Has INDIA really accepted GAY and LESBIANS?

First Previous

Page

Frequent Posters

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 11 years ago

#81

Originally posted by: souro
[

And if it is sexual reproduction but achieved by artificial means, then as I had mentioned earlier, artificial means of procreation cannot prove a relation to be natural, if at all it can only prove it to be artificial

You are glossing over the "it". The baby is still natural, the "container" (to put it crudely) is artificial. Which makes the entire "it" both artificial and natural.

Even a heterosexual couple can avail of the artificial womb (or a surrogate womb) but that didn't stop you from rejecting the couple on those grounds.

The logic goes both ways, for heteros and homos.

Quote

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 11 years ago

#82

it looks like the "pro-hetero" argument is that the sperm and the egg have to be from the couple in relationship. but if that is the case, why are sperm banks approved? why are adoptions legal?

i am not invested in the topic emotionally. it's just a mental chess game for me. i want to see if logic prevails or emotions.

i think the "pro-homo" group would lose the bestiality argument and the "pro-hetero" group would lose the "procreation" argument.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#83

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

You are glossing over the "it". The baby is still natural, the "container" (to put it crudely) is artificial. Which makes the entire "it" both artificial and natural.

Even a heterosexual couple can avail of the artificial womb (or a surrogate womb) but that didn't stop you from rejecting the couple on those grounds.

The logic goes both ways, for heteros and homos.

This is similar to earlier arguments that not all copulation is for procreation, heterosexual couples use contraceptives, heterosexual couples may not want a kid at all, heterosexual couple (or atleast one partner) may be sterile and unable to procreate.

However, we are talking about the act of procreation and how it can be achieved and not about each act of copulation. Procreation can be achieved only through heterosexual copulation. Yes, 100% of heterosexual copulation may not result in procreation, but 100% procreation (in humans) is a result of heterosexual copulation. Therefore, heterosexual copulation is natural. And therefore, I think homosexual copulation is unnatural.

However, just because I think it is unnatural doesn't make it unnatural. It might very well be a natural act but without any end result other than physical pleasure. But then, I'm yet to see irrefutable proof that homosexuals are born that way.

Edited by souro - 11 years ago

Quote

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 11 years ago

#84

Originally posted by: souro

However, we are talking about the act of procreation and how it can be achieved and not about each act of copulation. Procreation can be achieved only through heterosexual copulation. Yes, 100% of heterosexual copulation may not result in procreation, but 100% procreation (in humans) is a result of heterosexual copulation. Therefore, heterosexual copulation is natural. And therefore, I think homosexual copulation is unnatural.

Got it.

My point is that if a prerequisite applies to a homosexual couple, it has to apply to a heterosexual couple too (as in "can the couple conceive?") The questions itself is highly offending but if it has to be posed, it has to be posed to all; not selectively.

Say I am forming a team for a math olympiad contest. Say it is a given that all students in section A are way behind while students in section B may or may not be way behind. If I am screening students as to who can be on my team, I have to pre-test even section B students before accepting any of them into my team. The rule that I imposed (does the student know his/her subject matter?) applies to all students equally. Otherwise, I have to do away with the screening process and come up with another way to form a team. Like for instance, let section B students exchange notes with section A and bring them "on par"

Quote

DonnaHarvey

@DonnaHarvey

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

#85

No.

That was a rhetorical question, wasn't it?

Anyway, I was watching this documentary from Pakistan and this cross dressing gentleman who is a tv personality there (uses male pronouns) said that Pakistan had more important issues to deal with than homosexuality. Similar ideas were thrown around in the Uncultured (Bangladesh) social media comments. While I do not agree with this opinion, I believe the lack of LGBTQ activism in India may be due to this line of reasoning.

We are far from reaching the equal rights stage in India. the LGBTQ community does not even have human rights. Awareness and considerate language may be one step in the right direction. the second and more important one should be legislation and policy change to reflect the voices of the LGBTQ population.

Quote

983175

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

#86

Originally posted by: souro

This is what I said:

Please show me where I claimed that companionship and emotional support from one's sexual partner is exactly same as that received from friends, parents or other people you are close to. I only claimed that sexual partner is not the only source of companionship and emotional support. If that is to be the case then I'll have to believe that people before the age of 18 doesn't have any company or emotional support.

If you assume something and express shock and disgust at an imaginary claim, to try and ridicule your way into disproving me, then expect the same coming towards you.

Kindly go through ur initial post.. the post where u said that 'one does not need to jump into bed with someone for companionship,emotional support .etc.'.

Since your comments were made with respect to the LGBT community, it can be safely assumed (correct me if I am wrong) that u were talking about sexual partners/lovers/couples in the community.. right?..

I agree u did not use the following words but thats pretty much the essence of what u were getting at (correct me if I am wrong):

"These people should lead a celibate life unlike the heterosexuals since heterosexuals are privileged with the cause of procreation & things like companionship ,emotional support can be obtained from friends & family; & that should suffice"

Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but going by ur initial post & especially context of the post to which u used your initial post as a reply does insinuate something on similar lines..but again I will leave it to you to better explain your stand on this issue to avoid any misinterpretation..

Moreover, when u say that people dont need to have sexual partners to obtain emotional suppport & companionship as it can be obtained from friends & family, it is BUT OBVIOUS that according to you both types of emotional support & companionship can be substituted for each other..and hence I raised the question with my argument that both are different but equally important in an adult's life & cant be substituted for one or the other..again I would like to know what makes ur statement independent of such obvious interpretations...

Further more, ur argument that "If that is to be the case then I'll have to believe that people before the age of 18 doesn't have any company or emotional support." is irrelevant here as it can be safely assumed that when we talk about sexual relationships, we are talking about adults..

Edited by Quixotic5 - 11 years ago

Quote

1 ... 5 6 7 8 9

Has INDIA really accepted GAY and LESBIANS? - Page 9

Related Topics

Explore Topics