Missing the Point on Gays

Washington Post ^ | September 5, 2003 | Alan Simpson

[Recourse]

Missing the Point on Gays

By Alan Simpson Friday, September 5, 2003; Page A21

For several weeks now a storm has been brewing in the Senate over just how homosexuals fit into the mainstream of American life. First, an honest debate on the criminalization of gay sex in Texas somehow gave rise to baseless fears about permitting bestiality and incest. Then, after the Supreme Court's reasonable ruling in Lawrence v. Texas that the government had no business policing people in their bedrooms, a panic developed. Some worried that the decision would lead to gay marriage, thus posing a threat to the survival of the American family.

[First Amendment]

Your argument doesn't work. The boy who had his sex organ removed by mistake was still born a boy. The percentage of poor kids born sexually indeterminate or hermaphrodite or whatever is miniscule.
Additionally, many male homosexuals are not effeminate, in fact, they have an air of "ultra butch" masculinity. So this "wearing a dress" stuff isn't a large amount of them. Look at Nazi Germany - the Nazis were rampant with ultra masculine, militaristic homosexuals. In fact they scorned the effeminate "gays"; thought it made them look bad.

[First Amendment]

a lesbian is a pervert??? one what ground???

Because same sex acts are against the natural order. Same sex acts cause mental imbalances and are unhealthy. A lot of lesbians are into torture, S and M and bondage, anal sex, group sex, etc. They are not so lily pure as you want to think.

lesbians have the lowest incidence of STD(almost non-existence) and LOVE, not sex is their #1 agenda.

I guess you haven't investigated the matter much. Lesbians also have a high incidence of desiring sex with adolescents or even pre-adolescent girls, high rate of partner abuse, drug and alcohol abuse, and partner turnover. (Gym teachers, anyone?) And I would bet that their STD rate is rising.

[First Amendment]

. Individuals who have an intersex condition are quite often unable to reproduce. Should we also deny them equal rights because they do not produce offspring?

You're really beating a dead horse here. The number of children born with indeterminate or confused sexual identity BIOLOGICALLY is TINY! Got it? Minute!

And what rights are they denied? They may be denied normal sex or marriage by their birth, but everyone is denied something by the limits nature has placed on them. For instance, I could never have become a great athlete, or mathematician. Who should I sue?

[nosofar]

I think this homosexual should try toting his "queer" Muslim sign around the block in a country ran by Muslims. He might just find them a bit inhospitable to his desire to proliferate GRID.

There are some neighborhoods in France he should try first.

[First Amendment]

Thre is evidence schizophrenia has a physical cause. Depression also has a physical cause.

And love has a physical cause, the universe has a physical cause, and we're all just machine made of meat. Right, drugs cure all mental illness, no need to become introspective and change one's life or consciousness. Oh, and consciousness is based on matter, too.

Yeah, right, everything's just dead meat. That's the materialistic viewpoint, that everything is just machinery and chemistry. No soul, no one really in there, no responsibility, no real choices made, no free will at all. Just chemistry and DNA.

Very limited and one sided (what to speak of illogical) viewpoint.

[First Amendment]

i'm sure there are women pervs out there but it is very very small number. now men; you know the story!!

but i can assure that a man is behind that site and making money off it.

Your bias and ignorance are showing. Why should your factless opinion be of any importance?

[nosofar]

Essentially there are three reasons why homo marriages are a very bad idea and any move at any/every level of government that prevents it is a good move.

What I find interesting is that, to my knowledge, there is no major culture (perhaps none at all) in the world where homosexuality is treated as a normal and acceptable lifestyle. If one exists, I'd like to know (and not some minor blip in the corner of a small island, either).

[Old Professer]

Well, you did spell a few words correctly.

[hellinahandcart]

Heh. Believe it or not, I finally found it yesterday by looking at *your* bookmarks...

