|
View Poll Results: Is being gay a choice? | |||
Yes | 5 | 13.89% | |
No | 24 | 66.67% | |
Undecided | 7 | 19.44% | |
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-27-2008, 05:28 AM | #41 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 54
|
Agreed. As an optimist, I like to think that there aren't many people left who think that SSA is simply a choice.
__________________
"You're not gonna start humming the theme to Jeopardy are you?" |
02-27-2008, 05:31 AM | #42 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
By the way, whether it's environmental factors or not is neither here nor there to it being a choice. Someone can be rendered a paraplegic by environmental factors, but failure to walk is not a choice. "Environmental factors" vs. genetic is a red herring.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
02-27-2008, 05:32 AM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
Exactly, most of us aren;'t disagreeing with the main point you are making (stripped of its religious and political overtones); we are disagreeing with your poor poll question. Human behavior is just not that simple.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
02-27-2008, 05:34 AM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
Yes it does, particualrly becaseu SU is no pure hearted seeker of truth, but is an advocate trying to make a poitn and so constructs his poll for that purpose. In this context it makes the question even more objectionable.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
02-27-2008, 05:40 AM | #45 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
The points you are making are not material to the crux of this issue. If the law or a religion forced people to choose homosexuality or heterosexuality and stick with the choice, your points would be worth considering. Given that people who choose to be gay 100% of the time (and are monogomous are to boot) are treated differently from heterosexuals your "nuances" are irrelevant. As I've shown, nuance all you want, the point, which you don't seem to deny, is people don't choose their sexaul preference or absence thereof. Also, again, environmental factors vs. genetics is irrelevant as well.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 02-27-2008 at 05:45 AM. |
|
02-27-2008, 05:43 AM | #46 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
I have an agenda but I am a pure hearted seeker of truth. I'm in the right here unless anyone can persuade me that sexual preference is a choice. Because I have a belief and a point to make doesn't disqualify me from being righteous.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
02-27-2008, 05:52 AM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
|
Actually, I think Bayes Rule is very help in this situation. Suppose you think about a person who believes the following:
Let P(A1) = 0.99 (the prior probability homosexual preferences are best understood as a choice. Before he/she read the scientific literature. This probability may come from their upbringing or the hermeneutic that use when they read scripture.) Let P(A2) = 0.01 (the prior probability that it is not best understood as a choice) Let P(B|A1) = 0.05 (the probability what we observe the current empirical evidence given A1) Let P(B|A2) = 0.99 (the probability what we observe the current empirical evidence given A2) Bayes Rule P(A1|B) = P(B|A1)*P(A1)/(P(B|A1)*P(A1) + P(B|A2)P(A2)) P(A1|B) = 0.05*0.99/(0.05*0.99 + 0.99*0.01) = 0.83 Nice result! Their prior was so sharp that the posterior probability didn't move much despite the overwhemingly evidence. They still believe there is an 83% chance that it is best understood as a choice. I believe this answers MW earlier question (assuming no math mistakes). In fact this is the source of much message board conversation in general. People with sharp priors and people with more diffuse priors arguing endless because they come to vastly different conclusion about the implications of the data. Bayes rule is wonderful. Last edited by pelagius; 02-27-2008 at 05:58 AM. |
02-27-2008, 06:33 AM | #48 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,589
|
Quote:
Just guessing. |
|
02-27-2008, 12:00 PM | #49 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
Animals, other than the human animal are incapable of knowing or understanding that they may be trying to copulate with a male or female of their species at the instinctively appointed mating periods of their existence. Instinct to mate governs their actions, not sexual preference. Humans are the only animals on the planet that engage in sexual activity randomly and for reasons in addition to the perpetuation of the species. Therefore continual bisexuality and homosexuality in humans is due to a conscious choice on the part of the human, because the desire to mate is not purely instinctive but rather a deliberate act. |
|
02-27-2008, 12:22 PM | #50 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
I guess this is my point as well. Despite the seeming absence of empirical evidence that men choose to be sexually attracted to other men, many social conservatives choose to believe this, because it makes THEM feel better about their beliefs and political actions.
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|