|
On November 24 2012 15:43 DeepElemBlues wrote:Lots of Nazis and Commies are really disappointed that they got started too early. If they'd waited until the post-George Bush era, the isolationists would have been a much bigger nuisance to the free world.
Hasn't imposing morals on people (or at least trying your best to enforce fair and "correct ones") been the basis for human societies.. Forever?
Like.. Agreeing that killing people is bad, and raping people is bad.
|
On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers.
If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom.
|
On November 24 2012 15:46 Glurkenspurk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 15:43 DeepElemBlues wrote:We can not impose our morals on others. Plain and simple. Lots of Nazis and Commies are really disappointed that they got started too early. If they'd waited until the post-George Bush era, the isolationists would have been a much bigger nuisance to the free world. Hasn't imposing morals on people (or at least trying your best to enforce fair and "correct ones") been the basis for human societies.. Forever? Like.. Agreeing that killing people is bad, and raping people is bad.
Yeah, but you see, most posters on TL were entering puberty at some point when George W. Bush was president, so George W. Bush ruined the idea of imposing things on other countries in these posters' minds (even if those other countries deserve some imposing).
George W. Bush ruined a lot of things. If it wasn't for him, the man who is currently president wouldn't be president. Yeah, I blame Bush for that too.
|
United States43672 Posts
On November 24 2012 15:53 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 15:46 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 15:43 DeepElemBlues wrote:We can not impose our morals on others. Plain and simple. Lots of Nazis and Commies are really disappointed that they got started too early. If they'd waited until the post-George Bush era, the isolationists would have been a much bigger nuisance to the free world. Hasn't imposing morals on people (or at least trying your best to enforce fair and "correct ones") been the basis for human societies.. Forever? Like.. Agreeing that killing people is bad, and raping people is bad. Yeah, but you see, most posters on TL were entering puberty at some point when George W. Bush was president, so George W. Bush ruined the idea of imposing things on other countries in these posters' minds (even if those other countries deserve some imposing). George W. Bush ruined a lot of things. If it wasn't for him, the man who is currently president wouldn't be president. Yeah, I blame Bush for that too.
I think you can believe in a moral imperative to intervene while at the same time believing that the circumstances in Iraq did not qualify as such.
|
On November 24 2012 16:04 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 15:53 DeepElemBlues wrote:On November 24 2012 15:46 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 15:43 DeepElemBlues wrote:We can not impose our morals on others. Plain and simple. Lots of Nazis and Commies are really disappointed that they got started too early. If they'd waited until the post-George Bush era, the isolationists would have been a much bigger nuisance to the free world. Hasn't imposing morals on people (or at least trying your best to enforce fair and "correct ones") been the basis for human societies.. Forever? Like.. Agreeing that killing people is bad, and raping people is bad. Yeah, but you see, most posters on TL were entering puberty at some point when George W. Bush was president, so George W. Bush ruined the idea of imposing things on other countries in these posters' minds (even if those other countries deserve some imposing). George W. Bush ruined a lot of things. If it wasn't for him, the man who is currently president wouldn't be president. Yeah, I blame Bush for that too. I think you can believe in a moral imperative to intervene while at the same time believing that the circumstances in Iraq did not qualify as such.
I didn't mean to imply that Iraq deserved it with my parenthetical comment. It was meant to be read as thanks to him fucking up Iraq, the very passionate negative attitude generally towards intervention and also the "we can't impose our morals on others" are both far, far more popular than they would be otherwise.
|
On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom.
Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it.
|
Just so we get this straight no religion I know fundamentally deems it okay to oppress others in any form. But all major religions I am aware of do reject homosexuality.
People are homophobic and so use religion as a tool to justify their actions against it. Before marriage become a law. It was a religious union.
The persecution of people isn't within religious doctrines.
Sexuality especially for the purpose of pleasure is also not advocated in a number of religions. Because it can be destructive to your spiritual growth. That's why some have a sex after marriage doctrine.
Technically speaking even people having sex outside of marriage, should be frown upon by religion.
This is homophobia plain and simple.
|
On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it.
Why?
|
On November 24 2012 16:10 KingAce wrote:
Just so we get this straight no religion I know fundamentally deems it okay to oppress others in any form. But all major religions I am aware of do reject homosexuality.
People are homophobic and so use religion as a tool to justify their actions against it. Before marriage become a law. It was a religious union.
The persecution of people isn't within religious doctrines.
Sexuality especially for the purpose of pleasure is also not advocated in a number of religions. Because it can be destructive to your spiritual growth. That's why some have a sex after marriage doctrine.
Technically speaking even people having sex outside of marriage, should be frown upon by religion.
