[KappaWing]

Well it is a genetic defect, most likely. What else would it be? Assuming the certainty that its not a choice.

[Ghostavo]

I wonder how long before people start calling left handedness a genetic defect too...

[KappaWing]

I wonder how long before people start calling left handedness a genetic defect too...

Well IMO, in a purely scientific/objective sense, homosexuality is a genetic defect in that it prevents humans from carrying out the single most important task in which nature intends them (and all animals) to do, reproduce. Any genetically caused trait that prevents humans or animals from surviving to the point of reproduction or producing healthy offspring would be considered a defect, correct?

[karajorma]

If he had decided to fly the gay flag, does this not mean that he would have to fly a flag for every minority in the town?

Yep. And THAT is what the stupid ****er should have pointed out. Instead the mayor pointed out the real reason he'd decided not to do it.

And the mayor, Bill Mills, made it clear his decision was motivated by his Christian beliefs.

"There are writings in the book of Romans chapter one, to name a few -- basically I have to go with that conviction, and I know it's not a popular one," Mills said.

[Polpolion]

I wonder how long before people start calling left handedness a genetic defect too...

Yes but you see, there are no lefthandedpeopleaphobes.

[KappaWing]

Yes but you see, there are no lefthandedpeopleaphobes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-handed#Cultural_stigmatisation

[Ghostavo]

I wonder how long before people start calling left handedness a genetic defect too...

Well IMO, in a purely scientific/objective sense, homosexuality is a genetic defect in that it prevents humans from carrying out the single most important task in which nature intends them (and all animals) to do, reproduce. Any genetically caused trait that prevents humans or animals from surviving to the point of reproduction or producing healthy offspring would be considered a defect, correct?

They still have the ability to reproduce, they are not impotent!

And after all if it is genetic one must wonder why they exist on such a significant scale!

[KappaWing]

I wonder how long before people start calling left handedness a genetic defect too...

Well IMO, in a purely scientific/objective sense, homosexuality is a genetic defect in that it prevents humans from carrying out the single most important task in which nature intends them (and all animals) to do, reproduce. Any genetically caused trait that prevents humans or animals from surviving to the point of reproduction or producing healthy offspring would be considered a defect, correct?

They still have the ability to reproduce, they are not impotent!

And after all if it is genetic one must wonder why they exist on such a significant scale!

But they do not have the desire to mate with a female, which is the only way to naturally reproduce, so they're as good as impotent, from the standpoint of reproduction. And I wonder that often too, but I have only a highschool knowledge of genetics so I'm not qualified to throw anything in that arena.

[Black Wolf]

I think he did the right thing for the wrong reasons. A town hall is a civic building, owned by the local government in trust for all the citizens of the town. The town flag (if it has one) or symbol or crest belongs there, the state flag, sure, the national flag, no worries. These are all symbols representative of the entire population of the town. But the gay flag doesn;t represent the entire population of the town. It almost certainly doesn't represent a democratic majority. Even if you had a vote and found majority support for flying the flag, how many people would be voting yes not because they beleived in the rights of gay people to fly their flag, but becuae they were afraid of offending someone, or being considered a homophobe?

Realistically, if the guy hadn;t brought up religion, there is no way this would have been news. Councils refuse requests from special interest groups all the time. If the guy had just said "No" and explained that he didn't want to promote one minority group over another, or just refused to be drawn on why, it might have made the local newspaper. Since he brought up God, people care. And probably correctly - when an elected official is doing anything based on what religion says against the will of the people, well, that's  aproblem. As I said - right decision, wrong reason.

[TrashMan]

By that logic, could it be a genetic defect?  *awaits the storm*

Now now...you know how some people are too easily offended....let's call it a "genetic fluke"... or "faulty wireing"..
Hm... on second thought that might not sound any better.

[karajorma]

Or how about just calling it genetic and not trying to ascribe it to being any more flukey or faulty than you would eye or hair colour.

[TrashMan]

hmm....that would be an iven less accurate description than the previous one.

but if it makes you happy I'm game.

[KappaWing]

I think Black Wolf hit it right on the head there.

And the obvious problem with assigning scientifically correct terms such as "defect" to the genetic state is that, with an added subjective element, it has negative connotations. From a purely objective standpoint, "defect" simply implies that the genetic state impedes "nature's biological purpose", reproduction, blah blah blah. Subjectively, defect means that there is something "wrong" or "inferior" about the genetic state, or even worse, the human with that genetic state. Both of which are 'utter rubbish', Britishly speaking.

