Probably talking about me. I am, and I'll admit it, a complete dickhead when I'm arguing.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Homosexuality
- Thread starter jjfun
- Start date
- Status
Are you the personification of homosexuality in human form? No. Then you aren't a cancer, just like unless you can find me the personification of alcoholism (Ted Bundy?), that person is not a cancer either. To pretend homosexual activity, such as it is, has no adverse health effects is denial of the highest order. We treat homosexual suicide as a symptom of discrimination, not homosexuality itself. Whenever there is a dysfunction it is always, always blamed on the actions or words of an outside other. Back before everyone started calling themselves bi and experimenting with everything that moved, AIDS was a vastly more prevalent disease among homosexuals. Was this also because of discrimination? Or was it because hey, you build your identity around who you fuck you do a whole hell of a lot more fucking? I'd rather we abolish this entire gay/straight nonsense (hell, identity politics itself can hit the road). Sexual activity is something you do, not who you are, and we should generally reward sexual activities that are conducive to society. Marriage as currently constituted does that, although it'd do a hell of a lot better if we abolished no-fault divorce.
I know it will never happen, but sometimes I wish homosexuality was just another common interest like going to action flicks or playing video games. I eagerly await the day "Jedi Knights" seek revenge for the discrimination jocks, Battlestar Galactica junkies, and Trekkies have inflicted upon them.
People tell me all the time that straights have to look inward and fix their own house, whites have to look inward and fix their own house, Christians have to look inward and fix their own house, males have to look inward and fix their own house, conservatives have to look inward and fix their own house. Yet no one in the so-called aggrieved communities ever engage in any introspection whatsoever. That's a job solely for the people they have proclaimed guilty.
Well I don't feel guilty, and if I'm going on a self-searching tour I'm dragging the politically correct slackers to the depths with me.
You also have the exact same rights as your mother and father, you can vote, seek employment, and refuse unwarranted search and seizure of your property. You can also marry any person of the opposite gender of your choosing except for your immediately family, first cousins, and someone who is already married. Your assumption is that marriage is based solely on feelings between two undefined entities. My assumption is that marriage is a societal building block whose benefits exist for the sole purpose of incentivizing childbirth and stable child development, e.g. it is by necessity one man and one woman, the only combination which can both create children and provide them the entire spectrum of life experience. Your worldview assumes marriage is a functionless frivolity, mine does not. The only right the gay movement is seeking with marriage is a bragging right; exactly what are they going to do with the paper signed by the Justice of the Peace?
Since my worldview has worked for centuries and built the strongest societies, I'd rather we not change it just because a few postmodernist busybodies who couldn't deconstruct a ham sandwich believe that everything predating Karl Marx is a useless anachronism.
Also Morm for someone who lives in an existence to classify and define every aspect of life, it seems strange to me you would not jump at the chance to give me your working definition of "hate." If everything is hate, then nothing is hate. If hate is real it can be defined, but it can't be defined as everything.
Also for those who have gotten muddled Christian instruction (which doesn't surprise me in the least):
Homosexuality the inclination is not a sin. Everyone is tempted, it is part of being human. Sin applies only to actions, there is no judgment based on the relative wickedness of your temptations. Premarital sex is actually the sin a homosexual commits because biblical marriage is explicitly between one man and one woman for the purposes of procreation. The two become one flesh and life is born, and only men and women can adequately fulfill such a role. Thus a homosexual engagement is inherently pre- or extramarital.
The purpose of religion is to build a moral society, not one that merely functions at a base level. Sparta was a functioning society, but they left children out to be eaten by wolves, and generally men would be inducted into the military at Age 7 and barely find time to marry before being sent out to a war. Every society needs a little Sparta in them, but they placed too much focus on military achievement over all other forms of achievement. Religion exists to make a decent society good and a good society great. Multiple founding fathers have stated the Constitution is only useful for a moral people.
Never respond to something regarding sin with "because the Bible says." There is always an expanded and logical reason that a certain action is a moral affront. Because anyone whom you are giving moral reasoning to is equally or more ignorant of the underlying basis as you are, it requires more effort than just "X Holy Book" says.
