The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[Joel]

Why would it be the Church's?

What would it be?

As far as I'm concerned, it should be whoever wants to get married's responsibility. If a Catholic couple want to be married in a Catholic church, they should go to their church and get married. If a gay couple want to be married, they should be married wherever would permit them to.

A legal marriage contract could certainly be drawn up, and the bride, groom, or brides and grooms could decide what conditions they wanted to be included in the contract themselves.

I just think marriage is such a personal thing. What some people think is a "good marriage" may be the complete opposite to another. What some believe is a total deal breaker is another person's fantasy. I don't think it's right that the government hands out licenses and makes laws on marriage, when it's such a personal opinion on what makes up a good marriage.

I believe marriage should be whatever the people who are getting married want it to be. If one couple wants a traditional Christian, monogamous marriage, they should include that in the terms of their marriage. If two people want to have a polygamous marriage, or have multiple partners while remaining married, that should be their own decision. I think that it isn't fair to anyone that a government can decide who can and can't get married. And if the government weren't involved in the first place, gay New Yorkers wouldn't have to wait until 2011 to get married. I mean, it's great that it's legal in NY now, and it's certainly a step forward. If the government is involved in marriage, it had damn well better be for everybody, but I think it would be better if it was a private matter, and not the business of the state.

 

[BubbleBelly542]

homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1,500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them. Every last person I have know who is gay says they were either born that way, or they were affected by a heterosexual predator who molested them at a pre pubescent age. None of them have ever said they were once attracted to the opposite sex, then switched. No person can DECIDE to be attracted to something they are not naturally attracted to. You are a bigot by the definition of the word.
The consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions is that homosexuality is a normal and positive variation in human sexual orientation, though many religious societies, including Catholicism, Mormonism, and Islam have traditionally taught that homosexual activity is sinful or dysfunctional. If you believe homosexuality is wrong because your religion told you so, then you need to pull your head out of the sand and think for yourself.

I don't believe this could have been said any better, especially that last sentence.

 

[BubbleBelly542]

I think it's absolutely unnatural, disgusting and something to be ashamed of.

I think intolerance is absolutely unnatural (look at evolution for example, meaning creatures adapted and began to be able to tolerate different things), disgusting (because you won't let someone be how they want), and is something to be ashamed of (because it makes me think you are the kind of person who needs everything his way).

What if you had a child and they were gay? Would you disown them? Would you call them disgusting, and tell them to be ashamed?

What if it was you who was being to you were disguising and should be ashamed? Not even over your sexuality, just something?

 

[Machate-man]

Hooray for the San Francisco Pride Parade, I got stuck in 2 hours of traffic just trying to get home

Although I dont mind what they're doing, I wish the Pride organizers put the parade somewhere away from the rush-hour spaces
[/rant]

The nice thing with San Francisco is that extremists against the Gay Community get Hated upon by everyone!

We're open to anyone, except KKK

 

[Crispy]

I think intolerance is absolutely unnatural (look at evolution for example, meaning creatures adapted and began to be able to tolerate different things), disgusting (because you won't let someone be how they want), and is something to be ashamed of (because it makes me think you are the kind of person who needs everything his way).

What if you had a child and they were gay? Would you disown them? Would you call them disgusting, and tell them to be ashamed?

What if it was you who was being to you were disguising and should be ashamed? Not even over your sexuality, just something?

Well judging by his feeling towards gay people I doubt he would believe that evolution happened anyway.

 

[sumbrownkid]

homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1,500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them. Every last person I have know who is gay says they were either born that way, or they were affected by a heterosexual predator who molested them at a pre pubescent age. None of them have ever said they were once attracted to the opposite sex, then switched. No person can DECIDE to be attracted to something they are not naturally attracted to. You are a bigot by the definition of the word.
The consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions is that homosexuality is a normal and positive variation in human sexual orientation, though many religious societies, including Catholicism, Mormonism, and Islam have traditionally taught that homosexual activity is sinful or dysfunctional. If you believe homosexuality is wrong because your religion told you so, then you need to pull your head out of the sand and think for yourself.

It's not just religion, but also culture too. Culture has a huge impact on social issues, perhaps more so than religion at times.

 

[BubbleBelly542]

Well judging by his feeling towards gay people I doubt he would believe that evolution happened anyway.

Very good point

 

[FoolKiller]

Why would it be the Church's?

What would it be?

