"Religious Conservatives Lash Out at Kellogg’s Over 'Anti-Christian' Cereal"

[Jainarayan]

I did I posted a screenshot of my original comment

Well, then you're completely missing the point. I don't know how much plainer I can make it.

 

[Jainarayan]

that same-sex relationships cannot be treated in isolation from the sexual activity itself.

They most certainly can. Do you think of sex every time you see a male-female couple? Was the judge that married me and my husband thinking about what we do in bed? Did she see us only as sexual entities? Why should same sex couples be equated with sex itself? Why are we looked at as no more than our penises and whatever we do with them? There's no getting away from it, I see a fascination with same sex relationships and the idea of homo-sex... a certain homoeroticism... straight people have.

 

[Darkforbid]

Well, then you're completely missing the point. I don't know how much plainer I can make it.

Well you could explain the logic behind your belief that mentioning one offence tars everyone not just the offenders

 

[Laika]

They most certainly can. Do you think of sex every time you see a male-female couple? Was the judge that married me and my husband thinking about what we do in bed? Did she see us only as sexual entities? Why should same sex couples be equated with sex itself? Why are we looked at as no more than our penises and whatever we do with them? There's no getting away from it, I see a fascination with same sex relationships and the idea of homo-sex... a certain homoeroticism... straight people have.

I'm gay/bisexual. So I've sat with my best friend and wanted to tell him three little words that would rip my world apart if he rejected me. It took six years before I came out to him and he rejected me anyway, so I know the pain of what it means to be gay. However, for the purposes of this thread I didn't want to expose myself to a "loyalty" test over whether I am "gay enough" for my opinion to be taken seriously.

However, It does us no good to bleed in public and to make our anguish, hurt, pain and vulnerability spill out on to the pages of this thread. It will not change the hearts of those who are not already willing to listen.

I am going to turn in for the night. I hope you will take a break from this thread too. If you get an opportunity, I hope you will re-read my response and realise it was meant to be conciliatory, even if could have been worded differently. It was not meant to hurt you or anyone you care about.

take care and look after yourself.

 

[columbus]

Wow an atheist presenting personal testimony as evidence

Here's the difference.
It's enough evidence for me.
I don't expect anyone else to do the same thing.

Well you could explain the logic behind your belief that mentioning one offence tars everyone not just the offenders

This isn't difficult.
You bring up behaviors all too common amongst the whole population as though it tars gay people in particular. Rape and drug abuse are hardly gay behaviors, they're all to human. But you brought them up here, in this thread, as though they are gay.

So, if tarring gay people as drug abusing rapists wasn't your point, then what was your point?
Tom

 

[Darkforbid]

 

[sealchan]

I’m resigned to advertising as a part of a modern corporate economy, but personally I think it undermines the capacity for free thought but trying to manipulate individual behaviour and standardise human thoughts and feelings so they behave in a predictable way.

Whilst one product in isolation doesn’t mean much, the accumulation of psychological manipulation for sales techniques means we accept a much greater degree of control over our thoughts and feelings than we might otherwise be comfortable with. As each product and company competes for our attention, we all have less space for quiet reflection to get to know and be ourselves. The white noise of mass media drowns out the space to have genuinely original and independent thought. The pressure to sell easily translates in to a pressure to conform. (The social and psychological processes at work are now pretty blatant online).

The only silver lining was that advertising focused on economic goals (“buy this product”). It didn’t step in to the realm of being explicitly political propaganda. A broad separation between economics and politics keeps wider society free. Markets give us the space to make voluntary exchanges whilst the government uses the law to force people to behave one way or another. When “everything” becomes politicised, it begins to justify using state power to make political judgements. This is not a straight forward process, but the chipping away at the boundaries adds up in the end.

I find that using a cereal box as a propaganda/marketing tool for any political agenda is therefore pretty alarming (even if I support the cause), particularly if it becomes normal for inanimate household objects to be advertised based on their willingness to make political statements or support particular causes.

