Dont Ask Dont tell

[Jeimuzu]

The only logic you can apply to homosexuality is that which you create within your own mind to rationalize something you don't understand.

The more plausible explanation for homosexual's "low self-esteem" could be chalked up to conditioning as a child and an ignorant, prejudice society.

Like I may have said, there are millions of reasons and possibilities. When dealing with individuals you can usually put them in broad categories, but looking into it deeper and deeper, the possibilities are seemingly endless.

There are heterosexuals who don't want children. This in no way relates to self-esteem, but instead to genes, and DNA. Specifically it relates to the gene which influences the desire to reproduce (at least in mice- http://www.popsci.com/science/articl...nd-female-mice). Homosexuals have been found in close to 1500 species, from penguins to gut worms, and these relationships don't only include sex- but also involve the courtship, bonding, etc that is found in male/female pairs.

They aren't idiots- they are human beings who simply wish to live their lives as you wish to live yours. We as humans have moved past the idea of "we must procreate or we die" as we as a race are becoming less concerned with procreating, and more concerned with self-enlightenment. Even if it was a choice- who decides what is right or what is wrong? Doesn't the Constitution guarantee "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" to all Americans?

Self-esteem was just to exemplify one of many reasons for such a thing. Scribbles mentioned a few other ones; such as society, and parenting. And I said something along the lines of "If their beliefs consist of--" to also give an example as to what might effect one's reasoning.

Anex hates people who prevent the advancement of human kind, and I hate when I don't see any reason for something, so naturally I'll try to rationalize it.

I suppose the original issue was "Gays in military, good or bad?"

They have to pass training in order to be on the field. If they pass, good. If they're distracted by my sexiness, that's bad. My problem is that I can't leave it at that. I want to know and discuss more and come up with the possibilities mentioned.

"A conclusion is only the point at which someone stops thinking."

And no, they are not a race; your definition of "race" is incorrect. In addition, homosexuals might not be able to reproduce in homosexual partners, but they aren't required to do so. There will always be a chance for heterosexual couples to have homosexual children. This should be obvious, as if heterosexual couples only produced heterosexual children, we would not be having this discussion.

Think of it this way, James- take someone who cannot see the color blue. They simply cannot see it, no matter how hard you try to make them. It might not make sense to you why they can't see the color blue, but no matter what they will simply not be able to. Ever.

It isn't in the dictionary, it's my way of referring to social categories as I explained. I'm sure if you looked around on the forums you would find me using it in that context.

Funny thing is, when I refer to idiot race, you say "They aren't idiots, they're human," as if they were a race.. Or maybe being human is a social category. In that case, I sacrificed my humanity for the sake of those not human long ago.

I had a conversation with a family member the other day and I was trying to explain the difference between concepts and actualities. We can understand the concept of infinity but when it comes to actually visualizing it my mind starts to overheat and I knock myself out, or something along those lines. Though one could argue that infinity simply stands for a number uncountable by us but is in fact a value that is not endless.

That kind of relates to your "Seeing Blue" concept. They might not be able to see blue, but they could understand that there is another color out there that they aren't seeing.

But I have to say, what does being gay have to do with seeing blue? I mean, I can understand what you're saying, but literalism sets better with me.