-
@Kirwan comes down to difference between born that way versus an activity you choose to pursue? Sidestepping any developmental, mental health stuff that might mean you feel you were born an alcoholic or compulsive booty chaser (cause you could also just be a selfish douche).
-
@Paekakboyz the born that way makes it sound like you have zero control over your urges. Douglas Murray points out that it's not so black and white. We pretend to know a lot about homosexuality but we don't.
We live in a world where we claim gender is fluid but sexual attraction is set in stone and immutable. No strong evidence for that, anecdotal and taking the loudest people on their word.
It sounds like homosexuals have less legal rights than heterosexuals. Not true.
This whole hysteria is on the argument that all gay people have no choice. Not true and it opens up bad faith actors trying to gain from the system, which is what we've got.
Evidenced in the "lgbtq community " - there isn't one
-
@Paekakboyz said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan comes down to difference between born that way versus an activity you choose to pursue? Sidestepping any developmental, mental health stuff that might mean you feel you were born an alcoholic or compulsive booty chaser (cause you could also just be a selfish douche).
We could get into some pretty deep philosophical discussions around why people do what they do. I absolutely love Cricket but when it comes down to it I couldn't actually explain why.
-
@No-Quarter said in The Folau Factor:
@Paekakboyz said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan comes down to difference between born that way versus an activity you choose to pursue? Sidestepping any developmental, mental health stuff that might mean you feel you were born an alcoholic or compulsive booty chaser (cause you could also just be a selfish douche).
We could get into some pretty deep philosophical discussions around why people do what they do. I absolutely love Cricket but when it comes down to it I couldn't actually explain why.
LGBTQ and now C???
-
@Hooroo said in The Folau Factor:
@No-Quarter said in The Folau Factor:
@Paekakboyz said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan comes down to difference between born that way versus an activity you choose to pursue? Sidestepping any developmental, mental health stuff that might mean you feel you were born an alcoholic or compulsive booty chaser (cause you could also just be a selfish douche).
We could get into some pretty deep philosophical discussions around why people do what they do. I absolutely love Cricket but when it comes down to it I couldn't actually explain why.
LGBTQ and now C???
I demand my own letter!
Being obsessed with cricket and supporting the Black Caps is one of the most traumatic things you can do. But I can't seem to stop, maybe I was born that way?
-
@No-Quarter said in The Folau Factor:
@Hooroo said in The Folau Factor:
@No-Quarter said in The Folau Factor:
@Paekakboyz said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan comes down to difference between born that way versus an activity you choose to pursue? Sidestepping any developmental, mental health stuff that might mean you feel you were born an alcoholic or compulsive booty chaser (cause you could also just be a selfish douche).
We could get into some pretty deep philosophical discussions around why people do what they do. I absolutely love Cricket but when it comes down to it I couldn't actually explain why.
LGBTQ and now C???
I demand my own letter!
Being obsessed with cricket and supporting the Black Caps is one of the most traumatic things you can do. But I can't seem to stop, maybe I was born that way?
It's ok, I think i'm in the C closest just bursting to get out!
-
@Hooroo said in The Folau Factor:
@No-Quarter said in The Folau Factor:
@Hooroo said in The Folau Factor:
@No-Quarter said in The Folau Factor:
@Paekakboyz said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan comes down to difference between born that way versus an activity you choose to pursue? Sidestepping any developmental, mental health stuff that might mean you feel you were born an alcoholic or compulsive booty chaser (cause you could also just be a selfish douche).
We could get into some pretty deep philosophical discussions around why people do what they do. I absolutely love Cricket but when it comes down to it I couldn't actually explain why.
LGBTQ and now C???
I demand my own letter!
Being obsessed with cricket and supporting the Black Caps is one of the most traumatic things you can do. But I can't seem to stop, maybe I was born that way?
It's ok, I think i'm in the C closest just bursting to get out!
yes, you love cock. admit it and be free
fuck, sorry google!!
