I bet you're sick and tired of the AI argument being drawn into this debate ASPCA..
And being pro-deviant marriage in CA, I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the findings of the AI industry are making the deviant crowd more than a little uncomfortable.
The entire hinge of the deviant argument for inclusion in marriage rests on their pleas that they are currenlty being descriminated against in not being allowed to be legally married. However, they are allowed civil unions in most states.
Here's the thing, the AI industry is a nagging and bothersome little reminder that sexual preference isn't inborn or innate...or rather that it is, in the heterosexual sense, but it can be purposefully or accidentally waylaid by the time an individual reaches adulthood.
They don't want to hear about stallions being teased to prefer dummy mounts to the estrus female standing nearby, initially used to tease him for deviant release. They don't want to hear about the bull that will only mount steers after he was first trained by the smells of a nearby estrus cow to prefer only to mount castrated males from then on. They don't want to hear about the boar pig who runs to a stuffed dummy and begins to hump it just on the sounds of his handler approaching with the equipment he knows means "nirvana"...
They don't want to hear this because it means the unthinkable [to them]: it means that their own deviant sexual preference from heterosexuality may be a fixated result of classical conditioning, a miswiring of a normal drive to prefer the opposite gender...some mishap or frustration that resulted in association of orgasm to stimuli other than the opposite gender.
And my heart goes out to them in that fate is a cruel mistress. But their fate gone awry does not justify the rest of society rewriting the terms of normalcy, just because a few of us got screwed over [pardon the pun].
How will gay marriage affect society? It's a question that few proponents of it want explored, much less answered; evidenced in this thread in spades. They are "tired of hearing" the evidence about the origins of homosexuality. They resort to diversions, name-calling, group attacks, anything [oh please God,
anything] to get me to shut up about it..
I would say it is accurate to surmise that the vehemence to which they wish to shut down this discussion is the inverse proportion to which we should.
Before we normalize anything in society, we should discuss social contagions, human behavior and what we already know from our animal bretheren about how sexual-preference originates. We should think about potential to affect future generations. Choosing to ignore facts about human sexuality, and sexuality of mammals in general when seeking to normalize clearly deviant forms to our knowledge of sex to procreate...well that folks is treading on thin ice.
Deviant sex is deviant sex. Mainstreaming anything that is deviant should be examined with an electron microscope before the rubber stamp of "go-ahead kids" [always implied when society condones something directly or indirectly] is given.
