Quote:We may not consciously choose certain intrinsic sincere impulses but that doesn't mean that they should all be expressed and or celebrated.  <b>This entire first line just reinforces your degree of sexual repression.  "I felt something..  but it was bad.  I should not think lustful thoughts."  Of course you are not talking about being LGBT here..  (or that ol' devil masturbation).  No.  You are so morally conflicted with the idea a person could simply and harmlessly be born gay or trans that you will not click on any of the links I have listed in this thread for supportive evidence and will still cling to this false argument that being LGBT is explained in the same exact way being a pedophile, rapist or incestuous is.  You are wrong.  It isn't the first time.</b>



In your personal analysis you see same sex attraction as wholly separate from ANY OTHER form of sexual attraction that deviates from the heterosexual norm. That's fine. You are entitled to your oppinionon the matter.  It's not my opinion or my oppinionon (even your spellcheck is sick of your [BAD WORD REMOVED]).  I will explain, but you will reject my explanation.  Because.. it's what you do.



At the same time you can't use the argument "they don't have a choice who they are attracted to" to justify one deviation while wholly excluding someone that "doesn't have a choice" in their attraction to per pubescent boys or girls.  <b>Indulge me and let's see if you are capable of realizing how your insistence of going to this well time and time again only shows your ignorance on the matter.  I have already mentioned it is a level of ignorance that is also viewed as highly offensive.  You obviously don't care.</b>



Neither has a "choice" both would report the same intrinsic and sincere desire from birth. 


But both do have a CHOICE in acting on their desires. We have no problem as a society condemning the pedophile to a lifetime of bad sex. Why the double standard?  Here you only reinforce your personal belief that  an LGBT person acting on their biological impulses is morally "not right. "  You absolutely MUST associate being LGBT with something you find repulsive and despicable.  If we are talking nature vs. nurture, this obviously falls under your learned behavior.  You simply cannot remove this moral impediment from your ability to reason logically.  (There's a name for that.. what was it again?)  Pedophilia is a mental illness which requires a participant too young to willfully consent.  I don't see how being accepting of gay couples who have long, healthy, monogamous sexual relationships is creating a double standard.  Maybe I am not dumb enough to see it.

 

Does "unrelated" mean something else in your language?  

 

Pedophilia is a psychological disorder which produces sexual urges or fantasies about prepubescent kids. Though inconclusive as to it's cause, many argue pedophilia is caused by neurological abnormalities or psychological pathologies.    Though no conclusive evidence has been found for this, there are also those who believe pedophiles are "created" by confused kids who are molested and get their souls stolen from them who grow older and think..  "this is what I am supposed to do."   [molest littler kids]  

 

How is that related to biological makeup?  Oh it isn't?  So if I am arguing that I feel being LGBT is most easily explained through a biological explanation and that being gay or trans is NOT a psychological disorder, can you understand why I can continue to take the position that they are UNRELATED?  

 

This article is not talking about being gay having anything to do with a psychological disorder.  Do you reject it's validity?  

 

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/10/h...ations-dna

 

What about the thousands of species that also exhibit homosexual behavior in the wild?  Is it such a wide gap in logic to say...  hmmm..  all these animals are doing it..  surely they are not doing it due to societal pressures.  Maybe some of their brains are not developed enough for it to be psychological..  If thousands of species do it and humans do too...  maybe it's biological?  I assume you don't reject that lions and penguins and swans and well..  pretty much all animals do it despite the fact there is no genetic passing of the torch which can ever come from it.

 

Your moral impediment tells you that sexuality (straight or gay) is not a normal, healthy part of a person's personality.  I would argue that discovering your sexuality is a rite of passage and a huge building block when discovering your sense of self.  Even if your view of sexuality is so chaste you are only able to accept it for what it is by choosing to be with someone who shares these same conservative views of sexuality.  I know people who remained virgins until marriage.  That worked for them.  It doesn't work for the majority of people.

 

The issue with you is that you view all sexuality as immoral unless it fits the constructs of your chosen belief system (i.e. - one man/one woman, no premarital sex, etc.)  Therefore it is easy for you to link being LGBT with any number of despicable sexual perversions like pedophilia, incest and rape. Despite the fact the leading theories for the cause of being LGBT are biological in nature and the leading theory for the cause of pedophilia is psychological.

 

If a gay or trans person acts on their desires, they are not doing anything different from what every teenager in the world goes through.  If/when a pedophile acts on their desires they are committing a heinous and unforgivable crime. There are some pedophiles who acknowledge this and confess to their urges publicly as they know they are thoughts that are not right and acting on them harms innocent kids.  Any LGBT person who confesses publicly their urges which they feel are not right are doing so to appease others (usually a congregation or their family) because they have been indoctrinated with this same belief system which tells them they are morally unclean or impure. This explains the statistics of drug/alcohol abuse, depression, homelessness and suicide among the LGBT community.  They are told by parents, society and church leaders just where they are going and why, despite the fact they never had a say in who they are.

 

So pretty please with sugar on top..  STOP trying to link these two vastly different classifications.  It is offensive.  It is ignorant.  You can say...  well neither has a choice.  That is the only remote similarity.  I would argue the reasons why could not be further from the same.

 

I would also argue people do not have a choice in their natural hair or eye color or skin tone. It is in their biological makeup. People DO however have a choice regarding what faith to follow or not follow (and I could make an argument that people who are fanatical religious zealots also suffer from a psychological disorder despite the fact their condition is one of choice.).  People also have a choice on whether or not they are willfully ignorant. Continuing to link being LGBT to pedophilia would only reinforce the perception I have that you are willfully ignorant.  I would love for you to prove me wrong.

---