The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[VindictiveScrub]

I'm sure Bingham accidentally left off the asterisk that led to the note: Excluding any man that lies with another man. No? That's not on there? Hm, well slap me sideways because I'm sure I'm completely misinterpreting that sentence then.

Well, the last eight pages have been... interesting. Silly me, I forgot how cruel people could be on the internet. Not caring about innocent people being tortured and slaughtered in other countries for loving someone, etc. I sincerely hope that most homophobes don't reproduce, so they can't teach their young, impressionable children to hate people that only wish to live and love in peace.

I apologize for liking so many posts. Sorry for spamming your alerts, guys.

It's a hard fought cause, one which isn't going to end for a long time. Even just liking a post can in some way help people continue their efforts to strive for acceptance no matter someone's sexual orientation. Don't ever apologize for supporting what you believe in. 👍 I'm sure your support isn't lost on those who care.

 

[Dan]

It's a hard fought cause, one which isn't going to end for a long time. Even just liking a post can in some way help people continue their efforts to strive for acceptance no matter someone's sexual orientation. Don't ever apologize for supporting what you believe in. 👍 I'm sure your support isn't lost on those who care.

Well, let's just say I am not on either side of the road. If someone asked me "Do you like boys or girls," I'd reply with "Yes."

 

[Azure Flare]

Love is love. Some people love people of the same gender. They don't need to make babies to be happy. That is all.

 

[huskeR32]

Tim Tebow sucks I'll give you that but he did win a Heisman trophy and beat the Steelers, set the highest QBR rating in the last 5mins in 8 consecutive games being over (110). Michael Sam and Jason Collins didn't have the college credentials let alone stats. Tebow sucks for three quarters, but was clutch and you can't hide from that, he won games. I think I'll contact Oprah for a documentary documenting my ravaging heterosexual appetite, might get a book deal as well, probably a 30 min ESPN special.

Most of your ridiculous 🤬 has already been shot down (several times) thoroughly. However, this claim seems to have gone unchallenged. And it's utterly idiotic.

Let's take a look at the facts, shall we?

-2013 SEC Defensive Player of the Year*+
-Unanimous 2013 first-team All-American+
-First-team All-SEC+
-Led the SEC in sacks in 2013 (8th-most in the nation)*
-Led the SEC in tackles for a loss (9th-most in the nation)*
-Tied for 7th in the SEC in forced fumbles*

* Considering that most college football analysts consider the SEC to be best defensive conference in football, and indeed the best conference overall, these are no small feats
+ It is definitely worth pointing out that these awards were all given to Sam before he came out as gay, so if you were planning on pointing to them as more evidence of people rewarding his sexual orientation, let's just go ahead and nip that in the bud

Looking over that list, I'd say Sam certainly deserved to get a shot in the NFL. In my opinion, he deserved to get drafted a lot higher than he did, and many pre-draft selections agreed. I won't get into that too much, because it'll always just be speculation to wonder if his coming out had in impact on his draft position, but with our country's rich history of LGBT oppression, it's not much of a stretch to believe it did.

So, agree with me or not that he should have been drafted higher; it doesn't matter either way. But to claim that he "didn't have the credentials or stats" to be drafted is asinine. (Not that I'm surprised you made it, mind.)

 

[FoolKiller]

Let's take a look at the facts, shall we?

-2013 SEC Defensive Player of the Year*+
-Unanimous 2013 first-team All-American+
-First-team All-SEC+
-Led the SEC in sacks in 2013 (8th-most in the nation)*
-Led the SEC in tackles for a loss (9th-most in the nation)*
-Tied for 7th in the SEC in forced fumbles*

* Considering that most college football analysts consider the SEC to be best defensive conference in football, and indeed the best conference overall, these are no small feats
+ It is definitely worth pointing out that these awards were all given to Sam before he came out as gay, so if you were planning on pointing to them as more evidence of people rewarding his sexual orientation, let's just go ahead and nip that in the bud

Looking over that list, I'd say Sam certainly deserved to get a shot in the NFL. In my opinion, he deserved to get drafted a lot higher than he did, and many pre-draft selections agreed.

Must be affirmative action or stat inflation to compensate for his gayness.

 

[VindictiveScrub]

Most of your ridiculous 🤬 has already been shot down (several times) thoroughly. However, this claim seems to have gone unchallenged. And it's utterly idiotic.

Let's take a look at the facts, shall we?