Oh, and Zero: The entire point of Catholicism is that Jesus paid the ultimate price for our sins and through him we have salvation. Why do you think we have Jesus on our crucifixes where he is missing on Protestant crosses? Because Jesus was fully man and fully God, and only be being both could he save mankind. Christ the Man and Christ Risen are the same and as he suffered we must suffer, and as he triumphed we will triumph. He gave Peter the keys to the church and the apostles the power to forgive sins as intermediaries through him, thus the Pope and the Sacraments. If he is God than transubstantiation by definition cannot be outside his power, nor did he bother to correct people after he said you must eat his flesh and drink his blood and they all ran off. Those are just a few of the issues on which Catholics and Protestants disagree, and I'll go trailing after those inanities just as fast as I'll go after the house statists/Marxists/atheists.
I like this. But I'm thinking of the Catholic Church that usually doesn't have Salvation included in it. I guess you're a different type of Catholic that the ones over here; which is ultimately what Christianity is (what you believe, that is).
We (I) personally don't think that there is anything wrong with someone more powerful than you on a spiritual level that can guide you, but the pope has turned into a celebrity. And the thing we protestants don't like is the fact that he is incapable of sin (and iirc, can pardon others of theirs) and as you said before, only Jesus can do that.
Would you not agree that you chose to be that way?? Or not??
Slipping that way?? or Turning that way??
And the guys saying the stuff about the persecution and what not.
That is a little extreme. I mean this is the "United States or American."
It's not like people see gay people and just start smashing them.
It makes me sad to see the way some people think and rationalize. (not referring to you)
If a person can't CHOOSE their sexuality, then what can they chose. One has to make that choice. If you can't chose your sexuality then what can you chose???
Thats like saying people can't chose their careers. Or people can't stop[ themselves from being a criminal. Life is a book filled with choices, and how it turns out depends on those choices.
Even though I didn't agree with you on a lot of what you said. This was a good point my friend.
Thats what I've also been saying but it has obviously been ignored.
If you ask me this whole thread is kinda fail. It is just racking up infractions. And some of those infractions are biased. People are wasting their time. Voicing an opinion that won't really be heard. (not excluding myself)
People are still gonna be gay. People are still gonna dislike homosexuality (I dislike it). So really then, what is the point of this argument?? To be heard by a society of expert battlers, trainers, pokemoners, traders, and the like who really don't give a damn about what you think because this is the internet??
This is what I call "ssengnihton". Kinda like people saying rap music should be banned. Eminem is awesome. I know deep inside that it is not a good thing to listen to Eminem or rap period. But I do anyway. Just like people know homosexuality is not correct behavior but insist on defending it and engaging in it.
Uhm...choosing your career or being a criminal is totally different from sexual preference. Let's say pharmacy interests me. Okay, so I'm now a pharmacist, can't do anything about it. Please. One still has to receive the necessary education, dedicate himself to study, graduate from a good college, gain some sort of experience in the field, create a good resume to get hired, and then accept the position. Likewise, to be a crimminal, one must first have the temptation to do the act and then willingly proceed with it in however many steps it takes (maybe planning, contacting people to help you, cover up, etc.). If I find myself sexually attracted to the same sex to the exclusion of the other sex, I'm homosexual. See, the examples you listed require desire, action, and probably planning. Homosexuality or bisexuality simply involves what you're attracted to, which at least I've found not to be a conscious decision. Did you choose to be heterosexual, by the way?
Homosexuality is not natural. Stop trying to pretend like it is.
Man was born with a penis and woman was born with a vagina. We all know how these two organs work, so stop trying to pretend like homosexuality is anything other than some sort of disorder.
Stop pretending.
If my brain told me 'do backflips' instead of 'eat food' whenever I got hungry, I would be considered sick, wouldn't I? There is absolutely no difference.
And before you run me through your slander machine (which only suggests that you have no argument towards your position, by the way), i'll mention that this viewpoint has absolutely nothing to do with hate, intolerance, religion or 'fear' (lol), but is instead all about doing the right thing. Do your duty as a man and a woman. If you were born a man, then act like one. Everything else is incorrect behavior.
