PDA

View Full Version : I don't get the hatred of gays.



Pages : [1] 2 3

Ridley-X4
6th February 2008, 10:19 PM
I really don't. People say it's "a sin" or "an abonination of the lord", but what did the gays REALLY do to you? Exactly.

What do I think? I think that people like to pretend everyone has the same sexual interests. When they come across something different, sometimes it's easier to fear/hate them, then to actually understand. Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee even wanted to make an amendment to ban gay marrige. How could you deny rights to an entire group of people? That's as bad as having blacks do slavery, or women not being able to vote.

If a tigress can get along with piglets, why can't we get along with gays/bis? You guys treat them like they're terrorists. Well you know what? I'm bloody sick of the discrimination and prejudice of these living, breathing, human beings. I'm going to kick reason to the curb and ask for a legitimate reason why. You say it's "bad", but how? How does it affect you/them?

Is being gay honestly bad, or is it all just because being homo/bisexual isn't as popular as being hetero? I think if you hate on god's creations simply because you're going to feel closer to the lord, then it's you who are going to hell. For prejudice. Hatred. And slander. To god's very own, mortal creations.

For shame.

Wifi Kid11
6th February 2008, 10:23 PM
#1: its REALLY DISGUSTING
#2: it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin. i see it as a sin AND a disease. and as a Catholic, i read the bible. So for all you gays who are going to flame me and what not now, forget it, your wasting your time becuase i wont be entering this thread again.
#3: its disgracing the other sex that God put on this earth. This is one of the many reosons why its a sin.

nuff said.

Ridley-X4
6th February 2008, 10:25 PM
Yeah, but that's like, your opinion, man.

I don't want this "sinning" BS. I want acutal reasons, you genocidal pig. Are gays more likely to steal, etc?

Blazios
6th February 2008, 10:29 PM
Entire post.

Hear hear!


Is being gay honestly bad, or is it all just because being homo/bisexual isn't as popular as being hetero? I think if you hate on god's creations simply because you're going to feel closer to the lord

I think it is one of those two reasons. And the fact that this generation uses the word gay as an insult in the same way that cretin was used last generation. So a lot of people have an unfounded reason to hate. I think a lot of it is also just jumping on the bandwagon.

Bryloom
6th February 2008, 10:33 PM
#1: its REALLY DISGUSTING

What does that matter to you? Ever heard of ignoring?

#2: it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin. i see it as a sin AND a disease. and as a Catholic, i read the bible. So for all you gays who are going to flame me and what not now, forget it, your wasting your time becuase i wont be entering this thread again.

Where exactly in the bible does it say that homosexuality is a sin? I have yet to find it. Right, because only gays can flame you for you idiotic statements (try a Catholic *points at himself* who would rather not have other people generalize Catholics as nutjobs such as yourself) , disregard everyone else who finds what you said to be completely retarded.

#3: its disgracing the other sex that God put on this earth. This is one of the many reosons why its a sin.

Disgracing? How so?
nuff said.

10 char limit.

VampirateMace
6th February 2008, 10:36 PM
Here's a list of whys for you, but I'm not saying I agree with all of them:

1. We have 2 genders for a reason... although we are over doing that...
2. A lot of the hate is religious, but don't confuse 'I hate what you do' with 'I hate you'.
3. A lot of straight people get hit on by homo/bisexuals, and it's a really unpleasent experiance. Expecially if there's 2 people asking at the same time...
4. Marriage is a contract between a man, a woman, and their community, defining who may sleep with who. If gays want a union they should come up with another name, becuase that's what a lot of the stress is about, the use of the term marriage.
5. People are scared of others because they are diffrent...

magnemiteZ
6th February 2008, 10:38 PM
#1: its REALLY DISGUSTING
#2: it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin. i see it as a sin AND a disease. and as a Catholic, i read the bible. So for all you gays who are going to flame me and what not now, forget it, your wasting your time becuase i wont be entering this thread again.
#3: its disgracing the other sex that God put on this earth. This is one of the many reosons why its a sin.

nuff said.
It is disgusting, why though? I mean, Homosexual people are still as human as me or you, and still deserve all the same rights, so why should they be treated differently? People argue against racism all the time, saying it is bad, wrong, evil, uneeded, etc, but then people who read the bible will forever accept the fact that being a homosexual is a sin against the ALMIGHTY LORD, or whatever the **** else. Pretty stupid in itself when you consider people do not make a choice to be homosexual or not.
You're saying you aren't going to be entering this thread again, I suppose making all flamings against you null like you rightly said, but this just makes you look more idiotic, childish and moronic. You're accepting one opinion, and not growing the **** up and getting with the ****ing times.
And you need to get familiar with terms such as *** hags!! Besides; "there are plenty of other fish in the sea" as the old saying goes.

Where exactly in the bible does it say that homosexuality is a sin? I have yet to find it. Right, because only gays can flame you for you idiotic statements (try a Catholic *points at himself* who would rather not have other people generalize Catholics as nutjobs such as yourself) , disregard everyone else who finds what you said to be completely retarded.
Seemingly, I've been suckered into this stereotyped misconception!

Yeah, but that's like, your opinion, man.

I don't want this "sinning" BS. I want acutal reasons, you genocidal pig. Are gays more likely to steal, etc?
It is because people are scared, unaware, uneducated, paranoid for the wrong reasons and generally either old fashioned or retarded.
It has also been proven that the most homophobic of us are actually repressing thoughts and desires towards the same sex, and are thus most likely to be homosexual themselves.

People who say they are Bi to be scene annoy me though :(

Ridley-X4
6th February 2008, 10:38 PM
Oh, and another thing: People say that marrige is "sacred". Then how come the divorce rate is 50% in the USA and Anna Nicole Smith married an old man for his money?

Virtual Chatot
6th February 2008, 10:40 PM
Christians are commanded to not hate Homosexuals, but to only hate what they do.

Any Christian who would blatantly spread hate against Homosexuals is obviously misguided, and the entire religion should not be generalized as a hate group from one statement(s) that were made.


Oh, and another thing: People say that marrige is "sacred". Then how come the divorce rate is 50% in the USA and Anna Nicole Smith married an old man for his money?
From my religion's perspective, it's because this country has become immoral and people don't care if something is sacred or not.

Its not the system that God set up which is flawed, it is the factors ( people ) in the system.

VampirateMace
6th February 2008, 10:46 PM
It is because people are scared, unaware, uneducated, paranoid for the wrong reasons and generally either old fashioned or retarded.
It has also been proven that the most homophobic of us are actually repressing thoughts and desires towards the same sex, and are thus most likely to be homosexual themselves.


That's a bais researcher's opinion. Checking out another person's physical traits doen't have to be with relationship intentons...

That's like the saying that people aren't afraid of height, they're afraid they'll jump... it's completly opinionated... and untrue...

magnemiteZ
6th February 2008, 10:47 PM
Oh, and another thing: People say that marrige is "sacred". Then how come the divorce rate is 50% in the USA and Anna Nicole Smith married an old man for his money?
To some it is sacred.
To others obviously not.

In my eyes, it will always be an expression of how stupid you are to commit yourself to one person for an eternity of suffering and boredom! Though my opinion isn't too great I guess.

From my religion's perspective, it's because this country has become immoral and people don't care if something is sacred or not.
Immoral probably being the wrong word here. Morals are what drive the world these days, paired with "political correctness". Everything is thought about too seriously blah blah blah.
It's more of a disregard for an old, pretty decent, tradition. Shame really.

EDIT:

That's a bais researcher's opinion. Checking out another person's physical traits doen't have to be with relationship intentons...

That's like the saying that people aren't afraid of height, they're afraid they'll jump... it's completly opinionated... and untrue...
You don't seem to have argued the point at all, just depicted your own opinion over the top of what has proven to be fact. You yourself are either in denial, or really don't understand the whole study/have even read into it.

People aren't afraid of the height! It is the fear of falling from such a height that would co-incidentally kill them!

._.

Virtual Chatot
6th February 2008, 10:49 PM
It has also been proven that the most homophobic of us are actually repressing thoughts and desires towards the same sex, and are thus most likely to be homosexual themselves.
What? :D

Proven by whom? That is the biggest load of Ompah that I've ever heard!

ndralcasid
6th February 2008, 10:53 PM
I'm so happy my church is open to homosexuality.... -_-;

Bryloom
6th February 2008, 11:01 PM
****ing pussy replied to me in PM rather than in the thread:


disgracing.. how so?! and you're callign me a retard... well, first off, i'm 12, so don't use those fancy retarded speeches. they bore me.
Second, i am not retarded. and people who are gay think they're still christian but there not.
Oh yeah, umm, stop skimming the bible and go to church? damn, america is dying by the second...

You still have yet to point out how exactly a female would feel disgraced by homosexual men or vice versa. To feel disgraced by something, you'd have to be a part of it. For example, if someone says that you're a disgrace to your family (which is more than likely true), they're saying that you are the part of your family that brings shame. So what you're saying is that homosexual men bring shame to females. People who are gay THINK they're christian? First off, I have yet to see a gay say "I think I'm Christian. The bible is fabulous!!!" and even if I did, you're still making a huge generalization by saying that gays think they're christian. Secondly, wouldn't them thinking that they are christian make them christian? Unless you're saying that by being homosexual, they are commiting a sin, and thus can't be regarded as christian. Well, you completely forget the fact that other sins are commited by other christians. So, by your logic, there are only about 5 christians in the world. And yes, I've read the bible many times and I would like for you to point out exactly in the bible where it says that homosexuality is a sin. Which book/chapter? You're 12? Go out and play in the sunshine and stop making a fool out of yourself.

magnemiteZ
6th February 2008, 11:06 PM
What? :D

Proven by whom? That is the biggest load of Ompah that I've ever heard!
In b4 "LOL WIKI", but it does deliver on occasion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia

Profesco
6th February 2008, 11:07 PM
A big fear: fear of the unknown.

That translates into fear of what is different. And fear can become anger, mistrust, and depression, among other things.

Evolutionarily speaking, hetero relationships had to become the social norm. Thus, when homosexual relationships are observed, they are observed as abnormal. They're different, therefore, they're feared, therefore, they're hated.

As poor a reason as that is, it does explain the homophobia.


Its not the system that God set up which is flawed, it is the factors ( people ) in the system.

These kinds of takes on religious faith do nothing to help the problem. It's more than just gays, too.

The idea that "our God is the cause of all good, and we humans are the cause of all problems," spans every decent, virtuous accomplishment of mankind, and removes from us the virtue of accomplishing them. Likewise, every single thing that is not enjoyed or approved of becomes mankind's personal flaw record.

It's a very divisive and self-destructive ideology. It depresses man, and turns him against himself. Religion can do much better things with its power. It probably should.

??????
6th February 2008, 11:43 PM
I, as a Christan, am commanded to love my neighbor. If Christians are commanded not to hate, that includes Homosexuals.

Those who hate homosexuals are goings against the teachings of the Christian religion. These people do not represent Christians, and generalizations should not be based on them.

Kaiserin
7th February 2008, 12:12 AM
I, as a Christan, am commanded to love my neighbor. If Christians are commanded not to hate, that includes Homosexuals.

Those who hate homosexuals are goings against the teachings of the Christian religion. These people do not represent Christians, and generalizations should not be based on them.

See, kiddies, THIS is the kind of Christian that I, as an atheist, will show respect for, because honestly, most are pretty hypocritical in my eyes for this very reason -- they do not respect everyone just because they're gay, or Muslim, or female, or whatever else they might happen to be that's not a white heterosexual Christian blonde-haired-blue-eyed male.


These kinds of takes on religious faith do nothing to help the problem. It's more than just gays, too.

The idea that "our God is the cause of all good, and we humans are the cause of all problems," spans every decent, virtuous accomplishment of mankind, and removes from us the virtue of accomplishing them. Likewise, every single thing that is not enjoyed or approved of becomes mankind's personal flaw record.

It's a very divisive and self-destructive ideology. It depresses man, and turns him against himself. Religion can do much better things with its power. It probably should.

ilu. Really I do.

Anyway.

@ Wifi Kid 11: LOL, so much for "not entering this thread again". Coming in to state your particularly ignorant opinion and then saying "I'm not coming back to hear what you have to say or debate about it" is a gigantic sign of immaturity and weakness. And that PM was lulz. Twelve? As stated before, go play outside with your friends or something instead of listening to everything your parents tell you.

Sir Crocodile
7th February 2008, 12:17 AM
The Christian hatred of homosexuality is based off of books in the Bible written 1800+ years ago. This is when not much was known scientifically, and homosexuals were blamed for natural disasters and the like. Many teachings of the Bible are ignored by Christians, particularly from the Old Testament. The same book that condemns homosexuality (Leviticus) condemns eating pork and getting tattoos. Historical context must be taken into account. The anti-gay sentiment in the olden times was enormous. Racism and the oppression of women have ended (in America), both of which were supported by the Bible in certain verses.

Homosexuals don't get to select their sexuality. A homosexual is no more at fault for their sexuality than a woman is for her gender or autistic person for his or her mental state.

As a Christian, I believe in the acceptance of homosexuals as people like everyone else. I don't take every word of the Bible literally. It is a wonderful Book that teaches us how to live with good morals and ethics, but the authors of the Book were human and had their prejudices and imperfections.

Kabuto
7th February 2008, 12:17 AM
I never understood the logic of these religious fools. If being gay is a sin, why did "god" create gays? Exactly.


See, kiddies, THIS is the kind of Christian that I, as an atheist, will show respect for, because honestly, most are pretty hypocritical in my eyes for this very reason -- they do not respect everyone just because they're gay, or Muslim, or female, or whatever else they might happen to be that's not a white heterosexual Christian blonde-haired-blue-eyed male.

Just like Hitler. Might as well call them Nazis :p.

Sammi
7th February 2008, 12:24 AM
#1: its REALLY DISGUSTING
Your retardism pisses me off. How? Wouldn't two men doing "that" to each other be the same as a man and a woman doing "that" to each other with condoms?

#2: it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin. i see it as a sin AND a disease. and as a Catholic, i read the bible. So for all you gays who are going to flame me and what not now, forget it, your wasting your time becuase i wont be entering this thread again.
We're laughing at how stupid and retarded you are. Also, not all of the "flamers" will be gay. Also, how's it a disease? It's not something to be caught and cured. How's it a sin? Loving someone of the same gender is soooo sinly.

#3: its disgracing the other sex that God put on this earth. This is one of the many reosons why its a sin.
I think you mean:

#3: I'm a disgrace because I'm a hypocrite. God says to love everyone- Would that not include homosexuals?
Yah, you obviously mean that.

Also don't pull the "I'm twelve years old" card on me. I'm twelve years old myself. Also, for ??????: *applaud*

Hakajin
7th February 2008, 2:01 AM
Because a lot of people refuse to admit that anything in the Bible could've been politically or socially motivated, and there are a couple of verses that might suggest that it's wrong to be gay. People who hate gays are people who are arrogant and love to find fault in others to make themselves look better.

On the other hand, I also don't think it's fair to hate people who simply think that being gay is wrong. I used to be one of them. These kinds of people don't hate gays, they just think acting on homosexual desires is wrong. I have a friend like this, and she has gay friends and they know what she thinks, but... It's really hard when you're brought up in a society where you're taught that it's wrong to disagree with the Bible, especially when your family teaches you the same thing. Hatred is always bad, but this, I think, is different.

In the end though, people have always been unaccepting of those who are different. We get racism from this, too. I mean, in Rome, free adult men weren't supposed to be penetrated because they were the source of power in society, and they gave power to everyone else. If they were submissive... all of society would fall apart. Or so they thought. But it was fine to do it if you were a young boy. It was considered a service to your... what's the word I'm looking for? Not teacher... the guy you were a protoge to. And in Greece, young men were partnered with older men, who would have sex with them, but who would also mentor them. Mentor, that's the word I was looking for a minute ago.

Actually, I guess a lot of homophobia came out of Christianity, although Christ never taught that message. In ancient societies, it was seen as pretty normal is some cases. But people are so legalistic... They love to condemn. That's where it all comes from.

Profesco
7th February 2008, 2:30 AM
ilu. Really I do.

The feeling is returned, with a respectful "thank you."


On the other hand, I also don't think it's fair to hate people who simply think that being gay is wrong...It's really hard when you're brought up in a society where you're taught that it's wrong to disagree with the Bible, especially when your family teaches you the same thing.

Well, yes, that's true. You oughtn't dislike people for things they think, most of the time. It's more practical to make your alliances based on actions.

As for being taught by society and family... We all have to be taught by someone. From the time of infancy, we depend on what knowledge the existing system gives us. We prove our maturity and our intelligence by taking our education into our own hands once we come of age. While I don't particularly advocate universal doubt, we should not take what ideologies, opinions, and social norms we've been taught at face value.

Hakajin, I'm glad you've made some intellectual/religious decisions for yourself. Especially with religions, because they are usually rooted in tradition and archaic issues, we should not take their values as our own until we understand everything it entails.

bigpop618
7th February 2008, 4:45 AM
I love how people who hate homosexuality really think its a choice. Thats my beef. Yeah you can choose who you date and marry. But you cannot help how you feel towards a person. I didn't one day and say hey, I'm gonna like women. You say we are God's creation, But if its such a bad thing to him then why'd he create people like that? Just a thought.

Look at it this way. How would you feel if your parents told you they didnt like the person you're dating? and They said you should break up with him or her for this other person who they set up..But you love that person you're with. How would you feel if they did that? and told you that? because its the exact same thing.

BigLutz
7th February 2008, 5:05 AM
Wow alot of hatred in here, on both sides really. Anyway I am going to start off in saying that I do find two guys having sex and kissing to be disgusting. It is a personal view, one that I do not express openly, and one that I do not wish to force on others. If I were to see it happening I would just pass it and keep going. That being said you wont see me lining up to see Brokeback Mountain. I truely would hope that the others out there that share the same view would have the same restraint to do so. Yet sadly many do not have that restraint and have to butt into other's lives.

As for the hatred, really it seems to be the world has to adapt to it. Back in the 50s/40s it was something hush hush and to keep quiet with, and back then it was hated to see a White and Black Couple. Now days the only people that will see that as disgusting are those that were raised in the area.

Hopefully in the next 50 years the people will view Homosexuals in the same way that we view White/Black couples. Although I do seriously doubt it, religion being one thing to keep it back such as many of the world's main religions teaching against homosexuality. As well as possibly a more instinctual thing of seeing two guys kissing, kind of causes other guys to squirm a bit uncomfortably.

"L"
7th February 2008, 5:11 AM
I never understood the logic of these religious fools. If being gay is a sin, why did "god" create gays? Exactly.



What I don't understand is that they quote the bible to justify their hatred of the gays, yet, being Christian, they also ignore the one thing that the New Testiment is all about. Loving thy neighbour.

Atoyont
7th February 2008, 5:49 AM
The key is not to hate homosexuals, but to have disdain for the practice itself. I know several homosexuals personally, and they are the some of the nicest and friendliest people that I know.