-
@Siam my (current) position is that we don't have a lot of control over who/what we find pushes our buttons sexually. But we do have control (of varying degrees) on how we act on said urges. Something that adds in a random factor imo is people's limited or constrained life experiences - I reckon people absolutely have sleeper urges that might never come up (ahem) if they stayed within their same environment - cue the sorts of sexual liberation/exploration stories that are rife in human story telling. That could be discovering that you like eating boot-e (all the rage apparently) or a bigger change in that you find the same or other sex appealing when that wasn't the case previously. Add in mental health perspectives, religious thinking, and other environmental factors that might shape or impact on attraction and it can absolutely get grey pretty fast.
Without being overly familiar with Murray I'm not sure how weighty his contributions are, or what you are basing the claim that we don't know a lot about homosexuality on. But I'd also be fully up front with not having read much into latest thinking (science etc rather than social media noise). I would agree there is more nuance around attraction than we probably understand right now - but I do consider attraction at the hetero/homo level to be more hardwired than a pick a path, each to their own, kind of situation. At this stage in life at least - haven't actually met Brad Pitt irl so...
-
@mariner4life balls deep bro. Never change
-
I can only go by my own attractions and I can never remember anytime, no matter how far back I try that I wasn't attracted to women. As far as I can tell it is a hardwired feeling or urge. Luckily for me, that feeling was also the one accepted by society at the time.
If that is the accepted case for me why shouldn't it be accepted that others are wired differently? We all have different physical and mental attributes. Why wouldn't that extend to instincts? -
@Hooroo said in The Folau Factor:
@No-Quarter said in The Folau Factor:
@Paekakboyz said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan comes down to difference between born that way versus an activity you choose to pursue? Sidestepping any developmental, mental health stuff that might mean you feel you were born an alcoholic or compulsive booty chaser (cause you could also just be a selfish douche).
We could get into some pretty deep philosophical discussions around why people do what they do. I absolutely love Cricket but when it comes down to it I couldn't actually explain why.
LGBTQ and now C???
I feel sorry for the letters that miss out.
-
@Crucial said in The Folau Factor:
I can only go by my own attractions and I can never remember anytime, no matter how far back I try that I wasn't attracted to women. As far as I can tell it is a hardwired feeling or urge. Luckily for me, that feeling was also the one accepted by society at the time.
If that is the accepted case for me why shouldn't it be accepted that others are wired differently? We all have different physical and mental attributes. Why wouldn't that extend to instincts?If sexual predilection is 100% hardwired then what does that mean for our understanding of some of the more socially unacceptable/illegal attractions?
I say that in no way to suggest that homosexuality and those groups are similar. Only to point out the limitations of science's understanding of nature vs nurture when it comes to sexual orientation.
-
@rotated said in The Folau Factor:
@Crucial said in The Folau Factor:
I can only go by my own attractions and I can never remember anytime, no matter how far back I try that I wasn't attracted to women. As far as I can tell it is a hardwired feeling or urge. Luckily for me, that feeling was also the one accepted by society at the time.
If that is the accepted case for me why shouldn't it be accepted that others are wired differently? We all have different physical and mental attributes. Why wouldn't that extend to instincts?If sexual predilection is 100% hardwired then what does that mean for our understanding of some of the more socially unacceptable/illegal attractions?
I say that in no way to suggest that homosexuality and those groups are similar. Only to point out the limitations of science's understanding of nature vs nurture when it comes to sexual orientation.
I'm not saying 100% hardwired. If people desire to experiment and find pleasure from that experiment then, of course, an attraction will be added to them. The reasons for that experimentation are many and varied and can come in all sorts of degrees and combinations. Extremely difficult to pin down scientifically.
Of course nature can play a part as can a human instinct to experiment. Reasons for people's behaviour are not an exact science by any means.
Point is that we all have reasons or a lack of reasons for our behaviours. Why not accept that those behaviours that aren't harmful to others are absolutely fine.
