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.
Doesn't that just diffuse the entire idea of "natural" then?
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.
I am sorry to intervene, but honestly, could we stop using the word "homophobic"? It is not a phobia, nor are those who have those beliefs sick which the word inherently implies. They simply have a different opinion, however irrational that opinion is. It is a stupid term and discussions like these would be a lot better if both sides could acknowledge that neither side is suffering from some sort of illness.
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.
Clearly I must have hit a nerve with you, I am not homophobic and I don't see how I could contradict myself when I only posted 1 thing about 1 topic. There was nothing else said so there wasn't even the possibility of contradiction. I was asked my opinion and I gave it, I feel like homosexuality is something that needs to be fixed not endorsed. I am not homophobic no matter how aggressive you type your post. Anyway I shared my view, going to stop posting and sleep.
You really are. You hold gays, and only gays, to an absurd made up standard of natural behaviour so you can condemn them when they fail while pretending the same standard doesn't exist for anyone else and then you fall back on "it's just my opinion" when the intellectual dishonesty behind it is pointed out.
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.
Err... reproduce and survive through means of procreation is such an oversimplification of what we are. We're also wired to protect the herd as it were, to look out for 'your' group and help them. There's been arguments as to gays possibly being important in stone age civilizations. There's valid reasoning as to why a 'gay gene' exists evolutionary, it's even very prevalent in some species. So to say their choice (which it most often isn't, they're pretty much born that way) goes against nature is way too simple and I dare say wrong.
Also, I'm not sure why you feel homosexuality is something that's akin to being handicapped by genetics and... treated as such? What?
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.
Doesn't that just diffuse the entire idea of "natural" then?
last thing I wanted to comment on before I go sleep, there are many animals that have shown same sex attractions, there are also many animals in many different species that were born with many genetic deficiencies. I don't believe it's tied only to human beings and do believe that for some reason it is something that happens on a noticeable genetic level.
On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote: [quote] 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.
I am sorry to intervene, but honestly, could we stop using the word "homophobic"? It is not a phobia, nor are those who have those beliefs sick which the word inherently implies. They simply have a different opinion, however irrational that opinion is. It is a stupid term and discussions like these would be a lot better if both sides could acknowledge that neither side is suffering from some sort of illness.
Sorry to intervene, but homophobia is a valid mental disorder described in various literature on the subject of phobias.
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.
I am sorry to intervene, but honestly, could we stop using the word "homophobic"? It is not a phobia, nor are those who have those beliefs sick which the word inherently implies. They simply have a different opinion, however irrational that opinion is. It is a stupid term and discussions like these would be a lot better if both sides could acknowledge that neither side is suffering from some sort of illness.
Sorry to intervene, but homophobia is a valid mental disorder described in various literature on the subject of phobias.
Sorry to intervene, but homophobia is not accepted as a disease in neither the ICD-10, nor the DSM-4 (nor does it appear to be included in DSM-5). Furthermore applying the term to a person simply because he opposes gay rights showcases a lack of understanding of the definition of what an "irrational fear" is. I doubt anyone here is afraid of gays which homophobia quite literally means. The literature you are talking about is actually doing the cause a disservice for this exact reason which I am by no means the first to point out - for example:
On November 24 2012 14:32 Selendis wrote: This is indescribably evil. Furthermore, the presence of so many homophobia apologists in this thread is disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself for enabling the mass murder of innocents.
Yes because what someone says on an internetforum will obviously enable the mass murder of innocents in a country in Africa - oh wait - no.
Standing around doing nothing is enabling these murders to take place. Discussing this on the internet is enabling these murders to take place. And defending homophobia is spreading toxic beliefs and attitudes. What does help is being practive. At the very least, just sign one of the many petitions going round that oppose this bill from getting passed.
And before you jump the gun here, I have nothing against gay rights, I see absolutely nothing wrong with man/man or woman/woman, whatever floats your boat. But I would really urge people to take a step back from condemning people who do not agree with them as ironically it makes you no better than those you are so eager to judge.
On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote: [quote] 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.
Clearly I must have hit a nerve with you, I am not homophobic and I don't see how I could contradict myself when I only posted 1 thing about 1 topic. There was nothing else said so there wasn't even the possibility of contradiction. I was asked my opinion and I gave it, I feel like homosexuality is something that needs to be fixed not endorsed. I am not homophobic no matter how aggressive you type your post. Anyway I shared my view, going to stop posting and sleep.
Saying that you are not homophobic then saying that homosexuality is something that has to be "fixed"....uh yeah sure okay.
Oh gosh. That video is so dumb. I couldn't stop laughing at the end. "Is this what barrack obama want to bring to africa? To make a human right to eat the poopoo of our children?!?!"
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.