I just feel I have to state the obvious and be super clear around here as I have been far too often misunderstood in the past on these forums.

[Ghostavo]

I think Black Wolf hit it right on the head there.

And the obvious problem with assigning scientifically correct terms such as "defect" to the genetic state is that, with an added subjective element, it has negative connotations. From a purely objective standpoint, "defect" simply implies that the genetic state impedes "nature's biological purpose", reproduction, blah blah blah. Subjectively, defect means that there is something "wrong" or "inferior" about the genetic state, or even worse, the human with that genetic state. Both of which are 'utter rubbish', Britishly speaking.

I just feel I have to state the obvious and be super clear around here as I have been far too often misunderstood in the past on these forums.

And what is nature's biological purpose? 

Do you consider albinism a defect? Color-blindedness? 6th finger? Left-handedness? If so, why do you consider some and not the others?

[akenbosch]

  the 'genetic defect theory" is'nt correct. quite a few people are homosexual by personal choice.

if you want a defect, take a look at trashmanitis - the need to unbalance any video game you mod just so its fun and not as hard.

[KappaWing]

And what is nature's biological purpose? 

Do you consider albinism a defect? Color-blindedness? 6th finger? Left-handedness? If so, why do you consider some and not the others?

TO REPRODUCE as i must have said ten times so far.

Biologically speaking, the most basic purpose of all life on this planet to reproduce. Thats my whole basis. Look at my previous posts please.

And colorblindness may impede survivability of offspring (who may also be colorblind, if it is genetically carried as I assume) , so that could be considered a defect.

EDIT:

  the 'genetic defect theory" is'nt correct. quite a few people are homosexual by personal choice.

Really? I find that somewhat hard to believe, unless some people can mysteriously choose who they fall in love with.

[akenbosch]

actualy, they can. lets say you lived in a gay comunity with straight parents. you want to fit in, so you pound the idea into your head that guys are better tha  girls. tada, it works.

[Ghostavo]

And what is nature's biological purpose? 

Do you consider albinism a defect? Color-blindedness? 6th finger? Left-handedness? If so, why do you consider some and not the others?

TO REPRODUCE as i must have said ten times so far.

They are not impotent just like I said before. Unless you want to explain why a significant population is homosexual (if it is genetic). Carriers alone don't justify the population seen.

Biologically speaking, the most basic purpose of all life on this planet to reproduce. Thats my whole basis. Look at my previous posts please.

And colorblindness may impede survivability of offspring (who may also be colorblind, if it is genetically carried as I assume) , so that could be considered a defect.

So in your opinion that means left-handedness is a defect since people who are left-handedness have almost a decade less of life expectancy?

[KappaWing]

And what is nature's biological purpose? 

Do you consider albinism a defect? Color-blindedness? 6th finger? Left-handedness? If so, why do you consider some and not the others?

TO REPRODUCE as i must have said ten times so far.

They are not impotent just like I said before. Unless you want to explain why a significant population is homosexual (if it is genetic). Carriers alone don't justify the population seen.

I think carriers DO justify it. There are also a lot of homosexuals, either repressed by themselves or society, (ultimately society), who deny themselves and go on leading heterosexual lives and reproduce. I suppose this plays a factor, but they are obviously not acting on their genetically caused natural instinct, they are being artificially manipulated by society.

Biologically speaking, the most basic purpose of all life on this planet to reproduce. Thats my whole basis. Look at my previous posts please.

And colorblindness may impede survivability of offspring (who may also be colorblind, if it is genetically carried as I assume) , so that could be considered a defect.

So in your opinion that means left-handedness is a defect since people who are left-handedness have almost a decade less of life expectancy?

Well that decade less of life expectancy doesn't place them below the reproductive age, so no.
OT: And why would they have a shorter life expectancy anyway?

[Ghostavo]

On the first point, you basically gave me reason. If there are homosexuals that reproduce, then homosexuality can't be a genetic defect by your own definitions since they do reproduce. Of course this leads to the question, if it can be repressed can it be a fully genetic condition? Also, this website proposes a rather interesting meachanism that may explain the population percentage of homosexuality.

Regarding left-handedness death rates, it's mostly due to accidents regarding their left-handedness in a right-handedness dominated world.