Don't.
Please, just don't.

And what you're doing is exalting sexual relationships above nonsexual relationships. Poppycock. Why should two men who love each other, but chose to keep their relationship platonic (ie be hetrosexual) be discriminated against. Two brothers for example. Aren't brother who love each other commited for life? Why should they be discriminated against simply because they don't have sex.

It's the same old story from Western society. Sex = love. Sex= love.

No it doesn't. No it doesn't. </font>[/QUOTE]So you are either saying:

A. The only thing involved with being married is having sex

B. -or you have missed my point

C. -or you are trying to obfuscate the issue by comparing apples( ie. marital relationship)with oranges (fraternal relationships)

D. All of the Above

E. ????

Of course I didn't mention sexual relations in my post even once so I am quite curious how exactly am I exhalting them?

As for the topic of marriage, it involves a potentially lifetime union of two people who are not blood-related. (some places allow first cousin marriages though).

I am curious what exactly I said that gives you the impression I believe that sex = love? And how is this love = sex "point" relevant to same-sex marriage?

Ok then explain this.

I spent almost ten years of my life choosing to be attracted to girls yet I wasn't attracted to them. How come I couldn't make that choice?

If attraction is a choice, prove me wrong and choose to be attracted to a guy. It's that simple

If it's that simple, choose to hate your parents.

I never chose to love my parents. I just do. I can't even not love them when I'm mad at them!

If love is such a choice, hate everything you love then. Prove me wrong.

Again, and let me put this in bold:

For ten year I chose to be attracted to women yet I wasn't attracted to them. To be blunt, they never once aroused me.

Explain why. I made the 'choices' to be heterosexual, yet I wasn't attracted, explain why.

And I'll repeat it again:

For ten years I chose, with my mind, to be attracted to women yet they never aroused me. Explain why?

But, sex does not, I repeat, does not dictate one's lifestyle. Prove how it does.

As far as definition goes, then let's expand it to sexual attraction. I'm not sexually attracted to women, never have, and haven't met one yet that's sexually attractive to me.

If sexual attraction is a choice, then why not simply prove me wrong by choosing to be sexually attracted to a guy that isn't you?

As far as committed relationships go, these are not simply, as you put it, 'choosing to be attracted to someone'. If it was, then a lot of people would be in a committed relationship.

A committed relationship involves a major committment to stay with that one person. Commitment is the only true choice you can really make. Despite the fact that a person is in a commited relationship, it doesn't automatically equal "will only be attracted to one person".

[ 06-02-2004, 04:38 PM: Message edited by: Jerr Conner ]

I agree with you Jerr. I could not help but be attracted to girls -- I was a kindergarten cad. I didn't understand what it was I liked about them so much, but boy did I like it. I have also TRIED to find men attractive. I TRIED to open my mind to that possibility, but it just didn't work.

If it is a choice, it's on the level of choosing to slow your heartbeat. In order to get control over your base animal instinct attractions, you'd have to be "thinking" with parts of your brain like your medulla -- very difficult.

And, Yorick, he makes a good point. If you really WANT to prove him wrong, all you have to do is CHOOSE to be attracted to a man. C'mon, man, show us you can do it!! :D

Hehe that smiley made me laugh out loud :D

i agree with yorick in thinking its a choice, but not in the sense that a choice can be made today. in fact, most of the choice is not even made by the person, but rather by their peers and their elders.

it is a choice which, in effect, has been made already, and can't be so easily undone as to, say, switch underwear brands. it just isnt that kind of choice.

its a developemental choice, it becomes deeply engrained in the persons developed character. thus, in order to reverse such a 'choice' would require the aide of a psychologist to treat. again, this hinges on whether or not homosexuality is developemental or genetic, which has not yet been determined.

Equating or likening homosexuality with mental illness? This has been adressed around these forums before in one of the other umpteen threads on this topic.

Sorry, but homosexuality was taken out of the DSM-4 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)nearly 30 years ago and only a bonafide quack using unproven and unhealthy thereputic "techniques" would try and "cure" someone of homosexuality.

I doubt it's due to my elders. Most of my family is notoriously homophobic, and my parents may not be but they used to be in the past.

Add onto that the town I grew up in, where rarely did anyone mention they were gay (And they were scoffed at if they did, or so I heard from some friends). So peers didn't decide it either.

The first gay person I ever met was when I was 15 (A guy I was crushing on despite the fact that I didn't want to), and I didn't even know he was gay until he came out to all of his friends (A year later).

If it's such a developmental choice, then why exactly did it develop in me when I tried to develop straight crushes? Why did it develop in a highly homophobic environment? How did it develop when none of my peers, until my mid-teens (And that was just one person, for about a year and a half) and then my early twenties, were gay?

[ 06-02-2004, 07:34 PM: Message edited by: Jerr Conner ]

"Treating" homosexuality is not recognized as medicine. I'm not sure what might happen if a psychologist were to attempt to "treat" a homosexual... At the very least, s/he would lose credibility.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_exod.htm

Some quotes for you.

"There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of 'reparative therapy' as a treatment to change one's sexual orientation". American Psychiatric Association's 1997 Fact Sheet on Homosexual and Bisexual Issues"


"Essentially all gays, lesbians, mental health professionals, human sexuality researchers and religious liberals accept that a homosexual orientation is normal and natural for a minority of people. They believe that sexual orientation cannot be changed. They generally believe that both heterosexual and homosexual behavior can be either sinful or not, depending upon the circumstances. They regard these therapies to be non-productive and potentially dangerous."

" Almost all of the hundreds of thousands of remaining mental health professionals feel that therapy is: incapable of changing a person's sexual orientation,
is contraindicated,
may be damaging to the client, and
has the potential to cause serious depression
triggers suicide in some cases."

"All [therapy] methods have a few points in common:

None are currently accepted by most therapists.
None were accepted by most therapists at any time in the past.
All are, or have been, widespread forms of therapy by a minority of therapists and clergy.
None have been meaningfully researched and shown to be helpful."

[ 06-02-2004, 08:34 PM: Message edited by: Illumina Drathiran'ar ]

<font color = lightgreen>Without a much more complete life history and a degree in either psychology or a specialization in psychiatry, I don't think anyone here could answer that question for you.
On the other hand, maybe the temptation of "forbidden fruit" led you down that particular path.

Suppose you and I were to meet, get to know each other, and fall in love. Would you rather have me love you because I have to (genetic mandate) or because I choose to?

I don't have anything against homosexuals. I do have difficulties with the rationalizations people have for their actions or the vacillations of fence-sitters--pick one side or the other. </font>