Now, since the Christian debate seems to have been used up, let's focus on the natural world, shall we? (Additionally, since not everyone believes in a supreme being and all religions differ in teachings, getting a point across using only that can seem quite biased.)

In nature, the main drive for practically all animals is for self-survival and reproduction. As far as I am aware, the concepts of "nobility," "evil," and "political correctness" apply only to sentient beings- humans. Unlike our simian, avian, and other such friends, we can make decisions to sacrifice ourselves for the good of other members of our species. Practically all other animals, however, only want their genes to be passed down. For example:
The praying mantis is a relatively well known species. They have some interesting mating practices. The male will sneak up on the female and "have fun" with her in order to get some of his genes passed on to her. However, he does not use up all of "it" on one mate- he will go away after a little bit to find another female and repeat the process. The female, however, will bite the male's head off during intercourse if given the chance. This prevents the male from not releasing all of "it" to fertilize the eggs- hence the female maximizes its reproductive potential.

Now, you are probably wondering what on earth this has to do with homosexuality. Allow me to explain: if all other animal's main drive is to reproduce, then there should be no (or very few) homosexual animals. And this is indeed the case! This is the reason why insects like mayflies will not go out and party during the brief time they have during their adult life. No, they go and find mates so they can lay eggs and produce the next generation. Now, I'm not saying that we should go out and have sex as much as we can- no, that's just not right. It should be used only for procreation, which is what the natural world is trying to teach us.

There are a few instances of homosexuality in the natural world, but as far as I know, most cases are necessary (with the exception of the necrophiliac homosexual mallard- that's just weird). One case involves a desert lizard of which, unfortunately, I cannot remember the name. A female will mount another female to induce a sexual reaction, producing an egg. However, this is necessary, since all members of the lizard species are female- and the eggs contain all of the required genes.

While I personally believe that God created all of the animals and us, some of you don't. And even if a greater being did not create us, it cannot be mere coincidence that "evolution" made it so all species were to mate with the opposite sex. Why would we be an exception?

Also I can't rebut or debate in any way, so just say "omigosh thats a good argument" even if you don't believe it, k thnx.

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 5:55 AM
The key is not to hate homosexuals, but to have disdain for the practice itself. I know several homosexuals personally, and they are the some of the nicest and friendliest people that I know.

Now, since the Christian debate seems to have been used up, let's focus on the natural world, shall we? (Additionally, since not everyone believes in a supreme being and all religions differ in teachings, getting a point across using only that can seem quite biased.)

In nature, the main drive for practically all animals is for self-survival and reproduction. As far as I am aware, the concepts of "nobility," "evil," and "political correctness" apply only to sentient beings- humans. Unlike our simian, avian, and other such friends, we can make decisions to sacrifice ourselves for the good of other members of our species. Practically all other animals, however, only want their genes to be passed down. For example:
The praying mantis is a relatively well known species. They have some interesting mating practices. The male will sneak up on the female and "have fun" with her in order to get some of his genes passed on to her. However, he does not use up all of "it" on one mate- he will go away after a little bit to find another female and repeat the process. The female, however, will bite the male's head off during intercourse if given the chance. This prevents the male from not releasing all of "it" to fertilize the eggs- hence the female maximizes its reproductive potential.

Now, you are probably wondering what on earth this has to do with homosexuality. Allow me to explain: if all other animal's main drive is to reproduce, then there should be no (or very few) homosexual animals. And this is indeed the case! This is the reason why insects like mayflies will not go out and party during the brief time they have during their adult life. No, they go and find mates so they can lay eggs and produce the next generation. Now, I'm not saying that we should go out and have sex as much as we can- no, that's just not right. It should be used only for procreation, which is what the natural world is trying to teach us.

There are a few instances of homosexuality in the natural world, but as far as I know, most cases are necessary (with the exception of the necrophiliac homosexual mallard- that's just weird). One case involves a desert lizard of which, unfortunately, I cannot remember the name. A female will mount another female to induce a sexual reaction, producing an egg. However, this is necessary, since all members of the lizard species are female- and the eggs contain all of the required genes.

While I personally believe that God created all of the animals and us, some of you don't. And even if a greater being did not create us, it cannot be mere coincidence that "evolution" made it so all species were to mate with the opposite sex. Why would we be an exception?

Also I can't rebut or debate in any way, so just say "omigosh thats a good argument" even if you don't believe it, k thnx.

A FEW animals? Try over 500 species.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals

To the topic. Anyone who hates gays is an idiot. Hate in itself is idiotic. Being gay isn't a choice, blahblahblah, I've said everything multiple times before.

Profesco
7th February 2008, 5:57 AM
Okay, T Meister. Your argument may have been somewhat decent until in vitro fertilization was developed. By your logic, now that there are ways that homosexual people can still pass down their genes, and raise children and such, it's a perfectly acceptable practice.

Clash
7th February 2008, 11:44 AM
To the ****wits who think people just decide to be homosexual because they want to have no idea. You have as much choice of being homosexual than you have choosing what colour eyes you have. It's all about genetics, so realistically, God's the one who made people gay. The ironing is delicious!

Tyranny of Tyranitar
7th February 2008, 12:02 PM
To the ****wits who think people just decide to be homosexual because they want to have no idea. You have as much choice of being homosexual than you have choosing what colour eyes you have. It's all about genetics, so realistically, God's the one who made people gay. The ironing is delicious!

You have proof of the precise location inside DNA of this 'gene'? Didn't think so. All you have are studies, and so does the other side. Don't be too sure of yourself.

KetchupO
7th February 2008, 1:47 PM
You have proof of the precise location inside DNA of this 'gene'? Didn't think so. All you have are studies, and so does the other side. Don't be too sure of yourself.
I'm gay myself. And I didn't choose.
I think that is proof enough.

Also, this isn't only a problem with Christianity. In very few Muslim countries (mainly Iraq and Iran), they actually kill homosexuals. Why they do that is beyond me. My religion teaches love and peace, I don't think those religious ****s that make the law over there should have anything to do with the personal lives of people.

Also, to that twelve year old guy
You're disgusting.
Please educate yourself on a subject before expressing you're twisted opinion. There are many things other Christians disregard in the Bible, and the ones that think Gays are going to hell, well it's really none of your business is it?
It's isn't up to you. It's something between God and the person. You have no right to tell someone they're going to hell. I love God and I know God loves me.
So go to hell. :)

I really don't get the hatred of Homosexuals either. They're people. I'm just as much a person like anyone else. I don't have a mental disease. I'm not disgusting and I don't hate women. It's not a choice. So for me to just stop being Gay is impossible. And to ignore it and pretend to "love" a women would be wrong.

Tyranny of Tyranitar
7th February 2008, 2:01 PM
I'm gay myself. And I didn't choose.
I think that is proof enough.

Fallacy.
Some people who are gay think that it is a choice. Either they are wrong or you are, neither can be proven without hard evidence.
Also, I'm straight and I chose to be that way. Does that make it proof that it's choice-based? ;)

Atoyont
7th February 2008, 4:02 PM
LOL Wikipedia
Anyway, that is a decent argument, Carlisle- but it's still not very common (what's 1500 out of millions of species?). It does say that there is "no species in which homosexuality is not shown to exist" but really, that is to be expected. It also says that "they have sex with who they will," meaning that they choose.

And, IMHO, in vitro fertilization isn't a good thing. And besides, it still needs an egg from a female.

I still don't hate homosexuals, though (don't think that I do).

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 4:10 PM
LOL Wikipedia

LOL at the fact that it has sources in it as well.


It also says that "they have sex with who they will," meaning that they choose.

what kind of interpretation is that? obviously it means who they want to based on their own sexual attraction. it's not like animals have advanced brains or anything.

I assume that I don't have to respond to Wifi Kid as everybody has already owned him enough.

GentleArtillery
7th February 2008, 4:37 PM
I don't even get why people use religion as an argument. Certain parts of the Bible might condemn homosexuality, but as apologists say these days, "it's a matter of interpretation." And still, I really don't get how you can know what God thinks is right and wrong, even if you can somehow prove the existence of a higher being.
Most people frown upon homosexuality because they fear/dislike the different or unknown. It's rather natural, but that doesn't make it right. I think this is the reason in most cases, whatever the human him/herself says (God forbids it, etc).

bigpop618
7th February 2008, 4:48 PM
Fallacy.
Some people who are gay think that it is a choice. Either they are wrong or you are, neither can be proven without hard evidence.
Also, I'm straight and I chose to be that way. Does that make it proof that it's choice-based? ;)

So..you're telling me. You one day woke up and decided you were going to be straight?

If you can remember when you chose to be straight then maybe ill consider that side.

When i was in second grade, I found myself liking a girl. Didn't realize it until my friends pointed it out. You know..it kinda works the same way as choosing the people you want to go out with. You can't help how you feel towards someone. If you like someone but not someone else, thats definitely not a choice

Rensch
7th February 2008, 4:53 PM
I simply can't understand how, in a western country, where church and state are separated, homosexuals are still brutally discriminated against because of religion. Gays not being able to marry is discrimination. Who cares, you're not sinning against your own religion but PLEASE stop banning OTHERS to marry because what YOU believe. It's a violation of multicultural and religious freedom as wel as state and church separation.

To me it's a bit fascist and it is comparable to a person not being able to marry because he is black or something.

Ethan
7th February 2008, 5:07 PM
Ridley, this what the fifth time you've made a thread like this? Each one got closed. Use a little common sense.

You guys know that threads like this usually end up closed the least you could do is keep things civil.



Its perspective. I will be honest with you, I believe that homosexuality is a sin and that it is not moral. As many of you have heard already of the "hate the sin, not the sinner" concept. Lets take a look at the new testament. Do any of you remember the passage about the adulterous woman? She had sexual relations with another man other then her husband. Under the law she was to be stoned. She was on the ground looking at the people that were picking up the rocks from the ground. This woman was about to die. Jesus intervened. He said "You who are without sin throw the first stone" Do you see the profoundness in that?

What God was saying is that you are just as wicked and evil as an adulterous woman. You all are sinners, none of you are perfect so what right does a sinner have to condemn a sinner? By no means was Jesus condoning the womans actions the moral of the story is that "Love covers a multitude of sins." Even if they are in the wrong they are still human beings that think, feel, and breath like we do. We may condemn their actions but we cannot condemn they themselves. Thats the whole reason Jesus came here in the first place.

He was giving us a way out of our sin so we didn't have to pay the consequences. We are not good, but it is his love and his covering that makes us good. We cannot alone be rightouess. We are only good in him. I treat a homosexual person just as I would one of my own brothers, I don't support them in the midst of what they're doing wrong. Thats what love is all about. You care about someone enough to overlook their flaws, and their imperfections. In the end homosexuality is just another sin. Tell who can stand in a crowd of people and I asked "Those here that have never lied, please stand up." not one person would stand. How about Gossip? Is that not a sin? Who would be able to stand? No one. Sin has reached the heart of every human being and Jesus Christ died for everyone. He didn't die for some of the people but all of the people.

bigpop618
7th February 2008, 5:16 PM
The problem with your argument is this. Not everyone believes in a god. To impose a religion on someone who is atheist or even agnostic is not right because frankly someone like that doesn't follow the bible.

Like you have you opinions and beliefs. Others have theirs. They may not believe in a god. What you may think is wrong, the others think its perfectly acceptable. To say that its a sin, yeah its your opinion, but it's not fact. Unless evidence can be given that your religion is indeed fact

Ethan
7th February 2008, 5:22 PM
The problem with your argument is this. Not everyone believes in a god. To impose a religion on someone who is atheist or even agnostic is not right because frankly someone like that doesn't follow the bible.

Like you have you opinions and beliefs. Others have theirs. They may not believe in a god. What you may think is wrong, the others think its perfectly acceptable. To say that its a sin, yeah its your opinion, but it's not fact. Unless evidence can be given that your religion is indeed fact

Correct, however the subject matter is about the hatred of homosexuals not whether it is a sin or not. And once more I am not imposing my views on anyone or implying that in anyway shape or form. That is my foundation, take it or leave it.

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 5:23 PM
The problem with your argument is this. Not everyone believes in a god. To impose a religion on someone who is atheist or even agnostic is not right because frankly someone like that doesn't follow the bible.

Like you have you opinions and beliefs. Others have theirs. They may not believe in a god. What you may think is wrong, the others think its perfectly acceptable. To say that its a sin, yeah its your opinion, but it's not fact. Unless evidence can be given that your religion is indeed fact

Only the thing is Babylon isn't against gay marriage.

bigpop618
7th February 2008, 5:24 PM
True, the passage does give a valid point


Only the thing is Babylon isn't against gay marriage.

I saw religion and went for it. didn't read the entire post until like just now

GentleArtillery
7th February 2008, 7:07 PM
I can't see how something you can't affect can be considered a sin. It's passive to be gay. You don't decide for yourself. I always thought I was heterosexual, but I never saw it as a choice. On later times, however, I've discovered that I'm more bisexual with a current preference of men. Still, I don't see it as a choice. I never wanted to be bi. And I never wanted to be straight either - I never really cared for sexual orientation.

But if you call it a sin to be gay, then I'll call it a sin to be... let's say, being born at a maternity ward in California. You are now not allowed to have the same rights as others.

Ethan
7th February 2008, 7:24 PM
I can't see how something you can't affect can be considered a sin. It's passive to be gay. You don't decide for yourself. I always thought I was heterosexual, but I never saw it as a choice. On later times, however, I've discovered that I'm more bisexual with a current preference of men. Still, I don't see it as a choice. I never wanted to be bi. And I never wanted to be straight either - I never really cared for sexual orientation.

But if you call it a sin to be gay, then I'll call it a sin to be... let's say, being born at a maternity ward in California. You are now not allowed to have the same rights as others.


Lets stray away from the choice factor of the debate, this thread has survived surprisingly long. Lets keep it that way.

Ragnarofl
7th February 2008, 7:40 PM
No non-religious reasons of why homosexuality is 'wrong', yet. How surprising...

The whole 'hate the sin not the sinner' is retarded pussyfooting. I prefer those who downright admit that they hate gays. At least they are honest about it.

However, I applaud the Christians here who go against the hateful parts of their doctrine.

Ethan
7th February 2008, 7:44 PM
No non-religious reasons of why homosexuality is 'wrong', yet. How surprising...

Because thats not what the debate is about genuis.


The whole 'hate the sin not the sinner' is retarded pussyfooting. I prefer those who downright admit that they hate gays. At least they are honest about it.

Translation: All Christians hate gay people, don't blow smoke out of your *** and say you don't.

With a stereotype like that your no better then the fundamentalists that condemn and hate homosexuals.


However, I applaud the Christians here who go against the hateful parts of their doctrine.

Obviously by this statement you know nothing about our doctrine.

Ragnarofl
7th February 2008, 7:55 PM
Because thats not what the debate is about genuis.
lol genuis.
Did the starter of the thread say that only the theological view on homosexuality should be discussed? No.


Translation: All Christians hate gay people, don't blow smoke out of your *** and say you don't.
Nope. I said that about everyone who says 'hate the sin not the sinner' on the particular issue, so they'll get the green light to say their bigoted views while pretending to be 'nice'.


Obviously by this statement you know nothing about our doctrine.
"you don't know the history of ______, I do!"

Hakajin
7th February 2008, 7:56 PM
I can't see how something you can't affect can be considered a sin. It's passive to be gay. You don't decide for yourself. I always thought I was heterosexual, but I never saw it as a choice. On later times, however, I've discovered that I'm more bisexual with a current preference of men. Still, I don't see it as a choice. I never wanted to be bi. And I never wanted to be straight either - I never really cared for sexual orientation.

It's like this: most of them believe that it's not wrong to have homosexual feelings, it's only wrong to act on them. For them, homosexual feelings are only a temptation to sin.


No non-religious reasons of why homosexuality is 'wrong', yet. How surprising...

The whole 'hate the sin not the sinner' is retarded pussyfooting. I prefer those who downright admit that they hate gays. At least they are honest about it.

However, I applaud the Christians here who go against the hateful parts of their doctrine.

Thank you. But I have to say, I don't like this kind of attitude either. I mean, don't get me wrong, some religious people use this message and really are hateful. But I know a lot of people who believe this way, and I can tell you they don't hate gays. They have gay friends who know what they think, and they want their friends to change because they think that's what's best for them.

It's like someone who's alcoholic for them. You don't hate someone because he's alcoholic, but you want him to stop drinking because it's harmful to himself and others. They think gay behavior is harming the people involved. I used to think this way. I wondered why it was wrong, because I believe that when God doesn't want us to do something, it's because it hurts someone. I thought maybe it had something to do with STDs or something. But I just thought that it was none of my business and thought that the rule was there to guide you, not to tell you how to guide others. Now, others sometimes thought that it was their responsibility to try to reach their friends out of love, but that's another story.

And most of the people I know don't think homosexuality is a major sin, and that hateful acts toward gays and mocking them are far worse. They do believe that homosexual feelings are not a choice, and that the people who have them do struggle. Also, people who believe this way often suffer themselves because of it. I know someone who once had a crush on another girl, and she just tortured herself because she thought she was Lesbian and that God was angry at her. She's not lesbian, and now knows that it's natural for even strait people to be attracted to someone of the same sex occassionally, but it was really hard on her.

Like I said before, it's really hard to break out of this attitude when you've been raised to think that it's wrong to think otherwise. I grew up in a Southern Baptist community, and I was always told that there wasn't a single false statement in the Bible. I changed my beliefs eventually because I never could justify to myself why homosexuality should be wrong, as I can't see that it hurts anyone in normal circumstances. But my dad's pretty liberal when it comes to Christianity, and I've always been told to think for myself. It's even harder for people whose whole families believe this way.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to justify this way of thinking. The homosexual community has enough pressure from society without being made to feel like they're committing a sin. I definitely think it needs to be changed. I'm just trying to say that this belief does not necessarily entail thinking that gays are the cause of all the trouble in America and they're going to hell. It's still not right to think that way, but it's not nearly bad as hatred.

Ragnarofl
7th February 2008, 8:26 PM
Thank you. But I have to say, I don't like this kind of attitude either. I mean, don't get me wrong, some religious people use this message and really are hateful. But I know a lot of people who believe this way, and I can tell you they don't hate gays. They have gay friends who know what they think, and they want their friends to change because they think that's what's best for them.

It's like someone who's alcoholic for them. You don't hate someone because he's alcoholic, but you want him to stop drinking because it's harmful to himself and others.
Point taken. Thing is, I never encountered someone who would see this as substance abuse and not as something extremely filthy that deserves eternal torment and divine wrath, equal to actual crimes like murder (and they quote Apostle Paul for that).

They claim they don't hate the sinner, and yet proceed to make their lives miserable, by forcing religious guilt, bigotry, ostracization and discriminatory laws.


And most of the people I know don't think homosexuality is a major sin, and that hateful acts toward gays and mocking them are far worse.
Had the exact opposite experiences, here.