Uhh you say you have no problem and your friends with gays and all that, but im fairly sure your a troll, given you actually said you dont have a positive view even towards them expressing their homosexuality. Which can range from flamboyant and effeminate displays to the simply statement of "I am gay". You look down on the FREEDOM itself not even how its used. CLEARLY you are homophobic.
On November 24 2012 13:47 whatevername wrote: [quote] 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.
I am sorry to intervene, but honestly, could we stop using the word "homophobic"? It is not a phobia, nor are those who have those beliefs sick which the word inherently implies. They simply have a different opinion, however irrational that opinion is. It is a stupid term and discussions like these would be a lot better if both sides could acknowledge that neither side is suffering from some sort of illness.
I am aware it's not a phobia in the medical sense, just an irrational hatred that emerges in a series of nonsensical opinions. It is the term used for people who hate gays in common parlance and I'm using it working on the assumption that nobody is misunderstanding me. I would be happy to use a less vague term if anyone is concerned that I am implying that homophobes are sick, my intent was only to imply that they are hateful and irrational. One thing I would like to note though is just as someone who suffers from myrmecophobia might explain how he is terrified that ants might crawl under his skin a homophobe's arguments need no more basis in rationality. The irrational fear comes first, the opinions (such as ants are trying to crawl under my skin) come second.
Also a note on sincerity. One thing I see repeated a lot is how sincere homophobes are being when they want to condemn other people as if this somehow makes it better. Nobody anywhere is doubting their sincerity, we all know they're sincere, that's the problem. Imagine if an Islamic terrorist group said "behead all Americans" and then started executing random civilians but after a couple of hundred suddenly announced that it was all a setup for an elaborate 'Americans need to lose a few pounds' pun, you wouldn't be pissed off at the lack of sincerity, you'd be pissed off at all the beheading. Whether you sincerely want to deny homosexuals the same rights as everyone else in society or just like to impose homophobic policies for insincere reasons, it's still wrong. Nobody cares how sincere you are, stop doing it. Likewise on opinions, saying "it's just my opinion" doesn't make it any better, it makes it worse. If you were to end a homophobic rant with "it's not my opinion, in fact it's not anyone's opinion, it's the kind of ignorant medieval bullshit that we've all moved past" then nobody would be upset. The issue is that it is your opinion, if it wasn't then there would be no disagreement. When I oppose discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation the people I am opposing are the people whose opinion is that it is intrinsically wrong and bad to be homosexual, the people who aren't of that opinion aren't an issue.
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.
I am sorry to intervene, but honestly, could we stop using the word "homophobic"? It is not a phobia, nor are those who have those beliefs sick which the word inherently implies. They simply have a different opinion, however irrational that opinion is. It is a stupid term and discussions like these would be a lot better if both sides could acknowledge that neither side is suffering from some sort of illness.
Sorry to intervene, but homophobia is a valid mental disorder described in various literature on the subject of phobias.
Sorry to intervene, but homophobia is not accepted as a disease in neither the ICD-10, nor the DSM-4 (nor does it appear to be included in DSM-5). Furthermore applying the term to a person simply because he opposes gay rights showcases a lack of understanding of the definition of what an "irrational fear" is. I doubt anyone here is afraid of gays which homophobia quite literally means. The literature you are talking about is actually doing the cause a disservice for this exact reason which I am by no means the first to point out - for example:
Regardless of whether they're in the ICD-10 and DSM-4 (which are both up for revision by the way), it's no clear basis on the subject of whether it's a phobia or not. I can give you countless literature that show the definition of phobia in the DSM is the exact same as what has been ascribed to homophobes.
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.
If only one of your ancestors were homosexual, then you wouldn't be here, posting on this forum. This fact alone proves that it is a disorder. By your logic I am a homophobe. But then I'd be hating on all infertile people as well because they cannot reproduce? I don't hate anyone. They can live a complete life and be valuable members of humanity, but they have a slight condition that requires no treatment. There is no defeat in accepting that.
Err... reproduce and survive through means of procreation is such an oversimplification of what we are. We're also wired to protect the herd as it were, to look out for 'your' group and help them. There's been arguments as to gays possibly being important in stone age civilizations. There's valid reasoning as to why a 'gay gene' exists evolutionary, it's even very prevalent in some species. So to say their choice (which it most often isn't, they're pretty much born that way) goes against nature is way too simple and I dare say wrong.
It's not an oversimplification, if you put aside philosophy and civilized living, it all comes down to that. I also don't think that this 'gay gene' worked very well, otherwise there would not have been so many important eunuchs produced by history. The 'need' for an outsider 'gender' was met by castrating men, not looking up gay men.
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.
I am sorry to intervene, but honestly, could we stop using the word "homophobic"? It is not a phobia, nor are those who have those beliefs sick which the word inherently implies. They simply have a different opinion, however irrational that opinion is. It is a stupid term and discussions like these would be a lot better if both sides could acknowledge that neither side is suffering from some sort of illness.
