Homosexuality

[Mistress Darkrai]

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.

Well...I didn't nesscesarily mean it that way...alright, now, your confusing me. I'm 14 for crying out loud...sorry,

 

[Force Majeure]

A few examples out of millions of gay people. Wow I am flattered.

...What?

Anyway, I just ignored the rest of that post because it was stupid. Even though millions of gays aren't killed each year, it doesn't mean that we aren't persecuted. I personally have gone through some nice, fun, old-fashioned gay bashin', but mine is a resilient nature. Gays get persecuted very frequently. And no, I don't have a chart or graph to show this. Find your own.

 

[WarriorPrince]

...What?

Anyway, I just ignored the rest of that post because it was stupid. Even though millions of gays aren't killed each year, it doesn't mean that we aren't persecuted. I personally have gone through some nice, fun, old-fashioned gay bashin', but mine is a resilient nature. Gays get persecuted very frequently. And no, I don't have a chart or graph to show this. Find your own.

Once again, I did not say gays were not persecuted. Sometimes I bash them myself. I said "It's not like people see gay people and just start smashing them." For the third time.

I am done with this thread. I'm not about to get banned for this.

Have fun.

Sryy if ya got offended. anywho, peace out.

 

[hobo bob]

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?

Well based on your definition of marriage any married couples who do not choose to have children are sinners and do not diserve the right of marriage. You also assume that gay people would enjoy getting married to someone of the opposite gender but they don't want the right to get married; they want to get married to someone they love. It isn't about some sort of bragging right or power trip, they just want to be able to stay with a partner they love very much. Besides you make it sound like the sole point of marriage is to have as many babies as possible then die and pass on an inheritance to thier large spawn of children. You pretend that the foundation of marriage is based on procreation, which is why you state gays shouldn't marry but marriage should be based on the love of another person; not money, not kids, not race or a person's sexual orientation.

 

[ShynSpryt4]

Why are you saying you are gay, yet your being homophobic against people who are?

 

[Morm]

my solution for DK that makes everyone happy: Name a gay union something else.

It can have all the benefits, but, since language so enjoys singling things out with their own special noun, call it something the fuck else. That way, idiots who don't realize that they've been duped by language will be happy and gays can be happily 'married' as well.

 

[Force Majeure]

Why are you saying you are gay, yet your being homophobic against people who are?

What? I don't understand this question, and I don't know who it is directed to.

 

[The_Reaper]

To sum this up, most people are gay because they CHOOSE to be.

Are you serious? A person cannot choose who they are attracted to. Gays are attracted to people of the opposite gender. They cannot just decide and say "oh, i want to be attracted to people of the opposite gender now. So i will from now on." Having gay sex is a choice, however, being gay is not. And the reason why gays have gay sex? the same reason as straight people, because they are attracted to each other! Don't give me any BS about "creating many babies." If you say that, do you believe that the ONLY reason why people have sex is to reproduce?

I will put up a simple example so your feeble mind can understand. You are straight. Can you just say "I want to stop being attracted to woman. I want to become attracted to men now, so i will." No you cannot. It is the same for gay people, they cannot decide to be straight, they are born that way, no matter how you try to deny it.

Also why would people choose to be gay (if they could choose), so that they could be bashed upon by prejudiced and biased people (i.e. you)

Sometimes I bash them myself

and do something that is "gross and disgusting," when they could be straight and be considered normal and avoid all these problems?

 

[WarriorPrince]

To clear up something. One last post.

By "bash" I do not mean physically hurt. I mean fight with words. As in an argument. It's not like i just attack them. It's like when I say something and I can tell that they are hurt. Sometimes it's indirect.

Can you just say "I want to stop being attracted to woman. I want to become attracted to men now, so i will." No you cannot.

This is a lie. Because I could.

 

[Morm]

This is a lie. Because I could.

Put your money (or rather, a man) where your mouth is and prove it to us all.

 

[hobo bob]

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.