Much power to you for the very fact that you went against the tide of something that was forced to you and then decided to use the mind of your own.

ndralcasid
7th February 2008, 8:30 PM
http://www.ecchurch.org/marriage.htm

This is an an article that my church wrote on their stance on Homosexuality/Gay Marraige. It's a very good read for both sides

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 9:09 PM
You have proof of the precise location inside DNA of this 'gene'?

there has actually been studies about gays having a different brain pattern.

http://www.narth.com/docs/scrutinized.html

call it a gene, call it psychologically, but DON'T call it a choice


Also, I'm straight and I chose to be that way. Does that make it proof that it's choice-based?

so when you were say, 7-9 years old, you not only knew what homosexuality was, but you outright said to yourself that you'd be straight? in your own mind? I highly doubt it.

Ragnarofl
7th February 2008, 9:20 PM
http://www.ecchurch.org/marriage.htm

This is an an article that my church wrote on their stance on Homosexuality/Gay Marraige. It's a very good read for both sides
Thanks for sharing :)


Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted fan,
Jim

Magmar Master
7th February 2008, 9:39 PM
I think that most people who hate gays just want an excuse to hate people.

I don't even get the religion exucse (yes its an excuse not a reason) from people when I ask them why they hate gays

also on the matter of the bible saying its an abomanation every one I know who belives in god (which to be honest isn't many) don't hate gays

jake3000
7th February 2008, 9:42 PM
i am a Homophobe, i can say it with pride and im not bothered at all.

I just dont see the point in men ..... you know, it disgusts me.

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 9:44 PM
i am a Homophobe, i can say it with pride and im not bothered at all.

I just dont see the point in men ..... you know, it disgusts me.

YES.

HATE IS SOMETHING TO BE PROUD OF!

Thanks for being disgusting. Cause I really didn't choose to be who I am. kthxBAI

Drake Pokétrainer
7th February 2008, 9:45 PM
I also don't get it. Just let people be who they wanna be. I'm not gay but a friend of me is. Ok I also think its unnatural but I don't really care if some people are.

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 9:46 PM
Ok I also think its unnatural

it's about as natural as your attraction to women.

jake3000
7th February 2008, 9:47 PM
it's about as natural as your attraction to women.

"pukes blood"

WTF man, if its so natural, you go screw a guy.

Blazios
7th February 2008, 9:49 PM
"pukes blood"

WTF man, if its so natural, you go screw a guy.

Do me a favour.

Jump off a cliff, would you?

Because it is ignorant cretins such as yourself that are incorrect anyway. People like you disgust me, and most other people.

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 9:49 PM
"pukes blood"

WTF man, if its so natural, you go screw a guy.

You are SO ignorant.

Love is natural. Sex is natural.

How old are you? 10? What is this world coming to? -moves to Europe-

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 9:51 PM
WTF man, if its so natural, you go screw a guy.

I naturally don't want to screw a guy. just like a gay guy naturally doesn't want a screw a girl.


What is this world coming to? -moves to Europe-

you will be surrounded by intolerance of all kinds of things no matter where you go.

jake3000
7th February 2008, 9:51 PM
"s******s"

Ok i was only stating my opinion and isnt this thread all about that?

Blazios
7th February 2008, 9:52 PM
"s******s"

Ok i was only stating my opinion and isnt this thread all about that?

Do NOT play the opinion card. Or I shall destroy you.

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 9:52 PM
"s******s"

Ok i was only stating my opinion and isnt this thread all about that?

No.

You come in the Debate Forum to debate. Not to state and run off.

Magmar Master
7th February 2008, 9:52 PM
"pukes blood"

WTF man, if its so natural, you go screw a guy.

Just becuase somethings natural doesn't mean you have to do it


also I hate the unnatural argument, the same people don't care about other unnatural things, like the computer they're typing on

jake3000
7th February 2008, 9:53 PM
"sighs"

Okay, fine, whatver. If gays are so awsome so be it.

Blazios
7th February 2008, 9:54 PM
"sighs"

Okay, fine, whatver. If gays are so awsome so be it.

Good. Now leave. NOW.

Magmar Master
7th February 2008, 9:54 PM
moves to Europe-

Sorry but the homophobicism (is that even a word) is terrible here too

jake3000
7th February 2008, 9:55 PM
well thats one way to attract new members...

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 9:56 PM
Sorry but the homophobicism (is that even a word) is terrible here too

I'm from Europe, and I would say gays get it pretty damn well. At least in the Western part.

Where IS Eszett where you need him? Or Kirbs?

dusk456
7th February 2008, 9:56 PM
For all you guys who are using stuff from the Bible, I would like to ask you that how perfect are YOU. Never point at others when you are filled with SINS.
Oh, the most interesting part, here in India people cannot differentiate between gays and eunucs.LOL

Blazios
7th February 2008, 9:57 PM
well thats one way to attract new members...

We have enough idiots, thank you very much. And the world is really going to end without you.


I'm from Europe, and I would say gays get it pretty damn well. At least in the Western part.

Where IS Eszett where you need him? Or Kirbs?

First part: QFT.

Second part: Eszett is ill. Kirby is crying of lack of Geno in Brawl (I presume :p )


well you realy dont give a dude a chance do you.

Dolts like you don't deserve a chance.

jake3000
7th February 2008, 9:59 PM
well you realy dont give a dude a chance do you.

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 10:03 PM
you never gave gays a chance either.

Drake Pokétrainer
7th February 2008, 10:06 PM
it's about as natural as your attraction to women.

Well I was just saying what I think. I don't say that I am correct.

jake3000
7th February 2008, 10:07 PM
I had a gut feeling somone was gonna say that.

Im sorry if anyone was offended but im not here to stirr up any trouble. Im just a massive pokefan looking for some good forums to post on

Ragnarofl
7th February 2008, 10:12 PM
Here, have some classic funny

12 Reasons Why Gay People Should Not Be Allowed To Get Married

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth
control.

2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile
couples and old people can't legally get married because the world needs
more children.

3. Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents
only raise straight children.

4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if Gay marriage is allowed,
since Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

5. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at
all; women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by people, not the courts, because the
majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the
rights of the minorities.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the
values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have
only one religion in America.

8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that
hanging around tall people will make you tall.

9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy
behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal
standing and can sign a marriage contract.

10. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at
home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual
marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new
social norms because we haven't adapted to things like cars or longer
lifespans.

12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a
different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is
always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as
well as separate marriages for gays and lesbians will.

SHUCKLE MAN
7th February 2008, 10:20 PM
Thanks for sharing :)


Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted fan,
Jim

^You do know that the average Christian gets asked these questions over, and over, and over again. They can instantly give answers to these questions. Do you seriously think you're the first person to think these up, and that every single religious person has not been asked thousands of questions like this by anti-religious people in their life-times. Do you think millions of people are religious if religion makes no sense?

Anyways, I go to church, but I don't believe in God.

What I really wanted to say was that there are gay people that go to my church. Quite a lot actually, and they aren't 'persecuted'. People try and help them, because most Christians believe that homosexuality is brought on mentally, but they are treated the same as everybody else. Very few Christians hate gay people (mainly because they believe in loving everybody, no matter what). Only a few Christians actually HATE gay people, and then they aren't following their religion as well as they should be.

facetious
7th February 2008, 10:25 PM
We need to remember there are two homosexual divisions and we're exposed to them at different frequencies: those who are in the closet and those who are not.

Obviously, most of those who are out of the closet have no issues expressing their homosexuality. They do so in flamboyant and, at times, disturbing means. We don't need to ask if they are homosexual to know that we're spot on the money 98% of the time.

Heterosexuals look down on 'typical' homosexual behavior. The overt hand gestures, the irregular exaggeration on random words in speech, the mock punches, their dress code and the sight of seeing a homosexual run up and embrace some random guy in the street together forms a potpourri of trepidation and uneasiness for the heterosexual folk.

In contrast to most of the extroverts, you also have the closet homosexuals. It would be safe to assume that, judging from my personal experience, there are more homosexuals in the closet than not. They blend into the social norms and try to hide their 'deep dark secret' as much as possible. For the homophobes, they would never be able to take a stab at their sexuality. Closet gays learn these social norms, in part, by refusing to conform to their flamboyant and queer counterparts - even they know it's a stupid way to behave.

Case in point, the overtness of most flamboyant homosexuals encourages most of the populace to erect these vile, distasteful views that we typically see of gay people. Personally, I do not like seeing some guy dressed in skinny-leg jeans, wearing make-up, dancing like a fairy princess in the city with another guy for the sake of pissing off passersby. Nobody enjoys this. However, it's illogical to stereotype the whole gay populace when more than half of them do not act like freaks.

We only see half the picture, and it's this half that brings forth the hatred of gays that most are exposed to.

Ethan
7th February 2008, 10:40 PM
lol genuis.
Did the starter of the thread say that only the theological view on homosexuality should be discussed? No.


I believe the title of the thread is "I don't get hatred towards gays." I never implied that only the theological aspect of homosexuality should be discussed. Were talking about why people feel hatred towards them. The topic creator never said he wanted us to debate about whether it was moral from a theological or secular perspective.


Nope. I said that about everyone who says 'hate the sin not the sinner' on the particular issue, so they'll get the green light to say their bigoted views while pretending to be 'nice'.


Excuse me? I view this statement as a foul. I'm sure you have people you care about that do certian things that you don't like or appreciate, or think is wrong. Yet you still care about them. I have close friends that are gay and for you to imply that I hate them is pretty bigoted yourself. Also your making an assertion that my views are bigoted in order for you to finish the second part of your sentence. Whether you see my opinion as bigoted or not thats subjective so your argument holds no water at all.



"you don't know the history of ______, I do!"

Whatever Tom Cruise.



12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a
different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is
always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as
well as separate marriages for gays and lesbians will.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Its a different NAME. a life bond between a man and a woman is called marriage so something between a man and a man would logically be called something else. I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh when I read this. For one like I said before its the same but its called a different NAME. It is so retarded to compare that to segregation because during segregation days the schools weren't equal. What you speak of is semantics not discrimination.

Tyranny of Tyranitar
7th February 2008, 10:50 PM
there has actually been studies about gays having a different brain pattern.

http://www.narth.com/docs/scrutinized.html

I saw this study even gave its own possible situations on how it could have been cheated by its participants, how convenient. I realize there are 'studies', did I not say that before? Now, for a counter study:
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/Ch12.pdf
Ironically an off-link to the site you gave me.



call it a gene, call it psychologically, but DON'T call it a choice
choice.



so when you were say, 7-9 years old, you not only knew what homosexuality was, but you outright said to yourself that you'd be straight? in your own mind? I highly doubt it.
Yep. I highly doubt that that those who are gay are born with it, but that's an opinion, just like your doubt is.


So..you're telling me. You one day woke up and decided you were going to be straight?
Yes.


If you can remember when you chose to be straight then maybe ill consider that side.
Around the first grade. There was a pretty looking girl whom I liked, but I never got. I moved on. I chose to like her, it wasn't 'absolute destiny', like not being able to choose would be.


When i was in second grade, I found myself liking a girl. Didn't realize it until my friends pointed it out.
You chose to like a girl, but didn't realize it at first.


You know..it kinda works the same way as choosing the people you want to go out with. You can't help how you feel towards someone. If you like someone but not someone else, thats definitely not a choice
Last month, I chose to not like Hillary Clinton based on the presidential issues and chose to like John Edwards. A couple of weeks ago, I chose to like a person whom I met online more. Sounds like a choice to me.

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 10:52 PM
I highly doubt that that those who are gay are born with it,

you don't have to necessarily be born with it.


There was a pretty looking girl whom I liked, but I never got. I moved on. I chose to like her, it wasn't 'absolute destiny', like not being able to choose would be.

you didn't answer the question. you just said that you liked a girl in first grade. that's NOT the same as choosing to be straight. you were NATURALLY being straight by doing that.

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 10:55 PM
Have you people ever thought that being gay is NEITHER choice or genetics?
Jesus. Psychology has a play in sexual orientation.
But just for the record - I didn't choose to like other guys.

Cerulean21
7th February 2008, 11:09 PM
Have you people ever thought that being gay is NEITHER choice or genetics?
Jesus. Psychology has a play in sexual orientation.
But just for the record - I didn't choose to like other guys.

I totally agree with that. It's not like I woke up one day and thought: "hey, what could make my life more difficult".
It's just how it works. I fall in love with guys, so what. That doesn't make me less of a good person nor makes me a better person. It's just that I'm attracted to guys not girls. But in the end it really doesn't matter. You look for the right person out there and if you're lucky to find him/her you settle down and be happy. That what love is all about. I'm really getting tired of people saying things like "it's not how God intended it", "it's not natural", well, if it wasn't natural, then homosexuality wouldn't exist. What difference does it make that I'm gay? It says nothing about my personality and doesn't make me different from anybody else. I'm a normal young man who studies and works and is a good friend and a helpful person.
Even statements like "I support gay people", "I don't hate gay people" make me really tired. I don't see any people walking on the street carrying T-shirts that read: "I support human beings". For that's what we all are: humans. There's nothing to support in being gay for it is no political thing. The only statement that truly would be nice is: "I support gay activists who fight for the acceptance for what they are: human beings like everybody else"

Ethan
7th February 2008, 11:14 PM
Even statements like "I support gay people", "I don't hate gay people" make me really tired. I don't see any people walking on the street carrying T-shirts that read: "I support human beings". For that's what we all are: humans. There's nothing to support in being gay for it is no political thing. The only statement that truly would be nice is: "I support gay activists who fight for the acceptance for what they are: human beings like everybody else"

You want your cake and eat it too? Would you rather me be in Texas carrying picket signs outside of city hall reading in big letters "GOD HATES FAGS!"? I wouldn't think so.

Tyranny of Tyranitar
7th February 2008, 11:14 PM
you don't have to necessarily be born with it.
That's what some people are saying, like this person:
Clash (http://www.serebiiforums.com/showpost.php?p=7522503&postcount=30)

That's why I came to this debate room in the first place.



you didn't answer the question. you just said that you liked a girl in first grade. that's NOT the same as choosing to be straight. you were NATURALLY being straight by doing that.

I chose to like the girl. I could of chose to like a different girl, or a guy even. I didn't like the thought of kissing someone grimey like me and I thought this particular girl looked hot. Being older, I know what buttsex is and I don't like the idea of it at all because it's dirty (to me anyway).

Cerulean21
7th February 2008, 11:23 PM
You want your cake and eat it too? Would you rather me be in Texas carrying picket signs outside of city hall reading in big letters "GOD HATES FAGS!"? I wouldn't think so.

Did I say so? No, I don't think so. What I meant is: For God's sake stop arguing about being gay or not. It doesn't make a difference if you're gay or not. I don't remember anybody starting threads with the title: "I don't get the hatred of heterosexuals".

If you really look into it: Homosexuality and Heterosexuality are basically the same. It means that you fall in love with someone. That's all. I don't see why people are always argueing about it. I don't know any gay people who say: heterosexuality is wrong. That's what I meant that gay couples are the same as straight couples and therefore deserve the same rights, the same respect and the same acceptance.

Carlisle
7th February 2008, 11:24 PM
Did I say so? No, I don't think so. What I meant is: For God's sake stop arguing about being gay or not. It doesn't make a difference if you're gay or not. I don't remember anybody starting threads with the title: "I don't get the hatred of heterosexuals".

If you really look into it: Homosexuality and Heterosexuality are basically the same. It means that you fall in love with someone. That's all. I don't see why people are always argueing about it. I don't know any gay people who say: heterosexuality is wrong. That's what I meant that gay couples are the same as straight couples and therefore deserve the same rights, the same respect and the same acceptance.
The fact that someone cares that someone is gay is pretty sad. Or that there are arguments on it. Seriously, WHO. CARES.
"OMG U LYKE MEN IMMA MAKE A SCENE AND BE AN IDIOT AND TRY 2 FORCE MUH RELIGION IN2 DAH LAW SYSTEMZ"

Cerulean21
7th February 2008, 11:47 PM
It is sad, yes. You know, I had to hear some pretty ugly things when that whole thing came out. In my neighborhood there's a guy who wouldn't even come close to me as if it was some kind of disease and a priest who lives to blocks away told me that my illness (I suffer from major depressive disorders) was the punishment for being gay:(.

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 11:49 PM
I chose to like the girl. I could of chose to like a different girl, or a guy even. I didn't like the thought of kissing someone grimey like me

are you being honest here? you actually thought about kissing a guy when you were 6-years-old?

Tyranny of Tyranitar
7th February 2008, 11:52 PM
are you being honest here? you actually thought about kissing a guy when you were 6-years-old?

Yes.

Is there a point behind this?

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 11:54 PM
well, that is a VERY rare site to see.

I still stand behind my point, though. most children at that age don't even know what homosexuality is. neither do they choose between both that and heterosexuality (as in, thinking about it deeply).

Ethan
7th February 2008, 11:55 PM
are you being honest here? you actually thought about kissing a guy when you were 6-years-old?


You don't have to feel sexual attraction to want to be intimate with someone. If anything shes refering to puppy love more then anything else. Speaking of which if homosexuality is inborn how come we don't see homosexual behavior in children? Not a challenge to anyone I'm just curious. The claims of many when they "discovered" that they were gay range from puberty to late college years. If sexual orientation isn't a choice how come we here so much from people talking about how they "discovered" they were gay? Hmm?

EDIT: Feel free to refute/rebutt my comments but I will no longer be posting in this thread because I feel like I'm already pushing it. If I feel this thread should be closed I probably shouldn't be posting in it ^^;

GreyGoose
7th February 2008, 11:55 PM
Say nay to gay

Profesco
7th February 2008, 11:59 PM
You know, it's nice to see a lot of the posters here trying to describe love. I don't quite know what exactly it is; all I know is the biology and psychology of the emotion, and not much at that.

Attraction is caused by a number of psychological stimuli- appearance, smell, body movement, etc.- which in turn sets off many biological signals and functions that alert the mind to the feeling.

I don't think it's quite possible yet for a human to manipulate all the factors involved in his or her own psychology, and most definitely not his or her biology, so to expect that sexual attraction is consciously controlled is a big leap of faith.

That being said, for my part, it makes sexual attraction null and void when considering the better or worse qualities of any given person. But I also don't make decisions based on faith. I tend to be more practical and/or scientific.

Who knows? What works for me may not work for someone else. Even now, there's a lot of human psychology that is still left to understand.

GhostAnime
7th February 2008, 11:59 PM
You don't have to feel sexual attraction to want to be intimate with someone. If anything shes refering to puppy love more then anything else.

.. she?

and it being puppy love doesn't matter. that IS sexual attraction. sexual attraction is as simple AS puppy love.


speaking of which if homosexuality is inborn how come we don't see homosexual behavior in children? Not a challenge to anyone I'm just curious.

I honestly have no clue. it probably takes time psychologically. maybe there's something that puts you in the bias of being gay but it could also either go away depending on the environment or get stronger.

