Huckabee compares being gay to using alcohol, profanity

[Coolidge/Dawes '24]

Wow! Thanks for posting this. "There are some people who really like classical music, ballet and opera, it's not really my cup of tea." Imagine if CNN had run with the headline "Huckabee compares being gay to classical music, ballet and opera."

Exactly. I can guarantee you RPF's reaction would have been much different had that been the case. Sometimes, a headline reading just doesn't do the subject justice. The MSM used the same tactics to portray Ron Paul as a "secessionist." And in fact, he used a similar argument as Huckabee, if I do recall. To paraphrase, he said something along the lines of: "I may not agree with Texans who wish to secede from the Union, but that is their right. I may oppose the Drug War, but that doesn't mean I condone the use of drugs." This is not hard to understand.

 

[jmdrake]

Choosing to expose yourself to something to give it a chance is not the same as choosing to like it.

Choosing to keep exposing yourself to it in order to acquire a taste for it is a choice to choose to like it. Hell, I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue at this point or even accomplish other than to try to force your own ignorant opinion on someone else. The conversation has gotten stupid. In fact it's been that way since your first comment in this thread. You think you know everything well I will leave you to your ignorance. I will stick with the "We don't know" position and be done with it.

 

[jmdrake]

Exactly. I can guarantee you RPF's reaction would have been much different had that been the case. Sometimes, a headline reading just doesn't do the subject justice. The MSM used the same tactics to portray Ron Paul as a "secessionist." And in fact, he used a similar argument as Huckabee, if I do recall. To paraphrase, he said something along the lines of: "I may not agree with Texans who wish to secede from the Union, but that is their right. I may oppose the Drug War, but that doesn't mean I condone the use of drugs." This is not hard to understand.

I think you meant to say "I can guarantee you RPF's reaction would not have been much different had that been the case." And you are 100% right. Also Ron Paul's position on same sex marriage is leave it to the states and ultimately get the government out of marriage altogether.

 

[Crashland]

Choosing to keep exposing yourself to it in order to acquire a taste for it is a choice to choose to like it. Hell, I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue at this point or even accomplish other than to try to force your own ignorant opinion on someone else. The conversation has gotten stupid. In fact it's been that way since your first comment in this thread. You think you know everything well I will leave you to your ignorance. I will stick with the "We don't know" position and be done with it.

No, it isn't. Attempting to acquire a taste in something does not mean you will like it if you just decide to give it enough tries. But I agree that this is pointless. I hope someday you will realize the absurdity of someone suggesting that you might have willingly chosen your sexual orientation.

 

[jmdrake]

No, it isn't. Attempting to acquire a taste in something does not mean you will like it if you just decide to give it enough tries. But I agree that this is pointless. I hope someday you will realize the absurdity of someone suggesting that you might have willingly chosen your sexual orientation.

Grow up. Seriously grow up. I hope someday you will realize the absurdity of claiming that nobody can willingly choose to like something they may not already like, be that music, food or whatever. Or, maybe you're really an atheistic Calvinist, who knows. All you have done is jump from one logical fallacy and false assumption to another.

Edit: And if anything, you have absolutely proven Huckabee's point. There are cultural jihadists such as yourself who aren't willing to simply let others have their own opinion even when that opinion is "I have no opinion this" and even when you have nothing but your own idea that "My way MUST be right because that's what I think" as "evidence" to back up your position. Your own analogies make you look stupid. People can't choose to learn to like a different type of music? Seriously? That's the most absurd idea ever.

 

[Crashland]

Grow up. Seriously grow up. I hope someday you will realize the absurdity of claiming that nobody can willingly choose to like something they may not already like, be that music, food or whatever. Or, maybe you're really an atheistic Calvinist, who knows. All you have done is jump from one logical fallacy and false assumption to another.

Edit: And if anything, you have absolutely proven Huckabee's point. There are cultural jihadists such as yourself who aren't willing to simply let others have their own opinion even when that opinion is "I have no opinion this" and even when you have nothing but your own idea that "My way MUST be right because that's what I think" as "evidence" to back up your position. Your own analogies make you look stupid. People can't choose to learn to like a different type of music? Seriously? That's the most absurd idea ever.

I'll start listening again when you tell me that you chose your sexual orientation, that you chose to acquire a taste for being attracted to the opposite sex. If that didn't happen then you are already wrong.

 

[jmdrake]

I'll start listening again when you tell me that you chose your sexual orientation, that you chose to acquire a taste for being attracted to the opposite sex. If that didn't happen then you are already wrong.

