The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[AndersonG22]

Who gives a damn where you plant your seed if its consensual. Of course the bible would say somthin like "tho shall not lay with a man as he lays with a woman". It was writtin by straight men and straight men think thats disgusting. The bible never says anything bad about lesbians because lesbians are awsome. I dont read the bible but Im sure it doesnt say that, straight men wrote it.

If there was a straight guy, had two lesbos wanting to party with him, and he asked jesus what to do, jesus would slap him. If the man yall belive died on the cross for you came back to life for one day, just one day. And he was offered girls, drugs, little men, he would take them all. His father created them for the human race to enjoy, and enjoy them we will.

If you want to have sex with rocks, dogs, men, women, then I belive you should have the right to!!!! If you want to do drugs then I belive you should, ya only live once. The government should not infringe on our lives if were not hurting anyone. Who cares if I destroy my liver drinking....ohh wait, thats already legal and they dont give a DAMN!!!

So why do they care if gays get married??? ...............Oh yea the bible, A book telling us how to live our lives. I got news for ya people, we dont all get mansions in the sky when we die. Id rather have 72 virgins anyway!!!!!


This lie about hell is to scare you so that your a good citizen and dont sin. Dont these remind you of the LAWS we follow in everyday life? And doesnt anyone play tourist trophy anymore? "tho shall run at least 3 laps of the ring per week" - thats what god told me we all have to do, or he would keep the earthquakes coming.

 

[Public'sTwin]

Who gives a damn where you plant your seed if its consensual. Of course the bible would say somthin like "tho shall not lay with a man as he lays with a woman". It was writtin by straight men and straight men think thats disgusting. The bible never says anything bad about lesbians because lesbians are awsome. I dont read the bible but Im sure it doesnt say that, straight men wrote it.

If there was a straight guy, had two lesbos wanting to party with him, and he asked jesus what to do, jesus would slap him. If the man yall belive died on the cross for you came back to life for one day, just one day. And he was offered girls, drugs, little men, he would take them all. His father created them for the human race to enjoy, and enjoy them we will.

If you want to have sex with rocks, dogs, men, women, then I belive you should have the right to!!!! If you want to do drugs then I belive you should, ya only live once. The government should not infringe on our lives if were not hurting anyone. Who cares if I destroy my liver drinking....ohh wait, thats already legal and they dont give a DAMN!!!

So why do they care if gays get married??? ...............Oh yea the bible, A book telling us how to live our lives. I got news for ya people, we dont all get mansions in the sky when we die. Id rather have 72 virgins anyway!!!!!


This lie about hell is to scare you so that your a good citizen and dont sin. Dont these remind you of the LAWS we follow in everyday life? And doesnt anyone play tourist trophy anymore? "tho shall run at least 3 laps of the ring per week" - thats what god told me we all have to do, or he would keep the earthquakes coming.

Whatever that was,

 

[PureAwesomeness]

Does anyone else think that this kind of thread should never have been allowed in the first place? I cannot see any justification for singling out a group of people and debating the morality of their existence. It simply doesn't seem fair to me. And the title question is absurd: 'alternative lifestyle'. There is no alternative.

 

[Danny]

Does anyone else think that this kind of thread should never have been allowed in the first place? I cannot see any justification for singling out a group of people and debating the morality of their existence. It simply doesn't seem fair to me.

Well that is exactly what society does. To be honest, I find the variety of people's approaches to the issue fascinating.

 

[Keef]

Does anyone else think that this kind of thread should never have been allowed in the first place? I cannot see any justification for singling out a group of people and debating the morality of their existence. It simply doesn't seem fair to me. And the title question is absurd: 'alternative lifestyle'. There is no alternative.

Labelling things as bad or taboo by looking down upon the issue only increases the stigma about it. Sort of how anti-racism legislation actually promotes racism.

 

[PureAwesomeness]

Labelling things as bad or taboo by looking down upon the issue only increases the stigma about it. Sort of how anti-racism legislation actually promotes racism.

Nonsense.

 

[NLxAROSA]

Nonsense.

