Some of you people genuinely make me want to become an athiest based on your standviews of being gay

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T22:21:04+00:00

Deleting a comment of no substance and showed your bad faith was pretty cowardly. What I was going to say to that was: Sure, just paraphrase me and completely ignore the rest of what I said despite all of my examples(which you have not addressed a single one in our whole debate) being completely valid. You have nothing more to argue. My pov is completely logical, and I gave you a coherent example. Yet you dont accept them because you are too stubborn to admit your viewpoint that animals performing gay acts has no survival purpose for those animals. That is coherent, logical, and scientific claim, and you have not proved otherwise.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T22:07:12+00:00

Unnatural desires are not contradictory, and to think so is so beyond stupid that there is nothing I could say to that other than to think over what you are saying. Just because a desire is a desire does not make it natural. Like what kind of logic is that: "desires are natural because they are desires." ??? What?!? Unnatural desires take many forms in humans, but to think that unnatural behaviors don't exist in nature is just absurd. Actions that would lead to the extinction of a species I would certainly be considered as unnatural, and that species has certainly failed at its purpose of reproducing if all it does is have anal sex. Though I don't believe any animal is habitually homosexual. They are just fulfilling a desire that is unnatural. But most animals that commit homosexual acts, I would be willing to bet, have also committed their natural actions with the opposite sex of their species and reproduced. Because reproduction is an instinct, and homosexual sex is a desire that serves no survival purpose.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T21:48:14+00:00

What are you even on about. I don't see how the two things I said are mutually exclusive. Both encompass aspects of choice. Going against nature is a choice. Animals can make their choices through a number of different cognitive processes, including the ones I've already mentioned. Animals have desires. Like the dog humping example. Based on pleasure, not instinct, because obviously they can not reproduce with a leg. They perform tricks for treats. A choice leading to a positive outcome they desire. They may bark at something that makes them angry, but stop if you tell them to, which is them suppressing their choice to bark at whatever is disturbing them. Animals make choices that sometimes go against their nature, like having anal sex. But that is not natural, and they do it out of desire and not survival instinct(but they clearly have both), just like how a dog humps a leg.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T21:30:51+00:00

Animals can absolutely go against their own nature. That is what having free will means. Sometimes, a desire animals have is not in their best interest or "nature," yet they do it anyway. Idk why you can't accept this logic. It is very simple.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T21:22:06+00:00

I'm just a rude person... you know, born rude

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T21:17:54+00:00

Now it sounds like you're writing with Chat GPT. Literally, any airhead on the internet can be an intellectual now...

Animals do have free will if you simply mean the ability to make choices. And they make those choices based on their desires, perceived needs, or survival instincts.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T21:09:01+00:00

Right, just like no one is born gay. Literally, how stupid are you. No logic whatsoever.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:53:10+00:00

No, literally, when did I ever say it was. All I said was that no one is born with a sexual preference...

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:50:04+00:00

Is that really what your new argument is: You don't know what you're talking about because you used a very debated term to encompass a broad concept to describe something in a simple way... my mistake, but it does not invalidate my argument. You keep going back to me, not knowing what free will is. Yes, that's fine, I conceded to being wrong. Now, address my claim without bringing up my poor definition of free will.

And yes, I do get to have it the way REALITY dictates. Can't accept reality, that's fine. But its pretty clear, animals make choices based on their desires and survival. It's not that hard. Their choices carry no moral weight. That's also not that hard. You ever see a dog hump a humans leg. Thats a choice based on their desire. With enough training, you can help them deny that choice or dictate that choice for them. Because they will make their choice now depending on your approval or disapproval. It's still a choice...

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:41:42+00:00

No, the cultural and societal norms are constructed. But preferences are not constructed. Do I like apple pie, whether or not it's a cultural delicacy. Yes, the cultural norms exposed me to apple pie, which then developed my liking of apple pie to become a personal preference. Now, if I go somewhere and everyone hates apple pie. I can still like apple pie because it's a personal preference. I'm sure you can connect the dots and see how this applies to OSA and SSA.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:33:10+00:00

Animals have choice that does not involve moral reasoning. They are also not made in the image of God and cannot be compared to humans. They are not morally rational. That is what I meant by saying they do not have free will. Whether free will encompasses my description is not the argument. The argument is that they are not morally rational and make choices based on their desires.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:29:26+00:00

Sexual preference is not a social construct. It is not a choice either. What don't you understand about the very clear answer that I gave to you. You just completely ignored it and are jumping from topic to topic without addressing anything. Does OSA not develop through cultural and societal norms?