First of all it's the United States of America not "United States or American"

Now I was wondering what kind of pot are you smoking my friend, cuz that stuff is really making you delusional. Do you really believe that you can choose who you love? You, like everyone else, should know that you can't simply just pick and choose a person and say "hmmm I think I'm going to fall in love with you." Even if your lover treats you like a jackass, you will still love them deep inside your heart. If we could simply pick and choose who we fall in love with then this world would be a much more different place, and probably not for the better. It's just like a strange habit or pastime that people enjoy. For example some people absolutely detest gardening while others find solace through it. Even if you hate rock there may be one rock song that you enjoy listening too again and again for no apparant reason. You are correct in stating that people can choose thier profession but usually people choose a career in a field that they find interesting, which we have no control over.

The main point I am trying to make is that people can't control all of their emotions like you can turn a DS on and off. Some guys (or girls) are really fond (I guess you could use the popular word of the day: fetish) of girls who have really long blond hair and sexual orientation is the same way. I can't wake up tommorow and just decide "you know what today I'll be a homosexual from now on" and gays can't magically turn straight just because other people (who have rustic and medieval outlooks on life) demand it, for whatever reason.

So please people, stop saying that homosexuality is a choice.

 

[Force Majeure]

To clear up something. One last post.

By "bash" I do not mean physically hurt. I mean fight with words. As in an argument. It's not like i just attack them. It's like when I say something and I can tell that they are hurt. Sometimes it's indirect.

So, you don't beat up gays. You're just a jerk.

This is a lie. Because I could.

Oh? Well, this could become very interesting.

 

[WarriorPrince]

So, you don't beat up gays. You're just a jerk.



Oh? Well, this could become very interesting.

I added to N to America just to see which person bashing me would pick it out and lucky number ChristovaOnIce;1912584 did.

Lol. So, now I am a jerk. In one day, I have been called just everything there is to be called except gay (This is an exaggeration).

I've been called a ni*g*r. (I'm black), white (i eat proper), a nerd(no explanation needed), a geek, a thug, a gangsta(I wear a chain), a genius, a dawg,a murderer(killing ants), a "boy"(by my teacher, she's old), a "man", a monkey(some racist guy who tried to cheat me out of 5 bucks at Walmart and got mad when I proved he was wrong), and a jerk.

There's no way that I will add gay to the spectrum. I couldn't stomach being gay. I would prolly punch my lights out every time I looked in the mirror. I'm no jerk. I'm a nice guy. I just don't like people trying to pass of bul*sh*t as true. I know a couple of gay people. Girls & Boys. They were straight, but they changed over after bad relationships or because of emotional turmoil. Al of them. Is that a choice? Or is that some kinda destiny? Or were they born to do that??

I've actually defended a person in trouble once (about to get crushed by a so "called" gang) even though I knew they were gay. They were going to get crushed because they were gay, but the gang didn't want to see me and my switchblade go to work, I suppose. It is wrong to "beat" and "kill" anyone. (including homosexuals). And I would have even fought to save Elton John. If a gay guy approaches me in the incorrect manner (touching or speaking offensively) I will not hesitate to unleash a roundhouse to the back of his neck. I don't really CARE what a person does as long as they don't try to influence me or children in a manner that is not right. Including homosexuality in sex education is a nono.

And for the record. I don't smoke pot. But if I did, It would prolly be because.......... Fill the rest in with one's mind. That was a joke. As in saying "Is it because I'm ________."

Oops I returned again, didn't I??

I find it funny that people can't look at things objectively.

The truth is, this thread can just go on and on and on. Because no one will ever prove, that people are born gay, or that they are not. IT is simply what you think.

"To each his own."

 

[jrrrrrrr]

I don't really CARE what a person does as long as they don't try to influence me or children in a manner that is not right. Including homosexuality in sex education is a nono.

Right, because teaching people directly changes their actions. Just like learning about the holocaust makes you want to kill Jews.

Learning about and associating with gay people makes you gay in the same way that associating with tall people makes you tall.

If your kid becomes gay simply because he learned that homosexuality exists, then chances are he wasn't very straight to begin with.

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.

When you say that "homosexuality is a cancer", are you implying that homosexuals are a good thing for society? I didn't think so.

To pretend homosexual activity, such as it is, has no adverse health effects is denial of the highest order.

To pretend that heterosexual activity is a healthy alternative is a denial of the highest order. Also, this completely ignores the fact that lesbians have a significantly lower STD rate than heterosexuals.

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.