Bryloom
8th February 2008, 12:00 AM
This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Its a different NAME. a life bond between a man and a woman is called marriage so something between a man and a man would logically be called something else. I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh when I read this. For one like I said before its the same but its called a different NAME. It is so retarded to compare that to segregation because during segregation days the schools weren't equal. What you speak of is semantics not discrimination.
I have never seen my stance on gay marriage described so accurately like this.

Moreover, while I do believe that you don't have a choice to be homosexual, I do believe you have a choice whether to be a flamboyant retard about it or not.

Cerulean21
8th February 2008, 12:01 AM
Say nay to gay

Got some reasons for that statement or are you just some guy who randomly makes statements without having reasons for his opinion.

If that's all you got to say then don't post anything as this is a debate Forum --> people post their opinions and (here it comes) back it up with arguments. Seriously, we (as I think others share my opinion on that matter) don't need such statements. It's just wasting room where you have to scroll down to see what people say that actually do have something to say.

GreyGoose
8th February 2008, 12:02 AM
Serebii forums debate thread

Has no time to **** around

GreyGoose
8th February 2008, 12:09 AM
All this is is bunch of 11 year olds whining about how being gay is yucky. Then losers with no life bust in going, "GARSH, I HATE IDORTS LIKE YOU!!!1." The rant on with a paragraph of text that no one reads. Definitely doesn't merit serious discussion.

Profesco
8th February 2008, 12:14 AM
Speaking of which if homosexuality is inborn how come we don't see homosexual behavior in children? Not a challenge to anyone I'm just curious. The claims of many when they "discovered" that they were gay range from puberty to late college years. If sexual orientation isn't a choice how come we here so much from people talking about how they "discovered" they were gay?

Well, typically, the true sexual behavior of a human doesn't show up until puberty, or soon before. (Of course in the modern society, media's exhibition of romance and sexual behavior speeds it up a good deal, and certainly in the direction of heterosexuality.) At puberty, the hormones involved in sex differentiation are activated, that's why teenage girls menstruate and teenage boys have what they call "wet dreams."

Anyway, the activation starts the interest in sexual partners (horny teens!) and the true feelings of attraction are experienced.

As for early childhood behavior, their sexuality isn't yet activated, making all of their mentalities androgenous. You can see a lot of 'playing house' with boys being dads and girls being moms, but that comes from life experience- either through one's own family or some other experience like friends, school, TV, etc. When very young girls play together, they often express romantic behavior, though not intentionally, of course. Likewise, very young boys exhibit slightly romantic and sexual undertones during play, again, unintentionally.

At a young age, children are typically androgenous, neither experiencing nor understanding true sexual attraction. Thus, it's actually a very descriptive phrase to say people "discover" their sexuality- That's pretty much what does happen.

GreyGoose
8th February 2008, 12:15 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

See?

Profesco
8th February 2008, 12:30 AM
Well, yeah. That was a pretty long post. And it's probably not very interesting to most people here. Oh well.... If it gets read, it gets read. I just thought it might help out.

GhostAnime
8th February 2008, 12:34 AM
The rant on with a paragraph of text that no one reads. Definitely doesn't merit serious discussion.

actually, a typical debate post IS a paragraph of text..

GreyGoose
8th February 2008, 12:46 AM
If it was something worth debating.....

GhostAnime
8th February 2008, 12:50 AM
debate topics also include clarification.

GreyGoose
8th February 2008, 12:52 AM
Debates should also have interesting topics.

GhostAnime
8th February 2008, 12:53 AM
interest is extremely subjective and isn't the point of a debate forum entirely. if you aren't interested, don't waste a line in your post saying "LOL NOBODY CARES ABOUT THIS THEY WON'T READ."

GreyGoose
8th February 2008, 1:08 AM
A bunch of kids arguing about whether or not being gay is good or bad, isn't interesting. Not to mention it's totally opinionated.

Rave
8th February 2008, 1:14 AM
A bunch of kids arguing about whether or not being gay is good or bad, isn't interesting. Not to mention it's totally opinionated.

I also find it funny they make a big deal and argument over it.

Eszett
8th February 2008, 1:31 AM
I understand that this is a boring topic to debate. Hell, not even I want to debate it!

But, that being said, it's best to consolidate the gay debates in one thread so that these children have a place to debate. If you don't want to participate in the debate, there is no need to spam up the thread.

Consider this a warning. Should I see any off-topic discussion after this, I'm infracting you guys for spam. Do understand.

Alkaide
8th February 2008, 1:43 AM
#1: its REALLY DISGUSTING
#2: it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin. i see it as a sin AND a disease. and as a Catholic, i read the bible. So for all you gays who are going to flame me and what not now, forget it, your wasting your time becuase i wont be entering this thread again.
#3: its disgracing the other sex that God put on this earth. This is one of the many reosons why its a sin.

nuff said.

You are obviously not a true Catholic.

First of all, someone who reads the bible would know that being gay is NOT a sin, however, having gay sex is a sin. DO NOT get those mixed up.

Second, a Catholic does not discriminate others. Even if it is a sin, (which it's not) that does not give you a reason to flame them. God is forgiving, and you'll never get to heaven with hate in your heart. True Catholics would not not hate people like this.

Third, how is it disgusting? Just because it's not the normal way to do things, it's disgusting? There's no logic behind that. At all. None.

Fourth, you're NOT GIVEN THE CHOICE to decide whether to be heterosexual or homosexual. You're born with that mindset, and there's nothing you can do about it. Maybe people with that lifestyle don't want to be like that, but they can't help it, that's how their body works. Why make fun of someone for something they can't help? It's like making fun of someone who is around two inches short **me** even though they can't control their growth. It's pointless.

Though I am not gay/bi, I have freinds who are, and I don't see anything different about them, really. Once I found out it didn't automatically make them a different person. The reason why people make fun of them, I would guess, is because they're immature, and they have nothing better to do. Some people don't like them because they're afraid they're going to get raped by them...

Tyranny of Tyranitar
8th February 2008, 2:17 AM
Fourth, you're NOT GIVEN THE CHOICE to decide whether to be heterosexual or homosexual. You're born with that mindset, and there's nothing you can do about it. Maybe people with that lifestyle don't want to be like that, but they can't help it, that's how their body works. Why make fun of someone for something they can't help? It's like making fun of someone who is around two inches short **me** even though they can't control their growth. It's pointless.
Yes, they are given that choice. Like I asked in a previous post, "You have proof of the precise location inside DNA of this 'gene'?" So far, I haven't obtained a single link to such information, probably because it doesn't exist. All there seems to be are studies.
Now that I think about it, it makes me wonder where all of those advocates went that supported the Murder gene.

pokekid1
8th February 2008, 2:26 AM
at first I didn't understand the topic because you typed 'I don't get the hatred of gays'. I thought you meant you don't get hatred from people who hate gays also lol. what a funny misunderstanding.

Ridley-X4
8th February 2008, 2:30 AM
Yes, they are given that choice. Like I asked in a previous post, "You have proof of the precise location inside DNA of this 'gene'?" So far, I haven't obtained a single link to such information, probably because it doesn't exist. All there seems to be are studies.
Now that I think about it, it makes me wonder where all of those advocates went that supported the Murder gene.

If you don't believe that Homosexuality is chosen from birth, then YOU prove to us YOUR view that homosexuality IS a choice.

IIRC, there is still debate over the "nature vs. nurture" of being gay.


All this is is bunch of 11 year olds whining about how being gay is yucky. Then losers with no life bust in going, "GARSH, I HATE IDORTS LIKE YOU!!!1." The rant on with a paragraph of text that no one reads. Definitely doesn't merit serious discussion.


*slowly claps hands* Well played, Greygoose, well played.

Biechae
8th February 2008, 2:49 AM
I realy dont see what's wrong with being a homosexual. I mean i'm asexual but you don't see me complaining.

Tyranny of Tyranitar
8th February 2008, 3:01 AM
If you don't believe that Homosexuality is chosen from birth, then YOU prove to us YOUR view that homosexuality IS a choice.

IIRC, there is still debate over the "nature vs. nurture" of being gay.

An abstract on a report states that, with therapy, gays can become straight. (http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/aseb/2003/00000032/00000005/00471449)
A page that talks about a new book that came out in October 2007 that says it's a choice. (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200709/CUL20070917b.html)

As for actual proof, this is yet to be found because of this homosexual gene not being found yet. Until the actual gene is found, no one can completely assume that it is only by gene that people are homosexual, which are what people are doing here. I think absoluting the 'gay gene' theory without proof that it exists is attempting to treat it as an ailment so people feel sorry for you, which is a pretty cheap way out of moral issues.

Carlisle
8th February 2008, 3:07 AM
OMFG.
This just turned into a spam hole.
First of all, Tyranny of Tyranitar, shut up.

HAY EVERY1
I GOTZ AN IDEARZ

Maybe not ALL gay people choose to be gay! Maybe some DO! Maybe some are because of a psychological impact!

Oh, wait.
I forgot.
Individuality doesn't exist.

WHO CARES IF SOMEONE IS ATTRACTED TO SOMEONE ELSE.

LOVE IS LOVE.

Hakajin
8th February 2008, 3:32 AM
Point taken. Thing is, I never encountered someone who would see this as substance abuse and not as something extremely filthy that deserves eternal torment and divine wrath, equal to actual crimes like murder (and they quote Apostle Paul for that).

They claim they don't hate the sinner, and yet proceed to make their lives miserable, by forcing religious guilt, bigotry, ostracization and discriminatory laws.

Well, like I said, I grew up in a pretty fundamentalist environment, so I was probably exposed to more people who believe this way than you. Also, there can be differences in attitude depending upon where you live. Here are some quotes that represent what I'm talking about, though:

Excuse me? I view this statement as a foul. I'm sure you have people you care about that do certian things that you don't like or appreciate, or think is wrong. Yet you still care about them. I have close friends that are gay and for you to imply that I hate them is pretty bigoted yourself. Also your making an assertion that my views are bigoted in order for you to finish the second part of your sentence. Whether you see my opinion as bigoted or not thats subjective so your argument holds no water at all.


You are obviously not a true Catholic.

First of all, someone who reads the bible would know that being gay is NOT a sin, however, having gay sex is a sin. DO NOT get those mixed up.

Second, a Catholic does not discriminate others. Even if it is a sin, (which it's not) that does not give you a reason to flame them. God is forgiving, and you'll never get to heaven with hate in your heart. True Catholics would not not hate people like this.

Third, how is it disgusting? Just because it's not the normal way to do things, it's disgusting? There's no logic behind that. At all. None.

Fourth, you're NOT GIVEN THE CHOICE to decide whether to be heterosexual or homosexual. You're born with that mindset, and there's nothing you can do about it. Maybe people with that lifestyle don't want to be like that, but they can't help it, that's how their body works. Why make fun of someone for something they can't help? It's like making fun of someone who is around two inches short **me** even though they can't control their growth. It's pointless.

Though I am not gay/bi, I have freinds who are, and I don't see anything different about them, really. Once I found out it didn't automatically make them a different person. The reason why people make fun of them, I would guess, is because they're immature, and they have nothing better to do. Some people don't like them because they're afraid they're going to get raped by them...

It can also be hard to believe this way because you're sorta damned if you do and damned if you don't. Sometimes you feel like you're doing something wrong by believing homosexuality is wrong, but then you feel like it'd be wrong to go against those few Bible verses and change your opinion.

Anyway, as for why children typically don't display homosexual behavior, it's because adults don't allow it. The kind of sexual behavior we're talking about here is also performed more out of curiosity than out of real attraction. Most people don't start having real sexual attraction to one sex or another until puberty.

Anyway, someone said that homosexuality may not be a choice or a genetic thing, it may be psychological. This is... partially true. First of all, genetics are a huge part of the psychological field. And environment affects it, I'm sure. But it's not completely environment, either. I remember the story of Bryan/Brenda. Bryan was born a boy, but his circumcision was botched. There was a doctor, doctor Money, who saw this as his big chance to prove that gender was completely a social phenomenon. So Bryan was raised as Brenda. Dr. Money touted this experiment as a huge success, but he was covering up the truth, which was that Brenda did not feel like a girl, was ostracized by her peers, and was very unhappy. She later found out the truth and became David, but it continued to haunt him all his life. He killed himself in... 2004, was it? I'm just saying that gender (which sexual orientation is a part of) is influenced by many things, but genetics is a huge part of it. But like Carlisle said, there are individual differences, and how these factors all work together depends upon the individual.

As for finding DNA, we don't have to. We've already found that most gay male brains more closely resemble female brains than those of strait males. Not only that, it's been found that there's a correlation between how many boys are born into a family and the youngest being gay. Correlation doesn't always mean causation, of course, but some scientists think that it may be because the mother is in shorter supply of testosterone because she's had boys before.

And, Carlisle, to answer your question as to why people like to say that they support gays, I think one reason is that they want you to know where they stand. Especially if they're your friends. I mean, there's so much anti-gay sentiment, they may feel like they need to tell you that they're ok with it, just so you don't think they're not. Also, supporting a cause makes people feel good about themselves. I include myself in this statement, though not with this particular cause. But lots of people like to stick up for groups they see as oppressed. Also, I think that people are also sometimes trying to counteract all the bad messages gays get. I think they think it'll make gays feel good to know they have someone supporting them, who doesn't think they're committing a sin. You know, positive reinforcement. Though I do see how it could get... tiresome hearing it all the time.

Cerulean21
8th February 2008, 11:55 AM
I agree with Hakajin.

You can't go out and say: Homosexuality is only genetic or not. Like every other thing in human life it's dependant on three factors: genetic condition*, education** and environment***

*well, this is obvious
**this means, how you were raised, what you believe, what morals you have, etc
***and this is where you live now, how you live and what the surrounding people think

to summ it up: homosexuality depends on several factors in biology, psychology and pedagogy.

GentleArtillery
8th February 2008, 4:28 PM
If homosexuality was not a choice:

1. Would it be okay then to be a homosexual?
2. Would all people actually be straight if their sexuality was a choice?

My own opinion is that it wouldn't be wrong then either. Religion is hardly any good argument: we do have religious freedom. Unnatural? I don't think the human population would decrease too much, and if we had to be natural, then we shouldn't be sitting in front of computers. Also, is for example Christianity "natural"? Maybe I'm biased, but I had the same opinion before I realised I was bisexual (which was less than half a year ago).

Rensch
8th February 2008, 8:27 PM
Ignoring your feelings, even though they are towards the same sex, that's what I call unnatural!

Ridley-X4
8th February 2008, 8:56 PM
As for actual proof, this is yet to be found

Exactly. If you really wanted to prove it, your hypothesis would show up in NOT JUST ONE ARTICLE.

Profesco
9th February 2008, 1:52 AM
Anyway, as for why children typically don't display homosexual behavior, it's because adults don't allow it. The kind of sexual behavior we're talking about here is also performed more out of curiosity than out of real attraction. Most people don't start having real sexual attraction to one sex or another until puberty.

Young children exhibit sexually inspired behavior during play, regardless of gender. This is along the lines of two little boys wrestling, in what appears to be an intimate way, or two little girls playing family together, and kissing or some such. At this age, any sexual underscore (homo- or hetero-) applied to the behavior is only on the part of the adult observer, for the children know nothing of the concept yet. To say that homosexual behavior, specifically, is prevented by adults is a generalization of not only the adult population, but also of the many romantic-ish play situations, as homosexual.

When children are that young, they do not know yet of homo- or heterosexuality. And, the only adults who wouldn't allow "it," whatsoever "it" may be, are the ones who have a problem with it, or otherwise see the behavior as not okay. I don't suppose I need to state here that allowing the very young child exploration of his or her own body during this stage of growth is psychologically healthy.

Otherwise, your last two sentences here are perfectly true, seven ways from Sunday.

Dekk
9th February 2008, 3:17 AM
I don't think there is much more to state that hasn't been stated already, but I will say that I believe that I have nothing against homo/hetro/bisexuality. Also my mom is bisexual and has a transgendered girlfriend, though that brings up a whole new topic. I believe that any prejudice, not matter what kind, is still prejudice. I believe I am straight at this point in time and someones sexuality is partly there choice, but it is a terrible thing to supress your sexualy attraction to either sex and can be very emotionally damaging.

[aka]
9th February 2008, 7:08 AM
though possibly my only experience with a gay person is when i dyed my hair, I personally love the gays. Though as a Christian I "hate what they do", I just think they're totally fun.
I love their sense of style, the way they act (if Will & Grace has any truth about gay people, which a friend who has known gay people says it does), and probably most of all, their abnormality.

...sorry if I offended anyone, it was not my intent

RedJirachi
9th February 2008, 10:03 AM
#1: its REALLY DISGUSTING
#2: it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin. i see it as a sin AND a disease. and as a Catholic, i read the bible. So for all you gays who are going to flame me and what not now, forget it, your wasting your time becuase i wont be entering this thread again.
#3: its disgracing the other sex that God put on this earth. This is one of the many reosons why its a sin.

nuff said.

I'm pretty sure religious people just say that because they don't like that{they see it disgusting} or just are a mild extremist form.This is as controversible as Aryans being the master race

Ethan
10th February 2008, 1:04 AM
Since how Eszett has decided not to close this I guess its safe for me to post. With that said I'll present my next objection. If indeed homosexuality is not a choice take a look at what happens in maximum security prisons. These places have an all male inmate population and the majority of them are straight, in fact one reason why they are there in the first place is because they might have assaulted a woman in some way. Now when these men have been in confinement for a prolonged amount of time, they have no contact with women so some actually resort to raping their own inmates which are ofcourse the same sex. Surely you can't say they are bisexual! Granted this is due to pent up sexual frustration, but if sexuality was truely set in stone why would incidents like I have mentioned be taking place?

The_Panda
10th February 2008, 4:05 AM
Since how Eszett has decided not to close this I guess its safe for me to post. With that said I'll present my next objection. If indeed homosexuality is not a choice take a look at what happens in maximum security prisons. These places have an all male inmate population and the majority of them are straight, in fact one reason why they are there in the first place is because they might have assaulted a woman in some way. Now when these men have been in confinement for a prolonged amount of time, they have no contact with women so some actually resort to raping their own inmates which are ofcourse the same sex. Surely you can't say they are bisexual! Granted this is due to pent up sexual frustration, but if sexuality was truely set in stone why would incidents like I have mentioned be taking place?

It really comes down to how you define sexuality.

KetchupO
10th February 2008, 4:10 AM
Since how Eszett has decided not to close this I guess its safe for me to post. With that said I'll present my next objection. If indeed homosexuality is not a choice take a look at what happens in maximum security prisons. These places have an all male inmate population and the majority of them are straight, in fact one reason why they are there in the first place is because they might have assaulted a woman in some way. Now when these men have been in confinement for a prolonged amount of time, they have no contact with women so some actually resort to raping their own inmates which are ofcourse the same sex. Surely you can't say they are bisexual! Granted this is due to pent up sexual frustration, but if sexuality was truely set in stone why would incidents like I have mentioned be taking place?
So? They just got really horny :p
I know plenty of straight people that have been so 'in the moment' that they didn't even care if they did a guy or a girl as long as they got some :/

Kazekage
10th February 2008, 4:29 AM
See, kiddies, THIS is the kind of Christian that I, as an atheist, will show respect for, because honestly, most are pretty hypocritical in my eyes for this very reason -- they do not respect everyone just because they're gay, or Muslim, or female, or whatever else they might happen to be that's not a white heterosexual Christian blonde-haired-blue-eyed male.



ilu. Really I do.

