A question for both sides of the spectrum on the "gay debate"

[Brambila]

Psychologists today are split into two different groups: Those accepting that homosexuality is a normal, genetic difference, and is simply another form of human sexuality; and those who believe that homosexuality is caused by abnormal mental growth in the childhood due to traumatic or influencial mental events. The former group, of course, is predominant in the psychology world. However, the latter group has an argument worth fighting for.

Everybody has genetic predispositions, and in this belief, homosexuals most likely begin having sexual disfunction with a genetic predisposition; they have a higher chance of growing up to be homosexual (such as certain people have higher chances of having bipolarism or pedophilic tendancies). In effect, should the child have abnormal influences or traumatic events in his childhood, he could develop a homosexual attraction. The most common cases for males are when they are rejected by their male peers, and so they make friends with girls. It is common that within this, they not only connect with girls better, but also do not participate in sports or any other male activities.

It's simply an argument, but I think its a very good one.

[Brambila]

This *should* end the argument about choice: Why would anyone *choose* to be gay?

However, I know those people who believe it is a choice will come up with some zany answer to refute this.  In fact, the way I see it is, if you think it possible, than you must be at least bisexual, because only a non-straight person would think this. Straight people are not attracted to other members of the sex, and would never try it, because it would be to repulsive. Thusly, they must understand that if other people are willing to try it, - then it can't be a choice issue, now can it?

Bullsh**t.  The Greeks were then all bisexual.  It doesn't work that way.  You're taught to like it or not, and it is a decision.  And a fun one at that.

Greeks wern't bisexual- they were gay, specifically the Spartans. The Spartan army would take children away from their homes at a young age, and implant homosexuality into them through statutory rape, so that the boys wouldn't have families to want to go back to during war.

[Brambila]

Opebo, it was considered bizarre by most of the world. If a few hundred people from Nebraska decided to brainwash and sleep with little children, would that make it right because it was their statute?

[Brambila]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're contradicting yourself. You're agreeing with me that those people from Nebraska who sleep with children are doing something wrong, and yet you say that stuff like that is subjective. Make up your mind!

I'll use another situation: If in Bhutan it was socially acceptable to brutally rape and murder woman at the age of 30, would that make it right?

[Brambila]

Around. I got a little overwealmed this year with school.

Opebo, define subjective preference in your words.