just because they don't believe in a him?

I have a question for you believers, that is meant seriously.
If you believe in divine forces, but still have the sense to think about things rationally...how can you be sure that God is good, or even God?
What if Satan or some similar nemesis of God has defeated him and taken his place? You would be worshiping the devil then.

Think about it. The way the world works today, where there is more pain, grief and sadness that good things...what speaks of a good natured God?
If a divine force truly exists I would say that chances are big that he (or she) is evil and enjoys seeing humankind torment themselves.

Food for thought

[Pirog]

Regarding homosexuality>

I think we need a different perspective on homosexuality.
The discussion exists just because we dwell on it.

Take left handed people as a parallell. People doesn't dwell on them being left handed...we don't discuss if they are unnatural, a freak of nature of if they should be allowed to get married or reproduce...we just see being left handed as a natural thing and leave it at that.

The same perspective could be used for homosexuality.
Apart from them wanting to have sex with people of the same gender homosexuals doesn't stand out from any other person...and if you leave that detail to what it is, it really isn't bigger than left handed people using their left hand as the main hand instead of their right.

[Revanael]

Secondly, I think modern versions of chaos and evolution theory fully explain how things became as complex as they are. The human body is an incredibly complex machine which works miraculously well, but this can be fully explained by the human body having random deviations where some deviations survive and others don't. I see no reason why this complexity must have been 'designed' by someone/-thing. In fact, I find it much easier to comprehend the idea that a coincidence of factors created such complexity than that a designer could conceive of this.

Plus, the fact that even though the human body is amazingly complex, we know it could be a huge amount more effective than it is. So why, if we were designed, would they do a half-arsed job of it?

Unless we were designed by some exceptionally lazy god-like being, of course...

[Revanael]

I have a question for you believers, that is meant seriously.
If you believe in divine forces, but still have the sense to think about things rationally...how can you be sure that God is good, or even God?
What if Satan or some similar nemesis of God has defeated him and taken his place? You would be worshiping the devil then.

Think about it. The way the world works today, where there is more pain, grief and sadness that good things...what speaks of a good natured God?
If a divine force truly exists I would say that chances are big that he (or she) is evil and enjoys seeing humankind torment themselves.

Food for thought

I hadn't thought about it that way, but you do have a point. Very nice!

[Chrissy]

Hey Kroner, did you close your eyes and find God? lol

Wow.. I've never met so many people who don't believe in God. If you guys want to believe that there was a "Bang", and "poof", the universe and all it's living things with souls were created, that's fine. I pray for the whole world all the time so I'm sure you guys are covered. No need to thank me in the afterlife Humans have the right to free will. So if their assholes, their assholes on their own accord. Just like, I don't think at the end of the world some higher power is going to smite us all, I'm pretty sure were just going to self implode. We were given one earth and were slowly destroying it. Free will.

[SekoETC]

I think society is too great of a subject. This should be split in to several separate topics, like now we went from sexual differences to racism to religion. It's just too big to handle.

Most people think that everything is alright as far as it doesn't hurt others. Well it hurts me reading people write terribly, all lower case and wrong. I can avoid going to sites that promote that, but with messengers and all it's a great pain of putting all that kinds of people to the ignore list, and it hurts me mentally thinking that they might get offended. And if someone calls you a whore for no reason it definately hurts. If a culture teaches boys to think of all Western girls as whores it's not alright. That's racism too. Ok also Western people are thought to believe that Russian girls are all whores. Wrong too. But it cannot be changed, it's too big to be changed.

About God there should be a separate topic though I have noticed that the conversation never leads to anything. I believe and that's it. I have had enough debates about that in the past.

[Missy]

Again, I had a big post written but deleted it. (I don't know why.) I'll try to remember how I had it written. (I guess I think I'll get heat for my views. )

About the gay discussion-

I am going to have to say I agree with Nick's number one.

To add to it. A.) If being gay is a result of genetics, then how do they explain bi-sexuality? A disfunctional chromosome? (Some say there is no such thing as bi-sexuality, only confused gays or straights that haven't figured out they are one or the other yet. Even so, that wouldn't convince me that sexual preference relied on genetics alone.) Because somewhere a bi-sexual makes a conscious/subconscious decision to be with one or the other. Since when have genetics been the key factor in or when you preferred/decided what you liked from this day to the next?

(I saw somewhere a reference to food in this topic, and it was frowned upon, I'll use one here but I think it's completely legitimate. If you don't feel so, of course you're free to point that out.)

We as humans are reliant on affection (affection comes in many forms, you don't have to be sexually active to be affectionate,) if not the need to reproduce. In the same way, we are created reliant to eat.