-2013 SEC Defensive Player of the Year*+
-Unanimous 2013 first-team All-American+
-First-team All-SEC+
-Led the SEC in sacks in 2013 (8th-most in the nation)*
-Led the SEC in tackles for a loss (9th-most in the nation)*
-Tied for 7th in the SEC in forced fumbles*

* Considering that most college football analysts consider the SEC to be best defensive conference in football, and indeed the best conference overall, these are no small feats
+ It is definitely worth pointing out that these awards were all given to Sam before he came out as gay, so if you were planning on pointing to them as more evidence of people rewarding his sexual orientation, let's just go ahead and nip that in the bud

Looking over that list, I'd say Sam certainly deserved to get a shot in the NFL. In my opinion, he deserved to get drafted a lot higher than he did, and many pre-draft selections agreed. I won't get into that too much, because it'll always just be speculation to wonder if his coming out had in impact on his draft position, but with our country's rich history of LGBT oppression, it's not much of a stretch to believe it did.

So, agree with me or not that he should have been drafted higher; it doesn't matter either way. But to claim that he "didn't have the credentials or stats" to be drafted is asinine. (Not that I'm surprised you made it, mind.)

I guess, to be fair, I heard scouts saying he was directly in between being a defensive end or outside linebacker in the NFL due to his size, but was still expected to go no later than the 4th or 5th round. So why he fell to the 7th round... I don't know. If it was only to do with size I think that's a little ridiculous when someone is that naturally talented. If he needs to put on 20 pounds to be a defensive end I don't see why he wouldn't.

 

[huskeR32]

Must be affirmative action or stat inflation to compensate for his gayness.

I did forget that a gay sack is worth 1.3 straight-guy sacks. So, if we do the math... Wait, what were we talking about? I got distracted by all the sacs.

I guess, to be fair, I heard scouts saying he was directly in between being a defensive end or outside linebacker in the NFL due to his size, but was still expected to go no later than the 4th or 5th round. So why he fell to the 7th round... I don't know. If it was only to do with size I think that's a little ridiculous when someone is that naturally talented. If he needs to put on 20 pounds to be a defensive end I don't see why he wouldn't.

Exactly what I read too. Not a first-rounder by any stretch, but certainly not a last-rounder either. As far as the putting on weight goes, I think most of the "too small" knock against him concerned his height rather than his weight.

 

[Rage Racer]

Love is love. Some people love people of the same gender. They don't need to make babies to be happy. That is all.

I think, they also don't need to be married officially to be happy. In my country, at least.

 

[Scaff]

I think, they also don't need to be married officially to be happy. In my country, at least.

Neither do hetrosexual people, which means its not a reason to stop them getting married either.

 

[VindictiveScrub]

I think, they also don't need to be married officially to be happy. In my country, at least.

Unless you want to make sure your children don't get taken away if your partner dies. Or that estate can be collected by you if your partner dies. Or if you want the ability to make decisions about your partner's medical treatment if he or she were to become ill. All of those can be denied of a homosexual couple in my country if they're not married.

 

[Rage Racer]

Unless you want to make sure your children don't get taken away if your partner dies. Or that estate can be collected by you if your partner dies. Or if you want the ability to make decisions about your partner's medical treatment if he or she were to become ill. All of those can be denied of a homosexual couple in my country if they're not married.

In Russia, these things can be regulated by signing corresponding treaties. For property, the partners can sign a treaty of common property and arrange how they use it. Inheritance is easy, too - they write testaments to each other and the children. Child guardianship can be regulated by specific documents, too. The legal guardian of the child (parent or adopter) can notify the social agency that his/her partner will guard the child in case of death / heavy sickness / incompetency / etc. of the original guardian.

 

[huskeR32]

In Russia, these things can be regulated by signing corresponding treaties. For property, the partners can sign a treaty of common property and arrange how they use it. Inheritance is easy, too - they write testaments to each other and the children. Child guardianship can be regulated by specific documents, too. The legal guardian of the child (parent or adopter) can notify the social agency that his/her partner will guard the child in case of death / heavy sickness / incompetency / etc. of the original guardian.

Yeah, but why should anyone have to go through those extra steps? Most of that is automatically conferred by marriage, why not make it that easy for all people who just want to love each other and be happy?

What you described there is just a variation of the old "separate but equal" mindset, which is a dangerous road to go down. @FoolKiller addressed this pretty well a few pages back:

Your water fountain, my water fountain. Your bathroom, my bathroom. You get in the back of the bus, I'll ride up front.
You can use the restaurant, but not the lunch counter.

Separate but equal has been done. It's only a matter of time before it is no longer equal. Give a new tax break to married couples? Sure. Oops we forgot to say civil unions too. We'll get to it next session.

That bit in bold, especially, would really worry me.

 

[VindictiveScrub]

In Russia, these things can be regulated by signing corresponding treaties. For property, the partners can sign a treaty of common property and arrange how they use it. Inheritance is easy, too - they write testaments to each other and the children. Child guardianship can be regulated by specific documents, too. The legal guardian of the child (parent or adopter) can notify the social agency that his/her partner will guard the child in case of death / heavy sickness / incompetency / etc. of the original guardian.

