If gay people DO have a biological purpose that should give people who are capable of critical thinking a reason why homosexuals should be accepted. Though I know most homophobes don't like using that part of the brain.

They often use the "it's not natural" defense, so if we managed to prove that homosexuality actually has an evolutionary purp..... oh wait most homophobes are religious people who don't believe in evolution nvm.

We just like confirming things that's all, that's scientific curiousity for ya. Even if we were to prove without a doubt that homosexuality is something that plays a vital and intended role in our evolution, most homophobes would just shrugg it off.

Even intelligent people can be homophobic though I think. They just have misconceptions and misguided perceptions that need to be corrected by presenting facts. Which is why such research is still useful.

^I think you wrote the truth, Boo. Even on these boards, so many people borrow from science up to the point where it no longer suits them, then cast it aside.

I never understood homophobes myself. The homophobe who in reality is a repressed homosexual himself (always a guy) is of course a well known comic clichè. Is that what it is? Denial or fear that a little same-sex intimacy like a hug or even a kiss might stir something dormant or repressed in one's own sexual orientation? ;)

I don't think all homophobes are repressed homosexuals.

Most of them are very converative and religious. Christians believe that sex is for reproduction and just about any sex that doesnt suit this purpose is sodomy. Christians consider any kind of sodomy to be a choice made by deviants and those who reject gods gift of lifegiving.

In other words gay people choose to be gay because they feel it's a great way to piss god off just for the lulz.

My only issue with homosexuality isn't an issue so much as a simple disagreement. How dudes can be attracted to other men and not women is beyond me, but I know that it's caused by something biological and things beyond my grasp of understanding. They are just wired differently from heterosexual men in that regard.

I think a lot of straight people make the mistake that gay men find women repulsive to look at. Aesthetic appreciation and sexual attraction aren't really the same thing.

^ They're so Christian, all priests find it cool to do it with a 10 year old.
I believe repressed homophobes are usually repressed homosexuals.

I think pedophiles are different, especially those who don't pick one gender over the other. I don't think they should be lumped together with heterosexuals or homosexuals, I consider it something different entirely.

^ They usually pick out little boys. I'm guessing there's some picking going on.
And I'm talking about repressed hypocritical homophobes.

Yeah for serial. I know this ga y guy who's talked about how beautiful certain women are and whatnot--they just don't turn him on in a sexual way. Maybe he's extreme, but I imagine that most *** people don't find the opposite sex disgusting.

I hate when gay people start those "OMG, how can you look at her, she's repulsive... On the other hand, look at this muscular guy over there" (We had one like that, in a forum I joined few years ago). What an annoying little fellow.
And vice versa of course. I don't think heterosexual men are repulsed by other men. I think they can judge if one of them is good looking or not. As for girls, I don't think any heterosexual girl, don't look at good looking ones for tips or just like a way to critique and see they can improve themselves.

I've honestly never encountered a gay man (online or in real life) who was repulsed by women. On the contrary, I'd say the majority of gay man really appreciate female beauty (and women in general, I consider myself one of them).

On the other hand, the majority of men seem to be repulsed by other men, which frankly I can't understand. I'm not sure if it's just for show, deep-seated prejudice (anything other than complete repulsion MIGHT POSSIBLY MEAN YOU'RE A HOMO OMFG) or just genuine distaste...I mean yeah, there are some truly ugly men out there, but the same is true for women no? I dunno, can anyone really be repulsed by the dude in my avatar? I mean, that's a beautiful person no, anyone should be able to see that...:\

You're talking about priests I mean pedos in general.

The victims of perv priests tend to be of the adolescent age and when boys are at that age they are gaining more characteristically male features and can be considered young men, so that can be considered homosexuality.

I'm talking about those who prey on pre-pubescent children, some pedos prefer one sex but some like both. I think pedophilia of that kind is seperate from heterosexuality or homosexuality.

Many pedophiles aren't attracted to adults. If a man is only attracted to pre-pubescent girls I don't consider him a heterosexual and if he's only attracted to pre-pubescent boys I don't consider him a homosexual.