Why is homosexuality wrong?

[The Emerald Dawn]

You don't understand why it's considered necessary to provide links, sources, and necessary attribution on your own?

Have you ever written an essay that required research for school?

It was in quotes so I obviously wasn't trying to steal anything. Quotes are provided in publishing context to give credit and allow follow up research. This is the internet, it takes two seconds to look it up if you want too (just like in a real book I assume you don't look up every footnote). Either way I don't care if you look it up on not.

This is NSG. Show your work.

[Zottistan]

Well, nothing psychological is universal. The whole study of analytical psychology is just categorization and subcategorization of behaviours.

And then subcategorizing the subcategories.

I've read the writeup on Schizophrenia, the appendix has an appendix.

And then subcategorizing the subsubcategories, and so on and so on. The point is that the study doesn't even claim anyting about it to be universal. It acknowledges that each case of pretty much anything will be unique, and it just groups the similar ones together. Psychological diagnostics can be viewed as more of a Venn Diagram than anything else. The problem is that most people aren't psychologist/psychiatrists, or even people like me who just have an interest in the study. Most people assume psychological diagnosis and medical diagnosis are one in the same.

[Wolfine]

I love dick and I tend to be a pretty nice guy.

Wuss wrong with that?

:braceself:

You're living a siiiiiiiiiiin. D:<

The Bible sez so.

[Objectiveland]

why? If one wants to find it they can very easily. see you did.

Because it is intellectually dishonest, and ethically bankrupt to do otherwise.

Quotation without citation is called plagiarism. It's bad form.

Not dishonest, was in quotes, look it up if you want if not I don't care.

[Ivory Record]

You don't understand why it's considered necessary to provide links, sources, and necessary attribution on your own?

Have you ever written an essay that required research for school?

It was in quotes so I obviously wasn't trying to steal anything. Quotes are provided in publishing context to give credit and allow follow up research. This is the internet, it takes two seconds to look it up if you want too (just like in a real book I assume you don't look up every footnote). Either way I don't care if you look it up on not.

(Emphasis Mine)

In publishing contexts, a list of works cited is provided at the back of works of scholarly intent.

[Farnhamia]

You don't understand why it's considered necessary to provide links, sources, and necessary attribution on your own?

Have you ever written an essay that required research for school?

It was in quotes so I obviously wasn't trying to steal anything. Quotes are provided in publishing context to give credit and allow follow up research. This is the internet, it takes two seconds to look it up if you want too (just like in a real book I assume you don't look up every footnote). Either way I don't care if you look it up on not.

And with you having established a pattern, we can guess the author.

[Mavorpen]

Objectively: "A person who by nature, rather than by choice, is more attracted to members of the same sex than the opposite sex still has the choice to recognize and act in accordance with this fact or to repress or act against it. If a person wishes to achieve happiness and promote his life, then he must, in a realm as morally important as sex, act in accordance with his nature. For example, it is morally right for a woman whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a woman she loves and desires. In contrast, it is morally wrong for a man whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a man rather than seeking out a woman. So there are contexts in which homosexual behavior is immoral (just as there are contexts in which heterosexual behavior is immoral), but there is nothing immoral about homosexuality per se."

I see nothing objective about this at all.

[Zottistan]

I love dick and I tend to be a pretty nice guy.

Wuss wrong with that?

:braceself:

GOD! IT'S UNNATURAL! NO REPRODUCTION! MINYAAAAAAAAAH!
Nah, you're grand.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

It was in quotes so I obviously wasn't trying to steal anything. Quotes are provided in publishing context to give credit and allow follow up research. This is the internet, it takes two seconds to look it up if you want too (just like in a real book I assume you don't look up every footnote). Either way I don't care if you look it up on not.

And with you having established a pattern, we can guess the author.

It wasn't the one you're likely thinking of, but it was one of her modern acolytes.

[Northern Dominus]

Because it is intellectually dishonest, and ethically bankrupt to do otherwise.

Quotation without citation is called plagiarism. It's bad form.

Not dishonest, was in quotes, look it up if you want if not I don't care.

Except why should somebody else have to do your work? You're the one looking for corroboration, and therefore the burden of proof is upon you.

Quotation marks mean nothing. For all anybody knows you're just framing your own ideas with them and then trying to pass them off as a valid source. It's not mine or anybody else' duty to prove your own arguments, thats your job in a debate.

[Objectiveland]

Objectively: "A person who by nature, rather than by choice, is more attracted to members of the same sex than the opposite sex still has the choice to recognize and act in accordance with this fact or to repress or act against it. If a person wishes to achieve happiness and promote his life, then he must, in a realm as morally important as sex, act in accordance with his nature. For example, it is morally right for a woman whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a woman she loves and desires. In contrast, it is morally wrong for a man whose nature it is to be sexually attracted to women rather than men to become romantically involved with a man rather than seeking out a woman. So there are contexts in which homosexual behavior is immoral (just as there are contexts in which heterosexual behavior is immoral), but there is nothing immoral about homosexuality per se."

I see nothing objective about this at all.

sorry about that. might I point you to some further works to help you with objectivist thought?

[Meryuma]

OK? Congratulations? Talk about randomly derailing the conversation.

Sorry wasn't trying to but several people seemed to indicate my views were inconsistent so I was explaining. If you were not one of them I apologize.