Although I appreciate the good intentions at work here, this is a very sharp departure from the standard capitalist economic practice where companies are doing things-explicitly- for the profit motive. I am very left-wing but for once, I’m going to agree with Milton Friedman and say I’d prefer companies stick to making money rather than use ideas of “corporate social responsibility” to disguise it. If a company makes a good product, the market should reward that and that principle is what helps the economy behave in a rational, utilitarian and efficient way.

I too appreciate how insidious and manipulative advertising is. Apparently it is worth the money that many companies spend on it.

If our societies could get to a point where such cheap efforts at manipulation were no longer worth the effort I would be deeply gratified.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

How is stating the increased drug use within a community the same as saying the community causes drug use?

You said that representing homosexuality was "promoting a lifestyle with increased drug use".

I get it, you got caught out and now you're trying to avoid admitting you meant what you clearly meant. In these situations, a humble person would just admit that they were wrong.

 

[Darkforbid]

You said that representing homosexuality was "promoting a lifestyle with increased drug use".

I get it, you got caught out and now you're trying to avoid admitting you meant what you clearly meant. In these situations, a humble person would just admit that they were wrong.

Really? Wrong! You think allowing promotion of lifestyles with incread heath risks and a lifespan reduction of upto 20-30 years is a brilliant thing and advertise the said lifestyle to children is fantastic

Everybody who here who posted in favour should by deeply ashamed

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Really? Wrong! You think allowing promotion of lifestyles with incread heath risks and a lifespan reduction of upto 20-30 years is a brilliant thing and advertise the said lifestyle to children is fantastic

That's right, double-down on your bigotry rather than admit fault.

Yet again, homosexuality isn't a lifestyle. You cannot choose to be gay. That's just a fact, accept it.

And again, there are increased health risks and lower average life spans for black people. Does this mean we shouldn't encourage children to be accepting and tolerant of black people?

Everybody who here who posted in favour should by deeply ashamed

Says the guy who blames homosexuals for being driven to drug abuse and poor mental health because of the very bigotry they are an example of?

 

[Darkforbid]

That's right, double-down on your bigotry rather than admit fault.

Yet again, homosexuality isn't a lifestyle. You cannot choose to be gay. That's just a fact, accept it.

And again, there are increased health risks and lower average life spans for black people. Does this mean we shouldn't encourage children to be accepting and tolerant of black people?


Says the guy who blames homosexuals for being driven to drug abuse and poor mental health because of the very bigotry they are an example of?

Well provide evidence for that fact then

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Well provide evidence for that fact then

Can you choose to find people the same sex as you attractive?

Also:
Large-scale GWAS reveals insights into the genetic architecture of same-sex sexual behavior | Science
A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation
Genome-Wide Association Study of Male Sexual Orientation
Male-like sexual behavior of female mouse lacking fucose mutarotase
A functional circuit underlying male sexual behaviour in the female mouse brain
Loss of Sex Discrimination and Male-Male Aggression in Mice Deficient for TRP2

 

[Darkforbid]

Can you choose to find people the same sex as you attractive?

Also:
Large-scale GWAS reveals insights into the genetic architecture of same-sex sexual behavior | Science
A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation
Genome-Wide Association Study of Male Sexual Orientation
Male-like sexual behavior of female mouse lacking fucose mutarotase
A functional circuit underlying male sexual behaviour in the female mouse brain
Loss of Sex Discrimination and Male-Male Aggression in Mice Deficient for TRP2

If you wanted say, homosexuality is born from ancestral exposure to disease, it's a great link.

Although I have no idea why you'd leave homosexuals, open to their not well claims

The results also seem to support the resurch that found the anterior hypothalamus is underdeveloped in many homosexuals, a deformity or malformation

OK, I'll accept that it's not a choice for those that have this misshapen anterior hypothalamus,,, but I can't see 'they can't help it their deformed' being very popular within the homosexual community

 

[ImmortalFlame]

If you wanted say, homosexuality is born from ancestral exposure to disease, it's a great link.