@Siam it may be absolutely true to say that not all people have no choice in their orientation, but it is also fair to say that for many that is actually the case. It is how they are wired whether straight or gay or fluid or whatever. If I am allowed to declare that I was born hetro why can't another disposition be true for someone else.
Exceptions to the statement do not make the statement untrue. -
@Crucial said in The Folau Factor:
@rotated said in The Folau Factor:
@Crucial said in The Folau Factor:
I can only go by my own attractions and I can never remember anytime, no matter how far back I try that I wasn't attracted to women. As far as I can tell it is a hardwired feeling or urge. Luckily for me, that feeling was also the one accepted by society at the time.
If that is the accepted case for me why shouldn't it be accepted that others are wired differently? We all have different physical and mental attributes. Why wouldn't that extend to instincts?If sexual predilection is 100% hardwired then what does that mean for our understanding of some of the more socially unacceptable/illegal attractions?
I say that in no way to suggest that homosexuality and those groups are similar. Only to point out the limitations of science's understanding of nature vs nurture when it comes to sexual orientation.
I'm not saying 100% hardwired. If people desire to experiment and find pleasure from that experiment then, of course, an attraction will be added to them. The reasons for that experimentation are many and varied and can come in all sorts of degrees and combinations. Extremely difficult to pin down scientifically.
Of course nature can play a part as can a human instinct to experiment. Reasons for people's behaviour are not an exact science by any means.
Point is that we all have reasons or a lack of reasons for our behaviours. Why not accept that those behaviours that aren't harmful to others are absolutely fine.
That's pretty much where I fall down on the issue as well - although where you draw the line at being harmful to others (and yourself) is a question - and again comes down to individual personality, emotional capacity etc.
To that end I can understand where Folau is coming from to an extent. If he sees all activity outside of a heterosexual marriage (and even then is must be missionary) to be immoral then I don't particularly think he is targeting the LGBTQI+ community any more than your run of the mill adulterer of philanderer.
-
Maybe this has been covered and I apologise if it has, but...
But some of ya'll are saying what about the adulterers, thieves, atheists, etc.
Surely we can deduce that being gay and being a c**t that stole his best mates wife(Covered 2 in one go...) is not the same thing. And why would anyone bother defending them?
Atheists don't need defending because the very idea of hell is laughable to them anyway.
Im not saying anyone should be defended but sexual orientation is probably something more easily defended than someone stealing your car.
-
@Siam said in The Folau Factor:
@Paekakboyz the born that way makes it sound like you have zero control over your urges. Douglas Murray points out that it's not so black and white. ...
This whole hysteria is on the argument that all gay people have no choice. Not true and it opens up bad faith actors trying to gain from the system, which is what we've got.
Evidenced in the "lgbtq community " - there isn't one
Siam - what you say here is likely sedition, almost certainly racist and will definitely have you marked as "not to be hugged, stroked and patted" by your Prime Mister Ed.
I would like to stay but I must swiftly away to witness burning in Perth of the ancient witch Margaret Court, for wrong thought, intolerance and holding a job which is inappropriate and unacceptable. All right thinking Australians will be there, apart from those tens of thousands attending memorials across the country to celebrate, honour and eulogise a dead champion sportsman, who used to play basketball in his country 7,500 miles away.
Court's majors record surpasses that of any other player in the history of tennis, but that must be factually wrong to anyone born after Faceplant - therefore it is wrong - and anyway she was only ever seen in black and white.
The International Tennis Hall of Fame states: "For sheer strength of performance and accomplishment there has never been a tennis player to match (her)." How rude!
-
@raznomore said in The Folau Factor:
Maybe this has been covered and I apologise if it has, but...
But some of ya'll are saying what about the adulterers, thieves, atheists, etc.
Surely we can deduce that being gay and being a c**t that stole his best mates wife(Covered 2 in one go...) is not the same thing. And why would anyone bother defending them?