This whole issue stems from a lack of discipline. People nowadays think that you can just do whatever the hell you want whenever you want to do it, and they couldn't be more wrong.
Do what is right, not what feels good.
Man was born with a penis and woman was born with a vagina. We all know how these two organs work, so stop trying to pretend like homosexuality is anything other than some sort of disorder.
Stop pretending.
If my brain told me 'do backflips' instead of 'eat food' whenever I got hungry, I would be considered sick, wouldn't I? There is absolutely no difference.
And before you run me through your slander machine (which only suggests that you have no argument towards your position, by the way), i'll mention that this viewpoint has absolutely nothing to do with hate, intolerance, religion or 'fear' (lol), but is instead all about doing the right thing. Do your duty as a man and a woman. If you were born a man, then act like one. Everything else is incorrect behavior.
This whole issue stems from a lack of discipline. People nowadays think that you can just do whatever the hell you want whenever you want to do it, and they couldn't be more wrong.
Do what is right, not what feels good.
What? You know, there are idiots who practice lame versions of Protestantism, but attempting to placate DK by saying this is like when my grandmother would say that she liked Obama because he "was one of the good ones". Gah.
If I "wanted" to be gay. I would be, but I would rather burn in flames than to be gay.
I am straight because I want to be. Anyone can just up and turn gay. This is what many fail to realize. I have always been inclined to like girls (maybe it is because they are FEmale). So, no i didn't chose to be heterosexual but here I am.
You still can't explain how people DON"T choose to be gay. It they DON"T choose to be gay, then they are straight. It they could help it, then they would be straight.(heterosexual)
Out of curiousity, what should a man act like, and how does sexual orientation play into it? No, seriously, define masculinity and femininity for me. Is masculinity screwing women? Is it drinking at the bar with the boys? Is it fixing things around the house? Is it all about being strong and forceful? Is femininity about being beautiful? Looks? Submission? Being at home with the kids? Designer shoes and hot dresses? And how does sexuality play into this? What is the correct behavior.
And finally, how do you define this as wrong? How do you label this as a lack of discipline, as an act of hedonism? Going out and having sex with whatever you see, yes, that is hedonistic. But does a man loving another man or a woman loving another woman disbar them from being men and women respectively? It's not like being gay makes you automatically wear tight pink thongs and work at Forever 21, or being lesbian makes you wear dirty overalls and fix cars.
I think this is one of the things that bothers me the most about the whole homosexuality issue. Certain people (for example the above quote) feel like they have the supreme authority to tell what is "right" and what isn't. At the risk of being extremely trite, isn't "what's right" the thing that makes you happy? Being a doctor isn't necessarily the "right" thing to do, even though its one of the jobs most beneficial to society, if since you were young you felt like you were meant to become a basketball player.
Lol, if I could just turn straight then I would have those 5 or 6 years I was in denial about my sexuality, telling myself constantly I was straight. Actually, I would have done it right after I realized I was bi, as well. Oh yeah, there actually is a denial stage to homosexuality and bisexuality by the way; apparently, some people do want to be straight. That's why there are all those reformation programs, although I hear they have a shockingly low success rate. But regardless, you yourself said that you didn't choose your sexuality, so how exactly is this different from homosexuals and bisexuals being unable to choose their sexuality? And don't the bolded parts totally contradict your argument, anyway?
Come on you fucking jerks! Stop pretending a dick fits up a man's ass! It totally does not! Rai said so, so it must be true!
Not only does how organs work have nothing to do with anything here (they are normally used to piss or shit, but that does not stop us from using them for sex, and a dick cums no matter WHAT it is put in, and a pussy can explode with most anything shoved up it), but a lack of discipline?! What exactly is undisciplined about enjoying freedom? You can say it is a sin or wrong, but ignoring discipline has nothing to do with people having fun in sex.
Not only does how organs work have nothing to do with anything here (they are normally used to piss or shit, but that does not stop us from using them for sex, and a dick cums no matter WHAT it is put in, and a pussy can explode with most anything shoved up it), but a lack of discipline?! What exactly is undisciplined about enjoying freedom? You can say it is a sin or wrong, but ignoring discipline has nothing to do with people having fun in sex.