It's still inconsistent because the "voluntary" eugenics program you advocate removes free will.

[Mavorpen]

Not dishonest, was in quotes, look it up if you want if not I don't care.

Except why should somebody else have to do your work? You're the one looking for corroboration, and therefore the burden of proof is upon you.

Quotation marks mean nothing. For all anybody knows you're just framing your own ideas with them and then trying to pass them off as a valid source. It's not mine or anybody else' duty to prove your own arguments, thats your job in a debate.

Does it matter? The claim that anything in that paragraph was objective is stupid in itself.

[Southern Jasperia]

The first is of no more relevance to me as a person than whether or not you like pistachio ice cream or not.

The second is relevant to me, but in a positive manner.

So...nothing. In fact, there's everything right with it.

PEOPLE WHO LOVE PISTACHIO ICE CREAM SHALL BURN IN EVERLASTING DAMNATION.

[Mavorpen]

I see nothing objective about this at all.

sorry about that. might I point you to some further works to help you with objectivist thought?

If by objectivst thought, you mean "totally subjective nonsense that I'll pretend is objective," then no.

[Objectiveland]

Not dishonest, was in quotes, look it up if you want if not I don't care.

Except why should somebody else have to do your work? You're the one looking for corroboration, and therefore the burden of proof is upon you.

Quotation marks mean nothing. For all anybody knows you're just framing your own ideas with them and then trying to pass them off as a valid source. It's not mine or anybody else' duty to prove your own arguments, thats your job in a debate.

Exactly. I don't care if someone does my work or not. And quite frankly I knew someone would, just to point out I didn't.

[Objectiveland]

Sorry wasn't trying to but several people seemed to indicate my views were inconsistent so I was explaining. If you were not one of them I apologize.

It's still inconsistent because the "voluntary" eugenics program you advocate removes free will.

how so?

[Farnhamia]

And with you having established a pattern, we can guess the author.

It wasn't the one you're likely thinking of, but it was one of her modern acolytes.

Ah, I see. Well, in that case, an attribution would have been helpful. But making him provide sources would amount to coercion, no doubt. We can't have that.

[Objectiveland]

It wasn't the one you're likely thinking of, but it was one of her modern acolytes.

Ah, I see. Well, in that case, an attribution would have been helpful. But making him provide sources would amount to coercion, no doubt. We can't have that.

I know you mock but well said.

[Northern Dominus]

Except why should somebody else have to do your work? You're the one looking for corroboration, and therefore the burden of proof is upon you.

Quotation marks mean nothing. For all anybody knows you're just framing your own ideas with them and then trying to pass them off as a valid source. It's not mine or anybody else' duty to prove your own arguments, thats your job in a debate.

Exactly. I don't care if someone does my work or not. And quite frankly I knew someone would, just to point out I didn't.

So...you won't complain the next somebody calls you out on your quotation marks and demands you show proof of source because it's not their task to do so? And if they refuse to do your work will you similarly be recalcitrant to object if they dismiss your claims or views as unsupported and therefore not worth the effort to debunk?

[Zottistan]

Exactly. I don't care if someone does my work or not. And quite frankly I knew someone would, just to point out I didn't.

So...you won't complain the next somebody calls you out on your quotation marks and demands you show proof of source because it's not their task to do so? And if they refuse to do your work will you similarly be recalcitrant to object if they dismiss your claims or views as unsupported and therefore not worth the effort to debunk?

Well... a quote really doesn't need an author to stand as an argument*, so to dismiss it would be arrogant and illogical, but I agree with the rest of the post.

EDIT:* In most cases.

[The Emerald Dawn]

PEOPLE WHO LOVE PISTACHIO ICE CREAM SHALL BURN IN EVERLASTING DAMNATION.

The Noodly Eyes are upon you.

Where were we? Oh yes. Homosexuality.

My wife is home right now with her girlfriend. I'd call her and ask her opinion on this question, but the last time I mentioned one of these threads she rolled her eyes and told me that I was wasting my time by trying to convince people on the internet to think differently. She then made me a hoagie sandwich, and told me that she loved me anyway. So, yeah. Anecdote.

[Objectiveland]

Exactly. I don't care if someone does my work or not. And quite frankly I knew someone would, just to point out I didn't.

So...you won't complain the next somebody calls you out on your quotation marks and demands you show proof of source because it's not their task to do so? And if they refuse to do your work will you similarly be recalcitrant to object if they dismiss your claims or views as unsupported and therefore not worth the effort to debunk?

No I will not complain. No I will not object. My views are objective and need no support only rational self interest.

[Zottistan]

The Noodly Eyes are upon you.

Where were we? Oh yes. Homosexuality.

My wife is home right now with her girlfriend. I'd call her and ask her opinion on this question, but the last time I mentioned one of these threads she rolled her eyes and told me that I was wasting my time by trying to convince people on the internet to think differently. She then made me a hoagie sandwich, and told me that she loved me anyway. So, yeah. Anecdote.

Umm, wuh? People make my head hurt...

[The Emerald Dawn]

So...you won't complain the next somebody calls you out on your quotation marks and demands you show proof of source because it's not their task to do so? And if they refuse to do your work will you similarly be recalcitrant to object if they dismiss your claims or views as unsupported and therefore not worth the effort to debunk?

No I will not complain. No I will not object. My views are objective and need no support only rational self interest.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.