Sarah Sanders says she was thrown out of Virginia restaurant because she works for Trump

[bcking 3,157]

16 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Say what?  How do you not have a choice?  No one is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to have sex or a relationship with anyone.  If I want to have sex with chickens in between having sex with men and women, I am free to make choice.  Everyone is.

Having sex with someone (or something in your example?) is a choice. Sexual orientation is not.

 

Just like races aren't different species. Perhaps one should review a little biology?

Edited June 25, 2018 by bcking

[yuna628 9,676]

16 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Say what?  How do you not have a choice?  No one is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to have sex or a relationship with anyone.  If I want to have sex with chickens in between having sex with men and women, I am free to make choice.  Everyone is.

Sexual orientation is not a choice. Deciding to have sex with someone or something is. Though if you like to fool around with chickens, you're going to have to adhere to your state's beastiality laws. Because an animal does not have the ability to consent and you'd be a pretty gross individual if you did.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

The whole purpose of government is to regulate human behavior. If we don't want the government regulating our behavior we should have no government, and just "fend for ourselves" based on the principle of "personal responsibility". Oh someone wants to murder you? That is your personal responsibility to deal with it. There are no roads? Why don't you take "personal responsibility" and build them yourself.

 

You and I differ on what lengths we believe government should be able to go with regards to regulating human behavior. As I said, I believe it has a responsibility to protect those who are a minority and who can be easily overpowered by the majority. I believe history has shown that when the government doesn't do that, those groups are marginalized, punished and generally treated poorly. A core responsibility of government is to protect its citizens (from outside and within), and it fails to do so when it doesn't sufficient protect ALL of its citizens.

Umm no   MDL

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

2 hours ago, bcking said:

So you expect a marginalized minority group to just somehow "stand up" for themselves? 

 

That won't end well...It never has.

google civil rights movement and get back with us .

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Umm no   MDL

Why does government exist?

 

 

3 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

google civil rights movement and get back with us .

Which ended how exactly? Why don't you google the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and get back with us. 

 

Oh yes....by getting the government to extend the rights and protections of minorities. My guess is without laws on the books there would still be many places in the United States (sadly) that would choose not to serve people of certain races. As messed up as that is. We didn't just suddenly change everyone's behavior. We have to legislate it and enforce it, if need be.

Edited June 25, 2018 by bcking

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

20 minutes ago, bcking said:

Why does government exist?

Well, according to the preamble to the constitution...

 

”to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity”

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, IDWAF said:

Well, according to the preamble to the constitution...

 

”to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity”

Those three cover what we are talking about quite nicely. 

 

Trying doing those three without regulating human behavior in some way. As i said - government can't do its job without regulating human behavior for the "greater good" (General Welfare). That is how we form into societies. 

Edited June 25, 2018 by bcking

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

29 minutes ago, bcking said:

Having sex with someone (or something in your example?) is a choice. Sexual orientation is not.

 

Just like races aren't different species. Perhaps one should review a little biology?

Sure it is.  People choose it all the time.  I can choose to be straight or gay.  I had no choice in what sex organs I was born with.  But with whom to use them is something I decide every time I use them. 

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, IDWAF said:

Sure it is.  People choose it all the time.  I can choose to be straight or gay.  I had no choice in what sex organs I was born with.  But with whom to use them is something I decide every time I use them. 

Once again - Choosing to have sex is not the same thing as sexual orientation.

 

You really don't know what sexual orientation is, do you? You've made this error twice in a row now.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

Once again - Choosing to have sex is not the same thing as sexual orientation.

 

You really don't know what sexual orientation is, do you? You've made this error twice in a row now.

It’s not an error.  I just disagree with you.  Sexual orientation describes with whom a person chooses to engage sexually.  Straight people choose the opposite sex.  Homosexuals choose the same sex.  Bisexuals go both ways.  Pretty basic stuff.

[bcking 3,157]

9 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

It’s not an error.  I just disagree with you.  Sexual orientation describes with whom a person chooses to engage sexually.  Straight people choose the opposite sex.  Homosexuals choose the same sex.  Bisexuals go both ways.  Pretty basic stuff.

Not true. This isn't a matter of opinion. Sexual orientation is a term that has a definition and meaning whether you "disagree" with it or not. 

Try educating yourself:

http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.aspx

https://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/sexuality-definitions.pdf

 

If you want to use different terminology, that is fine. You just have to make up a different word or phrase to fit whatever you want to describe. This one is taken.

 

EDIT:

 

It would be like me pointing to a dog and saying "That's a horse". You correct me and say "No it's a dog" and my response is "It's not an error. I just disagree with you." 

Edited June 25, 2018 by bcking

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

6 minutes ago, bcking said:

Not true. This isn't a matter of opinion. Sexual orientation is a term that has a definition and meaning whether you "disagree" with it or not. 

Try educating yourself:

http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.aspx

https://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/sexuality-definitions.pdf

 

If you want to use different terminology, that is fine. You just have to make up a different word or phrase to fit whatever you want to describe. This one is taken.

You can say what you want.  As a doctor, I get your take on the subject.  Doesn’t make it any righter than mine.  I can choose to be lesbian, gay, homosexual, pansexual... whatever I want.  What I cannot choose is the sex organs I was born with.  I am a male.  Cannot “become” a female.  Just like Brucelyn Jenner will always be a male.  How he decides he wants the world to view him... that’s his choice.  Good for him.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2018 by IDWAF

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

You can say what you want.  As a doctor, I get your take on the subject.  Doesn’t make it any righter than mine.  I can choose to be lesbian, gay, homosexual, pansexual... whatever I want.  What I cannot choose is the sex organs I was born with.  I am a male.  Cannot “become” a female.  Just like Brucelyn Jenner will always be a male.  How he decides he wants the world to view him... that’s his choice.  Good for him.

Unfortunately for you it does...

 

What if I define the sex organs you were born with as female? What you say they're male? Well that isn't an error, it's just a difference of opinion. You're actually female now. I'm no more wrong than you are right.

Edited June 25, 2018 by bcking

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Just now, bcking said:

Unfortunately for you it does...

 

What if I define the sex organs you were born with as female? What you say their male? Well that isn't an error, it's just a difference of opinion.

Except that is not an option.  The definitions were made thousands of years ago.  All the other naming conventions came about in the past 30 years or so.

[bcking 3,157]

3 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Except that is not an option.  The definitions were made thousands of years ago.  All the other naming conventions came about in the past 30 years or so.

Where is the law that states definitions require a certain number of years to be held true?

 

It is an option. It's just a difference of opinion. Sorry buddy (or should I say miss?)

Edited June 25, 2018 by bcking