Atheists don't need defending because the very idea of hell is laughable to them anyway.
Im not saying anyone should be defended but sexual orientation is probably something more easily defended than someone stealing your car.
We shouldn't forget the Fornicators as well.
There's plenty of hypersexual people with a very high labido which is out of their control, so expecting them to only operate within the bounds of marriage is a big ask. They often end up working as p*rnstars. How dare he insult them like that. -
@raznomore said in The Folau Factor:
Maybe this has been covered and I apologise if it has, but...
But some of ya'll are saying what about the adulterers, thieves, atheists, etc.
Surely we can deduce that being gay and being a c**t that stole his best mates wife(Covered 2 in one go...) is not the same thing. And why would anyone bother defending them?
Atheists don't need defending because the very idea of hell is laughable to them anyway.
Im not saying anyone should be defended but sexual orientation is probably something more easily defended than someone stealing your car.
Good post and good questions Raz. There is a lot of defending going on. Defending that's raised ire and cost millions of dollars.
But I question the defending. The motives and the need.
You only defend the weak and vulnerable.
Gays today are predominantly not weak or vulnerable. They rightfully have the same rights as me and enjoy the highest echelon of the sexuality pay gap (uh oh), and men experience the least amount of domestic violence, (women the most, uh oh).
They have rights, dignity and agency, in these modern times. More than that, society,(actual society that we live in, not screen society) treats homosexuality as irreverently it does hair or eye colour.
I was in a rural Aussie truck depot last year - a better homophobe meme, you could never find- all blokes, nudie calendars on the wall and working class Xmas piss up in the depot behind a wall of chep and loscum pallets. 50 year old forklift driver (2 kids he never sees and estranged wife) comes out of the closet and everyman, except one, smiles, then shrugs and says " no shit Baz" or " why'd it take you this long?". Then ALL of us had a ripper time unleashing heaps of flag ( yeah ok google, "flag") jokes. Baz has never been happier and now it's all irrelevant.
Oh yeah, the one guy not comfortable is Hindu.
Now that one, tiny, anecdote is representative that, most of the population knows it's obviously a horrid time being "in the closet".
Homosexuality is accepted and rather unremarkable to the general populace of Australia.
So how come Raelene the fornicator or Fitzsimmons the drunkard, or the other tweet shriekers can ignore their category of sin but insist that the gays obviously can't. I guess they think the gays have neither the ability or agency to deal with Israel's nonsense.
Why do the gays need such veracious and vociferous support? Did they get asked?
It seems bloody arrogant to imply that the gays can't process theological nonsense like straights have. Do they seriously believe that other humans can't cope with that tweet and need million dollar public condemnations?
Do they think gays are like children or intellectually impaired?
Honestly, it's like Israel said " down syndrome" instead of "homosexuals".
If he condemned down syndrome people, because they were born with that "setting" too, then sure, we'll all pile on.So why are we treating homosexual people like they have down syndrome? Why the huge effort to say "they can't help it being....( insert affliction or hair colour), when we all know?
Because the offended and outraged view themselves as superior to weak, vulnerable gays, wittingly or not.
It's self serving public preening and posturing to exude an air of compassion and respectability. It lacks any substance and cost Aussie rugby a shit load in an unnecessary witch hunt.
So all the fornicators, adulterers and drunkards separate themselves from the homosexuals in the offensive tweet and then stand there on the pulpit preaching about inclusivity....after excluding themselves from the homosexuals and never refer to all of Folaus nonsense.
The woke sure do love constructing and maintaining victims to Lord it over, don't they.
They incite division in a place where we'd already, largely, settled our differences.
-
@Mick-Gold-Coast-QLD this that tennis tourney that's partnered with the homosexually progressive Emirates flagship airline?
Funny that's never brought up for " the cause"
-
@Siam said in The Folau Factor:
@raznomore said in The Folau Factor:
Maybe this has been covered and I apologise if it has, but...
But some of ya'll are saying what about the adulterers, thieves, atheists, etc.