Right, because when a kid is confused about his identity (which happens when you are outnumbered), hearing people like you screaming "immoral!" "bad!" "cancer!" is really going to help them. Suicide is not entirely caused by other people, but other people hating certainly doesn't help.

Your theory about gay people being more likely to commit suicide as a genetic condition is interesting. If it were true, it would mean that being gay is genetic....which would pretty much end your argument in the first place since it is pretty much bullshit to discriminate based on genetics.

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?

What does having AIDS have to do with discrimination? You associating AIDS with the entire gay community is discrimination, since only a small minority of gays have it. That would be like calling all Mexicans "swine flu cases".

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,

Ok, how do you go from this to "gay people are cancer to society"?

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.

I wish it was a common interest too. :naughty:

Are you are saying that bullying gay kids is fine because straight kids get bullied for things too? ANY bullying should be stopped, I just happened to refer to the increasing amount of hate crimes against gays because it was most relevant to this thread.

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.

Wow, just fucking wow. GAY PEOPLE ARE NOT ASKING FOR YOU TO GIVE US MONEY. WE DO NOT WANT YOUR SYMPATHY. WE DONT WANT YOU TO CONVERT. WE ARE ASKING FOR EQUALITY.

This preconceived notion that gay people need to shut up and stop bitching is retarded, when has taking abuse from a majority ever gotten anything done? Are you saying that after some arbitrary amount of time, straight people will just say "sorry about that gay people, you can have your rights now"?

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.

Unlike my mother, I can not marry a man (in most states, luckily I live in a semi-sane one). This is only because he is a man. How is that not sexual discrimination?

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?

Your view on what marriage *should be* is not what marriage *is*. There are tons of benefits of marriage that gay people are currently banned from enjoying. http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/10/us/studies-find-big-benefits-in-marriage.html?sec=health

There are mental and physical benefits to marriage, as well as economic incentives, that are currently refused to gay people.

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.

You are just as guilty of ignoring other people's views of the world.

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.

"Oh, sorry for calling homosexuality a cancer to society. That wasn't hatred, since you have to tell me the definition first!!" What a asinine deflection. You could have just said "I'm sorry", but I guess that would have put an end to your moral crusade.

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.

While I'm not going to comment on religion's purposes I just wanted to remind people that legislating based on religion is expressly forbidden by the first amendment.


I'm glad you took the time to reply in a civil-ish tone. Luckily for the rest of the world, people who believe the idiotic hate speech you believe are dying off. Time is the greatest enemy of the bigot. Maybe you should use your superior reproductive powers and repopulate the conservative community! The way things are looking right now, its going to be at least another 18 years before a conservative wins an election...so you might as well get started making voters now!

I just want to re-emphasize this, since it seems like Deck is going in the right direction:

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,

I must admit that I am kinda curious to see what Deck would think if his future child turned out to be gay, although as someone whose parents aren't too fond of it either idk if I'd want to give the kid that burden.

 

[Glen]

This is a lie. Because I could.

hahahaha

okay, okay, so when that girl doesn't want to be your girlfriend because you're fucking stupid (hypothetical, but it really wouldn't be a stretch) you're able to just get over her just by wanting to?

you're able to stop thinking about how much you miss her? about how much you wish she'd like you? you aren't. you're attracted to her, and you can't stop yourself. being attracted to someone of the same gender is just as choice-based as that is.

 

[Thydoom]

I added to N to America just to see which person bashing me would pick it out and lucky number ChristovaOnIce;1912584 did.

You did that JUST to see who would bash you for a typo?

Lol. So, now I am a jerk. In one day I have been called just everything there is to be called except gay (This is an exaggeration).

I've been called a ni*g*r. (I'm black), white (i eat proper), a nerd(no explanation needed), a geek, a thug, a gangsta(I wear a chain), a genius, a dawg,a murderer(killing ants), a "boy"(by my teacher, she's old), a "man", a monkey(some racist guy who tried to cheat me out of 5 bucks at Walmart and got mad when I proved he was wrong), and a jerk.

So, I can see you've had you're fair share of being bashed.And in ONE day too. Does this this happen to you all the time? Try to stop being any of those things for one day. Let's see how it turns out.

There's no way that I will add gay to the spectrum.I couldn't stomach being gay. I would prolly punch my lights out every time I looked in the mirror.