You conflate my criticism of the trends in homosexual activity with being homosexual itself. Sexual activity between homosexuals is an ultimately damaging behavior with negative effects on life expectancy and general health. It's no different than a public service announcement. The difference is while society acknowledges the harm abuse of alcohol leads to, mentioning the negatives of homosexual activity is taboo. Just like there's no such thing as safe drunken driving, there's no such thing as safe sexual activity, especially not given the limited and obvious applications as applied to homosexuals. A one-way tunnel has two holes at either end but they are not both entrances.
It's a deviation from the normal sex 90% of people engage in. If I meant to associate it with evil I'd have used "abomination." I still believe it's sinful, but not because of OMG teh ghey. That isn't why the Bible considers it sinful either, and I've been trying to emphasize that more often.
Don't the words "gay" and "straight" inherently encourage separation? It's like saying Coke and Pepsi. One is necessarily distinct and separate from the other.
Ray Mysterio beating The Big Show on WWE Smackdown wouldn't prevent anyone from committing violence against themselves. What if some black person read one of your posts about how America was still a racist nation and went on a shooting spree? Should you be held responsible for anyone he killed because potentially your words inspired him to get back at whitey?
It's asinine to blame the actions of people on internet posts. If you really want homosexuality to be treated normal just replace it in those phrases with heterosexuality. Aside from the fact heterosexuality is a mental tendency towards a functional sexual behavior (procreation), these aren't exactly firebrand demonizations. Heterosexuality is dead-doornail simple too: attraction to people of the opposite gender. Quite frankly these are the blandest statements I've ever written on the matter.
Your only real problem is with the word dysfunctional. If only 10% of the population engage in a behavior with more risks and fewer benefits than the other 90%, how can it be described as anything else. Dysfunctional doesn't even have a moral component to it. If someone offs themselves because I said they have a tendency to engage in an ultimately nonfunctional behavior, isn't that a score for the overpopulation whiners? If that's what drives them into a suicidal bender, they need a bit more perspective, and less people telling them that any suggestion their tendency is fruitless is an insult worth dying over.
No one thinks killing Gays is cool (most people are opposed to killing generally, unless its a fetus), at least not anyone who is remotely Christian. Gay menace? The only menace the gay population has is the menace the sexually and politically irresponsible ones cause the rest of them. I certainly do hate grievance-mongering activists with a passion, but this is usually because the first words out of their mouth are "bigot sexist homophobe!" the second I question them. They'd be funny if they weren't clearly insane, deranged, mouth-foaming nutters with Congressman Frank (self-proclaimed outer of gay-Republicans) on speed-dial.
Then all comparisons of anyone to any majority are worthless. For example, African Americans who are <13% of the population cannot be compared to the majority of whites. Thus we should not be concerned about their relative poverty because there are a higher amount of rich people lifting whites up.
Well maybe there would be less hate if gays did not engage in polarizing language at every turn. For every hate crime there is against a gay, 10 straights have been called bigot homophobes for no damn reason other than they weren't sufficiently pro-gay. Gays also share no love for ex-gays and threaten to silence and intimidate them. Never mind many of the hate crimes are utter hoaxes, including the poster boy Matthew Shepard who got killed because he didn't pay off the drug lords he got involved with. Hate crimes are a joke because they try and worsen sentences based on unknowable thoughts of hatred. You can't have equality under the law if the punishment for killing a gay is 100 years and the punishment for killing a straight is 10. It's the same damn crime.
I don't care about the rest of the world, their opinions, or their practices, as you well know. Quite frankly if you took the global test leftists always talk about, the US would fail only because we weren't degenerate and intolerant enough. I have no ability to affect policy outside my own country. Christians are still banned from practicing their faith publicly in Saudi Arabia and mainland China. Does this now give me a stump to jump on to talk about the horrible global discrimination Christians face? That's asinine. Most of the world is comprised of backwards hellholes of either the theocratic or communist variety. If you want, we can turn Saudi into a glass dessert together.