Surely we can deduce that being gay and being a c**t that stole his best mates wife(Covered 2 in one go...) is not the same thing. And why would anyone bother defending them?
Atheists don't need defending because the very idea of hell is laughable to them anyway.
Im not saying anyone should be defended but sexual orientation is probably something more easily defended than someone stealing your car.
Good post and good questions Raz. There is a lot of defending going on. Defending that's raised ire and cost millions of dollars.
But I question the defending. The motives and the need.
You only defend the weak and vulnerable.
Gays today are predominantly not weak or vulnerable. They rightfully have the same rights as me and enjoy the highest echelon of the sexuality pay gap (uh oh), and men experience the least amount of domestic violence, (women the most, uh oh).
They have rights, dignity and agency, in these modern times. More than that, society,(actual society that we live in, not screen society) treats homosexuality as irreverently it does hair or eye colour.
I was in a rural Aussie truck depot last year - a better homophobe meme, you could never find- all blokes, nudie calendars on the wall and working class Xmas piss up in the depot behind a wall of chep and loscum pallets. 50 year old forklift driver (2 kids he never sees and estranged wife) comes out of the closet and everyman, except one, smiles, then shrugs and says " no shit Baz" or " why'd it take you this long?". Then ALL of us had a ripper time unleashing heaps of flag ( yeah ok google, "flag") jokes. Baz has never been happier and now it's all irrelevant.
Oh yeah, the one guy not comfortable is Hindu.
Now that one, tiny, anecdote is representative that, most of the population knows it's obviously a horrid time being "in the closet".
Homosexuality is accepted and rather unremarkable to the general populace of Australia.
So how come Raelene the fornicator or Fitzsimmons the drunkard, or the other tweet shriekers can ignore their category of sin but insist that the gays obviously can't. I guess they think the gays have neither the ability or agency to deal with Israel's nonsense.
Why do the gays need such veracious and vociferous support? Did they get asked?
It seems bloody arrogant to imply that the gays can't process theological nonsense like straights have. Do they seriously believe that other humans can't cope with that tweet and need million dollar public condemnations?
Do they think gays are like children or intellectually impaired?
Honestly, it's like Israel said " down syndrome" instead of "homosexuals".
If he condemned down syndrome people, because they were born with that "setting" too, then sure, we'll all pile on.So why are we treating homosexual people like they have down syndrome? Why the huge effort to say "they can't help it being....( insert affliction or hair colour), when we all know?
Because the offended and outraged view themselves as superior to weak, vulnerable gays, wittingly or not.
It's self serving public preening and posturing to exude an air of compassion and respectability. It lacks any substance and cost Aussie rugby a shit load in an unnecessary witch hunt.
So all the fornicators, adulterers and drunkards separate themselves from the homosexuals in the offensive tweet and then stand there on the pulpit preaching about inclusivity....after excluding themselves from the homosexuals and never refer to all of Folaus nonsense.
The woke sure do love constructing and maintaining victims to Lord it over, don't they.
They incite division in a place where we'd already, largely, settled our differences.
That was a bit disappointing Siam. It was a lovely anecdote about old Baz, but I'm not sure the 14yr old confused kid will take much comfort from it.
One of the big distinctions people seem to be missing is that gays have been massively stigmatized over decades. It was ILLEGAL to visit vegemite valley for a bloody long time, yet this was never the case for the fornicater or the drunkard. Nobody ever for the shit beaten out of them BECAUSE they liked a drink (in fact, rhis was largelt celebrated). Plenty of gays were though.
It was considered a crime, a weakness, a despicable lifestyle, something incredibly shameful. Drinking and adultery on the other hand were just minor misdemeanors, often applauded.If we really can't see this distinction, them we really haven't come very far.
Foley deserved every fucking thing he got. If not for his content, then for his disdain for his employment.
I am genuinely disturbed that this is still a debate here.
Sports requiring athletes to support cultural positions