Quote: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

 

So wait a minute.  Any sexual behavior you don't like you attribute to extreme environmental trauma and then when someone insinuates that same sex attraction could be the result of some form of psychological abnormality you brow beat them as ignorant and not worthy of the air you breathe.  Hypocritical much?


 

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.

 

A female praying mantis eats the head of her male suitor during intercourse.  Do you want to follow that example?  


 

Your moral impediment tells you that sexuality (straight or gay) is not a normal, healthy part of a person's personality.  

 

Now, you're just exposing your own insecurities in your argument.  Sexuality is a vital part to everyone's personality.  Does that mean that we should have sex in the middle of math class?  What about on a crowded train?  Or would you concede that as healthy as sex can be it still has its place in society.  If you disagree with how i position sex in my personal moral hierarchy then that's fine, but childish name calling (sexually repressed) and exaggeration (YOU MUST HATE ALL SEX) just illustrates to me and everyone here that you are still incapable of rationally dealing with someone who doesn't share your basic moral programming.  


 

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.

 

Yes it does.  You can choose to express yourself in any way that you want with consenting adults, but that doesn't change the basic facts.  In the case of sex in the absence of monogamy there are actually a myriad of negative psychological issues specifically with self esteem.  In the case of heterosexual women they are hard wired to function sexually in a secondary role to a more global sense of safety and security associated with monogamy.  The more that you break that fundamental bond over time then the ability to trust her partner and function in a monogamous relationship degrades over time.  

 

I have already covered why monogamous marital relationships are the most beneficial in my DARWINIAN HEALTH SECTION ABOVE.  

 

Also, not to mention the fact that your pre-marital free love society has become riddled with Aids, STD's broken families and what 50 million abortions in the last 40 years...  but hey, at least you scored on prom night.  


 

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.

 

again, for all interested please reffer to the section about DARWINIAN HEALTH.  


 

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.

 

Depending on the state, you just contradicted yourself.  you beleive that teenagers should be engaged in free sex?  how young.  I think that someone should swipe this guys computer.  


 

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.

 

Because obviously same sex attraction mandates a healthy psyche to begin with.  


 

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.

 

Close your eyes.  What do you see.  That's how much i value your perceptions.  

 

You're a naturalist.  You think that if anything can be explained by a "biological explanation" then that means that it should be accepted as a part of who someone is.  

 

Nevermind the fact that there are certain psychological disorders that have genetic precursors, that's too easy.  

 

One of the first ittirations of Heart surgery was to correct a naturally occurring genetic defect in the aortic arch.  Since this had a biological explanation should we have just sat back as a  society and let these kids die while we bloviate about how they must have been sent as messangers from God about how short life is and that we should enjoy it?  If i have a tumor caused by a genetic deformation does that mean that i shouldn't seek treatment.  

 

Just because something biologically doesn't mean that it is beneficial or healthy.  

 

As for your whole inability to reconcile that you have relieved yourself in whole or in part based on the fantasies of another man...  I'm sorry it's so hard for you bruh.  It takes time.  but one day...  maybe you can live your truth!

---