Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (12707)	2/27/2000 9:26:00 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 769670

Well, there is indeed a cultural norms argument, although it need not involve AIDS. Even if homosexuality is socially harmless (and we can only regard it so assuming that it does not become widespread, since it would otherwise be highly disruptive of family life), we are constrained to view it as aberrant (a wholly homosexual society would not survive). We accept it on the grounds that it is not society's business, and on the grounds that some number of people probably cannot help it, regardless of the genetic argument, because it is so deeply ingrained in their makeup. However, we do not want to say that it is "just the same" as heterosexuality, for two reason: one, we do not want to encourage more people to become confused in their sexual identity, as it is likely that there are some number of persons with bisexual impulses who might settle into heterosexuality if there is social encouragement; and two, there are a number of other behaviors that are clearly undesirable, including pedophilia, incest, and wanton promiscuity, for which the " I can't help it" argument could be advanced, and against which it would become more difficult to maintain cultural norms if homosexuality were fully embraced.......