Anyway.

@ Wifi Kid 11: LOL, so much for "not entering this thread again". Coming in to state your particularly ignorant opinion and then saying "I'm not coming back to hear what you have to say or debate about it" is a gigantic sign of immaturity and weakness. And that PM was lulz. Twelve? As stated before, go play outside with your friends or something instead of listening to everything your parents tell you.

I find this term age discriminative.

I'm twelve going on thirteen, and I hold nothing, NOTHING, against homosexuals, I listen to reason, and Believe in god. I'm I unintelligent, blind, should I too go outside and play in this sunshine the rest of the world so desperately needs?

As i stated before, being gay isn't a problem, Im Bisexual myself.

And I would thank you not to judge people by a number, man has given them :/

Tyranny of Tyranitar
10th February 2008, 6:28 AM
Exactly. If you really wanted to prove it, your hypothesis would show up in NOT JUST ONE ARTICLE.

Actually, I linked to two articles, three if the one to the page about the book is counted.

What I mean by the 'actual proof' is that documents often have opinions attached to them; meaning that if someone is really determined to prove something, they'll jump to a conclusion and use the data they received to fit their desires. Sure, the proper way of research is to start by not having an opinion about the issue, but when a big raise lays in front of the researcher that will be given to them if they can prove a side of an issue to be correct, most likely they'll jump for it. Also, whatever data might be found in a study could potentially be misunderstood and later data could overrule the original support. This can apply to either side of this here debate, and is why I'd prefer having the DNA evidence than 50 reports.

I can provide more links to the matter, but we both could just be wasting our times.

GhostAnime
10th February 2008, 6:48 AM
Tyranitar, what's your opinion on homosexual animals?

Tyranny of Tyranitar
10th February 2008, 9:28 AM
Tyranitar, what's your opinion on homosexual animals?

Hard to say because we don't live in their 'world'. Animals supposedly don't think logically like we people do, so would they be able to decide who they find attractive and if they can choose? Who's to know? Also, there are a big range of animals, like a field mouse and a lion; they have different environments and have different breeding habits. It would be hard to answer this question without being in their world and seeing how they view things, species by species.

IIRC, there isn't any biblical scripture against animals that perform homosexual acts, but there is scripture against animals that have sex with humans. fyi.

John Light
10th February 2008, 9:37 AM
homosexuals are attracted to their own sex

Get over it!



Hatred or discrimination of gays is just as bad as racial or sexual abuse, and people only dislike them because they are different. Myself, I treat gays as if they were heterosexual.

ReallyOcean
10th February 2008, 9:50 AM
Here's a list of whys for you, but I'm not saying I agree with all of them:

1. We have 2 genders for a reason... although we are over doing that...

I'm sick of people using this argument. Using this logic, straight people who don't want to have kids or can't are just as bad as gay people. The same argument could be used to argue FOR gay marriage. If there is a heterosexual marriage couple who doesn't have kids, doesn't want to, or can't, what's the point of arguing the fact that because a gay couple can't have kids (leaving adoption completely out of the argument, because that's something religious folk seem to forget sometimes) they should not marry.

2. A lot of the hate is religious, but don't confuse 'I hate what you do' with 'I hate you'.

Oh, religion. The only good reason for human extincion. Although I suppose that might give it another chance. Giving it time, Science should have my back on this.

3. A lot of straight people get hit on by homo/bisexuals, and it's a really unpleasent experiance. Expecially if there's 2 people asking at the same time...

Did you actually include this? No, couldn't possibly. Skipping so I don't have to type out a hundred ways to say "cry me a river". Seriously, if this affects you and you use it next to "religion says down with gays rawr!!", there's a problem.

4. Marriage is a contract between a man, a woman, and their community, defining who may sleep with who. If gays want a union they should come up with another name, becuase that's what a lot of the stress is about, the use of the term marriage.

Some of the argument is above. If you get down to what marriage is in actuallity, it's nothing more than a binding of two people who happen to love eachother along with some financial ties. But this certainly couldn't exist with two people of the same sex!

5. People are scared of others because they are diffrent...

We call these people republicans.

ohhhh, no no. Just kidding. But yeah I agree.


krankenhaus

Death dealer
10th February 2008, 1:22 PM
Since how Eszett has decided not to close this I guess its safe for me to post. With that said I'll present my next objection. If indeed homosexuality is not a choice take a look at what happens in maximum security prisons. These places have an all male inmate population and the majority of them are straight, in fact one reason why they are there in the first place is because they might have assaulted a woman in some way. Now when these men have been in confinement for a prolonged amount of time, they have no contact with women so some actually resort to raping their own inmates which are ofcourse the same sex. Surely you can't say they are bisexual! Granted this is due to pent up sexual frustration, but if sexuality was truely set in stone why would incidents like I have mentioned be taking place?

If I was going on to defend the idea that people have sexual orientations, I would say that this does not actually prove the men were homosexual. They could simply be sexually frustrated heterosexuals. It would not be changing their sexual orientation, they would just be having sex in a different manner to what they would normally, since their prefered form of sexual behaviour is denied.
I am not going to dogmatically defend the sexual orientation idea though, just making an argument for those who do.

Xweek
10th February 2008, 2:24 PM
Personally, I'm less outspoken about by the Homo-Hetero argument and more about the bible.

In a nutshell, it's a story book. A story book which people choose to centre their lives around, but a story book none the less.

Keep in mind this book was written around 1500-2000 years ago, much too modern for an account of the earliest events. All that is written in there is what one man or one group think. Besides, it's had so many re-writings, it's hard for me to take seriously. Did you know the earliest version actually said that Jews were the dominant race and that others should be killed if they weren't Jews? That add SO much credibility, doesn't it?

Ethan
10th February 2008, 8:29 PM
If I was going on to defend the idea that people have sexual orientations, I would say that this does not actually prove the men were homosexual. They could simply be sexually frustrated heterosexuals. It would not be changing their sexual orientation, they would just be having sex in a different manner to what they would normally, since their prefered form of sexual behaviour is denied.
I am not going to dogmatically defend the sexual orientation idea though, just making an argument for those who do.

Yes I realize they are sexually frustrated, but my point was that in certian situations like I have mentioned humans are able to compromise. These inmates were able to get sexual relief from men when they realized they couldn't get that from women. Surely this would arouse some suspicion?

The_Panda
10th February 2008, 8:58 PM
Yes I realize they are sexually frustrated, but my point was that in certian situations like I have mentioned humans are able to compromise. These inmates were able to get sexual relief from men when they realized they couldn't get that from women. Surely this would arouse some suspicion?

May I point out that the vast majority of straight men who have gay sex for one reason or another do get sexual pleasure from it.

magnemiteZ
10th February 2008, 9:16 PM
May I point out that the vast majority of straight men who have gay sex for one reason or another do get sexual pleasure from it.
Males get sexual pleasure from everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hakajin
10th February 2008, 10:18 PM
Young children exhibit sexually inspired behavior during play, regardless of gender. This is along the lines of two little boys wrestling, in what appears to be an intimate way, or two little girls playing family together, and kissing or some such. At this age, any sexual underscore (homo- or hetero-) applied to the behavior is only on the part of the adult observer, for the children know nothing of the concept yet. To say that homosexual behavior, specifically, is prevented by adults is a generalization of not only the adult population, but also of the many romantic-ish play situations, as homosexual.

When children are that young, they do not know yet of homo- or heterosexuality. And, the only adults who wouldn't allow "it," whatsoever "it" may be, are the ones who have a problem with it, or otherwise see the behavior as not okay. I don't suppose I need to state here that allowing the very young child exploration of his or her own body during this stage of growth is psychologically healthy.

Otherwise, your last two sentences here are perfectly true, seven ways from Sunday.

I've heard these theories, but I don't know if I believe them. Sounds too reminiscent of Freud to me... Besides, it doesn't take into account things like immitation of adults and media. Boys also tend to be more aggressive anyway, and I don't agree with this sex=aggression thing.


In a nutshell, it's a story book. A story book which people choose to centre their lives around, but a story book none the less.

Keep in mind this book was written around 1500-2000 years ago, much too modern for an account of the earliest events. All that is written in there is what one man or one group think. Besides, it's had so many re-writings, it's hard for me to take seriously. Did you know the earliest version actually said that Jews were the dominant race and that others should be killed if they weren't Jews? That add SO much credibility, doesn't it?

Sorry, I just have to say something about this. First of all, the Old Testament is pretty much a history of the Jews. They tried to justify their wars, so they used God to do it. As for the translation issues, people still study the original texts and write about it all the time. What I find is that while the Bible contains mostly truth (especially the new Testament), sometimes prejudices make their way in. You have to use your brain and your own gut sometimes. The important things come through clear though. Sometimes they find differences in translation, but in my experience, these usually make the Bible more credible, not less, because they tend to present less narrow-minded ideas. Finally, while the Bible is old, it's still relevent because people don't change. Technology does, but that just means we're doing the same old things in different ways.

Anyway, homosexuality is when you prefer your own sex. It doesn't mean you can't enjoy any other kind of sex, but you're primarily attracted to only one.

Hyper Chibi Absol
10th February 2008, 11:08 PM
I don't understand either. I'm of a Christain family (the bible-humping kind). I'm the only one in my family who seems to see that there's nothing wrong with being homosexual.

It's a choice of love, which BTW this is what God tells us all to do. He EVEN says to love your enemy even if you want to slice them open and sell their guts on eBay.

My mom says otherwise. She thinks that being homosexual is having a 'mental illness'!!!

Let me run that again...

A Mental Illness!!

She's the person who believes that we were only put on this earth was to breed and die. Similar to a fly. If one were to die, no one would care.

I think that's just barbaric. We humans can offer this world much more if we actually tried. We're more than just animals, we're beings that can make choices to save the world. In this case, save the population with adoption.

Sorry if it sounds like I'm ranting, but... that's how I feel.

Profesco
11th February 2008, 1:31 AM
I've heard these theories, but I don't know if I believe them. Sounds too reminiscent of Freud to me... Besides, it doesn't take into account things like immitation of adults and media. Boys also tend to be more aggressive anyway, and I don't agree with this sex=aggression thing.

Yeah, I did sound a little Fruedian. Anyway, there are some points I was making, psychology aside. From a biological perspective, even, children around the ages of 2-6 (if I recall correctly) play with their bodies, discovering the places that elicit more exciting feelings, so to speak. There can be feelings of arousal, even at that agespan. Did you know toddler girls can masturbate? I was shocked to learn that...

This, of course, is not to assign any specific sexuality to the behavior- just the opposite. Since there is no concept of sexual orientation yet, there is no 'choice' or 'preference' involved in play where this behavior may occur. Again, this play behavior can occur across and within gender lines.

On the aggression front: it's due to testosterone. Testosterone is the hormone associated with assertiveness/aggression/et cetera. Boys of course have more of it than girls. If not proof of a relation between sex and aggression for you, it's certainly a reasonable correlation between the two.


Anyway, homosexuality is when you prefer your own sex. It doesn't mean you can't enjoy any other kind of sex, but you're primarily attracted to only one.

I guess this was for Babylon. On top of this, we can look at what humans do in stress situations. Fear, depression, anger, et cetera all can cause people to change their mind, submit to others, exhibit new behaviors, blah blah blah. I'd really rather not start telling the old stories about moms lifting cars off their children. Even money is enough to persuade people to act wildly out of their normal behavior. The prison scenario is no great cause for suspicion.


I'm of a Christain family (the bible-humping kind).

I think you meant "bible-thumping."
*snickers*

Arceus Master
11th February 2008, 2:11 AM
I have nothing againest gays. It may be a sin in Chritianality. People probally hate gays because they're different. I know some gay people in my school but I'm cool with them. I just wonder where the word, "gay" came into use of saying something like, "that's gay," when something you hear, see, or do happens that you don't like. People can't really help being gay. You're born with it and you can't help it. How it happens, I'm not sure. My grandmother thinks it has to do with some flaw in reincarnation but I'm not sure. If you like them, that's good. If you discrimagate againest them, well then, that's your problem.

Hakajin
11th February 2008, 3:11 AM
Yeah, I did sound a little Fruedian. Anyway, there are some points I was making, psychology aside. From a biological perspective, even, children around the ages of 2-6 (if I recall correctly) play with their bodies, discovering the places that elicit more exciting feelings, so to speak. There can be feelings of arousal, even at that agespan. Did you know toddler girls can masturbate? I was shocked to learn that...

This, of course, is not to assign any specific sexuality to the behavior- just the opposite. Since there is no concept of sexual orientation yet, there is no 'choice' or 'preference' involved in play where this behavior may occur. Again, this play behavior can occur across and within gender lines.

On the aggression front: it's due to testosterone. Testosterone is the hormone associated with assertiveness/aggression/et cetera. Boys of course have more of it than girls. If not proof of a relation between sex and aggression for you, it's certainly a reasonable correlation between the two.

I don't disagree with the first point at all. Young children are definitely able to be aroused. I'm just arguing that their play isn't necessarily driven by sexuality.

Well, testosterone is involved with aggression and sex, and while I think aggression does accompany male sexuality, I don't think that means that all male aggression has a sexual basis. I'm not so sure how much of a role testosterone plays in arousal. Mostly what I know about it are its roles in giving a fetus male anatomy, puberty (including spermatogenesis, bone and muscle growth, hair growth, etc.), and in aggressive behaviors.

The_Panda
11th February 2008, 8:06 AM
Males get sexual pleasure from everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No, that's just you.

Death dealer
11th February 2008, 6:02 PM
Yes I realize they are sexually frustrated, but my point was that in certian situations like I have mentioned humans are able to compromise. These inmates were able to get sexual relief from men when they realized they couldn't get that from women. Surely this would arouse some suspicion?

Yes, but what is stopping them from being heterosexual men who find sexual enjoyment in other men? It dosn't actually mean they have to be attracted to these other men. They could also be doing it out of a way to hurt and shame members of an out group. To put such behaviour down all to genuine sexual attraction seems naive. However, then you could simply question whether there is a "genuine sexual attraction" in the first place.


Testosterone is the hormone associated with assertiveness/aggression/et cetera. Boys of course have more of it than girls.

Not if you're a spotted hyena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotted_Hyena).

GentleArtillery
11th February 2008, 6:36 PM
When it comes to Christianity and homosexuality. (http://www.zeldauniverse.net/forums/1941709-post48.html)

Use the Bible to prove that homosexuality is wrong?

Tyranny of Tyranitar
11th February 2008, 8:43 PM
When it comes to Christianity and homosexuality. (http://www.zeldauniverse.net/forums/1941709-post48.html)

Use the Bible to prove that homosexuality is wrong?

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+6% 3A9-10&version1=31)

One verse I found supporting a New Testament view, for those debating on this cause (I'm undecided if I should join).

GhostAnime
11th February 2008, 9:14 PM
so, Tyranitar, if being homosexual is strictly choice, how do the animals deal with the choice?

Death dealer
11th February 2008, 9:17 PM
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=1+Corinthians+6% 3A9-10&version1=31)

One verse I found supporting a New Testament view, for those debating on this cause (I'm undecided if I should join).

I find it quite interesting that you could in fact interpret it to mean that only certain forms of homosexual behaviour are prohibited.


"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (Leviticus 18:22)

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)

Surely, if it only intends to prohibit males from lying with other males as they would do with a woman, homosexuality is not banned in itself. Mutual masturbation concerning two males is not something that could be replicated with a male and a female, and would therefore not be prohibited.

Tyranny of Tyranitar
11th February 2008, 9:26 PM
so, Tyranitar, if being homosexual is strictly choice, how do the animals deal with the choice?

http://www.serebiiforums.com/showpost.php?p=7534253&postcount=135

I am having second thoughts about it being pure choice, but I wouldn't completely rule it out.


Surely, if it only intends to prohibit males from lying with other males as they would do with a woman, homosexuality is not banned in itself. Mutual masturbation concerning two males is not something that could be replicated with a male and a female, and would therefore not be prohibited.

Good point.

Ethan
11th February 2008, 10:52 PM
Yes, but what is stopping them from being heterosexual men who find sexual enjoyment in other men?

Because that sentence is completely oxymoronic.


It doesn't actually mean they have to be attracted to these other men. They could also be doing it out of a way to hurt and shame members of an out group. To put such behaviour down all to genuine sexual attraction seems naive. However, then you could simply question whether there is a "genuine sexual attraction" in the first place.

Then tell me how do you get sexual satisfaction from something your not sexually attracted to? Hmm?


Good point.

lol.



Surely, if it only intends to prohibit males from lying with other males as they would do with a woman, homosexuality is not banned in itself. Mutual masturbation concerning two males is not something that could be replicated with a male and a female, and would therefore not be prohibited.

Heres the part where you have to use your brain. Does Leviticus really need to go down the list of all possible sexual acts that a man can perform and tell which are forbidden and which are not? No they certianly do not. You need to read imbetween the lines. When Leviticus says "Like one lies with a woman" they are using that to paint a picture so people know exactly what they mean. Your case is similar to a mother saying to her child "Okay Johnny you can't cross that bridge" then Johnny says to himself "Oh, but she never siad I couldn't go around it." That's where your argument fails.


@GentleArtillery: your link did not work for me. I assume that your argument is that the scriptures do not condemn homosexuality. Can you provide an alternative link?

Josiah
12th February 2008, 2:01 AM
Then tell me how do you get sexual satisfaction from something your not sexually attracted to? Hmm?One could say they got satisfaction from their hand(as in masturbation), but that doesn't mean they are attracted to it. Maybe they don't imagine it being a man while they are having sex with them in a jail.

Profesco
12th February 2008, 4:25 AM
Then tell me how do you get sexual satisfaction from something your not sexually attracted to? Hmm?

That's very easy to accomplish. It's so... awkward... to talk about things like... morning erections... and other movements and things that... begin the process... Anyway, blindfold a man and have anyone with hands perform masturbation on him, and he will become aroused. It's not always just about attraction.

Eughh...

Cool_Trainer_Tyrone
12th February 2008, 10:33 AM
#1: its REALLY DISGUSTING
#2: it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin. i see it as a sin AND a disease. and as a Catholic, i read the bible. So for all you gays who are going to flame me and what not now, forget it, your wasting your time becuase i wont be entering this thread again.
#3: its disgracing the other sex that God put on this earth. This is one of the many reosons why its a sin.

nuff said.
hahahaah well, well, its a sin in the bible to be gay what a load of ****!!!to all you cathlic extremust out there must allso know that killing is a sin too, but it didnt stop you guys killing lots of inacent pagens in the 12 to 16 centry or so.