Marriage is nothing more than a legally binding financial and social contract between consenting adults. Why does the government need to be involved in deciding who can do that? My marriage ceremony began at 1:00 PM on a Saturday, I said, "I Do," and was presented as a married couple at 1:30ish, although the state recognizes it as the 1:45 put on the marriage certificate by the priest when he signed it. Why is my memory of my wedding not when I was legally married? And why did it cost me money to get the government to agree to that?

But here is a good question, and it goes for anyone arguing for a law made in either way. When you ask that a law be made specifically recognizing or specifically banning a homosexual marriage you are saying that your own marriage is subject to the approval of government. You are saying that whom you marry is at the whim of politicians and/or the voting public.

Now, if you really do think someone has to be in charge of that, then I say it is time you grew up and took some personal responsibility. Quit asking for a nanny to hold your hand through life and show that you can make a commitment to a person without some authority figure reassuring you that it is OK. Seeing someone cry because someone they don't like has the same thing they do or needing someone to hold their hand helping and reassuring them as they go about their day is the stuff I see at my daughter's daycare.

 

[Public'sTwin]

Marriage is nothing more than a legally binding financial and social contract between consenting adults. Why does the government need to be involved in deciding who can do that? My marriage ceremony began at 1:00 PM on a Saturday, I said, "I Do," and was presented as a married couple at 1:30ish, although the state recognizes it as the 1:45 put on the marriage certificate by the priest when he signed it. Why is my memory of my wedding not when I was legally married? And why did it cost me money to get the government to agree to that?

But here is a good question, and it goes for anyone arguing for a law made in either way. When you ask that a law be made specifically recognizing or specifically banning a homosexual marriage you are saying that your own marriage is subject to the approval of government. You are saying that whom you marry is at the whim of politicians and/or the voting public.

Now, if you really do think someone has to be in charge of that, then I say it is time you grew up and took some personal responsibility. Quit asking for a nanny to hold your hand through life and show that you can make a commitment to a person without some authority figure reassuring you that it is OK. Seeing someone cry because someone they don't like has the same thing they do or needing someone to hold their hand helping and reassuring them as they go about their day is the stuff I see at my daughter's daycare.

They were rhetorical questions (aimed at Noob 616), but QFP[osterity] anyway.

 

[Sander 001]

If you're against gay, you may be gay yourself and you're just exercising self hatred:
Top 10 Anti-Gay Activists Caught Being Gay

Known as Pastor Ted to his congregation at New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, Ted Haggard was outed by prostitute, and professional masseur, Mike Jones in November 2006 for paying him to engage in sex with him for three years.

Haggard had supported Colorado Amendment 43, which bans same-sex marriage in the state.

In his own words, he's not a homosexual, he's just a "heterosexual with issues."

 

[Villain]

The Onion is always the best.

 

[AndersonG22]

Following a warm farewell in which Ruggiero hugged Benedict—an incident the Holy Father described as "not even weird or anything" - LMAO

 

[PeterJB]

If only such an article was true.

 

[fitftw]

The Onion is always the best.

👍👍👍👍👍

 

[Danny]

👍

 

[Farynthane]

For me it doesn't matter if someone is bi-sexual, homosexual, straight or transsexual etc.. Everyone should decide that themselves, since it's their own live. And if they are happy with that, what's the problem?

 

[Prosthetic]

Marriage is nothing more than a legally binding financial and social contract between consenting adults. Why does the government need to be involved in deciding who can do that? My marriage ceremony began at 1:00 PM on a Saturday, I said, "I Do," and was presented as a married couple at 1:30ish, although the state recognizes it as the 1:45 put on the marriage certificate by the priest when he signed it. Why is my memory of my wedding not when I was legally married? And why did it cost me money to get the government to agree to that?

But here is a good question, and it goes for anyone arguing for a law made in either way. When you ask that a law be made specifically recognizing or specifically banning a homosexual marriage you are saying that your own marriage is subject to the approval of government. You are saying that whom you marry is at the whim of politicians and/or the voting public.

Now, if you really do think someone has to be in charge of that, then I say it is time you grew up and took some personal responsibility. Quit asking for a nanny to hold your hand through life and show that you can make a commitment to a person without some authority figure reassuring you that it is OK. Seeing someone cry because someone they don't like has the same thing they do or needing someone to hold their hand helping and reassuring them as they go about their day is the stuff I see at my daughter's daycare.

Great post FK 👍

But as long as the government is involved there has to be people to step up and change a few things. Then maybe, just maybe we get to the point where it doesn't require the approval of a higher authority. The fact that there is any authority about ones personal social life is quite comical.