Although I have no idea why you'd leave homosexuals, open to their not well claims

The results also seem to support the resurch that found the anterior hypothalamus is underdeveloped in many homosexuals, a deformity or malformation

OK, I'll accept that it's not a choice for those that have this misshapen anterior hypothalamus,,, but I can't see 'they can't help it their deformed' being very popular within the homosexual community

Yet more deliberate misrepresentation. Only one of those links references the hypothalmus, the rest simply note genetic markers related to homosexuality.

But at least you now admit that homosexuality is not a choice. Your argument is now reduced to bare bigotry, and you can retract your position at will.

Will you?

 

[Darkforbid]

Yet more deliberate misrepresentation. Only one of those links references the hypothalmus, the rest simply note genetic markers related to homosexuality.

But at least you now admit that homosexuality is not a choice. Your argument is now reduced to bare bigotry, and you can retract your position at will.

Will you?

Misrepresentation? From the link you posted:

'One likely candidate eliciting such change is alpha-fetoprotein, recently implicated in mediating a hormonal effect on brain development associated with sexual behavior'

Of course I'd retract if it's ever proven and found to be present in the majority of homosexuals

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Misrepresentation? From the link you posted:

'One likely candidate eliciting such change is alpha-fetoprotein, recently implicated in mediating a hormonal effect on brain development associated with sexual behavior'

From ONE of the SIX links I posted, and it doesn't even claim that this is the only cause - just one possible cause in one specific instance.

The fact that you have to ignore all of the other information in that study, and five other studies I provided, demonstrates an unwillingness to engage honestly with the evidence.

Hence, your misrepresentation.

Of course I'd retract if it's ever proven and found to be present in the majority of homosexuals

You asked for evidence of homosexuality not being a choice. I've provided you with six studies which demonstrate that there is a link between genetics and sexuality.

Do you or do you not concede the point, or are you going to widen the goalposts?

 

[Darkforbid]

From ONE of the SIX links I posted, and it doesn't even claim that this is the only cause - just one possible cause in one specific instance.

The fact that you have to ignore all of the other information in that study, and five other studies I provided, demonstrates an unwillingness to engage honestly with the evidence.

Hence, your misrepresentation.


You asked for evidence of homosexuality not being a choice. I've provided you with six studies which demonstrate that there is a link between genetics and sexuality.

Do you or do you not concede the point, or are you going to widen the goalposts?

I skimmed all your links dude! But what part of 'possibly' as you said support 'Homosexuality isn't a choice'?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I skimmed all your links dude!

And yet you only partially referenced one of them and have made no mention whatsoever of any of the other five.

If you presented me with six studies about, let's say, the causes of domestic violence, and one of the six studies mentioned "One of the causes of domestic violence may be poverty", and I responded to you presenting these studies by saying "See! Your sources say that poor people are violent! I'm sure victims of domestic violence won't like being told that they're poor".

Is that a reasonable response to what you presented?

But what part of 'possibly' as you said support 'Homosexuality isn't a choice'?

You asked for evidence, I presented evidence.

Do you contest that?

 

[Darkforbid]

And yet you only partially referenced one of them and have made no mention whatsoever of any of the other five.

If you presented me with six studies about, let's say, the causes of domestic violence, and one of the six studies mentioned "One of the causes of domestic violence may be poverty", and I responded to you presenting these studies by saying "See! Your sources say that poor people are violent! I'm sure victims of domestic violence won't like being told that they're poor".

Is that a reasonable response to what you presented?


You asked for evidence, I presented evidence.

Do you contest that?

'And yet you only partially referenced one of them and have made no mention whatsoever of any of the other five.'

WTF! You haven't referenced any of them!

 

[ImmortalFlame]

'And yet you only partially referenced one of them and have made no mention whatsoever of any of the other five.'

WTF! You haven't referenced any of them!

You asked for evidence that homosexuality wasn't a choice, I linked to six studies which all present evidence for genetic components of homosexuality.

What are you struggling to understand? Do you contest that these six studies are evidence that homosexuality is not a choice?