You're full of shit. If I changed my sexual orientation you would just say I was really gay or bisexual all along. If you can't understand that people can willingly change their choice of music then you are really too stupid to have a conversation with anyway.

 

[philipped]

Put a fork in Huck...He's not gonna get far with these statements. Especially general election far.

 

[jmdrake]

Put a fork in Huck...He's not gonna get far with these statements. Especially general election far.

I don't like Huck, but actually watch the video. He didn't say anything wrong and I doubt Rand Paul disagrees with him on the idea that someone can think somebody else is doing something he/she disagrees with and still be friends with that person.



CNN lied.

 

[Crashland]

You're full of shit. If I changed my sexual orientation you would just say I was really gay or bisexual all along. If you can't understand that people can willingly change their choice of music then you are really too stupid to have a conversation with anyway.

I didn't ask about you changing your sexual orientation. I asked if you had to choose the one you associate with right now. You keep fixating on this acquired taste issue. You can choose what music you listen to, but you can't choose how a song makes you feel. You can try to influence it, but ultimately it is not in your control. You are also completely ignoring the fact that your argument does not apply when you hear a song for the first time. When I heard Rebecca Black's "Friday" for the first time, I didn't like it, and I still don't. If someone was never attracted to the opposite sex, they didn't choose to be that way. The same way you didn't choose to be attracted to the opposite sex, it's just the way you are.

 

[jmdrake]

I didn't ask about you changing your sexual orientation.

Again, anyone too stupid to realize that someone can choose to learn to like a style of music he doesn't already like isn't worth talking to. Ciao!

 

[philipped]

He didn't say anything wrong and I doubt Rand Paul disagrees with him on the idea that someone can think somebody else is doing something he/she disagrees with and still be friends with that person.

Saw the video. Huckabee did not compare it to alcohol or profanity. But, it's more than obvious this is going to be a major part of his campaign. I side with the Republican Party when it comes to opposing government enforcing a privately run firm to conduct business and provide services in an industry with religious ties specifically for homosexual marriages.

But Huckabee is gonna clearly come out and promise a law prohibiting voluntary action, or work to overturn the future Supreme Court ruling if it's not in his favor. To me, it's just EXTRA, OD and not a winning strategy. The Paul "get gov out of marriage altogether" position is the better one to hold overall.

 

[juleswin]

First of all, I think after watching the video of the actual interview, we can all agree that what Huckabee said is very different from what the headline thinks he says.

But to the other part of the debate, people do not really choose to be gay. Sexuality has a lot to do with hormone levels which affect brain structure. Hormone levels can be affected by diet, exercise, environment etc etc . Like some people have already said, its a spectrum with some people sitting far away from each poles to be actually able to pick one over the other. But for the vast majority of us, choosing our sexuality is as possible as choosing how to be left handed after being right handed all their lives.

You didn't choose when you became straight, you were born that way and the same goes for the gays. Also the exceptions don't make the rule so stop bring them up.

 

[jmdrake]

First of all, I think after watching the video of the actual interview, we can all agree that what Huckabee said is very different from what the headline thinks he says.

But to the other part of the debate, people do not really choose to be gay. Sexuality has a lot to do with hormone levels which affect brain structure. Hormone levels can be affected by diet, exercise, environment etc etc . Like some people have already said, its a spectrum with some people sitting far away from each poles to be actually able to pick one over the other. But for the vast majority of us, choosing our sexuality is as possible as choosing how to be left handed after being right handed all their lives.

You didn't choose when you became straight, you were born that way and the same goes for the gays. Also the exceptions don't make the rule so stop bring them up.

That's nice. You've got absolutely no validity to your argument, but believe it anyway. People make no choices at all. People either like or hate country music because of genetics and hormones too. That's what your side believes. I believe the science on the issue is not settled so your side should quit pretending that it is.

 

[Crashland]

Again, anyone too stupid to realize that someone can choose to learn to like a style of music he doesn't already like isn't worth talking to. Ciao!

Still haven't answered my question on whether it is your fault that you are attracted to members of the opposite sex.

 

[juleswin]

That's nice. You've got absolutely no validity to your argument, but believe it anyway. People make no choices at all. People either like or hate country music because of genetics and hormones too. That's what your side believes. I believe the science on the issue is not settled so your side should quit pretending that it is.

I am not talking about country music, sexuality is more innate than music preference. I am talking about hormones, brain structure etc. Sorry but I don't think you can easily voluntarily change the influence of hormones on your brain. Also I a bit confused what the argument is all about when you say.

People make no choices at all

Is that sarcasm? or are you slipping off and admitting you never had a case in the first place? I am confused.