No. Over here in NL, some public bodies use rules like 'since all our higher staff are males, our next one must be a female'. So males that are higher qualified for a job get turned down because they are not female. Same goes for ethnic heritage and such (because the public body must somehow reflect ethnic distribution in society on all levels). Anti-racist (or rather anti-discriminatory) legislation is racist (discriminatory) by itself.

 

[PureAwesomeness]

No. Over here in NL, some public bodies use rules like 'since all our higher staff are males, our next one must be a female'. So males that are higher qualified for a job get turned down because they are not female. Same goes for ethnic heritage and such (because the public body must somehow reflect ethnic distribution in society on all levels). Anti-racist (or rather anti-discriminatory) legislation is racist (discriminatory) by itself.

You are both confusing anti-racism with positive discrimination. The two are not (or at least should not be) the same.

 

[Tesla]

Recently, one of my friends admitted to being bisexual and having a few crushes on guys who go to our school. With me being a closet bisexual, I have the utmost of respect for him to come out and say that. Now, being a school environment, he gets harassed by almost every male in our grade (8).

Is it fair that he gets treated like that? No, and I believe that most of the guys don't really care that much for it. But because you have those few people that have been brought up with the insult of "gay" and have taken it to heart, you get people who don't want to be accused of homosexuality joining in on the harassment, and the domino effect takes hold and you end up having everybody not wanting to get called out.

I've had conversations with him about how it's all an image thing in high school, and I sincerely hope that changes in the future. And the sad thing is that it probably won't. There is a distinct lack of education regarding gay rights in my country, as I can't ever recall being told by a teacher/educator what homosexuality even was.

 

[FoolKiller]

Who gives a damn where you plant your seed if its consensual. Of course the bible would say somthin like "tho shall not lay with a man as he lays with a woman". It was writtin by straight men and straight men think thats disgusting. The bible never says anything bad about lesbians because lesbians are awsome. I dont read the bible but Im sure it doesnt say that, straight men wrote it.

If there was a straight guy, had two lesbos wanting to party with him, and he asked jesus what to do, jesus would slap him. If the man yall belive died on the cross for you came back to life for one day, just one day. And he was offered girls, drugs, little men, he would take them all. His father created them for the human race to enjoy, and enjoy them we will.

If you want to have sex with rocks, dogs, men, women, then I belive you should have the right to!!!! If you want to do drugs then I belive you should, ya only live once. The government should not infringe on our lives if were not hurting anyone. Who cares if I destroy my liver drinking....ohh wait, thats already legal and they dont give a DAMN!!!

So why do they care if gays get married??? ...............Oh yea the bible, A book telling us how to live our lives. I got news for ya people, we dont all get mansions in the sky when we die. Id rather have 72 virgins anyway!!!!!


This lie about hell is to scare you so that your a good citizen and dont sin. Dont these remind you of the LAWS we follow in everyday life? And doesnt anyone play tourist trophy anymore? "tho shall run at least 3 laps of the ring per week" - thats what god told me we all have to do, or he would keep the earthquakes coming.

So fun watching people rant about stuff they don't know about. The Bible only mentions men, not because it was written by straight men (although we can safely presume it was) but because it was written at a time and place when women weren't even counted in the census and during the parts of The Bible that were actually directed more at cleanliness than holiness. Leviticus also mentions sex with a woman on her period.

I suggest your assumptions about The Bible not be based on the statements of bigots who claim to be Christians.


And before anyone thinks I opened a door to say The Bible is sexist, I said the society was. Jesus had women whom he interacted with just as much as the men, to enough of a point that Catholics have actually given Mary an equally high status with the likes of Moses and Elijah, believing she ascended into Heaven and never suffered a physical death and is held as the highest of the saints.

Does anyone else think that this kind of thread should never have been allowed in the first place? I cannot see any justification for singling out a group of people and debating the morality of their existence. It simply doesn't seem fair to me. And the title question is absurd: 'alternative lifestyle'. There is no alternative.

Go back to post one, created in 2003 by an American citizen. Why would this be a relative topic for opinion and debate from 2003 America? Because the politics of the time were debating it, to the point of amendments being up for a vote that would ban gay marriage. It is relevant and is still a major point of discussion. California had this come up very recently. While it is very likely that outside the US this topic is a non-issue, here it still is very much a large issue.