If there's an injustice in power of attorney or visitation rights, that's obviously something that should be addressed. You should be able to give PoA to whatever your living will or given testimony says. Marriage certificates don't guarantee any of that. Terry Shiavo's asshole husband kept her parents from saving her life, so even blood can't stop a particularly vicious relative. All of the injustices you talk about can be fixed by applying them to currently existent legal mechanisms, and they should be. As far as food goes, we have already established that the mean income of gays is starvation-prohibitive :).
I do have a way with words.
My argument in that homosexual activity is dysfunctional, and the scale some have taken it to because they have no sexual restraint is bad homosexuals as a whole. My entire argument is in opposition to action, not people. This is my problem with identity politics: You can't just be a homosexual, you must become homosexuality itself.
Every time I hear some idiot say the word "(BAN ME PLEASE)" when not speaking about an extremely bellicose, vulgar, arrogant homosexual I want to smack them. Because sometimes the label is truly deserved, as in Musto's case in the link. There is truly no better summation of a classless, low-brow cocksucker than the word "(BAN ME PLEASE)." Just like you don't call your wife a whore until you find her sleeping around, you don't call anything "gay" or a "(BAN ME PLEASE)" unless and until it is truly warranted.
Good. Next time you see a Fox Hole, go try sticking it in there. You are physically capable of doing it so it must be both intelligent and proper!
Excuse me, but have you been living under a fucking rock? Ever heard of Matthew Shepard? He was a college student, literally tortured by his classmates. Because he was gay.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard
How about James Zappalorti. A DISABLED Vietnam war veteran. He was gay. He was also murdered. Guess why.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Zappalorti
Or Glenn Kopitske. Murdered by Gary Hirte, who claimed that homosexual acts were "worse than murder"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Kopitske#Gary_Hirte
Then there was that gay bar in Massachusetts that was gunned down by Jacob D. Robida
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Kopitske#Gary_Hirte
Keep in mind, these are just examples. There are plenty more.
In short, claiming that the homosexuals aren't persecuted is ignorant bullshit.
Knowing all of this, why would anyone choose to be gay?
Homosexuality was considered perfeclty normal in the ancient greek societies, even in Sparta. Pederasty was considered part of the education even in the military education.
Also, unless you consider "moral society" a place where everyone is heterosexual, monogamic and live their lifes to pay for sins, there's no reason for religion to exist. I'm a atheist and I never killed, stealed, raped, etc. Religion is a imposed illusion making people believe that they can only be happy after death, a illusion that make us feel guilty for enjoying our lifes.
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness.
Um. You went a little extreme. I didn't say they weren't persecuted. Some are, some aren't. Thats like saying, "Black people are persecuted." I am black. SO don't think about calling me racist.
I said "It's not like people see gay people and just start smashing them."
A few examples out of millions of gay people. Wow I am flattered.
I could name tons of gay celebrities that are alive and kicking. I can name gay people I know that aren't scared to be gay because they think they will get killed.
To sum this up, most people are gay because they CHOOSE to be.
You can attempt to justify but it doesn't solve anything. It's not like I take it into mind anything that any of the one's defending gays say.
All this extremism doesn't solve anything.
You said right in your own post, in the part I quoted, that it is extreme to say gays are persecuted. Try reading your own damn posts.
The thing your not understanding is that no one would want to choose to be gay, if thats truly how it happens (its not, there's been studies leading to specific genes related to homosexuals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_gene While its not perfect, its sure as hell more than you have.)
EDIT: Why would I call you racist in the first place?
The thing your not understanding is that no one would want to choose to be gay, if thats truly how it happens (its not, there's been studies leading to specific genes related to homosexuals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_gene While its not perfect, its sure as hell more than you have.)
EDIT: Why would I call you racist in the first place?
Hitler, Stalin, and Mao enjoyed killing. Killing is what made them happy.
Religion was the only thing that stood in their way. Furthermore truly religious people are happier with their lives than atheists, as borne out by countless studies. Your idea that religion and happiness are mutually exclusive is a fabrication designed to grant you the freedom to believe in irresponsible things.