This is homophobia plain and simple.
Marriage wasn't initiated by religious groups, in fact there is plenty of evidence for it's existence over many cultures without religion having any part.
I'm also not homophobic, I am aware of what you do, I understand it and have accepted that it exists. Doesn't mean that I have to like it or agree with it. I am also not religious.
|
On November 24 2012 16:15 HTOMario wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:10 KingAce wrote:
Just so we get this straight no religion I know fundamentally deems it okay to oppress others in any form. But all major religions I am aware of do reject homosexuality.
People are homophobic and so use religion as a tool to justify their actions against it. Before marriage become a law. It was a religious union.
The persecution of people isn't within religious doctrines.
Sexuality especially for the purpose of pleasure is also not advocated in a number of religions. Because it can be destructive to your spiritual growth. That's why some have a sex after marriage doctrine.
Technically speaking even people having sex outside of marriage, should be frown upon by religion.
This is homophobia plain and simple. Marriage wasn't initiated by religious groups, in fact there is plenty of evidence for it's existence over many cultures without religion having any part. I'm also not homophobic, I am aware of what you do, I understand it and have accepted that it exists. Doesn't mean that I have to like it or agree with it. I am also not religious.
Why do you not agree with homosexuality?
|
On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why?
Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend.
A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here.
So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue.
If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such.
I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them.
Again it's not something I hate, just something I think we should be focusing on fixing instead of endorsing.
|
On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them.
How come people like you always preface their remarks with "I have gay friends"?
|
On November 24 2012 16:23 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them. How come people like you always preface their remarks with "I have gay friends"?
Same reason people say " I have black friends ".
I'm not gay and I don't really get why people think it's wrong or that gay people shouldn't have the same privileges as heterosexuals. There's always the "im not religious" or "i have gay friends" thrown in there and really the only reason I could understand is the religious standpoint. Saying "it's against nature" is bullshit and you're just lying to yourself about why you think gays should be treated as second class citizens.
|
United States43672 Posts
On November 24 2012 16:08 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:04 KwarK wrote:On November 24 2012 15:53 DeepElemBlues wrote:On November 24 2012 15:46 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 15:43 DeepElemBlues wrote:We can not impose our morals on others. Plain and simple. Lots of Nazis and Commies are really disappointed that they got started too early. If they'd waited until the post-George Bush era, the isolationists would have been a much bigger nuisance to the free world. Hasn't imposing morals on people (or at least trying your best to enforce fair and "correct ones") been the basis for human societies.. Forever? Like.. Agreeing that killing people is bad, and raping people is bad. Yeah, but you see, most posters on TL were entering puberty at some point when George W. Bush was president, so George W. Bush ruined the idea of imposing things on other countries in these posters' minds (even if those other countries deserve some imposing). George W. Bush ruined a lot of things. If it wasn't for him, the man who is currently president wouldn't be president. Yeah, I blame Bush for that too. I think you can believe in a moral imperative to intervene while at the same time believing that the circumstances in Iraq did not qualify as such. I didn't mean to imply that Iraq deserved it with my parenthetical comment. It was meant to be read as thanks to him fucking up Iraq, the very passionate negative attitude generally towards intervention and also the "we can't impose our morals on others" are both far, far more popular than they would be otherwise.
Ah, then I see your point. Although America has historically always had a strongly non-interventionist wing which is a pity given the good the US has and can continue to do on the global stage. They're probably at least somewhat offset by the fact that the same generation was also heavily impacted by 9/11.
|
On November 24 2012 16:23 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them. How come people like you always preface their remarks with "I have gay friends"?
people like me?
More so to point out that I am not homophobic, a lot of arguments revolving around this topic is you're just homophobic get over it.
|
On November 24 2012 16:23 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them. How come people like you always preface their remarks with "I have gay friends"?
it's a way of trying to explain that you're views aren't based on a hatred of people who belong to that particular group. it's not the most useful thing to say, but it is more in response to the knee-jerk reaction that is given whenever someone says something against the popular opinion about a protected class than an actual attempt to prove that you aren't hateful. basically, if people would stop assuming that everyone who has a contrary opinion was necessarily basing that opinion off of mouth-frothing hatred then the "I have [insert class here] friends" would go away.
|
United States43672 Posts
On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them. Again it's not something I hate, just something I think we should be focusing on fixing instead of endorsing.