[Recourse]

I always liked Simpson because he was a maverick, but I can surely see him saying that, and if he did, it is very insensitive and unnecessarily mean-spirited. I agree with you on this issue and Simpson should feel guilty for ever uttering such remarks.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Private marriage contracts should hold the same legal weight as any other contract freely entered into by two or more adults. Government involvement should be limited to courts enforcing the contracts just as they would enforce any other contract. If you're dumb enough to get married without a written contract, you'll likely end up with a heap of trouble -- just as if you'd entered into a business partnership with no contract.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Re XX fetuses, the "cure" would be abstinence throughout pregnancy (presumably you can grasp what the primary source of in utero testosterone is). Not sure if any research backs up the notion that the opposite would work for XY fetuses. But at any rate, I'm skeptical that any significant percentage of pregnant couples would be willing to stick to such programs.

[GovernmentShrinker]

The Netherlands.

[hellinahandcart]

To me the issue is pretty simple - everyone has the right to a free conscience/religion and no one, if you truly believe in freedom, has the right to be slaming other people especially when it comes to race, sex, creed, sexual orientation and physical disabilities.

If you want your Christian religions to operate freely in this country then, all must also tolerate other forms of religions and other forms of free conscience as long as they are not a serious risk to the health and safety of the public.

You seem to be saying that I must neither have an opinion on the subject nor ever give voice to it. Strange idea of freedom you have up there.

And I am under no obligation to "tolerate" anything I find intolerable.

I find identity politics intolerable, and the radical homosexual movement is the very definition of that.

[WestPacSailor]

Let's just use the term "butthole surfer"...

How 'bout "rump ranger", "Keister Cowboy", "backdoor bandit", etc., etc.?

[infowarrior]

Alan Simpson is a former US Senator from the Rocky Mountain West (Wyoming)...

the infowarrior

[punster]

"preferably studies not performed by "gay" activists wanting to prove a pre-determined outcome."

The study in the scientific journal, Nature (1995), is a good example of the research on such conditions.

1. Women were shown to have a significantly smaller BTSC region in the hypothalamus (p=0.005) than heterosexual males.

2. Male homosexuals had a slightly larger BTSC than heterosexual males, but the difference was not significant.

3. Male to female transexuals had a BTSC region of the hypothalamus which was within the female range, and it was also highly significant (p=0.005)in being smaller than that of heterosexual males.

This research was not done to advance any agenda, it was done to identify any differences in the brain. I doubt that anyone could say that it was done to advance the 'gay' agenda, because it did not show any significant differences for male homosexuals.

Furthermore, there have been animal experiments, which have already been mentioned.

[punster]

"Second, even if all kinds of people who used to practice same sex acts do have some kind of brain difference (which is highly unlikely) there is every chance that the brain difference could have been CAUSED by their same sex behavior."

Is it? Male homosexuals do not have a significantly different BTSC region in the hypothalamus. XY individuals have a significantly smaller BTSC (p=0.005) than heterosexual males or homosexual males. Reference to research published in Nature.

[punster]

"Your argument doesn't work. The boy who had his sex organ removed by mistake was still born a boy."

What the medical establishment did, in that case, was to create in effect, a female transexual. The one thing suggested, by this case, is gender identity is not determined by nurture or environment. The foundations are set in the womb, the child will migrate to the gender identity that most closely resembles the biological programming they have.

[punster]

"And what rights are they denied?"

You are referring to a rhetorical question. The specific example is relating to marriage. Let's take the case of women that have androgen insensitivity syndrome. They are phenotypically female, they have female external genitals, they develop breasts, and are often quite attractive women. They also have a normal female sex drive directed towards men, and look forward to getting married and having a family (adopted, since they are sterile). However, their genotype is XY, male.

Now, the question is: Are we to require a chromosome count and declare them to be men? Are we to declare them to be male homosexuals, because they are interested in men? Are we to tell them they cannot get married, because they are not really women? A good question for a course on medical genetics or medical ethics.