| Author | Message | ||
     Fast1075 |
If you don't care if the store bags your purchase in paper or plastic, you are bi-sacksual???? Speaking of handedness. I am left handed. so were both my parents, my sister, one of my grand parents, most of my aunts and uncles, and a few of my cousins. Hereditary or learned behavior? I write and throw left handed, fire a long gun right handed, but a hand gun left handed. As a mechanic, I am fully ambidextrous with tools. And if I'm gay, I'm a lesbian stuck in a man's body.  | ||
| J2blue |
Homophobia is a word created expressly for waging a deconstruction of social values to support the gay agenda. There is no fear of it, just a recognition that it is not a normal condition or natural behavior. If anything the average response to it is disgust, not fear. When the word "homophobia" was coined it was attempt to turn the tables and make opposition to that behavior be seen as abnormal. It was a tactic. I think if one were to examine any gay hate crimes closer they would find that it comes out of the same population, those who engage in homosexual behaviors. The division is between those who are afraid to be honest with themselves and others, and those who just go for it. In either case, the behavior is still unnatural and abnormal. And it isn't just between consenting adults, a simple fallacy, it affects society in the deepest way. But no one can see that if they are buried in a cult of individualism. Many people today have not presumed and have spent agonizing moments in reflection on this topic. I have many friends with whom I do not completely agree on their views with them, nor do I completely agree with their lifestyle choices(other than sex). We each have our faults and vices, but one need not force others to accept what one chooses to do as being healthy, normal, and worth celebrating just to make one be at peace with "who they are". Another point, simply saying that others who have called out someone else's behavior in a mean, rude, hurtful way does not alter the message, but it does condemn the messenger. Splinters and planks in the eye are still bad! | ||
| Boltrider |
Tennis great Rafael Nadal is a natural right-hander but taught himself to swing the racket left-handed. The dude is only left-handed when on the tennis court. Everything else is done as a righty.  (Message edited by boltrider on September 22, 2012) | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
Homosexuality being "unnatural and abnormal" is a social construct that is dependent upon time and place. Historically, there have been many societies that accept and even support homosexuality. There is no "agenda" attached to homophobia- it's merely a label applied to those who fear something they don't understand. It is the claim that homosexual behavior is not normal or natural that is dumbfounding. It has existed from the beginning of recorded human history and has been documented in the animal world. It cannot be claimed that homosexuality is not part of the natural world, and it is intrinsic to human nature. That being so, it is the responsibility of human beings to treat each other with decency and respect regardless of their sexual orientation. To support a belief that suggests there's something wrong with individuals based upon their sexual orientation is very sad indeed. | ||
| Sifo |
RBJ, Let me start the the "mental abnormalities" thing. I wasn't trying to say that homosexuality is a mental abnormality. I can see how it could be taken that way though. What I was trying to point out was that there are people who tend to avoid treatment. Those with mental abnormalities are an example of a tendency of that behavior. I have no idea if homosexuality is a mental or physical thing though. Trying to associate natural with normal is just incorrect. There are many things that happen in nature that are abnormal. Still, I think you would be very hard pressed to find examples of animals associating with their own sex as they would with a mate of the opposite sex. Isn't that pretty much what homosexuals claim of their relationships, that they are the equivalent of heterosexual relationships? Even if you could find examples of this, natural still doesn't mean normal. Gays seem to be content and happy with their "gayness" Are you sure about that? I'm not. I hear all the time how terrible it is to deal with being gay. It was brought up early in this thread. Clearly not everyone is so happy being gay. Let's be clear though. No one is talking about imposing a "cure" on someone who doesn't want it. What about those who would consider it though? I guess they just have to suck it up because we are too PC to consider the possibility that a cause for homosexuality might just be identifiable, and there for changeable. You talk of people talking from ignorance. At this point we don't know if homosexuality comes from genetics, chemical, environmental, or other causes. Yes we are in fact talking from ignorance. We all are. What a great place to be, right? | ||
| Sifo |
It just occurred to me... If we could identify the cause of our sexual preference, and learn to change it, perhaps a bunch of people will then choose to become gay so that that can be "normal" too. No, I don't believe it either. | ||
| Kenm123t |
If they were happy being gay why do they need every one elses approval? The Lgbtetcs seen to want validation from everyone if they were happy with being gay why would they care what we think! | ||
| 99savage |
My giggle of the day - well, actually it has been making me giggle since the homosexual community brought the genetic thing into it. Let's pretend they are correct & that it is genetic. If it is we should soon isolate the the DNA marker for it. When we do that it is reasonable to assume that parents will begin terminating the children with the marker en-utero. The giggles come when I imagine the dutiful little Leftists who were so for abortion last week rushing to their legislative halls to ban abortion. | ||