Marxism is the opiate of the academic. As long as they get to live in the airy fairy world in the ivory tower, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" will always be a brilliant and enlightened philosophy and not a blood-soaked banner.
Atheism is an amoral theory for amoral people. Atheists live at the mercy of everyone else around them, which is why they flourish in societies with tolerant religions and are executed in societies with either brutal religions or atheist dictators.
Your ignorance of history is stunning. Then again, Karl Marx is your avatar.
WarriorPrince + Rai: I assume you to have proof that people simply choose to be gay right? I really doubt that you do have proof from an unbiased source. Do some people have gay sex by choice? Probably so. Does that mean that all gays are just gay by choice? No it does not.
I find it funny. Ask any gay person if they choose to be gay. You will get told that they did not choose to be that way. I myself am gay and still in the closet for the most part. My school is a small Jewish private school filled with intolerance. I would most likely get my ass kicked if I were to come out of the closet there. You honestly think I want that? If it was a matter of choice I would be straight and save myself all this suffering.
I spent three years saying "come on dude, you aren't gay, you can't be, you have to be straight" and in the end I just could not force myself to be attracted to a woman. I tried, believe me I tried.
Oh and Rai maybe you should have a chat with Akuchi. Tell her how you think a woman should act. I really think I would enjoy seeing that conversation.
Oh and ps: Not all gay men act gay. Like jrrrrrrrrr, I happen to hate the sterotypical gay person with the fucking annoying accent, and "girly" demeanor.
I find it funny. Ask any gay person if they choose to be gay. You will get told that they did not choose to be that way. I myself am gay and still in the closet for the most part. My school is a small Jewish private school filled with intolerance. I would most likely get my ass kicked if I were to come out of the closet there. You honestly think I want that? If it was a matter of choice I would be straight and save myself all this suffering.
I spent three years saying "come on dude, you aren't gay, you can't be, you have to be straight" and in the end I just could not force myself to be attracted to a woman. I tried, believe me I tried.
Oh and Rai maybe you should have a chat with Akuchi. Tell her how you think a woman should act. I really think I would enjoy seeing that conversation.
Oh and ps: Not all gay men act gay. Like jrrrrrrrrr, I happen to hate the sterotypical gay person with the fucking annoying accent, and "girly" demeanor.
You forget all the cases that aren't on wikipedia, or all the violence the media picks up and whatnot. Really. It's not like every murder gets its on wiki article or makes the 6 o'clock news.
But you have given absolutely no evidence to support this. Hell, you haven't given any sort of coherent argument to refute the opposition. You even contradicted yourself with that little, "I didn't choose to be heterosexual" comment.
"I'm right so I'm not going to listen to what anyone says otherwise." Nice logic there. Usually signifies someone a weak argument that the person is afraid of having refuted.
Uh, what extremism? Providing evidence that contradicts your claims?
I didn't say it was extreme to say gays were persecuted. I even admitted that they were persecuted. WTF WTF
This was extreme
This is funny because I never even said they were not persecuted. I have explained what I said.
Ignorance is confound stalinism with marxism. I'll copy-paste what I replied in the evolution thread
Stalinism and Maoism are the distortion of the marxist thinking (Hitler never talked about taking over the bourgeois). The soviet revolution ended when Stalin takes power. Marxism defends that the workers revolution would only be possible in international scale, stalinism defends the concept of the Socialism-in-one-country creating the imperialist Soviet Union. Stalin did not create the dictatorship of the proletarid, he took the power that workers had in the soviets and centralized it to himself.
I don't know if you live a Cold War paranoid. But most marxists are anti-stalinists too.
Stalinism and Maoism are the distortion of the marxist thinking (Hitler never talked about taking over the bourgeois). The soviet revolution ended when Stalin takes power. Marxism defends that the workers revolution would only be possible in international scale, stalinism defends the concept of the Socialism-in-one-country creating the imperialist Soviet Union. Stalin did not create the dictatorship of the proletarid, he took the power that workers had in the soviets and centralized it to himself.
I don't know if you live a Cold War paranoid. But most marxists are anti-stalinists too.
- Status