Sorry to intervene, but homophobia is a valid mental disorder described in various literature on the subject of phobias.
Sorry to intervene, but homophobia is not accepted as a disease in neither the ICD-10, nor the DSM-4 (nor does it appear to be included in DSM-5). Furthermore applying the term to a person simply because he opposes gay rights showcases a lack of understanding of the definition of what an "irrational fear" is. I doubt anyone here is afraid of gays which homophobia quite literally means. The literature you are talking about is actually doing the cause a disservice for this exact reason which I am by no means the first to point out - for example:
Regardless of whether they're in the ICD-10 and DSM-4 (which are both up for revision by the way), is no clear basis on the subject of whether it's a phobia or not. I can give you countless literature that show the definition of phobia in the DSM is the exact same as what has been ascribed to homophobes.
While I agree that the term homophobia is thrown around too soon, to say it doesn't exist is another matter entirely.
P.S. How do you know what is included in the DSM-5 or not?
I think you should go back and reread what I initially wrote, because it seems quite clear that you did not understand that my opposition to the word was with its usage in this thread, these kinds of discussions and in the general society. Because it seems necessary, let me reiterate: At no point did I claim the concept of homophobia does not exist - I claimed that people have been and are using it wrongly and as such it has lost its original meaning and become a stupid term which should be abandoned all together, especially as it in its current use alludes to an underlying disease of some sorts on the basis of people disagreeing with you.
Also, let me recommend to you to actually read the articles you reference because they do not talk about homophobia in the way you want to portray its existence (or if they do I am unsure why in the world you would ever debate my initial statement):
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J236v03n03_02 <--- Describes homophobia as the phenomenon of internalizing societies pressure to not be gay - which is very different from being used to describe a person opposed to gay rights.
P.S.: I thought it was common knowledge amongst anyone with a smidgen of interest or knowledge of psychopathology that the proposed revisions of DSM-V are published regularly?
On November 24 2012 14:32 Selendis wrote: This is indescribably evil. Furthermore, the presence of so many homophobia apologists in this thread is disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself for enabling the mass murder of innocents.
Yes because what someone says on an internetforum will obviously enable the mass murder of innocents in a country in Africa - oh wait - no.
Standing around doing nothing is enabling these murders to take place. Discussing this on the internet is enabling these murders to take place. And defending homophobia is spreading toxic beliefs and attitudes. What does help is being practive. At the very least, just sign one of the many petitions going round that oppose this bill from getting passed.
And before you jump the gun here, I have nothing against gay rights, I see absolutely nothing wrong with man/man or woman/woman, whatever floats your boat. But I would really urge people to take a step back from condemning people who do not agree with them as ironically it makes you no better than those you are so eager to judge.
Condemning people for murder is not hypocritical.
Oh I already signed a petition, I just do not think that people who are opposed to gay rights should be directly lumped together with murderers as was what I (perhaps erroneously?) gathered from your initial post. I really do not think I have read a single response in this thread (or well, I think I did read one, but there is always the village idiot) saying that gays should be murdered due to their sexuality. You are effectively arguing that people should not be allowed to have certain thoughts and that is not only hypocritical when you at the same time argue people should practice whatever sexuality they have, but also the start of a slippery slope towards an Orwellian society with its thought-police. What I am essentially getting at is that if you want to argue freedom for all to practice what they believe in, you have to tolerate those who disagree with you and just be happy that they are a rapidly (although still too slowly) declining part of the population.
EDIT: Sorry for the double post, but it was too very different discussions.
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.
If only one of your ancestors were homosexual, then you wouldn't be here, posting on this forum. This fact alone proves that it is a disorder. By your logic I am a homophobe. But then I'd be hating on all infertile people as well because they cannot reproduce? I don't hate anyone. They can live a complete life and be valuable members of humanity, but they have a slight condition that requires no treatment. There is no defeat in accepting that.
Err... reproduce and survive through means of procreation is such an oversimplification of what we are. We're also wired to protect the herd as it were, to look out for 'your' group and help them. There's been arguments as to gays possibly being important in stone age civilizations. There's valid reasoning as to why a 'gay gene' exists evolutionary, it's even very prevalent in some species. So to say their choice (which it most often isn't, they're pretty much born that way) goes against nature is way too simple and I dare say wrong.
It's not an oversimplification, if you put aside philosophy and civilized living, it all comes down to that. I also don't think that this 'gay gene' worked very well, otherwise there would not have been so many important eunuchs produced by history. The 'need' for an outsider 'gender' was met by castrating men, not looking up gay men.
So you think that anyone that doesn't want to have children has a mental disorder? Really..?
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.
If only one of your ancestors were homosexual, then you wouldn't be here, posting on this forum. This fact alone proves that it is a disorder.
I think you need to research what the word proves means. If only one of my male ancestors was attracted to a different woman then I wouldn't be here today either.
EPT