 

[terminator363]

I don't know, but why is it so talked about, I mean I honestly don't care if people were same sex, or having intercourse with chickens (or maybe I do mind about the chicken bit). But never the less, I don't need to know or care about people with the same sex having sex. I mean radio, TV, all alike won't shut up about it. If you're going to do it do it, it's not my business it's yours.

Also, all this gay pride is unnecessary because if the people who are gay don't want others disliking them, don't go around in a pink float with your wiener hanging out through a leather thing. Keep it in your pants.

This is one reason I don't like it. I'm fine with it if you're not extreme about it but c'mon! WTF! What's with the extreme pink? What's with Pride parades? I'm straight and we don't have a straight pride parade where everyone is naked? What gives?

So in conclusion. Do it but do it like any normal human being would do it without making a big deal about it or attracting unnecessary attention. 💡


Thank You.

 

[fitftw]

you know how a lot of guys 'show off' to attract women? Well maybe gay guys have to 'show off' to attract other gay guys.

 

[Prosthetic]

I don't know, but why is it so talked about, I mean I honestly don't care if people were same sex, or having intercourse with chickens (or maybe I do mind about the chicken bit). But never the less, I don't need to know or care about people with the same sex having sex. I mean radio, TV, all alike won't shut up about it. If you're going to do it do it, it's not my business it's yours.

Also, all this gay pride is unnecessary because if the people who are gay don't want others disliking them, don't go around in a pink float with your wiener hanging out through a leather thing. Keep it in your pants.

This is one reason I don't like it. I'm fine with it if you're not extreme about it but c'mon! WTF! What's with the extreme pink? What's with Pride parades? I'm straight and we don't have a straight pride parade where everyone is naked? What gives?

So in conclusion. Do it but do it like any normal human being would do it without making a big deal about it or attracting unnecessary attention. 💡


Thank You.

They do it because its a problem that needs to be fixed. If they didn't say anything or do anything no one would care and they would continue having less rights. Who the **** cares if they were pink, who cares if there are parades. They aren't forcing you to go.

Straight people don't have pride parades because there aren't people harassing them for being straight, and they have all the rights in the world. Clearly this whole thing is going straight over your head.

 

[Danny]

Also, all this gay pride is unnecessary because if the people who are gay don't want others disliking them, don't go around in a pink float with your wiener hanging out through a leather thing. Keep it in your pants.

When civil liberties are equal, then it will cease to be necessary.

Also, stereotype much?

I think you may have missed the point...

 

[thepineapple1]

I haven't a problem with homosexuality whatsoever, I don't think of homosexual people any other than I do of heterosexual people and frankly, I couldn't care less about what they do or not do.

You couldn't care less? Because their genitalia preference has given some of them the idea that they should get married as *normal people do.
Also, should we start closing down streets for people to parade about what they thrust up their poop shoot?

*Normal...the norm...the majority. Seeing as how the majority does not like sausage (whilst having their own sausage) or a beaver(whilst having their own beaver), it's only logical to call them the opposite = abnormal/irregular/odd/strange/unbalanced/insane.
http://thesaurus.com/browse/normal

 

[Prosthetic]

You couldn't care less? Because their genitalia preference has given some of them the idea that they should get married as *normal people do.
Also, should we start closing down streets for people to parade about what they thrust up their poop shoot?

*Normal...the norm...the majority. Seeing as how the majority does not like sausage (whilst having their own sausage) or a beaver(whilst having their own beaver), it's only logical to call them the opposite = abnormal/irregular/odd/strange/unbalanced/insane.
http://thesaurus.com/browse/normal

I don't like whip cream. Most people seem to like it, does that make me abnormal? Does that mean I should have my marriage rights stripped?

EDIT: Funny how you also can't seem to make a post without mentioning another very wrong stereotype.

 

[Luminis]

You couldn't care less? Because their genitalia preference has given some of them the idea that they should get married as normal people do.

Why would anyone care about whom someone else gets married to, as long as both of them are consenting adults?

Also, should we start closing down streets for people to parade about what they thrust up their poop shoot?

No different from closing down streets because some people want to celebrate their love for (in my opinion) crappy electronic music, for example.

 

[thepineapple1]

I have male best friends, as everyone else. I however don't feel the need to whip my out and start doing things.
And that's the only difference between a regular relationship & a gay one.
It's obviously a psychological illness; same like the need to do things with under-aged children or whatever other long list of horrible fetishes sick people have come up with.

Why would anyone care about whom someone else gets married to, as long as both of them are consenting adults?

Because the act of marriage came from religion (not that I'm religious, but that's irrelevant). They are obviously trying to change what's been happening for as long as man has lived.
In ancient Greece & Rome (and probably other cultures), such behaviour was accepted, yet there were no marriages.