This going against nature thing is absurd. You don't have laser eyes and yet you eat your meat cooked. You don't have fur and yet you wear clothes. It's the kind of nonsensical doublethink that people bring out whenever they want something to bash the gays with and then put it back before they ever take a look at the implications of it.
|
On November 24 2012 16:28 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them. Again it's not something I hate, just something I think we should be focusing on fixing instead of endorsing. This going against nature thing is absurd. You don't have laser eyes and yet you eat your meat cooked. You don't have fur and yet you wear clothes. It's the kind of nonsensical doublethink that people bring out whenever they want something to bash the gays with and then put it back before they ever take a look at the implications of it.
Birds aren't born with nests but yet they make them? They use the tools around them to survive, just like early man killed animals and cooked them with fire and used their pelts to stay warm no? I'm not bashing gay people... I have no problem with them, this is just what I believe.
|
United States43672 Posts
On November 24 2012 16:25 HTOMario wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:23 Praetorial wrote:On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them. How come people like you always preface their remarks with "I have gay friends"? people like me? More so to point out that I am not homophobic, a lot of arguments revolving around this topic is you're just homophobic get over it.
You almost certainly are. The vast majority of arguments, such as the against nature one you used, are things that the anti-gay individual does not ideologically subscribe to, rather they make an exception just for opposing homosexuality. When you take one stance on a single issue and then a completely contradictory stance on the same situation regarding every other issue you encounter then you're simply engaging in a hypocritical doublethink to allow you to rationalise your irrational bias against that issue. In this case your argument that it is against nature is contradicted by your lifestyle unless you add the addendum "it's only wrong to go against nature if the way you go against nature is being gay" at which point it's all pretty transparent.
Sorry but you are homophobic.
|
United States43672 Posts
On November 24 2012 16:31 HTOMario wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 16:28 KwarK wrote:On November 24 2012 16:22 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 16:13 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 24 2012 16:10 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 15:49 Smat wrote:On November 24 2012 13:53 HTOMario wrote:On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote:On November 23 2012 21:14 EtherealBlade wrote:
So if there's strong support for it throughout the country what's your deal with it? Let them make their own laws, they aren't a colony. There are other moral standards than Western. The disgusting consequences of relativistic morality. Thanks, you vile excuse for a human being. --- Hopefully this bill doesnt pass, but people, dont blame Christianity. Africa is stuck, in every sense of the word, quite a bit in the past. They have little to no respect for individual rights or the modern world as a whole, and religions got nothing to do with that. Just because they don't support being gay doesn't mean that they are "stuck in the past". You have such an aggressive stance towards this topic, it looks like the majority are voting against it and the majority winning is the way most people can live in peace. This is also how america works. Personally I don't mind gay people however I could see either side and if the country wants to vote against it well then so be it. If they don't then they don't. Take your stance for what you believe in and hope your side wins, no reason to take out pitchforks and scream death to the non believers. If my country voted to kill me I'd sure as hell be screaming and getting my pitchfork, right before they killed me of course. Wtf is your "could seee either side". What does that mean? Whats the other side that you could see besides allowing freedom. Well my view on homosexuality isn't positive, not even for the freedom to express it. Why? Let me start off by saying that I have plenty of gay friends, I don't have a problem with them and hang out with them very frequently, one of them is in fact my best friend. A lot of people claim it's a choice, a lot claim it isn't either. From my understanding of everything on this planet our goal is to reproduce and survive through means of procreation. That is how species keep going and so forth yada much more detail could be put here. So if it is a choice, you are intentionally going against nature? This is something I'm against. I would chalk this up in few words, a psychological issue. If it isn't a choice... A genetic issue really. Kind of like being handicapped in some form and it should be treated as such. I may offend a lot of people however this is how I perceive it. I have no hatred for it though, my friends make jokes all the time and I am very comfortable. They know how I feel, I know how they feel. We get past it despite that if it ever came down to a vote I would vote against them. Again it's not something I hate, just something I think we should be focusing on fixing instead of endorsing. This going against nature thing is absurd. You don't have laser eyes and yet you eat your meat cooked. You don't have fur and yet you wear clothes. It's the kind of nonsensical doublethink that people bring out whenever they want something to bash the gays with and then put it back before they ever take a look at the implications of it. Birds aren't born with nests but yet they make them? They use the tools around them to survive, just like early man killed animals and cooked them with fire and used their pelts to stay warm no? I'm not bashing gay people... I have no problem with them, this is just what I believe.
What you believe is both intellectually hollow and transparently homophobic. I don't doubt your sincerity though, I'm sure you really do believe it.
As for your birds example, that just shows how utterly foolish the nature argument is. It's natural for birds to make nests because birds make nests, in nature. Likewise it's natural for gay men to meet up in public toilets and jack off each other because that's what they do, in nature. They do it therefore it is natural except when they do it but I don't like it at which point it becomes unnatural.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
