Another "gay roommate" thread?

[Itachirumon]

<p>

First, I will pardon you and your Godwins Law violation as long as we are able to maintain a respectful debate. </p>

<p>I agree it isn’t a choice, but again, comparing it to being black is disingenous.</p>

<p>The causes of sexual orientation is a very undefined topic, unlike being black. A scientist can actually locate the genetic code inside an African America which accounts for their complextion, you cannot do that for homosexuals.

</p>

<p>To be fair, I didn’t really violate Godwin’s law, but okay. I mostly use that as an example to show the struggles between LGBTs and Blacks are very similar, there are those who would deny us the blanket term for civil rights… Alveda King comes to mind, but so does Maggie Gallagher. They’ve both been oppressed for things that are innate characteristics that cannot be changed. You and I will probably get along very well because our definitions of homosexuality are essentially identical. It’s not purely biological, and it’s not purely an environmental thing. The nature/nurture can’t be teased apart. From what I’m to understand from the research, some people are born with more of a predisposition in brain structure and testosterone/estrogen and such, this predisposition is then affected upon by environmental factors in a way we can’t really understand.</p>

<p>

When addressed, these inter-family marriages are typically rebutted with, “Well, marriages between family members will almost certainly lead to sex, which could lead to pregnancy/offspring and we all know how dangerous that is - a society couldn’t encourage such a practice that actually allows something like that.”</p>

<p>This seems like a pretty reasonable response to a not-so-reasonable question. There is a problem though, what if offspring aren’t possible? I think most of us would agree that offspring shouldn’t be required to be married and millions of married couples chose not to have children or biologically can’t. If the same was so for inter-family marriages, should they be allowed?

</p>

<p>I tend not to get into it with people because of the incest taboo but barring the genetic reasons, there also isn’t any reason to bar a relationship like that beyond our own personal disgust, which isn’t a valid legal reason. Maybe I’ve been perverted too much by anime but I’ve heard it argued (by my honors cultural anthropology professor no less ((and before anybody tries to slam him, he’s the guy who won the California Community College Professor of the Year 2010 award thingy – as in he knows what he’s talking about)) that the incest taboo doesn’t really have a lot of basis in rationality and is entirely a cultural construct. </p>

<p>If we look at this, the Buck is probably going to eventually stop in about 100-150 years after we’ve legalized Ephebophilic relationships, since age of consent laws have been as low as 13 in other cultures that’ll probably be the last marginalized group. </p>

<p>It kind of seems like we go over the arguments again and again with each marginalized group, doesn’t it? The people in power don’t want to give a group rights, they deny them for some reason, and then (at least in America and Europe) the Bible (or any religion - expanding it worldwide) is used as justification along with some difficult-to-tease-apart prejudices people have. That group finally gets enough scientific backing behind them to launch a fair argument for equality, they’re resisted strongly…resisted moderately…resisted weakly…resisted… begrudgingly accepted… disdainfully accepted… accepted. Then people look back and think “*** were we thinking, discriminating against X-group? Man, were we ignorant!”</p>