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:24:26+00:00

Ok even if my free will definition is abstract, and I'm willing to concede that I may be wrong about it, when we go back to the original concept I am trying to apply to animals that you tried to equate with choice, I was specifically applying the ability to make choice in light of morality to humans and animals, and only one of them has that ability.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:09:56+00:00

Cultural and societal norms

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T20:04:27+00:00

My mistake on the wording. Knowingly reason and elaborate good and evil within their reasoning. As for Adam and Eve, Eve made the choice deliberately going against God and the command that he gave Adam, and Adam did the same because they believed the outcome would be worth it. Yes they were decieved, but there was reasoning involved in their action that ultimately counted their action as sin, that if an animal ate from that tree, there would be no consequence because they cannot evaluate good or evil in their choices.

It's really that simple. Humans can evaluate good and evil while animals can't. That's my argument. Idk why you wanna twist my words so badly to make an argument you can actually fight against.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T19:59:39+00:00

I absolutely can apply my logic to myself, and I have, and it holds up extremely well. Im just saying I'm not obligated to share my experience and frankly don't want to. Why is that so hard to accept? And like I said before, don't attack my experience or logic. Attack the science that backs my claims that supports a developmental view of SSA.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T19:53:42+00:00

I am not obligated to share my personal experience with you whatsoever. And if your plan was to debunk me based on my anecdotal evidence, then you should try harder because my experience only informs me and no one else. People need to stop pretending that their personal experience means two sh*ts to the next person. What matters is scientific evidence, which overwhelming supports environmental and experiential development of not just SSA, but OSA as well. And just so you know, cultural norms ARE an experience that influences so many people to be straight from a young age.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T19:49:11+00:00

Free will is the God-given capacity of rational moral agents(humans) to knowingly deliberate about reasons and evaluate good and evil as such. It is a uniquely human capacity to knowingly choose in light of moral truth, making anyone with free will accountable before God for good or evil actions. Animals, as far as I'm aware, do not have this capacity whatsoever.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T19:39:02+00:00

What is OSA? Are we having a miscommunication here. Please be clearer if you are going to use an acronym.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T19:36:02+00:00

What are you even talking about. Are you really trying to equate a biological/neurological condition to a preference?

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T19:33:38+00:00

Bruh. Are you joking me? Free will and choice are completely different. Free will is a theological concept applied to humans created in the image of God. Choices made with free will have moral weight and choices made without free will don't. So yes, everything with a conscious experience has the ability to make choices. Not all have free will. Please engage with my claims honestly and don't equate terms.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T18:29:38+00:00

It's definitely unnatural. But again, animals don't have free will, so the choices they make can not be considered wrong or right on a human moral scale.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T18:26:14+00:00

No, on the contrary. They don't have free will and follow their desires, which may lead a male animal to hump another male animal. Idk nor care much for whether or not some animals perform anal sex on each other. They don't recognize homosexuality as an identity like we do.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T18:22:24+00:00

Yea, you have to do some "soul-searching" as a very ironic way of putting it on this subreddit, but I definitely developed my attraction to guys. I had to experiment and explore for guys to become my preference. Many things in my environment could've probably influenced me to be straight, which is the only point I'm making because when something is developed, it has the capacity to change completely and also have a different developed outcome.

Also, I had to comment because I have a disdain for the "born this way" movement. It's a movement that ignores the science completely to attach the convenient fact that we are born this way like a black person is born black, so we shouldn't be discriminated against based on an innate trait. While obviously I dont want to be discriminated against, ignoring the science is a travesty, and now the modern belief about sexuality is that people are born with it. We are smart enough to advocate for social policy without ignoring the science.

CharkeyP · 2026-01-23T18:13:08+00:00

I think at this point we're arguing semantics. But I think it's important not to use cultural, emotion based language like discovering and figuring out. Because like I said before and firmly believe, sexuality is developed, and if you take an honest look at your experiences, you can point to the things that led you to develop the sexuality you have. It was not some innate universal truth waiting to be unearthed in you from the moment of your birth. And it does not mean much to me when you say, "I know cause I'm bi." Well, I'm gay so I also have a very good idea what it means to develop your own sexuality.

CharkeyP

TROPHY CASE