Replies

Homosexuality is defined by behavior, i.e., unless one engages in sexual activity with a member of the same sex, he, or she, is not a homosexual. (The term sexual orientation is a diversionary tactic employed to rhetorically cloud the issue.)

Any human behavior (not driven by autonomic or instinctual responses) that is not voluntary is, by definition, a psychosis.

Therefore, homosexual behavior is either a voluntary choice or a psychosis.

If homosexual behavior is a voluntary choice, then it is subject to the same types of societal regulations as is any other sexual behavior such as pedophilia, prostitution, polygamy, etc.

If homosexual behavior is a psychosis, then it is validly subject to treatment and possible cure.

If homosexual behavior is voluntary, it has no more claim to discussion in a public school curriculum than does pedophilia, prostitution, polygamy, etc., i.e., none.

If homosexual behavior is involuntary (a psychosis), it has no more claim to discussion in a school curriculum than does any other psychosis, i.e., none.

In either case, homosexual practitioners have no valid claim to insist on inclusion of discussion of their sexual proclivities in a public school curriculum. Homosexual individuals are incapable of reproduction if they are exclusively homosexual. (If these individuals do not practice exclusively homosexual activity, then, by definition, they can choose not to be homosexual.) By the principles of genetics, exclusively homosexual practitioners would cause such types of individuals to appear in the population at no greater rate than that of other genetic disorders which prevent their victims from procreating, not the currently observed proportion of the population.

Homosexuality is defined by behavior, i.e., unless one engages in sexual activity with a member of the same sex, he, or she, is not a homosexual. (The term sexual orientation is a diversionary tactic employed to rhetorically cloud the issue.)

Let me add my two cents. One could think of actual homosexuality being just as you defined it --in essence, a "homosexual" is a disordered heterosexual -disordered because he/she chose to or chooses to engage in the disordered activity of homosexual sex...

However, as to "sexual orientation" -think of "sexual orientation" as feelings... Those suffering the homosexual disorder claim to have feelings of predisposition cause unknown to engage in the disordered activity of homosexual sex...

If they do not act on those feelings then they simply suffer from the homosexual disorder and are not actually one time, practiced, and or severely addicted "homosexuals" ...

e.g. one may think of bowling without being a bowler AND one may be a bowler without being a professional bowler...

Obesity is defined by behavior, i.e., engaging in eating activity with no exercise and gaining lots of weight. (The term obese is a diversionary tactic employed to rhetorically cloud the issue.)

Any human behavior (not driven by autonomic or instinctual responses) that is not voluntary is, by definition, a psychosis.

Therefore, obese behavior is either a voluntary choice or a psychosis.

If obese behavior is a voluntary choice, then it is subject to the same types of societal regulations as is any other behavior such as pedophilia, prostitution, polygamy, etc.

If obese behavior is a psychosis, then it is validly subject to treatment and possible cure.

If obese behavior is voluntary, it has no more claim to discussion in a public school curriculum than does pedophilia, prostitution, polygamy, etc., i.e., none.

If obese behavior is involuntary (a psychosis), it has no more claim to discussion in a school curriculum than does any other psychosis, i.e., none.

In either case, obese practitioners have no valid claim to insist on inclusion of discussion of their eating habits in a public school curriculum. (If these individuals do not practice exclusively obese activity, then, by definition, they can choose not to be obese.) By the principles of genetics, exclusively obesity practitioners would cause such types of individuals to appear in the population at no greater rate than that of other genetic disorders which prevent their victims from enjoying life to the fullest, not the currently observed proportion of the population.

The argument can be twisted to anything. I have a cheesecake habit but don't demand any special recognition. It's my CHOICE! There is no cheesecake gene.