Posted by bistiza on 4/24/2013 1:42:00 PM (view original):

It's not as simple as that because sexuality isn't a choice.

You're just repeating your ridiculous position now, without anything to back it up.

Your stubborn denials notwithstanding, all the evidence suggests sexuality is a choice, as does simple logic.

Evidence and logic trumps your goofy notions of "I am whatever I say I am" every single time.

What evidence do you have that proves sexuality is a choice?

OR A YOUNG EARTH!?!?!!!??!?!?!

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/24/2013 1:46:00 PM (view original):
OR A YOUNG EARTH!?!?!!!??!?!?!

That too, bis.

What evidence do you have that proves sexuality is a choice?

The fact that you choose who you are with in sexual situations.

You keep insisting that doesn't determine your sexuality, but provide no reason as to why other than "because I say so" and "other people agree with me", neither of which proves anything.

You also keep saying people can declare themselves to be whatever they want to be despite the fact that this doesn't make any logical sense. If it did, all criminals who say they are innocent would be found as such, and  I'd be the billionaire batpope because that's what I said I was - but the criminals aren't being set free, and I'm not a billionaire batpope, because you don't get to declare yourself to be whatever you want.

Posted by bistiza on 4/24/2013 3:04:00 PM (view original):

What evidence do you have that proves sexuality is a choice?

The fact that you choose who you are with in sexual situations.

You keep insisting that doesn't determine your sexuality, but provide no reason as to why other than "because I say so" and "other people agree with me", neither of which proves anything.

You also keep saying people can declare themselves to be whatever they want to be despite the fact that this doesn't make any logical sense. If it did, all criminals who say they are innocent would be found as such, and  I'd be the billionaire batpope because that's what I said I was - but the criminals aren't being set free, and I'm not a billionaire batpope, because you don't get to declare yourself to be whatever you want.

Hey smart guy, the definition of a criminal is someone who commits illegal acts. The definition of homosexual is someone who is attracted to the same sex. Since I'm the only person who knows who I'm truly attracted, I'm the only one who can determine my sexuality. So yeah, I am whatever I say I am when it comes to sexuality. Clearly my status as a criminal is entirely different.

You choose your partners but you don't choose what gender you are attracted to. That's what defines your sexuality.

Hey smart guy, the definition of a criminal is someone who commits illegal acts. The definition of homosexual is someone who is attracted to the same sex.

I know that's what the propaganda tells you, but as I've been saying, logic dictates people are defined by what they do, not by "attraction". You're only a criminal when you commit illegal acts, and you're only a homosexual when you are involved in homosexual acts.

Since I'm the only person who knows who I'm truly attracted, I'm the only one who can determine my sexuality.

Except attraction doesn't determine your sexuality - your actions do. Again, logic trumps the propaganda you've been fed.

So yeah, I am whatever I say I am when it comes to sexuality.
 

No. You are what your actions say you are when it comes to your sexuality. If you say otherwise, you're just lying and living in denial.

Clearly my status as a criminal is entirely different.

While they are different concepts, your criminal status and your sexuality are both determined by your actions. To say otherwise for either is simply ridiculous.

You choose your partners but you don't choose what gender you are attracted to. That's what defines your sexuality.

I've told you why attraction does NOT define your sexuality - namely, because actions determine it instead, which is a logical line of reasoning as actions clearly determine most things about people.

You still haven't provided a single shred of proof for your position.

Tell me WHY attraction should define your sexuality instead of action, and please give a real reason, not "because I say so", or "because people agree with me".

My checkbook is ready.  Do you not want my business?

Bistiza is the kind of person that ensures that homosexuals continue to commit suicide at several times the rate of heterosexuals...

That's all you got? You're insisting that the definition of a word is not only incorrect, but purposefully incorrect in order to serve an agenda. That's quite a claim. It's especially interesting considering the fact that just about everyone determines which gender they are attracted to long before they have any romantic encounters and that it's that attraction that drives the decision to partner up with one gender or the other.

You're married to a woman. You chose a woman because you are straight. If you weren't attracted to women, you would have picked a man.

Bistiza is the kind of person that ensures that homosexuals continue to commit suicide at several times the rate of heterosexuals...

Why in the world would you say something like this? I treat everyone the same regardless of their sexuality.

You're insisting that the definition of a word is not only incorrect, but purposefully incorrect in order to serve an agenda. That's quite a claim.

I'm not saying the definition is incorrect at all.

I'm saying the definition you give isn't logical DESPITE it being commonly accepted.

That common acceptance is why it has made it into some dictionaries, because that's how dictionaries work. Dictionaries  list common definitions without regard to "right" and "wrong" or "correct" and "incorrect".

The definitions in the dictionary (and even words themselves) change over time with common use. As a result, arguing that the dictionary defines a word a certain way only shows that the definition is commonly accepted - it does NOT necessarily show that it is "correct".

It's especially interesting considering the fact that just about everyone determines which gender they are attracted to long before they have any romantic encounters and that it's that attraction that drives the decision to partner up with one gender or the other.

So your argument is that since attraction is one of the factors (or even the primary factor) which drives the decision for many people, that somehow means the decision itself does not exist? That makes no sense, which seems to be par for the course with you.

You're married to a woman. You chose a woman because you are straight. If you weren't attracted to women, you would have picked a man.

I'm married to a woman, and I chose a woman because of a multitude of factors, one of which was a greater attraction to women. I wasn't straight until I made that choice, and I could have made the choice to be with a man instead if I had wanted to do that.

Everyone has the ability to choose who they want to be with for ANY reason they wish, not just attraction. If they want to use attraction as the reason or the primary reason, they are free to do that. If they want to make the decision for other reasons, or a combination of reasons, they can do that too.

The bottom line is attraction doesn't mean anything - the actual choice of partners is what is important in determining sexuality. But you'll never understand that because it doesn't fit with your personal beliefs, so you absolutely refuse to see the inherent logic. I'm fine with that, but don't keep lying to others and spreading the propaganda just because you're foolish enough to believe it yourself.

You sound like a switch hitter to me.

Where can I find a dictionary with the actual correct definitions of words?

You sound like a switch hitter to me.

Sounds like you enjoy being wrong because you assume things.

Where can I find a dictionary with the actual correct definitions of words?

I've tried to educate you by explaining how dictionaries work; if you can't understand how they work and aren't willing to learn, maybe you shouldn't be using them in your arguments.