GhostAnime
12th February 2008, 12:12 PM
One could say they got satisfaction from their hand(as in masturbation),

the thing here is that they're attracted to their brain, not their hand.

and in their brain is what sexually attracts them.

Maxim
12th February 2008, 3:45 PM
Why?

Because there is no hatred of gays at all! The people are defending them like they were gods. In Britain you may end up in the jail for several years for being homophobic. While the REAL evildoers are living and free as a horse...

In countries like Spain, Sweden or The Nederlands the gays can legally adopt children. The definition of "family" in these countries is already ****ed up. The real family consists of mother, father and children. The relationship of 5 gays, 3 lesbians and children is not a family.

The whole thing about "homophobia" is a plain HUMBUG. The gays have bigger rights than straights have. At least in some countries.

Being overly tolerant is also wrong!

When you give someone big rights and privileges, he will ALWAYS want more. The people have never enough of freedom. And when one can do something, the other one also wants to. That's how the watergate opens. It's a process which most of you have no idea of. If the gay marriages will be globally accepted and they can adopt children, there will be no real families in future. The humanity will REGRET that. I can see the future, but most of you don't. Does anyone here care for the future and future families? I don't see anyone... That's why the people will destroy themselves.

You wanted a non-religious opinion against homosexuality. So now, you have one. Constructive and purely political.

GentleArtillery
12th February 2008, 6:05 PM
@GentleArtillery: your link did not work for me. I assume that your argument is that the scriptures do not condemn homosexuality. Can you provide an alternative link?

http://www.zeldauniverse.net/forums/internet-serious-business/73904-what-s-wrong-homosexuality-2.html Post #48.


Why?

Because there is no hatred of gays at all! The people are defending them like they were gods. In Britain you may end up in the jail for several years for being homophobic. While the REAL evildoers are living and free as a horse... What evildoers do you mean? Murderers, etc?

In countries like Spain, Sweden or The Nederlands the gays can legally adopt children. The definition of "family" in these countries is already ****ed up. The real family consists of mother, father and children. The relationship of 5 gays, 3 lesbians and children is not a family. So. Why must everyone follow your idea of a "real" family? And seriously. Is the relationship of 5 heterosexual men and 3 heterosexual women with children living together a family? Silly. Usually, they are two. Two.

The whole thing about "homophobia" is a plain HUMBUG. The gays have bigger rights than straights have. At least in some countries. Not really. Gays cannot marry in church in most countries, there are fewer rights and so on...

Being overly tolerant is also wrong! ...

When you give someone big rights and privileges, he will ALWAYS want more. So we can't let x group have the same rights as other people, because they POSSIBLY will want more? The people have never enough of freedom. And when one can do something, the other one also wants to. That's how the watergate opens. It's a process which most of you have no idea of. If the gay marriages will be globally accepted and they can adopt children, there will be no real families in future. The humanity will REGRET that. I can see the future, but most of you don't. Does anyone here care for the future and future families? I don't see anyone... That's why the people will destroy themselves. Yeah, everyone will become homosexual if gay marriage and adoption is allowed.

You wanted a non-religious opinion against homosexuality. So now, you have one. Constructive and purely political. But illogical.

Death dealer
12th February 2008, 6:27 PM
Because that sentence is completely oxymoronic.



Then tell me how do you get sexual satisfaction from something your not sexually attracted to? Hmm?

A man does not need to be homosexual to get sexual pleasure out of having sex. It would be similar to masturbation, except perhaps fulfilling other desires, like the will to dominate others. I hardly think most sex like this that occurs in prisons is consentual.


lol.

Lol.



Heres the part where you have to use your brain. Does Leviticus really need to go down the list of all possible sexual acts that a man can perform and tell which are forbidden and which are not? No they certianly do not. You need to read imbetween the lines. When Leviticus says "Like one lies with a woman" they are using that to paint a picture so people know exactly what they mean. Your case is similar to a mother saying to her child "Okay Johnny you can't cross that bridge" then Johnny says to himself "Oh, but she never siad I couldn't go around it." That's where your argument fails.

Read between the lines? Whose idea of what lies between those lines is correct then?
I thought you were supposed to be able to get all knowlege about the world from the bible, and nothing from anywhere else, according to biblical literalists of course. If we accept the idea that it condemns mutual masturbation between two men then why not accept that "love thy neighbour" means tolerate gay sex?

blasters49
12th February 2008, 6:42 PM
Ok on this issue i'm stuck in the middle.
I don't OPPOSE gays or SUPPORT gays. Also i KNOW their people but..... i think mrrage should always between a man & woman if Gays are allowed to marry what about Brothers and sisters ? Should they be allowed to marry ? What about Uncle and neice ? Or Aunt and nephew? Or parent and child ? Etc..... It will cause a giantic contervosey and i think family love (seaxully ) Is WRONG no 2 family bloods can marry each other (sister & brother etc...) It's wrong... And also i don' t support gay marrige but i do support those unions(civic ?) their people but.... they will bring a big burden along with them ......

Maxim
12th February 2008, 7:04 PM
So. Why must everyone follow your idea of a "real" family? And seriously. Is the relationship of 5 heterosexual men and 3 heterosexual women with children living together a family? Silly. Usually, they are two. Two.

Uh, so the real family being mother, father and children is only my view? So, the generic family is NOT mother, father and children, right? The generic family consist of two men and a son they **** every day? That's the real family. So, I guess my definition of family was wrong. Oh well...

Then thanks me for teaching me what is family. From now, I'll always be saying that the real and generic family consist of two gays... Thanks for enlightening me.

I FINALLY KNOW WHAT DOES "FAMILY" MEAN!

Ethan
12th February 2008, 7:37 PM
A man does not need to be homosexual to get sexual pleasure out of having sex. It would be similar to masturbation, except perhaps fulfilling other desires, like the will to dominate others. I hardly think most sex like this that occurs in prisons is consentual.

You just repeated yourself here. Does it necessarily need to be consensual?




Lol.

Curse my poor grammar.


Read between the lines? Whose idea of what lies between those lines is correct then?

You were taking things at face value. So why propose the question?


I thought you were supposed to be able to get all knowlege about the world from the bible, and nothing from anywhere else, according to biblical literalists of course.

Where did you get that idea? Even the most hardcore evangelicals acknowledge that not all answers are in the bible. I doubt the new testament will teach you about qauntum physics...


If we accept the idea that it condemns mutual masturbation between two men then why not accept that "love thy neighbour" means tolerate gay sex?

Because the entire meaning of love is to overlook what they do and still care about them. It doesn't mean you have to accept what they do as moral.

The_Panda
12th February 2008, 8:41 PM
In countries like Spain, Sweden or The Nederlands the gays can legally adopt children. The definition of "family" in these countries is already ****ed up. The real family consists of mother, father and children. The relationship of 5 gays, 3 lesbians and children is not a family.

Define family. And what about families with divorced parents or one or both parents that are dead? I always thought there were several types of family, with your idea being the most common one (or as we call it the"nuclear" family). The point is although there is a "generic family", not everyone conforms to it and we definitely shouldn't force people to conform to it.


The whole thing about "homophobia" is a plain HUMBUG. The gays have bigger rights than straights have. At least in some countries.

I highly doubt this about statement. Care to try support it? And homophobia is just wrong. Homosexuality doesn't harm you or anyone any more than heterosexuality does. Why the **** do homophobes like you even care? What two people do together and who they want to love is entirely their own business as long as both are at liberty. Yes that's right, it's not your business it's theirs, nosy.


When you give someone big rights and privileges, he will ALWAYS want more. The people have never enough of freedom. And when one can do something, the other one also wants to. That's how the watergate opens. It's a process which most of you have no idea of. If the gay marriages will be globally accepted and they can adopt children, there will be no real families in future. The humanity will REGRET that. I can see the future, but most of you don't. Does anyone here care for the future and future families? I don't see anyone... That's why the people will destroy themselves.

You wanted a non-religious opinion against homosexuality. So now, you have one. Constructive and purely political.

ROFL. I think you should know the "slippery slope" argument is a fallacy. Because at the moment I see no logical link between gay marriage and adoptions and the end of your concept of a family. What about those countries which have gay marriage and civil unions? I still see nuclear families there!


Uh, so the real family being mother, father and children is only my view? So, the generic family is NOT mother, father and children, right? The generic family consist of two men and a son they **** every day? That's the real family. So, I guess my definition of family was wrong. Oh well...

Just because the generic family is x, doesn't mean y is wrong. You shouldn't force people to conform - that's just horrible.

As with every other extremely bigoted thing you post you are making a vast generalisation. The vast majority of homosexuals are loving, caring, and would absolutely detest the idea of child molestation. It is even a well known fact that over twice as many paedophiles are heterosexual than they are homosexual when it comes to their behaviour with other adults. It's disgusting to think that homosexual parents have sexual intercourse with their children - it only shows exactly how far your extremely bigoted views go.

Profesco
12th February 2008, 9:07 PM
Because there is no hatred of gays at all!

Well, your entire post came off as a bit... furious. Both did, actually. Unfortunately, there are people out there who hate homosexuals. They're not that hard to find, either.

Maxim
12th February 2008, 10:15 PM
ROFL. I think you should know the "slippery slope" argument is a fallacy. Because at the moment I see no logical link between gay marriage and adoptions and the end of your concept of a family. What about those countries which have gay marriage and civil unions? I still see nuclear families there!

Then what about it:

When the gay marriages are legalized, then:

The Paedophiles will want to legalize paedophilia (which means, not being punished for it) or even the underage marriages.

The Polygamists will want to legalise polygamy
The FFs (which stands for family fu(ker) will want to legalize incest and in-family marriages

It will be just a watergate for other, HARMFUL perversions. And it's one of the reasons why gay marriages should not be legalized. They don't only deny the definition of family, they also open a gate for other perverts.

I don't see why people see my opinions as homophobic. I'm just trying to defend the old and (possibly) eternal rights. Something which can't be harmed by a bunch of gays... That's the peace which was unharmed since long ages and now the people want to deny it. It's just a proof that the world is coming in the wrong way... It's not the same place as before.

GhostAnime
12th February 2008, 10:19 PM
* The Paedophiles will want to legalize paedophilia (which means, not being punished for it) or even the underage marriages.

not happening. there's no reason for a child to marry an adult when the child hasn't even finished school. they can fight but nobody will listen to them.


* The Polygamists will want to legalise polygamy

not exactly a bad thing I suppose.


* The FFs (which stands for family fu(ker) will want to legalize incest and in-family marriages

incest is at least proven to be detrimental so no, not happening.

Carlisle
12th February 2008, 10:50 PM
My god. This is idiocy.

YES! OF COURSE PEDOPHILES WILL WANT TO MARRY CHILDREN! Because I'm SO sure hoards of people will come out and say "YES! I'M sexually attracted to children and want to marry them!" Yeahhhhhh. That is SO happening. Plus the fact there is NOTHING connected with sexual attraction to the same sex and sexual attraction of children.

Two, there is nothing wrong with polygamy. It should be legalized.

Incest is OK as long as reproduction is not a side effect.

HUMAN RIGHTS BE DAMNED! KEEP EVERYTHING THE SAME! Lets illegalize divorce, interracial marriage, and make women property again!

Idiot.

GhostAnime
12th February 2008, 10:54 PM
to go further with that point, if one of your arguments are simply "those crazy people will want to marry their dogs" or something of that nature, then consider the fact that marriage is like, 50% divorce.

Death dealer
12th February 2008, 10:54 PM
You just repeated yourself here. Does it necessarily need to be consensual?

I may have been repeating myself, but that was because you put forward a question that I had to answer, and what I said there happened to be something I had said before.

No, it dosn't need to be consensual for either man to experience sexual pleasure. I was saying that much of the sex that goes on in prisons is probably non consensual to back up the idea that many of these rapists want the power over their victim and the want to shame them, in addition to or instead of for sexual pleasure.


You were taking things at face value. So why propose the question?

???


Where did you get that idea? Even the most hardcore evangelicals acknowledge that not all answers are in the bible. I doubt the new testament will teach you about qauntum physics...

I thought that was what some people believed. I am sure at least one person promoted this view that I have heard of.


Because the entire meaning of love is to overlook what they do and still care about them. It doesn't mean you have to accept what they do as moral.

Why does "love thy neighbour" not mean "have sexual relationships with your neighbour"? If we strip all the cultural ideals which have been linked to the messages supposedly condemning homosexuality in itself, and are left with supposedly the unadultured word of God, then I can't see why it does not imply only the message I attributed to it.


Then what about it:

When the gay marriages are legalized, then:

The Paedophiles will want to legalize paedophilia (which means, not being punished for it) or even the underage marriages.
The Polygamists will want to legalise polygamy
The FFs (which stands for family fu(ker) will want to legalize incest and in-family marriages

It will be just a watergate for other, HARMFUL perversions. And it's one of the reasons why gay marriages should not be legalized. They don't only deny the definition of family, they also open a gate for other perverts.


Do you even understand the idea of two consenting adults having the same legal rights whether they are heterosexual or homosexual?

Pedos and Polygamists want to legalise their behaviour and wants regardless of the legality of gay marriage, and legalizing gay marriage does not automatically mean that we must legalize all other "perversions".

It seems you can only think in terms of "Heterosexual good, anything else nasty" and using the appeal to disgust to lump homosexuality with sexual beliefs and orientations that are in fact harmful. The idea of consenting adults really does fly out of the window.

Carlisle
12th February 2008, 10:59 PM
to go further with that point, if one of your arguments are simply "those crazy people will want to marry their dogs" or something of that nature, then consider the fact that marriage is like, 50% divorce.

Brittney Spears' one day marriage also really helps their point, too! Not to mention that 60% of second marriages fail!

Profesco
12th February 2008, 11:51 PM
When the gay marriages are legalized, then:

The Paedophiles will want to legalize paedophilia (which means, not being punished for it) or even the underage marriages.

The phrase "two consenting adults" comes to mind.


The Polygamists will want to legalise polygamy

Well, if everyone involved consents, I can't think of any problems...


The FFs (which stands for family fu(ker) will want to legalize incest and in-family marriages

Genetic defects and other detrimental psychological side effects rule this one out.

Hakajin
13th February 2008, 2:23 AM
Ok on this issue i'm stuck in the middle.
I don't OPPOSE gays or SUPPORT gays. Also i KNOW their people but..... i think mrrage should always between a man & woman if Gays are allowed to marry what about Brothers and sisters ? Should they be allowed to marry ? What about Uncle and neice ? Or Aunt and nephew? Or parent and child ? Etc..... It will cause a giantic contervosey and i think family love (seaxully ) Is WRONG no 2 family bloods can marry each other (sister & brother etc...) It's wrong... And also i don' t support gay marrige but i do support those unions(civic ?) their people but.... they will bring a big burden along with them ......

Incest is a problem because it frequently produces children with mental and other disabilities due to the similarity of the parents' genes. This isn't a problem with homosexuality though, because they can't have children of their own.


As with every other extremely bigoted thing you post you are making a vast generalisation. The vast majority of homosexuals are loving, caring, and would absolutely detest the idea of child molestation. It is even a well known fact that over twice as many paedophiles are heterosexual than they are homosexual when it comes to their behaviour with other adults. It's disgusting to think that homosexual parents have sexual intercourse with their children - it only shows exactly how far your extremely bigoted views go.

In fact, we learned in Psych of Sexual Behavior that heterosexual men are actually more likely to be child molesters.


Read between the lines? Whose idea of what lies between those lines is correct then?
I thought you were supposed to be able to get all knowlege about the world from the bible, and nothing from anywhere else, according to biblical literalists of course. If we accept the idea that it condemns mutual masturbation between two men then why not accept that "love thy neighbour" means tolerate gay sex?

But on the other hand, loving someone and tolerating their behavior are two different things. I think a lot of people who believe homosexuality is wrong are loving toward the people, they just don't accept the behavior. I don't believe this way, but I understand how it goes.


Why does "love thy neighbour" not mean "have sexual relationships with your neighbour"? If we strip all the cultural ideals which have been linked to the messages supposedly condemning homosexuality in itself, and are left with supposedly the unadultured word of God, then I can't see why it does not imply only the message I attributed to it.

Because love doesn't necessarily entail sex. That's only in a romantic relationship. There's also family love and friendship. I don't think homosexuality is wrong, but love definitely does not always equal sex.

Josiah
13th February 2008, 2:25 AM
the thing here is that they're attracted to their brain, not their hand.

and in their brain is what sexually attracts them.They could do the same thing with the guy in jail. They don't have to imagine it being a guy.

The polygamy thing- maybe a problem would be huge alimony if all the wifes hated the man and divorced him, but I can't think of much else.

Also, does anyone have information on when divorce rates began to rise?

itsme
13th February 2008, 2:41 AM
omg, people who says gays are wrong, should get their head fixed.

First of all, those people who says gays are wrong, because of what they learn from their religion, are dumb shi*s. They are saying what the gay people believe is right, is wrong. If they deny homosexuality to gay people, they are also denying other races of their religions. And if they say only gays, then they are f***ing unfair and prejudice.

Second, those people who say gay people are wrong, because of influence from others, are just gullible dumb sh*ts. Other people do not control what you think. If other people around them think gays are wrong, it is not mandatory for them to think gays are wrong also. You do not want to be friends with people who unjustly claims certain people are wrong, or does not accept certain people. Those who unjustly claims gay people are wrong, has weak reasoning and logical thinking skills. They only see what others see.

"L"
13th February 2008, 3:09 AM
omg, people who says gays are wrong, should get their head fixed.

First of all, those people who says gays are wrong, because of what they learn from their religion, are dumb shi*s. They are saying what the gay people believe is right, is wrong. If they deny homosexuality to gay people, they are also denying other races of their religions. And if they say only gays, then they are f***ing unfair and prejudice.

Second, those people who say gay people are wrong, because of influence from others, are just gullible dumb sh*ts. Other people do not control what you think. If other people around them think gays are wrong, it is not mandatory for them to think gays are wrong also. You do not want to be friends with people who unjustly claims certain people are wrong, or does not accept certain people. Those who unjustly claims gay people are wrong, has weak reasoning and logical thinking skills. They only see what others see.

I don't see how your reaction to their bigotry is any better.

Just as it is not people's fault for their own sexuality, it is not their fault for their acting this way. They have these preconcieved notions due to how they were raised and the environment they lived in. They weren't born saying "Gays are wrong" nor were they born thinking that. It was most likely picked up from their parents and the kind of environment they lived in.

People who are more accepting of others were likely raised that way, or lived in an environment where being gay is not taboo, thus have no problems with it. However, these very same people are raised to learn to hate, or dissociate themselves from those with these prejudice attitudes. This causes them to have prejudice attitudes against those people aswell, as seen in your very own post.

I really hope you people realise that I am not siding with those who bash gays, but I do not condone with your attitudes towards these people either.