| Kenm123t |
ROFL 99 it will be fun to watch them swing in the wind | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
"If they were happy being gay why do they need every one elses approval? The Lgbtetcs seen to want validation from everyone if they were happy with being gay why would they care what we think!" "Let's pretend they are correct & that it is genetic. If it is we should soon isolate the the DNA marker for it. When we do that it is reasonable to assume that parents will begin terminating the children with the marker en-utero." I sincerely hope neither one of you is serious. Gays are not looking for approval- they're looking to be treated with the same common decency as everyone else. 99savage- your comments do not deserve a response. Some of the opinions being shared here are prime examples of the misconceptions, animosity, and bigotry faced on a daily basis by people who have done nothing but be born with a sexual orientation that's different from the societal norm of their time and place. Imagine how better the world would be if they simply could be allowed to live as they are without the fear of being "cured" or "corrected" by those who obviously know what's better for them. I sometimes wonder how some people can rationalize their own virulence.  | ||
| J2blue |
Not misconceptions, just different conclusions. Normal is a statistical phenomena, and calling homosexuality abnormal is a very precise and scientific statement. It isn't the complete absence of a behavior that makes it abnormal, it simply isn't supported statistically as a "norm". The why behind that is a different matter. I think most of the opinions shared in here have come from a well thought out position that isn't full of misconceptions at all. To suggest that they are is merely dismissive arrogance... in my book. Call it Modern Arrogance, if you will, the idea that the contemporary mind has somehow risen above the collective force of thousands of generations. I suppose we are all sticks in the mud for not supporting the triumph of the individual over society. Sorry, but I surely don't support that. It does not concern me in the least that others who wish to persuade me out of my opinion feel such contempt and hate for my kind. | ||
| 99savage |
Both Leftists & homosexuals make me giggle (I realize there is a very broad overlap), despair for humanity but giggle just the same. You just said"born with" - OK, I always start from the premise that I am wrong and those disagreeing with me are correct. - We will assume that homosexuals are "born with" a propensity to engage in other than hygienic behavior. - If indeed they are "born with" the propensity it is more than reasonable to assume they will soon identify the marker. (Have seen some, not very well received research that they have. - Making no judgment on its worth) - Further, the Left promotes terminating children en-utero at any time, for any reason and has enshrined that into law. - Do we agree so far? - Children are routinely terminated for having Down's syndrome and especially for being female. - And the "right" to do so in enshrined into law; is in fact, part of the Democrat platform. - Do we agree again? OK, we agree so far. Is it not perfectly reasonable that when we get to the point that amniocentesis can detect the marker, would-be homosexuals will be terminated to the extent that it is legal? No I do't "hate" anybody. - For me this is just a matter of hygiene. I have already ceded the public rest-rooms to my little friends in the homosexual community and I peaceably whiz by the roadside.} | ||
| Sifo |
Imagine how better the world would be if they simply could be allowed to live as they are without the fear of being "cured" or "corrected" by those who obviously know what's better for them. I see you continue the mischaracterization of the position as something that someone feels should be forced upon someone else. It's a sure sign of a failed position when you rely on this tactic. | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
99savage- I continue to be surprised by the lack of civility and common human decency in your comments, and even more so that you come across as proud of it. I don't enjoy discussions with those espousing an unprincipled view. Sifo- it is simply that homosexuals cannot lead a life that's normal to them in a society bent on "adjusting" their behaviour. Homosexuals do not intend to regulate heterosexuals' behaviour, why is it that heterosexuals seem intent upon regulating homosexual behavior? Again, the issue is created and sustained by the "normal" populace, yet is blamed on the taken out on the "abnormal" populace. How does it become acceptable to treat fellow human beings in such a manner? | ||
| Sifo |
RBJ, In what way is anyone in this discussion trying to regulate the behavior of anyone? I just don't see it. If you can't support that assertion, then your entire argument is moot. | ||
| Sifo |
BTW, I see pretty straight forward logic in what 99savage is saying. It's a predictable course of events given our current laws and views. | ||
| Kenm123t |
RBJ When the lgbt commuity starts acting like adults instead of spoiled nasty little children. LGGTES whatevers talk about decency Now that is a real laugh! | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
I'm honestly trying to figure out if what I'm reading here is veiled vitriol or contorted precepts. Where does one learn such ignoble stances? | ||
| Julie |
RBJ - I'll let you in on a little secret - Sifo is ignorant and doesn't even know it. Ignorance is bliss! | ||