Wait, didn't you just say you could? Granted, no one ever said you would.

I'm no jerk. I'm a nice guy.

Not only do I smell denial, Admitting you bash Gay people and then trying to pass off as a nice guy... Not the First time you're being Hypocritical.

I just don't like people trying to pass of bul*sh*t as true.

Wait you actually are a nice guy?

I know a couple of gay people. Girls & Boys. They were straight, but they changed over after bad relationships or because of emotional turmoil. Al of them. Is that a choice? Or is that some kinda destiny? Or were they born to do that??

Tricky question. I don't recall anyone ever posting ALL gays were born gay.If they did, please direct me to the post. There is no reason why someone would choose to be gay, yet that doesn't have to stop anyone from being gay.

I've actually defended a person in trouble once (about to get crushed by a so "called" gang) even though I knew they were gay. They were going to get crushed because they were gay, but the gang didn't want to see me and my switchblade go to work, I suppose.

Huh. You and a Switchblade can intimidate an entire gang. That is quite admirable I must admit.

It is wrong to "beat" and "kill" anyone. (including homosexuals).

True

And I would have even fought to save Elton John.

Save him from What? Baldness? any one of his addictions? from being gay?

If a gay guy approaches me in the incorrect manner (touching or speaking offensively) I will not hesitate to unleash a roundhouse to the back of his neck.

What is the correct manner?

What YOU consider Offensive is not what someone else may consider offensive.

I don't really CARE what a person does as long as they don't try to influence me or children in a manner that is not right. Including homosexuality in sex education is a nono.

Jrrrrrrr Beat me to the Punch on this one.

To be honest, Not learning about Homosexuality can only incite misconceptions and give us people that hate one another for no better reason other than "They are Different then me"

And for the record. I don't smoke pot. But if I did, It would prolly be because.......... Fill the rest in with one's mind. That was a joke. As in saying "Is it because I'm ________."

I'm no psychologist, but I'm gonna guess you'd smoke pot because of how much you're insulted on a daily basis.

Oops I returned again, didn't I??

I find it funny that people can't look at things objectively.

If we could, we wouldn't be having this debate

The truth is, this thread can just go on and on and on. Because no one will ever prove, that people are born gay, or that they are not. IT is simply what you think.

Why do you assume all those that are gay chose to be gay?A few may have chosen to, but others were born that way.

"To each his own."

If you want my Opinion, They should go ahead and teach it in Sex Ed.Along with the proper use of anti-conceptives, but I digress.

 

[Griffin]

my solution for DK that makes everyone happy: Name a gay union something else.

It can have all the benefits, but, since language so enjoys singling things out with their own special noun, call it something the fuck else. That way, idiots who don't realize that they've been duped by language will be happy and gays can be happily 'married' as well.

That's the same argument people used to use to justify blacks sitting in the back of the bus while whites sat in the front, or blacks drinking from one water fountain and whites from another. Just because the two are technically the same, that doesn't make them equal.

By making same sex couples use the "worse" term* you're sending the the message that their union is less important or significant than a union between a man and a woman.

* "I'm married" is better than "I'm civilly united", "This is my husband/wife" is better than "This is my civil partner".

 

[Luduan]

I don't feel like responding to the hateful rantings, so I will further quibble about Deck Knight's philosophical illiteracy.

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.

1. Try telling Frederic Jameson that "Postmodernists" (an almost meaningless term, anyway) are Marxists.
2. Postmodernism actually has roots in pre-Socratic philosophy, which predates Marx by about...2500 years. Your attempts to be clever succeed in nothing but exposure of gross ignorance.
3. Slavery built "strong" societies (Greece, Rome, America, Early Modern Europe, etc., etc.). That does not morally justify it. (Incidentally, homosexuality was also rampant in Greek and Roman society. I suppose that doesn't count, though?)

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.

To begin with, "truly religious" is an incredibly vague term. I am an atheist and am perfectly content with my life. Your idea that atheism and happiness are mutually exclusive is idiotic. Also "[r]eligion was the only thing that stood in their way"? You are so wrapped up in the poetics of your religious bigotry that you actually explicitly deny the possibility that atheists can be moral in your post, which I find breathtaking in its sheer audacity. You also implicitly deny the possibility of nontheistic religions, which is simply counterfactual. But I digress.