As has been said already, in the U.S. government only gives certain rights to those whom are lawfully married, and there are plenty of legal cases where homosexual couples have been denied basic rights that anyone should have simply because they weren't allowed to be married.

 

[Danny]

So anyway over the last couple of months the LGBT community has become fractured, with T accusing LGB of biggotry particularly over the word 'tranny'. Anyway it's this whole big mess and support for the side of T has come from an unlikely source.

 

[squadops]

As has been said already, in the U.S. government only gives certain rights to those whom are lawfully married, ...

And there is the problem, special rights for being married, why do we need permission or our hand held in our personal maters? We've lost all integrity and ability to live our own lives. The courts should be empty and the laws not needed.

 

[TenEightyOne]

So anyway over the last couple of months the LGBT community has become fractured, with T accusing LGB of biggotry particularly over the word 'tranny'.

It's a common misconception to think that what a society collectively sees as a "minority" is itself cohesive and self-accepting.

Gay male communities (by that I mean 'scene' communities, often centered around club life or visual arts) can be extremely bitchy, divided places and have been for as long as I've known them and, I'm certain, much longer.

Saying that the "fracture" (or big crack) has been exposed in the last few month seems a little naive.

 

[Danny]

Saying that the "fracture" (or big crack) has been exposed in the last few month seems a little naive.

I'm talking this specific one that began with Carmen Carrera and Katie Couric in January and has rumbled on since.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm talking this specific one that began with Carmen Carrera and Katie Couric in January and has rumbled on since.

Ah, you said "The LGBT community" instead of naming two unknowns, I'm afraid to say that it led me to believe you meant "The LGBT community" instead of two unknowns. Written language can fool one sometimes

 

[FoolKiller]

And there is the problem, special rights for being married, why do we need permission or our hand held in our personal maters? We've lost all integrity and ability to live our own lives. The courts should be empty and the laws not needed.

I agree with this, that marriage should not be a thing that is regulated at any level. It would solve the whole issue. Ultimately it is just a contract anyway.

In the government's eyes I was married when me, my wife, and the priest signed the marriage certificate. In my eyes I was married when I said, "I do." That piece of paper was an unnecessary expense and waste of paper, all so the government won't steal my stuff if I die. Of course now they just tax it when I die.

 

[VindictiveScrub]

I agree with this, that marriage should not be a thing that is regulated at any level. It would solve the whole issue. Ultimately it is just a contract anyway.

In the government's eyes I was married when me, my wife, and the priest signed the marriage certificate. In my eyes I was married when I said, "I do." That piece of paper was an unnecessary expense and waste if paper, all so the government won't steal my stuff if I die. Of course now they just tax it when I die.

And that's the major issue here. Not to impede on religion, or change anything people already receive, but to simply obtain the same benefits of being legally married that only being legally married will give, at least within the United States. As you said before, sure the government can say they'll give equal benefits to civil unions, but what would ever stop them from skipping something in the future they add to marriage rights? The LGBT community wants marriage because that is the only thing and will be the only thing that will make them equal to straight couples in the eyes of the law and government.

There's still a whole cluster of other issues that are for social reasons, but in my opinion those are much further away from being amended than marriage rights.

 

[ledhed]

I hope I live long enough to finally see the people of the USA . Just see a person and not a type or color or category . I have reason to hope as I have lived through massive change in our culture . For all thats great about my country its the stain of discrimination that keeps us from being truly great .

 

[Benoir]

It pains me that this discussion still even exists.

Please watch:

 

[SniperRed3]

Homosexuals are not interested in making other people homosexuals however homophobes are interested in making other people homophobic.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Homosexuals are not interested in making other people homosexuals...

Not necessarily true. I can think of gay friends who have clearly expressed an interest in making Brad Pitt extremely classifiably gay. Jus' sayin'...

 

[SniperRed3]

Yes as a joke (if you know what a joke is) But homophobes trying to inspire hatred against homosexuals is as serious as it gets and it's wrong, completely wrong. But this is common place the latter is not.

 

[Danny]

Homosexuals are not interested in making other people homosexuals

No, that's wrong. It's part of the gay agenda.

 

[SniperRed3]

Please explain? Because from my point of view the homophobes shout louder then try and explain them selves with a book which may or may not be 2000 years old and is manipulated in such a way to justify beliefs each "interpretation" contradicts one another.

 

[Spurgy 777]

Please explain? Because from my point of view the homophobes shout louder then try and explain them selves with a book which may or may not be 2000 years old and is manipulated in such a way to justify beliefs each "interpretation" contradicts one another.

Sarcasm

 

[Joel]

No, that's wrong. It's part of the gay agenda.

That along with shoving it down our throats is pretty much the entirety of the LGBT rights movement.

 

[Danny]

That along with shoving it down our throats is pretty much the entirety of the LGBT rights movement.

Educate yourself.