| Aesquire |
When the Greens take over, and they make homosexuality mandatory to reduce the population, and ban hetero sex by pain of imprisonment or death, and abortions mandatory.... we'll see who's cheerful. Think that can't happen? Abortion is already mandatory in China under the one child policy. ( I had a fellow get furious with me for calling China's policy "mandatory". He insisted it was NOT. They just send you to prison if you disobey....... By that "logic" taxes aren't mandatory, and murder is a "choice".... ) One of the biggest gifts last year for the PC green crowd was the DVD series "Life After People". Detailing the wonders of a world where we're all gone and our crumbling cities provide shelter to the deer, polar bears, and cute, cute foxes roaming the post apocalyptic world. ( oddly undamaged by war, so I assume the release of the Last Plague by an Eco-terrorist group... "12 Monkeys" anyone? ) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114746/ So a Greenie regime will find itself with a nihilistic view, a love of cute furry things and a hatred of humans, and our despoiling the Earth and Mother Gaia. The New Religion in the New Normal World could easily ban Hetero-sex as an abomination. IF/When that day comes, the hetero's will be fighting for the right to have sex with whomever they wish. The Irony will be lost on most.  P.S. the idea of "other than hygienic behavior" is just funny. We've had soap and condoms for over a century. For myself, if it's not sweaty, wet and fun, I assume I'm doing it wrong. YMMV. | ||
| Sifo |
Julie, I've already pointed out that we are all ignorant on this subject. At least I'm in favor of pushing past the ignorance. Others seem to be offended by the suggestion of actually studying these issues.  RBJ, if you are really trying to understand the positions being posted, please go back and reread what has been written where I've pointed out how you have repeatedly misrepresented the opposing opinion. It's been presented and clarified quite well at this point. If you really want to understand it, it's all right there. Any further misrepresentations of the opposing opinion simply demonstrate your unwillingness to engage in an honest discussion. | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
Sifo, the "opposing" position isn't hard to understand, frankly, it's hard to believe. What I'm reading are views that find it humorous to consider a future where the unborn are killed based on homosexual genetic markers, heterosexuality is banned, finding "cures" for homosexuality- where does all this venom come from? I enjoy honest discussion- what is challenging is feeling comfortable with whom to have the discussion. This topic has taken a very dark and disturbing tangent. (Message edited by redbuelljunkie on September 23, 2012) | ||
| Kenm123t |
RBJ you confuse fear with annoyance. we have no fear of lgbtetcs Were just tired of hearing how bigoted every one who doesnt agree with lgbtetcs are. You can live as perverted and deviant as you wish. We dont care just leave us alone The funny part is the lgbtetcs and the murderous abortionists are of the same mindset . Its ok to kill the unborn except for those with the gay Gene will be the next political plank for the demoncrats. | ||
| Sifo |
What I'm reading are views that find it humorous to consider a future where the unborn are killed based on homosexual genetic markers, Seems to me you are blaming the messenger. We already live in a world where we kill the unborn based on criteria such as the sex of the baby. Yes, here in the US. Is it really hard to imagine that this will be true if we find a genetic marker for sexual orientation? I think the humor you are talking about was the irony of the situation being pointed out. You make it sound like dead gay baby jokes were being told. PLEASE stop misrepresenting what is being said. heterosexuality is banned, I have my doubts about that one. Again it isn't presented as where we would want to go, but simple a possible path in the future. If you want to avoid heading down a path such as that, it can be helpful to read the road signs before the fork in the road. Surely you are not uncomfortable with the idea that we should NOT become a society that banns heterosexuality? I don't see your problem with this. Please expand upon these thoughts. finding "cures" for homosexuality Again, I'm not clear why a preventive treatment for homosexuality would be such a horrible thing. It's those defending the homosexual lifestyle that have made the case of how horrible a thing it is to grow up with. Do you disagree with that assertion? I believe it's been quite well documented. What I don't understand is that if there was something that could be done that would prevent this tormented life, why would that be a bad thing? Is a cure for... let's pick chronic depression for example, equally abhorrent to you? I know you want homosexuality to be considered "normal". The problem is that statistically, it just isn't. You can want it to be all you want, but a teen growing up attracted to those of their own sex will always understand that they are different from their peers. I just don't understand why you would insist that there be no treatment to alleviate this. Again, no one is suggesting any sort of forced treatment. It would simple be a choice that would be available. What horror! | ||
| Sifo |
RBJ - I'll let you in on a little secret - Sifo is ignorant and doesn't even know it. Ignorance is bliss! One other irony in this situation... I admit to a huge amount of ignorance on this matter. That's one of the problems. I'm willing to hear any facts that you can bring to the table. That is the cure for ignorance, is it not? You do know the meaning of the word I presume? What does that say about those who claim to not be ignorant, but refuse to divulge their knowledge to those wanting to learn? Thanks for sharing! | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