The odd bit about that is that in all honesty the US government should have no roll in marriage, whatsoever. To anyone in the US that believes the government should be creating laws that prohibit gay marriage I have to ask if they also believe that the government should have the power to approve or disapprove of their heterosexual marriage, because that is the power you are giving them. You are saying that the government can have the power to show up at any point and tell you your marriage of 10 years is no longer allowed for whatever arbitrary reason the masses decide should disqualify a marriage.

Nonsense.

While I agree that Keef's point isn't quite related here, would you say that disallowing speech on an issue, particularly one that is in the public spotlight, would make those with a non-accepting point of view suddenly become accepting?

I could easily avoid discussions of racism and whatnot because I think the point of view of those who disagree is wrong, but then what good have I done? If instead of allowing racists or homophobes to debate the issues I legislate my morality upon them how am I anything more than a morality tyrant? No, true change does not come about by laws and rules that force actions upon those who wish to act and think differently. A true activist for change is a proselytizer, a debater, a person willing to discuss the ugly issues of the world. A law or rule intended to silence that which you find abhorrent affects no more change than a dictator can achieve.

True change comes when hearts and minds are changed, and no rule or law will ever achieve that. Silencing free speech is akin to silencing goodness and acceptance.

 

[PureAwesomeness]

While I agree that Keef's point isn't quite related here, would you say that disallowing speech on an issue, particularly one that is in the public spotlight, would make those with a non-accepting point of view suddenly become accepting?

I could easily avoid discussions of racism and whatnot because I think the point of view of those who disagree is wrong, but then what good have I done? If instead of allowing racists or homophobes to debate the issues I legislate my morality upon them how am I anything more than a morality tyrant? No, true change does not come about by laws and rules that force actions upon those who wish to act and think differently. A true activist for change is a proselytizer, a debater, a person willing to discuss the ugly issues of the world. A law or rule intended to silence that which you find abhorrent affects no more change than a dictator can achieve.

True change comes when hearts and minds are changed, and no rule or law will ever achieve that. Silencing free speech is akin to silencing goodness and acceptance.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed homosexual. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their existence represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

 

[PeterJB]

Recently, one of my friends admitted to being bisexual and having a few crushes on guys who go to our school. With me being a closet bisexual, I have the utmost of respect for him to come out and say that. Now, being a school environment, he gets harassed by almost every male in our grade (8).

Is it fair that he gets treated like that? No, and I believe that most of the guys don't really care that much for it. But because you have those few people that have been brought up with the insult of "gay" and have taken it to heart, you get people who don't want to be accused of homosexuality joining in on the harassment, and the domino effect takes hold and you end up having everybody not wanting to get called out.

I've had conversations with him about how it's all an image thing in high school, and I sincerely hope that changes in the future. And the sad thing is that it probably won't. There is a distinct lack of education regarding gay rights in my country, as I can't ever recall being told by a teacher/educator what homosexuality even was.

I'm one the fortunate few that received very little harrassement and discrimination, though I did only announce it properly about 2 years ago.

At your age a lot of people tend to be confused about their sexuality, so if they fear they may be gay then they will just harrasse anyone who is. This happened to me around yeay7/year 8 time. They never admitted to being gay or whatever but I could just tell anyway. But now, basically everyone is comfortable with whatever their sexuality may be, and everyones just stopped caring.

 

[FoolKiller]

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed homosexual. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their existence represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed christian. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their belief system represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed Libertarians. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their political philosophy represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed Democrats. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their political philosophy represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed Republicans. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their political philosophy represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed drug users. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their recreational activity represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed racist. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their existence represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.




See what I did there?

 

[fitftw]

gays have been around since the beginning of time.

Just as you and I get aroused when a beautiful woman walks by, a gay man gets aroused when you or I walk by. It's not a sickness, some people are just made to want their own sex. My sister is gay.

If you honestly think homosexuality is something "wrong" then you suck at life.