So here is example 1.) I have to eat. So I prefer a hamburger and choose that item over the chicken sandwich. I eat a hamburger every day of the week because I choose to. I choose it based on what I know of my previous interactions with the food. The quality, the taste, the fulfillment, and perhaps some unknown genetic reasoning as well.
In the same, a person has choices to sate their affectionate deprived appetite. I go to the counter and there's a gay woman, a straight man, a bi- woman, a transvestite, a cross dresser. I choose the male because he is what I am hungry for. I know that another woman based on previous interactions with one, doesn't compare to the quality of the interactions of the male, and I don't get the fullfilling supply of affection I would want from my affection giver.
(This theory doesn't at all mean you have to have been with the same or opposite sex in a sexual way before. In fact it implies we have in time through out each indivudals life grown intuitive to what will fullfill our desires and satisfy our tastes.)

Example 2.) Anyone can make themselves want something. I would not drink a cup of my own urine right now if I had to. If you stuck me in the middle of a desert with no cactai in my proximity, Id learn to like my own urine for the sake of surviving OR I will die.
If you put a lonely man or woman alone with another of their own sex for twenty years, noone else in sight, they will seek out affection and either learn to provide those affections to one another OR not and continue to be lonely, regardless of their preference.
(This is not to say that homesexaulity stems from desperation. I'm saying anyone under the right/wrong circumstances and predicaments can mold or shape to what they're provided with. But even in worst case scinerios, you have a choice.) If you forced a funnel down my throat with urine in it I still may force myself to like it just to get through it OR I may not and go through an incredibly horrible ordeal.



B.) If genetics did play the dominant role in why persons are more attracted to/interested in one sex than another, then explain why animals have gay tendencies but always refer back to their opposite sex when it is there?. Don't tell me you people have never seen two female dogs or two male dogs hump one another.

C.) I wont say that I dont believe everyones genetic make up doesn't play a role in who they become, but that goes for everyone, gay or straight. I think the idea of trying to prove homosexuality is genetic, defeats the purpose of gay rights activists to be honest. Not only will gays be looked down upon for being gay, if it is discovered that it is completely genetic they will also then be looked at as if they have a disfunction/disorder/illness. From there, scientists will then look for a cure, just as they look for a way to cure downs syndrome or spinal bifida. I am totally against the research of it. I can just imagine how many steps it will take us backward. "Awee he's/she's gay because their gene's are messed up." And to be frank, I don't find homosexuality abnormal or think it should be treated as if it is.


D.) I also believe that we as humans are all bi-sexual in some sort of way. I believe that a group of people formed the belief or shunned the the thought it was normal to admitt you have an attraction to someone of your same sex, due to biblical practices that sex is meant for reproduction. As time went on, the idea of someone being attracted to another of their same sex became out-lawed in a sense and so people forced themselves to shove their appreciation for beauty of either sex away. You must know that in those times, a part of our society today was created, which is the instilled fear that to have an off opinion- other than what the majority holds is to be kept quiet. Cliques, social classes, groups weren't just formed in highschools this century, they've been around for many. (Or maybe I'm just bi-sexual myself and have this opinion because I am? )

E.) I don't consider myself bi-sexual. I'm married to a male, and am female myself. I have had a sexual relationship with a female before. I do find female(s) attractive, but I get what I am hungry for and the quality I look for from a male.

F.) I think if there is to be normalicy, it has to be treated normal. People must begin to walk down the streets and assume that the people whose paths they cross are not just straight peoples paths because it is majority, but that they might be gay OR straight.. (This is an extremely large step, especially for places where people are anti, or where noone has ever heard of a gay person in their proximity.)
I also think that people have to stop saying "My Gay friend." That makes it odd. Or "I have a friend who is gay..." UNLESS you are talking directly about sexual preferences. Or perhaps if you were talking about interaction with a said person they might bring it up. I think mentioning it like this, ~MAKES~ it a problem. Mentioning the sexual preference automatically makes people assume there is something differant about them and more inclined to turn their noses up.
I also think, that getting privelages or rights, doesn't require you to stand naked on Capital Hill. I'm straight and want certain rights that I don't have too, but I don't go around breaking damn laws to prove the point I am entitled to those rights.
I think for a straight person to say "You can be gay but don't hit on me" is absolutely ignorant and borderline anti. I don't condone for a gay person to walk around grabbing crotches in a bathroom, but I don't condone that out of straight people either. That in my opinion is like saying "You can have a sexual preference, but you can't." Which is it? Aren't they humans with needs too? You don't get yelled at by a woman for hitting on her because you have a need to be with her, why should a gay get yelled at for hitting on you because they have a need to be with someone as well? You should, politely say, "I'm sorry, I'm not interested." Gays aren't stupid and they have to follow the laws regarding sexual harrassment just as any straight person. Unless you'd punch someone of your opposite sex for hitting on you, you should think twice the next time you punch a gay person for offering to buy you a drink.