Originally Posted by Maxim
In countries like Spain, Sweden or The Nederlands the gays can legally adopt children. The definition of "family" in these countries is already ****ed up. The real family consists of mother, father and children. The relationship of 5 gays, 3 lesbians and children is not a family.

This reminds me of the parable of Wise old King Solomon. Two women come to him claiming that they are the mother of this one child. They argue and argue, and since neither would give in, Solomon had a solution. Since both claim that the child is theirs, it will be cut in two so that both would have equal parts. The first woman whole heartedly agrees, while the second woman, horrified by what is said, decides to let the first woman have the child in order to save it’s life. Through her actions, King Solomon concludes that she is the true mother, and hands the baby to her.

Now does this mean that the second woman was the biological mother? No. As we know, back then, only a male child can inherit the property, and by having this male child, they will have someone to take care of them in their older years. The first woman, who we shall now call the “biological mother” only, wanted the child for this purpose. The second woman, who we shall call the “loving mother”, knew that she would not love this child and wishes to merely exploit him.

Don’t act as if being a biological parent means you automatically love your child. There are many parents who don’t love their child, and I would assume that someone who cannot have a child of their own, but were given the chance to raise one would love them more than anything else in this world.

Your definition of a family is a very childish dictionary definition. I wouldn't even say childish because I am sure that a few children out there realise that a family is not only "mommy, daddy, brother and sister" but the people you love.

To those who have pets, I am sure that most of you consider them as part of the family, why? Because you love and care for them. Why is it thenthat we can consider a dog, a part of a human family, but not the assimilation of two people of the same gender and their adoptive child?

Surely their bonds are closer than those in your conventional family. Let's face it, there are unwanted pregancies out there, and even between married couples there are still unwanted pregancies happening. They did not want this child, but they do accept it as their own. Why do they do this? Merely because it is a product of their sperm and their egg. Love will eventually grow, but it was not present at the time of conception.

When two homosexuals have a child, it is not as easy as having sex. There are a lot of legal paper work to be done, which I assume is discouraging. They consciously make the decision, both of them, to have this child and raise it as a couple.

I am sure I will hear the arguements that this child will be traumatised from having two same gendered parents, but I will like to point out that it is not their parents who traumatise them. It is the outside world, who cling to their "dictionary definition" of what a family is that will osrtricise them, talk to about them behind their backs, and may even give them dirty looks as they pass by. Their negative attitudes may be spilled over to their children, causing further teasing in school. But in the end, it is not their parents fault, it is these people who cannot realise that a family is not defined by blood, but defined by those who love you.

The_Panda
13th February 2008, 7:46 AM
Then what about it:

When the gay marriages are legalized, then:

The Paedophiles will want to legalize paedophilia (which means, not being punished for it) or even the underage marriages.

The Polygamists will want to legalise polygamy
The FFs (which stands for family fu(ker) will want to legalize incest and in-family marriages

It will be just a watergate for other, HARMFUL perversions. And it's one of the reasons why gay marriages should not be legalized. They don't only deny the definition of family, they also open a gate for other perverts.

I see no logical progression from allowing two consenting adults to marry flowing into paedophilia.

And also, you shouldn't force people to conform to your idea of a "family" (which is a nuclear family, as I said their are different types of families). And how do you know your definition of family is right? The Zeitgeist changes.


I don't see why people see my opinions as homophobic. I'm just trying to defend the old and (possibly) eternal rights. Something which can't be harmed by a bunch of gays... That's the peace which was unharmed since long ages and now the people want to deny it. It's just a proof that the world is coming in the wrong way... It's not the same place as before.

Just because something is old doesn't mean it's right. And tbh, I prefer today's world over your archaic ideals. The Zeitgeist changes and you can't stop it. Get with the times.

Cutiebunny
13th February 2008, 8:29 AM
I like how Maxim refers to homosexuals as "the gays". Is that sorta like SNL jokes about "Da Bears"?

Hatred of gays is just like hatred of anything that is considered radically different from the 'status quo' - it's feared because it's seen as 'new' and thus, a 'threat' to the way things are, the "good old days" where people walked 50 miles uphill(both ways) to school and in the snow.

Watching Sesame Street all through my younger years has taught me that a family can be just about anything. It can be children with a mom and dad, two moms, two dads, grandma, grandpa, etc. We live in an age where a family can't solely be defined by a man and a woman and their kids. Divorce happens. So do wars that take our family members away, sometimes permanently. And as our world becomes a global economy, more and more will parents have to leave their children in order to earn an income.

I personally see nothing wrong with homosexuals adopting children. I see no problem with overweight people adopting children(which, in the US, was banned until recently). As long as an individual can provide a safe and loving environment for a child, they should be a parent. That's all that matters.

Walcott
13th February 2008, 6:56 PM
I think the whole hatred gays is so stupid. Why do so many people even care about it, it's not like it's hurting other people. Some people are raised differently an taught different things, so its not always there fault that they like a certain group of people. If staright people can love eachother and have children, than why not gays? That's right, I'm sraight and defending the gays, so put that in your juice box and suck it!

Profesco
13th February 2008, 8:39 PM
Surely their bonds are closer than those in your conventional family. Let's face it, there are unwanted pregancies out there, and even between married couples there are still unwanted pregancies happening. They did not want this child, but they do accept it as their own. Why do they do this? Merely because it is a product of their sperm and their egg. Love will eventually grow, but it was not present at the time of conception.

When two homosexuals have a child, it is not as easy as having sex. There are a lot of legal paper work to be done, which I assume is discouraging. They consciously make the decision, both of them, to have this child and raise it as a couple.

This is a good point. For a couple who cannot conceive a child, the arrival of one is all the more significant. For children adopted by parents who can't conceive, there is undoubtedly a very high level of devotion and love in the future- perhaps more than the cases in which pregnancy and childbirth is taken for granted or seen as an inevitability.

crobatman
13th February 2008, 11:00 PM
It is a "sin" because God says it is a sin. Dur...

You can justify your actions all you want, but that is not what makes your beliefs or decisions right.

GhostAnime
13th February 2008, 11:48 PM
crobatman, in this debate, you can't force your religious beliefs down others' throats and say that's why you're right. you need to give better reasoning than that.

berserk gene
14th February 2008, 12:00 AM
People hate gays because they are different. That's it. Period. It's stupidity, it's the same reason why people hate athiests, muslims, etc. They think that because they do not conform, they are bad people.


It is a "sin" because God says it is a sin. Dur...

You can justify your actions all you want, but that is not what makes your beliefs or decisions right.

I pity you for taking the authority as truth, rather than truth as the authority. Close minded people like you should really think about things before spewing them out.

Having faith in your own God does not make your beliefs or decisions right either, in fact, you are doing the same thing that you are criticizing against, only by hiding behind the word "God".

The fact is, there are billions of people in this world and no two people think exactly alike. To say "I'm right because God says so" is the root of bigotry. How do you know god is truth? You don't, it's a belief, hence the word "faith". You have no right to falsely judge and discriminate against an entire group of people just because you believe it to be right (in your case, because "God says so", which is just justifying your decisions and beliefs, the same thing you were complaining about)


For example, I am now forming a new religion.

It's called applesauceastothiesm. It's main teaching is that crobatman is bad.

The end.

"L"
14th February 2008, 12:40 AM
It is a "sin" because God says it is a sin. Dur...

You can justify your actions all you want, but that is not what makes your beliefs or decisions right.

If God is real, and what he says is law, then I surely hope you don't like eating Lobster, because after all, that to is against his law. Sure it's basically what the conservative jews call "cosher" but if you wish to quote the old testament on what is right on sexuality, then you must also believe it in it's dietary laws.

And last I checked the thread was asking about why people hate gays, and not whether it is a sin or not.

And again, I would like to point out to all the christians out there who love to quote the old testament to fuel their hatred, not to forget the message of the new testament.


The FFs (which stands for family fu(ker) will want to legalize incest and in-family marriages

If I recall, cousin lovin' was the norm in the olden days for royalty and those of higher class in order to keep the power within the family. Just look at WWI, the leader of Germany, Britain, and Russia were all cousins.

Ethan
14th February 2008, 12:40 AM
crobatman, in this debate, you can't force your religious beliefs down others' throats and say that's why you're right. you need to give better reasoning than that.

Way to miss his point. Both of you. Crobat was explaining why people think its a "sin." Christians believe its a sin because in the bible God deems it as such. So its stupid to say "Why do people believe homosexuality is a sin?" because the answr is right in front of your face.

GhostAnime
14th February 2008, 12:46 AM
how do you know he explained why through people? all he said was that it was a sin and then duh. then said we're wrong no matter what.

I'd say it's okay to assume that he stated his own position.

Ethan
14th February 2008, 12:48 AM
how do you know he explained why through people? all he said was that it was a sin and then duh. then said we're wrong no matter what.

I'd say it's okay to assume that he stated his own position.

Point conceded. :/

phantom1113
14th February 2008, 4:45 PM
basic xenofobia I think
fear of the unknown

+ they seem to pop out everywere :S

EDIT: and ofcourse the church..

Midnight_Dialga
14th February 2008, 7:16 PM
I am a Christian, and so I will speak for all of us when I say that "We do NOT think that gays/bis/les are stupid, below us or should go to hell". This is our opinion: we do not agree with what they are doing, because of what our religious text says. That is all, nothing else. We think they are perfectly normal, except for their sexual preferences.

phantom1113
14th February 2008, 8:14 PM
I am a Christian, and so I will speak for all of us when I say that "We do NOT think that gays/bis/les are stupid, below us or should go to hell". This is our opinion: we do not agree with what they are doing, because of what our religious text says. That is all, nothing else. We think they are perfectly normal, except for their sexual preferences.

no thats your opinion...

Midnight_Dialga
14th February 2008, 9:32 PM
no thats your opinion...

Not exactly,a lot a Christians feel that way, go to the SPPF Christian club and read the first post... and besides, I have a gay friend and I respect him as a person...

SlipKnoT
15th February 2008, 1:25 AM
i am a Homophobe, i can say it with pride and im not bothered at all.
There are many things that you can and should be proud of, but being a hateful bigot isn't one of them.


I just dont see the point in men ..... you know, it disgusts me.
Your lack of intelligence disgusts me.


I am a Christian, and so I will speak for all of us when I say that "We do NOT think that gays/bis/les are stupid, below us or should go to hell". This is our opinion: we do not agree with what they are doing, because of what our religious text says. That is all, nothing else. We think they are perfectly normal, except for their sexual preferences.
You can't speak for all Christians, because your opinion is not universal. Just because you feel one way doesn't mean every other Christian feels the same way. I know a good deal of Christians that are extremely homophobic, inluding my own grandmother.


Not exactly,a lot a Christians feel that way, go to the SPPF Christian club and read the first post... and besides, I have a gay friend and I respect him as a person...
'A lot' doesn't mean 'all'.

As for my opinion: I'm a heterosexual that's very supportive of both homosexuals and bisexuals. What truely pisses me off is homophobes, and generally angry people that hate people because of their sexual orientation. Ignorance like that just shows how unwilling society is to accept people regardless of their lifestyle or traits.

Darkmaster Rannon
15th February 2008, 2:01 AM
people who discrimate against any other race/religion/sexuallity/etc are ****ing bigots. Also if they follow the bible, right there is says something about "Love thy neighbor as they love thyself" or something, and *gasp* gay people can be neighbors! the bible teaches you to love and not hate, and bigotry against gays is hate.

Now, I'm not against gays myself, but against most kinds of gay sexual activities, it's just creepy, yeah... gays can go kissing, but no porno, no.

So go out, be gay, make out with your boyfriend, don't do him and live on another day.

Bigots on the other hand, can go to the knawing and gashing of teeth. (oldschool!)

SlipKnoT
15th February 2008, 2:08 AM
Now, I'm not against gays myself, but against most kinds of gay sexual activities, it's just creepy, yeah... gays can go kissing, but no porno, no.
Sex is sex, heterosexual or homosexual, if you find gay sex 'creepy', then ignore it.


So go out, be gay, make out with your boyfriend, don't do him and live on another day.
Who are you to make such claims? The Emperor of Gay People?

For someone that talks down on biggotry so much, you sure seem like a biggot to me.

Deku_Link
15th February 2008, 2:16 AM
Religious folk can't even agree with each other on whether or not homosexuality is a sin. With ambiguous wording, untrustworthy translations (why does the Word of God need to be "revised"?), paper rot, and assumptions, who do you trust?

I don't personally believe it is a sin, and I do not believe that homosexuality will get you condemned.

However, it's foolish to believe that religion is the only obstacle in the way of homosexual rights. I know atheists who are against homosexuality. Some people just don't want to have to go through the societal change it would bring to start seeing openly gay couples and gay families. They either believe it will be for the worse to accept them, or they do not care what the result will be, they just do not want to go through the rough societal transition period that might show them they are looking in the wrong direction.

vaerna
15th February 2008, 3:28 PM
I don't have a hatred of gays. I just don't think it should be such a political issue nor should I have to see and hear about their bedroom rights on public forums. I don't want to know and I don't care. Just because it isn't right for me doesn't mean I get to judge what's right for them. It was better when they kept it mum. I also think that they shouldn't be able to create children because it's not a natural thing. Adoption is okay as it happens in the wild.

GentleArtillery
15th February 2008, 4:43 PM
I don't have a hatred of gays. I just don't think it should be such a political issue nor should I have to see and hear about their bedroom rights on public forums. I don't want to know and I don't care. Just because it isn't right for me doesn't mean I get to judge what's right for them. It was better when they kept it mum. I also think that they shouldn't be able to create children because it's not a natural thing. Adoption is okay as it happens in the wild.

Define "natural".

phantom1113
15th February 2008, 5:25 PM
Not exactly,a lot a Christians feel that way, go to the SPPF Christian club and read the first post... and besides, I have a gay friend and I respect him as a person...

you said you speaked for everyone and you didnt ask me :P
+ some ppl just say there fin with gays because its a minority and it can be found discrimination etc.
there just scared

Ethan
15th February 2008, 5:35 PM
You can't speak for all Christians, because your opinion is not universal. Just because you feel one way doesn't mean every other Christian feels the same way. I know a good deal of Christians that are extremely homophobic, inluding my own grandmother.

But the Christian doctrine can. If Christianity teaches one thing and then Christians believe another then those Christians are clearly in the wrong. Don't try and justify your stereotype.

Midnight_Dialga
15th February 2008, 8:01 PM
But the Christian doctrine can. If Christianity teaches one thing and then Christians believe another then those Christians are clearly in the wrong. Don't try and justify your stereotype.

Thank you Babylon for clarify this. So, yes, if any of you DARE call yourselfs Christians but don't agree with this:
I am a Christian, and so I will speak for all of us when I say that "We do NOT think that gays/bis/les are stupid, below us or should go to hell". This is our opinion: we do not agree with what they are doing, because of what our religious text says. That is all, nothing else. We think they are perfectly normal, except for their sexual preferences.

...then you need to rethink your life or go read the bible. Seriously!

SlipKnoT
15th February 2008, 9:35 PM
But the Christian doctrine can. If Christianity teaches one thing and then Christians believe another then those Christians are clearly in the wrong. Don't try and justify your stereotype.
I'm not making a stereotype, I'm just saying that Midnight_Dialga doesn't speak for all Christians when she says she's accepting of homosexuals. And while Christian dostrine says one thing, not all Christians follow it.

Thank you Babylon for clarify this. So, yes, if any of you DARE call yourselfs Christians but don't agree with this:
I am a Christian, and so I will speak for all of us when I say that "We do NOT think that gays/bis/les are stupid, below us or should go to hell". This is our opinion: we do not agree with what they are doing, because of what our religious text says. That is all, nothing else. We think they are perfectly normal, except for their sexual preferences.

...then you need to rethink your life or go read the bible. Seriously!
What's not normal about their sexual preferences?

phantom1113
15th February 2008, 9:46 PM
Thank you Babylon for clarify this. So, yes, if any of you DARE call yourselfs Christians but don't agree with this:
I am a Christian, and so I will speak for all of us when I say that "We do NOT think that gays/bis/les are stupid, below us or should go to hell". This is our opinion: we do not agree with what they are doing, because of what our religious text says. That is all, nothing else. We think they are perfectly normal, except for their sexual preferences.

...then you need to rethink your life or go read the bible. Seriously!

chirstanity doesnt say you cant think gays are stupid or hate them...

hell is katholic not realy for reformed christians

Nobody can speak for everyone unless he has heard everyone say it

Darkmaster Rannon
15th February 2008, 9:55 PM
Sex is sex, heterosexual or homosexual, if you find gay sex 'creepy', then ignore it.

For someone that talks down on biggotry so much, you sure seem like a biggot to me.


yes sex is sex, but should only be used to make more babies, nothing more, nothing less (porn just ruined that though...) so gay sex has only one real point: sexual pleasure

SO I'm a bigot? hmm, maybe should have a better reaction when people call me gay... Sorry if your offended if I say "Go out, be gay" because clearly that means don't be gay fine, whatever.

GhostAnime
15th February 2008, 9:58 PM
but should only be used to make more babies, nothing more, nothing less


so gay sex has only one real point: sexual pleasure

guess how many people in the world have sex just to have a baby and never for pleasure?

here's a hint:

but honestly, anybody can have sex for whatever reason outside of rape.

EDIT: one more thing I'd like to note is that porn didn't ruin anything. people have been having sex for pleasure since the beginning of time.

Death dealer
15th February 2008, 10:02 PM
yes sex is sex, but should only be used to make more babies, nothing more, nothing less (porn just ruined that though...) so gay sex has only one real point: sexual pleasure

SO I'm a bigot? hmm, maybe should have a better reaction when people call me gay... Sorry if your offended if I say "Go out, be gay" because clearly that means don't be gay fine, whatever.

Under the premise that the only purpose for sex is for procreation, then yes, homosexual sex is immoral. However, on what basis do you tack this "purpose" on to sex, when it clearly harms no one and dosn't affect the amount of childeren that are had.

phantom1113
15th February 2008, 10:04 PM
Under the premise that the only purpose for sex is for procreation, then yes, homosexual sex is immoral. However, on what basis do you tack this "purpose" on to sex, when it clearly harms no one and dosn't affect the amount of childeren that are had.

could the reason also be that they want to do more things that normal people do

Ragnarofl
15th February 2008, 10:05 PM
yes sex is sex, but should only be used to make more babies, nothing more, nothing less (porn just ruined that though...)
I facepalmed so hard, my face caved in.

Hospital brb

Carlisle
15th February 2008, 11:42 PM
yes sex is sex, but should only be used to make more babies, nothing more, nothing less (porn just ruined that though...) so gay sex has only one real point: sexual pleasure

SO I'm a bigot? hmm, maybe should have a better reaction when people call me gay... Sorry if your offended if I say "Go out, be gay" because clearly that means don't be gay fine, whatever.

lolol.

Does anybody HONESTLY have sex ONLY for reproduction?