 

[occasionalracer]

I'm stunned that this alternative lifestyle gets so much respect here, I think it's absolutely unnatural, disgusting and something to be ashamed of. Any gay relationship should be covered up from the public. Like so many things in the world these days, a lot of traditional values and purely common sense ways of life are completely lost.
I guarantee just 20 years ago this type of poll would have yielded the opposite in votes for the acceptance of gays.
So I say SERIOUS PROBLEM, that goes for those who are straight and have voted it's Ok for those involved, cause that just means these people must have homosexual tendencies, which is awfully scary. This has nothing to do with being respectful or disrespectful either.

 

[FoolKiller]

I'm stunned that this alternative lifestyle gets so much respect here, I think it's absolutely unnatural, disgusting and something to be ashamed of. Any gay relationship should be covered up from the public. Like so many things in the world these days, a lot of traditional values and purely common sense ways of life are completely lost.

Huh? Why? How so? Define unnatural in light of the fact that it has been seen in nature.

I guarantee just 20 years ago this type of poll would have yielded the opposite in votes for the acceptance of gays.

And 200 years ago people would have voted that slavery is OK. What's this prove?

So I say SERIOUS PROBLEM, that goes for those who are straight and have voted it's Ok for those involved, cause that just means these people must have homosexual tendencies, which is awfully scary. This has nothing to do with being respectful or disrespectful either.

Hey, I oppose racism as well. Does that make me black?

 

[Danny]

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed homosexual. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their existence represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

Nonsense.

There aren't any here.

They're probably all far too busy discussing cosmetics.

 

[risuku13]

gays have been around since the beginning of time.

It's not a sickness, some people are just made to want their own sex. My sister is gay.

If you honestly think homosexuality is something "wrong" then you suck at life.

Some say its just a personal preference, about the subculture or environment, but then again I also believe it is somewhat biological. A mixture of various elements, really. e.g. less testosterone leads to effeminacy, etc. That's why some women look like men (body build, facial features) and vice versa. Then comes androgyny, media and whatever.

 

[TheCracker]

I'm stunned that this alternative lifestyle gets so much respect here, I think it's absolutely unnatural, disgusting and something to be ashamed of. Any gay relationship should be covered up from the public. Like so many things in the world these days, a lot of traditional values and purely common sense ways of life are completely lost.
I guarantee just 20 years ago this type of poll would have yielded the opposite in votes for the acceptance of gays.
So I say SERIOUS PROBLEM, that goes for those who are straight and have voted it's Ok for those involved, cause that just means these people must have homosexual tendencies, which is awfully scary. This has nothing to do with being respectful or disrespectful either.

I feel exactly the same way about Christians.

 

[fitftw]

I feel exactly the same way about Christians.

👍

What WOULDN'T Jesus do?

 

[Vince_Fiero]

Not clear if we can keep this on topic, I read very recently a remark from Marine Le Pen ( a woman, legal expert and extreme right party leader in France):

"If we allow homosexual marriage, why would we not allow polygamy as well."

Maybe the thread should indeed not be focused on one topic, but stating something more like:

Do you believe that: "Your sexual preferences are your business only?"

Even if this includes, in full respect of and transparency to your partners:

• relationships within the same gender
• gender changes
• several partners
• large age differences (above a certain legal age, ...)

I do!

On the "Homosexuality - serious problem?", this does seem to be a topic in society, so mentioning it in that context seems to be a freedom of speech right. I also do not like the way this is formulated, from there be careful the way you present things:

Words as weapons, sharper than knives. (INXS)

I am an arms dealer, fitting you with weapons in the form of words. (Fall Out Boy)

 

[FoolKiller]

I feel exactly the same way about Christians.

👍

What WOULDN'T Jesus do?

So long as the intolerance goes both ways the world stays in balance, I guess.

Yin and yang. Douche and bag.


EDIT:

Not clear if we can keep this on topic, I read very recently a remark from Marine Le Pen ( a woman, legal expert and extreme right party leader in France):

"If we allow homosexual marriage, why would we not allow polygamy as well."

I fail to see the problem. But then I point those who do back to my comments regarding government's role in marriage.

Maybe the thread should indeed not be focused on one topic, but stating something more like:

Do you believe that: "Your sexual preferences are your business only?"

Even if this includes, in full respect of and transparency to your partners:

• relationships within the same gender
• gender changes
• several partners
• large age differences (above a certain legal age, ...)