PLEASE stop misrepresenting what is being said. Sifo, referring to comments made by others is not misrepresentation. Surely you are not uncomfortable with the idea that we should NOT become a society that banns heterosexuality? I am uncomfortable with a society that judges individuals based on their sexual orientation... or race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, age, disability, or any other excuse to discriminate based on prejudice. Again, I'm not clear why a preventive treatment for homosexuality would be such a horrible thing. You would need to ask homosexuals if that's something they'd be interested in. I'd bet they'd say their "tormented life" is the result of how they're treated by intolerant, malicious individuals with the tacit consent of current social constructs. Again, we witness the suggestion that homosexuality should be "cured" by someone who I assume isn't homosexual. Where does this need to "correct" homosexuals come from? Are you capable of considering that they may have a different point of view- and that it may be valid? I accept that homosexuality isn't statistically common, but that doesn't make it abnormal. It is what it is. It has always existed and will always exist. The problem with homosexuality is not intrinsic, the problem stems from the belief that it must be alleviated- and the concomitant actions of those wishing to "correct" it. | ||
| Sifo |
Sifo, referring to comments made by others is not misrepresentation. However restating those comments differently is misrepresentation. I've pointed out a few examples where you have done that in this thread. I am uncomfortable with a society that judges individuals based on their sexual orientation... or race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, age, disability, or any other excuse to discriminate based on prejudice. The problem is that you can't keep society from judging people. You do understand that you are judging those who are judging others, don't you? You are no better or worse than those you are pointing to. Beyond that, I'm NOT trying to make any judgment on gays here. I don't know if you understand that or not. You would need to ask homosexuals if that's something they'd be interested in. I'd bet they'd say their "tormented life" is the result of how they're treated by intolerant, malicious individuals with the tacit consent of current social constructs. Again, we witness the suggestion that homosexuality should be "cured" by someone who I assume isn't homosexual. I did a search and here's the first article I clicked on... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/12/nyregion/12group .html?pagewanted=all&_moc.semityn.www I wish it didn't get into religion so much, but it is from what some would call a reputable source. I would hardly call it an article that takes the stance that gays NEED treatment however. The point I want to make though is that gays ARE seeking treatment. They are clearly uncomfortable with their situation early on when they realize they are different than the majority of the population. That BTW, is pretty much the definition of "not normal". I'm sorry for that little bit of truth. Where does this need to "correct" homosexuals come from? Are you capable of considering that they may have a different point of view- and that it may be valid? And here we are back to misrepresenting your opponents position. I have no need to have gays treated at all. They can also have any view point on this that they want. That BTW, is getting into it being a choice, not a condition of birth BTW. Which is it? That kind of get to the point. We just don't have a clear understanding of why some are gay. At the same time, it's undeniable (at least to anyone willing to accept truth) that many are looking for a way to be treated. Reading the article I posted, it's also clear that current "treatments" are failing quite miserably. Frankly, I'm not the least bit surprised about that. Current treatments are treating it like a psychological issue. I have my doubts about that being correct. Until we are willing to allow this to be examined clinically, without damning those who are willing to examine this issue, there will be no progress at all. Seriously, who has the more open mind on this subject? Who is really speaking from ignorance? Who is really offering an individual to best choose for themselves what they feel will be best for them? | ||
| Sifo |
The question is, if they don't want treatment, why is treatment offered, and why are they getting treatment. The obvious answer is that many are in fact, looking for treatment. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/09032 5222008.htm Given the known poor results of current treatment, they must be very desperate to even give it a try. Doesn't is border on inhumane to tell these people that as a society, we just will not tolerate them having the option of good treatment? Is that not what you are doing when you condemn those who would simply suggest that a proper treatment could be found? Please explain where I'm wrong about this. | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
Sifo, your pompous and smug demeanor detract from your presuppositions. You're removing the impetus to continue the dialogue. There is no "winning" this argument- in the end all we'll have is how we conducted ourselves, and you continue to make me question the merit of continuing. | ||
| Pwnzor |
Every gay person I know is miserable inside. Just my observation, they can't really hide it no matter how they try. |