 

[jmdrake]

I am not talking about country music, sexuality is more innate than music preference. I am talking about hormones, brain structure etc. Sorry but I don't think you can easily voluntarily change the influence of hormones on your brain. Also I a bit confused what the argument is all about when you say.

No, but Crashland made that point. At first I thought he was joking but then I realized he was serious. And that point makes about as much sense as the "People have no choice on sexuality" argument. The bottom line is while you have your theory, and your theory may be right (or not), it's a theory. It's not even a scientific theory like, say, evolution where there is at least a well established body of scientific literature supporting it. It's just a theory that, so far, has not been widely embraced by the scientific community as true. So...believe it if you will. Dannno has his "micro nutrient" theory to explain why you can have two identical twins, one who's straight and the other who decides he wants a sex change. Oops...I guess he didn't decide. It was decided for him in utero by his brother that grabbed more micronutrients or more hormones or more whatever. Again, if you want to speculate and believe that, go right ahead. Just realize that you are speculating and your speculation is no better or worse than the people you are disagreeing with.

Is that sarcasm? or are you slipping off and admitting you never had a case in the first place? I am confused.

Obvious sarcasm is obvious.

 

[Crashland]

No, but Crashland made that point. At first I thought he was joking but then I realized he was serious. And that point makes about as much sense as the "People have no choice on sexuality" argument. The bottom line is while you have your theory, and your theory may be right (or not), it's a theory. It's not even a scientific theory like, say, evolution where there is at least a well established body of scientific literature supporting it. It's just a theory that, so far, has not been widely embraced by the scientific community as true. So...believe it if you will. Dannno has his "micro nutrient" theory to explain why you can have two identical twins, one who's straight and the other who decides he wants a sex change. Oops...I guess he didn't decide. It was decided for him in utero by his brother that grabbed more micronutrients or more hormones or more whatever. Again, if you want to speculate and believe that, go right ahead. Just realize that you are speculating and your speculation is no better or worse than the people you are disagreeing with.

Obvious sarcasm is obvious.

Are you ever going to acknowledge that you didn't choose to be attracted to members of the opposite sex?

 

[jmdrake]

Are you ever going to acknowledge that you didn't choose to be attracted to members of the opposite sex?

Again, anyone too stupid to realize that someone can choose to learn to like a style of music he doesn't already like isn't worth talking to. Ciao!

 

[juleswin]

No, but Crashland made that point. At first I thought he was joking but then I realized he was serious. And that point makes about as much sense as the "People have no choice on sexuality" argument. The bottom line is while you have your theory, and your theory may be right (or not), it's a theory. It's not even a scientific theory like, say, evolution where there is at least a well established body of scientific literature supporting it. It's just a theory that, so far, has not been widely embraced by the scientific community as true. So...believe it if you will. Dannno has his "micro nutrient" theory to explain why you can have two identical twins, one who's straight and the other who decides he wants a sex change. Oops...I guess he didn't decide. It was decided for him in utero by his brother that grabbed more micronutrients or more hormones or more whatever. Again, if you want to speculate and believe that, go right ahead. Just realize that you are speculating and your speculation is no better or worse than the people you are disagreeing with.



Obvious sarcasm is obvious.

Its not really that much of a speculation cos this topic that been researched well enough. Gestational hormone treatment in children have some effect on their sexual orientation. I will post an abstract to a paper written about it

Prenatal endocrine influences on sexual orientation and on sexually differentiated childhood behavior

Both sexual orientation and sex-typical childhood behaviors, such as toy, playmate and activity preferences, show substantial sex differences, as well as substantial variability within each sex. In other species, behaviors that show sex differences are typically influenced by exposure to gonadal steroids, particularly testosterone and its metabolites, during early development (prenatally or neonatally). This article reviews the evidence regarding prenatal influences of gonadal steroids on human sexual orientation, as well as sex-typed childhood behaviors that predict subsequent sexual orientation. The evidence supports a role for prenatal testosterone exposure in the development of sex-typed interests in childhood, as well as in sexual orientation in later life, at least for some individuals. It appears, however, that other factors, in addition to hormones, play an important role in determining sexual orientation. These factors have not been well-characterized, but possibilities include direct genetic effects, and effects of maternal factors during pregnancy. Although a role for hormones during early development has been established, it also appears that there may be multiple pathways to a given sexual orientation outcome and some of these pathways may not involve hormones.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3296090/

There is a lot of research backing it up, its not just me theorizing. Also, its many factors which all add up to literary push you to one team or the other. This meaning that Danno could be right with his theory about micronutrients. At the end of the day, biology chooses for the vast majority of us which team we play for. And its not a choice we make like which career to go into.