I do!

Still not seeing a problem with any of these.

On the "Homosexuality - serious problem?", this does seem to be a topic in society, so mentioning it in that context seems to be a freedom of speech right. I also do not like the way this is formulated, from there be careful the way you present things:

But it has never been conclusively proven via some form that homosexuality is something that someone can't help, so some people believe they are speaking out against something as bad as pedophilia or people truly wishing to just thrust disgusting behavior into the public spotlight.

My thought is that even if it were something that stemmed from the same kind of source as pedophilia or whatever, it still shouldn't matter. Pedophilia isn't bad because it is a choice or some form of mental disorder, but because people below an age of consent are involved.

Homosexuality, no matter where it comes from is between consenting adults, so I see no reason to prevent it from being treated the same as any other relationship between consenting adults.

 

[Roo]

I think it's absolutely unnatural

You are in Canada. I am over 2,500 miles away in the UK, and yet I can read your opinion on something seconds after you write it. What's natural about that? Or is the Internet disgusting and something to be ashamed of too?

 

[FoolKiller]

You are in Canada. I am over 2,500 miles away in the UK, and yet I can read your opinion on something seconds after you write it. What's natural about that? Or is the Internet disgusting and something to be ashamed of too?

Have you seen the Internet?

 

[Roo]

Have you seen the Internet?

3 minutes. Sorry, just doing some counting That had crossed my mind when I posted.

 

[Tired Tyres]

You are both confusing anti-racism with positive discrimination. The two are not (or at least should not be) the same.

There is no such thing as positive discrimination without an equal negative discrimination. In order to give to one, you much either take from or deny to another.

 

[Joel]

I'm stunned that this alternative lifestyle gets so much respect here, I think it's absolutely unnatural, disgusting and something to be ashamed of. Any gay relationship should be covered up from the public. Like so many things in the world these days, a lot of traditional values and purely common sense ways of life are completely lost.
I guarantee just 20 years ago this type of poll would have yielded the opposite in votes for the acceptance of gays.
So I say SERIOUS PROBLEM, that goes for those who are straight and have voted it's Ok for those involved, cause that just means these people must have homosexual tendencies, which is awfully scary. This has nothing to do with being respectful or disrespectful either.

This is just so out there I'm not sure if you're serious or trolling. However, opinions like yours are a serious problem, not homosexuals minding their own business. And you're right, it has nothing to do with being respectful or disrespectful. It has to do with you being unable to mind your own business.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I don't have a problem with gay people. But I do have a problem with gay people that make other gay people look bad.

As a comedian once said, I'm not in your face about my straightness...

But I'll accept a compliment from a gay man or woman though.

 

[Keef]

Not clear if we can keep this on topic, I read very recently a remark from Marine Le Pen ( a woman, legal expert and extreme right party leader in France):

"If we allow homosexual marriage, why would we not allow polygamy as well."

There are a few intelligent people out there who think any form of government should not have anything to do with marriage in any way. It is a religious institution, and therefore religious organizations, churches and whatnot, should be in charge of it.

The vast majority of politicians - including this French lady - are terribly mistaken about the issue as a whole. Debating what government should allow with respect to marriage is totally pointless because government should have nothing to do with it in the first place.

With government out of the picture, arguing stupid points like her's and wasting time is not a problem anymore.

 

[PureAwesomeness]

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed christian. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their belief system represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed Libertarians. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their political philosophy represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed Democrats. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their political philosophy represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed Republicans. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their political philosophy represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed drug users. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their recreational activity represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.

I think it is fair to assume that some members of GTP are indeed racist. For others to use this forum as a place to debate whether or not their existence represents a 'serious problem' for society strikes me as disrespectful.




See what I did there?

Yes, I do. You missed the point. All of the examples you listed are standpoints that people choose to take. You don't choose to be homosexual any more than you choose have to brown hair or green eyes.

There is no such thing as positive discrimination without an equal negative discrimination. In order to give to one, you much either take from or deny to another.

I know. That is an unfortunate and unavoidable consequence of positive discrimination; it is not its intention or objective though.