No different from closing down streets because some people want to celebrate their love for (in my opinion) crappy electronic music, for example.

Music is something we listen to. It's fully accepted and has been part of us since we developed ears. EVERYONE listens to some form of music, so to celebrate it is a no brained. But few same-sex people have intercourse. So why do I need to go on alternate routes, because a bunch of fairies want to walk around in leather straps, and why do I need to explain to my children (if I had any) who these people are and what they are trying to achieve. (Obviously they want the whole world to know that they suck )

But sure, let's just let everyone who does something out of the ordinary get full rights. Why should we ever care, right?
If they don't want to be considered different, then why the heck are they going out of their way so much to tell the whole world "Hey look at us, and know what we do between the bed-sheet"?
Is their mentality like "Well no one is persecuting us (in the white world at least) so let's try to get more right, just for the fun".

 

[G.T.Ace]

EDIT: Funny how you also can't seem to make a post without mentioning another very wrong stereotype.

Because he's one himself. I'm not even going to try to argue with him, especially not after the last post.

EDIT: Oops, two different people, never mind.

 

[Luminis]

Because the act of marriage came from religion (not that I'm religious, but that's irrelevant). They are obviously trying to change what's been happening for as long as man has lived.
In ancient Greece & Rome (and probably other cultures), such behaviour was accepted, yet there were no marriages.

Obviously, by now, there's a bit more to marriage than what there was to it two hundred years ago. Think of texation or of the ability to visit your partner in a hospital and such.

Music is something we listen to. It's fully accepted and has been part of us since we developed ears. EVERYONE listens to some form of music, so to celebrate it isn't a no brained. But few same-sex people have intercourse. So why do I need to go on alternate routes, because a bunch of fairies want to walk around in leather straps.

Everybody listens to music, everbody has sexual intercourse (well, most people do). Only a certain amount of people indulge in techno music or same-sex intercourse. So why do I need to go on alternate routes, because a bunch of ravers wants to walk around in bright green and orange clothes.

If they don't want to be considered different, then why the heck are they going out of their way so much to tell the whole world "Hey look at us, and know what we do between the bed-sheet"?

For one thing, I'd assume, because of a bunch of homophobe rednecks, in their raised pick-up trucks with their Confederate flag in the rear window? (See, I can use dumb stereotypes as well. Cool, isn't it? )

 

[thepineapple1]

Oh, it seems there are enough homophobes around to keep you company, no need to worry

And equally as many *homo-lovers to keep YOU company
*(I don't know any antonym to "homophobe" so don't report me, correct me instead)

Everybody listens to music, everbody has sexual intercourse (well, most people do). Only a certain amount of people indulge in techno music or same-sex intercourse. So why do I need to go on alternate routes, because a bunch of ravers wants to walk around in bright green and orange clothes.

Why are you comparing music with sex?
Just to name a single major differences: You can listen to music from the moment you're born, but you're not allowed to have sex until the age of 12-18 (different countries have different policies on this, but you're smart enough to get my point).

For one thing, I'd assume, because of a bunch of homophobe rednecks, in their raised pick-up trucks with their Confederate flag in the rear window? (See, I can use dumb stereotypes as well. Cool, isn't it? )

I don't see how that replies in any sort of way to my statement.
"If they don't want to be considered different, then why the heck are they going out of their way so much to tell the whole world "Hey look at us, and know what we do between the bed-sheet"?"

 

[Luminis]

And equally as many homo-lovers to keep YOU company

He, thankfully, I'm sure enough of my own sexuality to not think much into a comment like that

Why are you comparing music with sex?
Just to name a single major differences: You can listen to music from the moment you're born, but you're not allowed to have sex until the age of 12-18 (different countries have different policies on this, but you're smart enough to get my point).

I don't see how it matters when you're allowed to start it.

Bottom line is, you'll be getting stuck in traffic because of other stuff that some people like and you don't. How's that an argument against homosexuality?

 

[thepineapple1]

He, thankfully, I'm sure enough of my own sexuality to not think much into a comment like that

I don't see how it matters when you're allowed to start it.

Bottom line is, you'll be getting stuck in traffic because of other stuff that some people like and you don't. How's that an argument against homosexuality?

Obviously all you want to do is joke around, and aren't smart enough to come up with anything related to what I'm saying. Age has nothing to do with it now; nothing has anything to do with it now, right?
Basically you're just 'trolling'.

And really Luminis, are all your comebacks about pointing out the flaws in other things, in stead of the topic on hand?