Hm, I think thats pretty much it for now.

[Pirog]

SekoETC>

And if someone calls you a whore for no reason it definately hurts. If a culture teaches boys to think of all Western girls as whores it's not alright. That's racism too. Ok also Western people are thought to believe that Russian girls are all whores. Wrong too. But it cannot be changed, it's too big to be changed.

And what about a white person saying that all Turks share that view, degrade women and are generally less educated and intelligent than others?
That is wrong too, right? So you are basing your unfair (and also totally false) view of foreigners on an assumption that most of them treat others as you do them? That is not very logical...

By the way, if you think that Turkish culture teaches boys to think of Western girls as whores you need to do some studying...

And although it will take some effort and time to changed views like this they can definately be changed. Not very long ago africans and indians weren't even considered human. That view was as widespread and accepted (actually much more widespead and accepted) than the racist arguments are today...but very, very few uphold that view nowdays.

I do agree with you on one thing though...this topic should be split up.

[Chrissy]

If a culture teaches boys to think of all Western girls as whores it's not alright. That's racism too. Ok also Western people are thought to believe that Russian girls are all whores. Wrong too. But it cannot be changed, it's too big to be changed.

If another culture teaches people to think all western girls are whores that is truly one of the funniest things I've ever heard. And as a person who lives in the west, I can you tell that I have never heard in my entire life that Russian woman are whores. That's funny too. I'm not sure that it's to big to be changed because I'm not sure that rumor was ever started.

Those are all really good points Melissa. My genetic beliefs only stem from the fact that everyone is gay on the Castellese side of my family, and nobody is gay on the Spencer side. I'm pretty good at reading people and I've known these people my whole life so I have a pretty good read on them. The contrast between the two sides is so striking, that it just lead me to believe genetics might play a part. It's truly just a guess though.

I should add to something I said earlier, I think boys who know statistics are sexy, intelligence is hot, and that's what attracts me to a man. I just don't want you guys to get so caught up in facts you don't allow your mind and spirit to roam freely. Kroner.. I closed my eyes opened my heart and sent you a hug via the lord last night. Did you get it? If not, that's o.k., I'm going to keep trying.

[Junesun]

B.) If genetics did play the dominant role in why persons are more attracted to/interested in one sex than another, then explain why animals have gay tendencies but always refer back to their opposite sex when it is there?. Don't tell me you people have never seen two female dogs or two male dogs hump one another.

I'm not sure this example belongs here... animals hump one another because of dominance issues. If e. g. a dog feels seriously threatened by another of his kind and doesn't want to fight, he'll assume a subservient position and the other dog will usually hump him in order to show his dominance. After that the two have defined their respective positions within the pack and will usually get along.

[Missy]

B.) If genetics did play the dominant role in why persons are more attracted to/interested in one sex than another, then explain why animals have gay tendencies but always refer back to their opposite sex when it is there?. Don't tell me you people have never seen two female dogs or two male dogs hump one another.

I'm not sure this example belongs here... animals hump one another because of dominance issues. If e. g. a dog feels seriously threatened by another of his kind and doesn't want to fight, he'll assume a subservient position and the other dog will usually hump him in order to show his dominance. After that the two have defined their respective positions within the pack and will usually get along.

Is that completely true when you refer to dogs who have lived in captivity? Humans also have dominant roles. There's a theory that women will one day be the only existent sex on earth. I believe it's relative since we are animals too, and in some relationships regarding certain instances you or your partner can be seen as submissive or dominant. Though thats not the point of your argument. There is no proof that dogs "only" do what they do to determine dominance since noone has yet become a dog and been able to understand it's way of thinking. Beside that I seen two female dogs hump eachother, in fact I'd say it was the non dominant female who humped the dominant. Nevermind they were in heat. This happened every time one of them was. I would think that after six years of being in heat and humping every time, they would have determined by now who was dominant and who wasnt.



Mm, and I wouldn't say that animals only hump to prove dominance either when you catch a black lab pulling your comforter to the floor. The comforter is by no means anything that that would give the impression to a dog it was dominant or passive. Thus I think as an animal, just a human is, it has a need for some kind of relationship. Though the blanket in this case might be considered the transvestite.


But....perhaps you're right. I think my B.) doesn't belong there either, if you are.