Yeah, I thought so.

eeveefox
15th February 2008, 11:48 PM
yes sex is sex, but should only be used to make more babies, nothing more, nothing less (porn just ruined that though...) so gay sex has only one real point: sexual pleasure Can't people have sex because they love each other!

Cain
15th February 2008, 11:56 PM
Really, I can totally understand how many people don't approve of homosexuality. It's really their own opinion. But to say that you hate gays because you are Christian is just wrong. Yes, the Bible says homosexuality is a sin. Sure, you can believe that if you want, it's up to you. But I distinctly remember Pope John Paul speaking about how we must accept homosexuals for what they are, and saying how they must be given the same amount of respect and dignity as the average heterosexual. So if you say that you hate gays because of your religion and say that the Christians who do not hate gays are not following the teahcings of the Church, think again.

Carlisle
16th February 2008, 12:07 AM
Can't people have sex because they love each other!

Not in Christianity!

Everything good in life is illegal, immoral, or fattening.

Mcr 4 life
16th February 2008, 12:12 AM
I honestly have no clue why people are like that i know its a "sin" but that isn't an excuse because everyone is a sinner so if you say that than you can basically be called a hypocrite.

I am a catholic but i do not agree with everything the bible says an homosexuality is one of the things that i do not agree with.

I however have no problem with gay people and if they hit on me i just say i don't bend that.

Ragnarofl
16th February 2008, 12:14 AM
Not in Christianity!

Everything good in life is illegal, immoral, or fattening.
Like good ol' William Blake said, 'As the caterpillar chooses the fairest leaves to lay her eggs, so the priest lays his curse on the fairest joys.'

j_hunter
16th February 2008, 12:22 AM
Um... about the having sex only to reproduce remark...

It's kind of becoming evident that the world is overpopulated. Shouldn't homosexuality be encouraged rather than shunned as a way to decrease reproduction?

Just a bit of critical thinking, here.

I don't understand the hatred either, and I would like someone to help me understand why perfectly respectable, mature people suddenly become so angry when GLBT people are mentioned.

GentleArtillery
16th February 2008, 12:27 AM
Really, I can totally understand how many people don't approve of homosexuality. It's really their own opinion.

So I could not approve of being infertile, female, a 43-year-old or whatever, if it didn't have to do with my religion? Could I, to go further, (try to) deprive them of common rights because of my opinion?

Ridley-X4
16th February 2008, 12:55 AM
yes sex is sex, but should only be used to make more babies, nothing more, nothing less (porn just ruined that though...)

lolwut. Enjoy your boring life.


so gay sex has only one real point: sexual pleasure


So? People paid to get it on as back as during the times of Rome. What's your point?

Komedic Konservationist
16th February 2008, 6:31 PM
There's no such thing as "normal" and "abnormal." Normality, and abnormality, are perceptions, nothing more. They are perceptions based on what is familiar to us, and on what is unfamiliar to us.
Heterosexuality is the designated "norm" because it is what is most familiar to us. If there were more homosexuals than there were heterosexuals, homosexuallity would be the designated "norm" (don't pull any wisecracks here, smart a ss. I know it wouldn't be possible for homosexuallity to be the most common sexual orientation because if it were humanity would go extinct, I was being purely hypothetical).
"God hates freaks" was early man's way of explaining our irrational hatred of the "abnormal", and is modern man's way of justifying it.

GentleArtillery
16th February 2008, 7:03 PM
There's no such thing as "normal" and "abnormal." Normality, and abnormality, are perceptions, nothing more. They are perceptions based on what is familiar to us, and on what is unfamiliar to us. There is such things as "normal" and "abnormal", it's just that it's relative to the situation and subjects.
Heterosexuality is the designated "norm" because it is what is most familiar to us. If there were more homosexuals than there were heterosexuals, homosexuallity would be the designated "norm" (don't pull any wisecracks here, smart a ss. I know it wouldn't be possible for homosexuallity to be the most common sexual orientation because if it were humanity would go extinct, I was being purely hypothetical).
"God hates freaks" was early man's way of explaining our irrational hatred of the "abnormal", and is modern man's way of justifying it. I agree.

*Annoying with character limits when you type in quotes.*

Monk76
16th February 2008, 7:46 PM
People dislike what they find offensive. Whether it's on a spiritual, moral, ethical, or whatever level. Gays don't have to do anything to anyone to find rejection among others. Their sexual preferences make them pariahs in most peoples eyes. If you ask most people in a public setting if they accept the gay lifestyle most will say yes. But I can promise you that's not what they're really thinking. If you asked me in public if I accepted the way gays choose to live I would say no. I understand their choice, but I do not have to accept it in any way, shape or form. I'm tired of doing the politicaly correct thing. There's nothing wrong with having your own unique opinion about things.

Komedic Konservationist
16th February 2008, 8:02 PM
People dislike what they find offensive. Whether it's on a spiritual, moral, ethical, or whatever level. Gays don't have to do anything to anyone to find rejection among others. Their sexual preferences make them pariahs in most peoples eyes. If you ask most people in a public setting if they accept the gay lifestyle most will say yes. But I can promise you that's not what they're really thinking.

What, so you know the inner thoughts of everyone on the planet! That must mean your psychic! No, wait, psychics are freaks! You must be destroyed! No, bullying and discriminating against people for being what they are is NOT wrong? A fairy tale man who lives in the sky, invented by cavemen with no scientific understanding of themselves or the world around them, hates freaks, so that makes it okay for us to hate freaks, too! Screw all that "love thy neighbour as thyself" crap, I'm off to go start off a holocaust!

Monk76
16th February 2008, 8:09 PM
What, so you know the inner thoughts of everyone on the planet! That must mean your psychic! No, wait, psychics are freaks! You must be destroyed! No, bullying and discriminating against people for being what they are is NOT wrong? A fairy tale man who lives in the sky, invented by cavemen with no scientific understanding of themselves or the world around them, hates freaks, so that makes it okay for us to hate freaks, too! Screw all that "love thy neighbour as thyself" crap, I'm off to go start off a holocaust!

Did you have something useful to add or are you just going to overreact? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of things. It doesn't mean they hate anyone. You can accept the person but not agree with their lifestyle. I have many gay friends and their being gay doesn't stop us from being friends. They understand that I don't care for their sexual activities or want to hear about it so they refrain from mentioning it around me. In turn, I don't bother them with the sexual details of my own life because that isn't what they're into. It's all about mutual respect and respecting others comfort boundries.

Ragnarofl
16th February 2008, 8:20 PM
Did you have something useful to add or are you just going to overreact? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of things. It doesn't mean they hate anyone. You can accept the person but not agree with their lifestyle. I have many gay friends and their being gay doesn't stop us from being friends. They understand that I don't care for their sexual activities or want to hear about it so they refrain from mentioning it around me. In turn, I don't bother them with the sexual details of my own life because that isn't what they're into. It's all about mutual respect and respecting others comfort boundries.
I don't think anyone is against that, since there is no hate on what you described. It's like a group of friends where some of them smoke and some of them do not, but they find this totally acceptable and are still friends all the same.
What people are talking about is hate and bigotry. Like alienating your friend who came out, telling them they are going to eternally suffer by the hands of your angry god, using psychologically abusive tactics to make them 'see the light', etc.

Monk76
16th February 2008, 8:26 PM
I don't think anyone is against that, since there is no hate on what you described. It's like a group of friends where some of them smoke and some of them do not, but they find this totally acceptable are still friends all the same.
What people are talking about is hate and bigotry. Like alienating your friend who came out, telling them they are going to eternally suffer by the hands of your angry god, using psychologically abusive tactics to make them 'see the light', etc.

Now that would be completely unacceptable.:(

GentleArtillery
16th February 2008, 8:34 PM
People dislike what they find offensive. Whether it's on a spiritual, moral, ethical, or whatever level. Gays don't have to do anything to anyone to find rejection among others. Their sexual preferences make them pariahs in most peoples eyes. If you ask most people in a public setting if they accept the gay lifestyle most will say yes. But I can promise you that's not what they're really thinking. If you asked me in public if I accepted the way gays choose to live I would say no. I understand their choice, but I do not have to accept it in any way, shape or form. I'm tired of doing the politicaly correct thing. There's nothing wrong with having your own unique opinion about things.

So I assume you mean that they right to have that opinion. Then, does the right to have opinions justify them?

I mean, if I'm rich, I have the right to buy out all food in a store and then no one will hypothetically get any food. Does that make it "ethically" right, just because its "legal"?

I don't think they should not be allowed to have those opinions. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be allowed to try to convince them to something other.

Monk76
16th February 2008, 8:41 PM
So I assume you mean that they right to have that opinion. Then, does the right to have opinions justify them?

I mean, if I'm rich, I have the right to buy out all food in a store and then no one will hypothetically get any food. Does that make it "ethically" right, just because its "legal"?

I don't think they should not be allowed to have those opinions. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be allowed to try to convince them to something other.


There is a huge difference between simply having an opinion and acting on it. I may not agree with the gay lifestyle, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and blow away everyone I know to be gay. That would be wrong, yet I am still entitled to my opinion. I would never try to change someones beliefs or values by trying to convince them it's ok if that's not what they want to believe. Believe as you wish, but do no harm because of what you believe.

GentleArtillery
16th February 2008, 8:47 PM
There is a huge difference between simply having an opinion and acting on it. I may not agree with the gay lifestyle, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and blow away everyone I know to be gay. That would be wrong, yet I am still entitled to my opinion. I would never try to change someones beliefs or values by trying to convince them it's ok if that's not what they want to believe. Believe as you wish, but do no harm because of what you believe.

Well, then I think we're even.

I'm against the act of trying to deprive gay people of common rights due to their opinions.

Monk76
16th February 2008, 8:53 PM
Well, then I think we're even.

I'm against the act of trying to deprive gay people of common rights due to their opinions.

Every person deserves equal rights no matter what their opinion on anything may be.

Ragnarofl
16th February 2008, 8:58 PM
Every person deserves equal rights no matter what their opinion on anything may be.
In most cases, at least. There are a couple of ideologies that encourage unprovoked direct harm on other people.

Mrmagius
16th February 2008, 9:05 PM
People fear what they dont understand and homo/bisexuality is part of that.



From my religion's perspective, it's because this country has become immoral and people don't care if something is sacred or not.

Dear, the USA has been immoral for hundreds of years *remembers extermination of the Great Plains Indians*

Monk76
16th February 2008, 9:05 PM
In most cases, at least. There are a couple of ideologies that encourage unprovoked direct harm on other people.

That's not something I would approve of.>:(

Magmar Master
16th February 2008, 9:10 PM
People dislike what they find offensive. Whether it's on a spiritual, moral, ethical, or whatever level. Gays don't have to do anything to anyone to find rejection among others. Their sexual preferences make them pariahs in most peoples eyes. If you ask most people in a public setting if they accept the gay lifestyle most will say yes. But I can promise you that's not what they're really thinking. If you asked me in public if I accepted the way gays choose to live I would say no. I understand their choice, but I do not have to accept it in any way, shape or form. I'm tired of doing the politicaly correct thing. There's nothing wrong with having your own unique opinion about things.

Were I live it's the opisite

Eevry says they hate gays but you can tell some don't mean it

Heliotrope
17th February 2008, 10:10 AM
I must admit that I haven't read the whole thread, but I felt like responding to this:


From my religion's perspective, it's because this country has become immoral and people don't care if something is sacred or not.

Religion and morality don't go hand in hand. I don't believe in god or heaven or hell or the devil or ghosts or an afterlife of any kind.

But that doesn't mean I go out murdering, stealing, raping or anything like that. I don't see why people seem to think that you have to believe in god to be moral.

Midnight_Dialga
19th February 2008, 8:09 PM
chirstanity doesnt say you cant think gays are stupid or hate them...

hell is katholic not realy for reformed christians

Nobody can speak for everyone unless he has heard everyone say it


Seriously, why would you say this, unless you think that they should go to hell and that they are stupid...but WHY? WHY would you hate them? They are the same as you, PEOPLE!!! Mostly people hate things because they are scared of them...so must be scared of gays/bis/les...?

I can tell you are not a real Christian, you only SAY you are.

Death dealer
19th February 2008, 8:25 PM
In most cases, at least. There are a couple of ideologies that encourage unprovoked direct harm on other people.

Still, people shouldn't be arrested simply for believing they should kill others. They will simply be told that there will be consequences for their actions if they carry out that ideology. I am against any kind of thought or speech crime.

Shiny Magmortar
19th February 2008, 8:37 PM
First off, I'm straight...Second, I couldn't care less whether someone is gay or not...Just don't let me see them all over each other and I'll be fine...I really don't care...

EDIT: Cool...Rank up...

Ethan
19th February 2008, 11:17 PM
What, so you know the inner thoughts of everyone on the planet! That must mean your psychic! No, wait, psychics are freaks! You must be destroyed! No, bullying and discriminating against people for being what they are is NOT wrong? A fairy tale man who lives in the sky, invented by cavemen with no scientific understanding of themselves or the world around them, hates freaks, so that makes it okay for us to hate freaks, too! Screw all that "love thy neighbour as thyself" crap, I'm off to go start off a holocaust!

The strawman of the month award goes to you! *claps*

Peakock_king
19th February 2008, 11:36 PM
i honestly have no problems with gays at all......people are people and we should except them for who and what they are, people of course!

i mean if being gay is wrong than hurting yourself horribly for other peoples enjoyment is wrong....and then i'm a very wrong person....

people have choices in life a the way they want to live is up to them....and we should respect their decisions even if they aren't the choice we would make...

eeveefox
22nd February 2008, 9:20 AM
I don't have a problem with gays either.Let people be themselves and love who they want.

sikorski
22nd February 2008, 1:32 PM
wow who cares if you guys love each other go for it just dont pull me in lol

grounder
22nd February 2008, 6:18 PM
Homophobia is not something that's restricted to the 'Pharisee Elite'. I've lived in places that is secular beyond my experience and have residents that probably are the most homophobic people I've met.

Profesco
23rd February 2008, 9:05 AM
Homophobia is not something that's restricted to the 'Pharisee Elite'. I've lived in places that is secular beyond my experience and have residents that probably are the most homophobic people I've met.

Well naturally. Even atheists, if they are perhaps hardcore evolutionaries, can regard homosexuality as against the trend of reproducing genes. There can be other examples as well. Unfortunately, hatred spans all cultural divides.

GentleArtillery
24th February 2008, 1:24 AM
^Yeah, but it's easier to go against that than any religious person considering homosexuality wrong, because then it's "religious freedom."

Anyway, why should religions that consider such things wrong (and act thereof) be approved of? Yes, you have the right to believe whatever you feel like. But you have the right to debate if you should think like that.

If someone thought being an American citizen (and not moving away from the US) was wrong, wouldn't you want to convince them that it isn't? For example. So right, I'm going to debate against those who consider it wrong because of their religion.

First, those who say "I'm not against homosexuality, but if you are because of your religion it's O.K." It seems rather that they don't want any troubles here.

Let's see, what if we took it like this:

"I'm not against being black, but if you are because of your religion, it's O.K."
"I'm not against rights for women, but if you are because of your religion, it's O.K."

Why is religion an accepted reason for going against something as harmless and not-your-business as homosexuality? The thought - fine then. Claiming homosexuality is wrong - rather an insult. Trying to deprive homosexuals of common rights, such as gay marriage (like, maybe voting for a party that will do that) - definitely intolerable.

Ethan
24th February 2008, 1:37 AM
First, those who say "I'm not against homosexuality, but if you are because of your religion it's O.K." It seems rather that they don't want any troubles here.

No, I was waiting for something interesting to debate.


Let's see, what if we took it like this:

"I'm not against being black, but if you are because of your religion, it's O.K."
"I'm not against rights for women, but if you are because of your religion, it's O.K."

So all the sudden homosexuality became a race. "Rights" in itself is a very weak word unless you put some punch into it.


Why is religion an accepted reason for going against something as harmless and not-your-business as homosexuality? The thought - fine then. Claiming homosexuality is wrong - rather an insult. Trying to deprive homosexuals of common rights, such as gay marriage (like, maybe voting for a party that will do that) - definitely intolerable.


Perhaps to forbid it by law is going a step to far but simply holding the belief that it is wrong, holds no problem within itself.

Empoleon Bonaparte
24th February 2008, 3:52 AM
First off, I'm glad there's a topic 'bout this. In my city, and in other towns, there's a Gay Parade every year. People stand on wagons which look like, ummm, Mardi Gras wagons. They're all dressed up in pink and purple clothes and are having a lot of fun. Everyone in the city is, actually. The wagons drive through the city, going from the marketplace to the soccerstadium on the other side of town. They also drive past.....right. Churches. And is it me, or is America the only contry where the hatred of homosexuals really exists? Asides from the Islam (no offense). I even know some homosexual priests, and they also party at the Gay Parade. And that's a big diffrence next to that family in America which is so full of homosexual hatred, they even protest and curse dead soldiers who ARE gay(forgot the name). That's all I wanted to say. BTW, I'm not Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Amish, an Atheist or any religion whatsoever. I am who I am, a free man, and ******* proud of it!

Carlisle
24th February 2008, 4:25 AM
First off, I'm glad there's a topic 'bout this. In my city, and in other towns, there's a Gay Parade every year. People stand on wagons which look like, ummm, Mardi Gras wagons. They're all dressed up in pink and purple clothes and are having a lot of fun. Everyone in the city is, actually. The wagons drive through the city, going from the marketplace to the soccerstadium on the other side of town. They also drive past.....right. Churches. And is it me, or is America the only contry where the hatred of homosexuals really exists? Asides from the Islam (no offense). I even know some homosexual priests, and they also party at the Gay Parade. And that's a big diffrence next to that family in America which is so full of homosexual hatred, they even protest and curse dead soldiers who ARE gay(forgot the name). That's all I wanted to say. BTW, I'm not Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Amish, an Atheist or any religion whatsoever. I am who I am, a free man, and ******* proud of it!

1. Gay pride parades should be shot.
2. Um, no. Gays have it pretty damn well in America. Any gay complaining should go to Africa or the Middle East. There, it's a crime to be gay there.
3. Those priests aren't priests then.

InfernapeIZCool
24th February 2008, 4:47 AM
The entire religion is full of right wing extremists that confuse hating gays with hating what they do. Although it is hard to do one without appearing to do the other. That's why I don't like when people ask me what religion I am, because sadly, I have to say Catholic.
Anyways, It's just different. It's America, people hate difference. And children use it as an insult. I mean, how are we supposed to respect the choices of other people if someone calls you gay as an insult?

masteroftime
24th February 2008, 4:54 AM
It still lies to be decided whether homoness is a diesese or a trait.
Besides...
"its adam and eve, not adam and steve"

InfernapeIZCool
24th February 2008, 4:57 AM
Mental disorder. When investigated, (people who have homosexual tendencies against their will) have lacked love from the parent of that particular gender. For example, a man had not father, so he grew up without paternal love. They try to fill this void by homosexual acts.