Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Physical: Head, shoulders, eyes, legs, mouth, etc.
Everything else is a genetic difference. What's your point?
Just because you are Jew and the others are Black, you both are still H. sapiens. Unless you classified yourself as a different species
There seems to be confusion on my part. Again, the "concept" of race is a social construct. If we didn't distinguish ourselves White, Black, Yellow, Red, we would only be considered H. sapiens. And that is what my point is.
Wishing away race and differences will not make it any less likely for me to have a taysachs child that would not survive to be 1 year old.
Wishing away race won't make glaucoma rates in blacks go down
No, again you are comparing outside of like comparisons. Homosexuality is a behavior that occurs in humans (as well as animals). We can properly assess its normality within humans. Heterosexual behavior is consistent, common, normal, homosexual behavior is not consistent, uncommon, abnormal.
The reason your example is flawed is because each of those races do not produce the other unless they mix. They are isolated and so comparing them is a flawed assessment.
Now you could rate normal or abnormality based on mixed race products. For instance, what hair color, skin pigmentation, etc.. is common or uncommon, normal or abnormal.
That is, they share a common relation and therefore both influence the result. The rate of their occurrence establishes its normality.
It seems to me as though we are getting into the political correctness of the proper usage of the word "abnormal".
I suppose we are getting into the whole definition of terms which is pretty much pointless to argue
I'll never question the legitimacy of my position on the subject...my suggestion to you is to question your position on the subject.
My point exactly, you never assess the merit of your position and therefore make all efforts to avoid dealing with any conflicts that question it. You prove my point exactly.
As a cognitive behaviorist (psychologist) I believe that homosexuality is a failure to successfully master one of Erikson’s eight stages of life development, specifically the fifth stage: Identity vs. Role-confusion. Erik Erikson Stages of Development No one chooses to be homosexual. But failing this stage of development means being gay will feel perfectly natural to the indivual so it is no wonder that so many homosexuals feel they were born this way. The whole human genome has been mapped and there has not been a “Gay Gene” found. It’s not genetic, it’s not a choice, it’s a learned behavioral condition.
Why hasn't the American Psychological Association postulated the same theory? Do you believe that homosexuality can be "cured"?
It seems to me as though we are getting into the political correctness of the proper usage of the word "abnormal".
I suppose we are getting into the whole definition of terms which is pretty much pointless to argue
I don't understand why you're so afraid of the word abnormal?
I don't think that homosexuals are bad, immoral or anything. But they are abnormal as most people are heterosexual. it's not a judgment, just a description. What scares you so much about descriptions?
My point exactly, you never assess the merit of your position and therefore make all efforts to avoid dealing with any conflicts that question it. You prove my point exactly.
Look, why don't you tell me why I should assess the merit of my position...why should I as a gay man assess the merit of my posistion?
It seems to me as though we are getting into the political correctness of the proper usage of the word "abnormal".
I suppose we are getting into the whole definition of terms which is pretty much pointless to argue
It is a proper definition, it is a relevant definition and it is an appropriate definition. The fact that people don't use it is simply they do not want a negative sound to their description. They take it personally and honestly, I don't care how someone takes a word when it is specifically relevant to the discussion.
If anything, political influence has led to people thinking it is a bad word when it is simply a fact. We have enough people who can't read, the last thing we need is constant changes to definitions to fit emotional appeal. In fact, I personally think it the path to an ignorant society.
I don't understand why you're so afraid of the word abnormal?
I don't think that homosexuals are bad, immoral or anything. But they are abnormal as most people are heterosexual. it's not a judgment, just a description. What scares you so much about descriptions?
Again, it's the political correctness of the word. We ARE in a politics thread.
The word "abnormal" has been associated with negativity and therefore has been tinted as such.
Which may be the reason for the ping pongs we've been having
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