EDIT:

If a gay guy approaches me in the incorrect manner (touching or speaking offensively) I will not hesitate to unleash a roundhouse to the back of his neck.

...CHUCK NORRIS???

 

[Annhialator Zero]

Oh dear lord.

Warior Prince is easily the worst poster on this forum, how fucking stupid can you get?

Cba responding to all the bullshit (Of which there is a lot) but how can anyone honestly believe you choose your seuality? I sure as hell didn't choose to be straight, I just started noticing girls, I imagine Jrrr had the reverse of that. Homosexuality is rather clearly something that is a part of you, maybe you're not born that way but the way your personality and brain turns out is what makes you homosexual, not just waking up one day and thinking "hey I wanna be gay!"

Use your fucking brain, and the whole "Look how morally wonderful I am" doesn't count for shit.

 

[Synre]

I should probably have ignored this post and let the children keep arguing with the children and the adults keep debating the adults, but I couldn't resist and it's about time I jumped in here....

There's no way that I will add gay to the spectrum. I couldn't stomach being gay. I would prolly punch my lights out every time I looked in the mirror. I'm no jerk. I'm a nice guy. I just don't like people trying to pass of bul*sh*t as true. I know a couple of gay people. Girls & Boys. They were straight, but they changed over after bad relationships or because of emotional turmoil. Al of them. Is that a choice? Or is that some kinda destiny? Or were they born to do that??

And of course, the handful of random people you've met are representative of every gay person in America, right? Especially ones that aren't just a bunch of [what I assume are] silly high schoolers who don't understand themselves, their own sexuality, or their own relationships yet, let alone that of other people?

I was going to say something along the lines of "If you honestly think that all gay people are just "being gay" because they had bad experiences with straight people, as though somehow, that would make them fit in better, or have more success in their relationships, you must be absolutely out of your mind", but after that plebeian "I'd probably punch my own lights out if I were gay" BS it's pretty obvious you're just justifying your own homophobia, there. Cute.

I've actually defended a person in trouble once (about to get crushed by a so "called" gang) even though I knew they were gay. They were going to get crushed because they were gay, but the gang didn't want to see me and my switchblade go to work, I suppose.

I feel the need to point out I don't believe this anecdote for a second. Did you stand up for someone you thought might be gay maybe in the lunchroom when kids were saying mean things to him? Honestly...

It is wrong to "beat" and "kill" anyone. (including homosexuals). And I would have even fought to save Elton John.

Oh no, even Elton John! Whoever would save such a heinous individual? Seriously, are you fucking kidding me right now?

If a gay guy approaches me in the incorrect manner (touching or speaking offensively) I will not hesitate to unleash a roundhouse to the back of his neck.

I have to admit I was laughing pretty hard at this point in your post.

Ignoring the urge to go on "Feel free and try and roundhouse me any time you want and see how far you get, kid" rant, listen to yourself talk... insecure much? "I just can't handle the thought someone might find me attractive, I'd just have to physically attack them immediately!" Grow up. Take it as a compliment, tell them you aren't interested, whatever, but by the sounds of it all you'll have to do is open your mouth and there won't be too many people of either gender who stick around.

I don't really CARE what a person does as long as they don't try to influence me or children in a manner that is not right. Including homosexuality in sex education is a nono.

"Not right" is subjective. Your homophobia is at least as "not right" to me than homosexuality seems to be to you. You're making it pretty clear you don't understand this at all, yet you're campaigning against it as if you have any idea what you're talking about, what it is like to be gay. I'm pretty indifferent on the education thing since people find out anyway, but I mean, you seem to be an awfully good example of why this shit probably does need to be taught in schools - otherwise we get people with misconceptions like these.

I find it funny that people can't look at things objectively.

Said the kettle to the pot...

The truth is, this thread can just go on and on and on. Because no one will ever prove, that people are born gay, or that they are not. IT is simply what you think.

Actually, it's been proven repeatedly that there are a number of biological differences between straight and gay individuals, mostly in the brain, especially around the hypothalamus - have you had psych or bio yet?

 

[RaikouLover]

Wow, just wow... I've just been reading the last 7 pages and taking everything in. Pretty much everything I have to say has been said already by Morm and J7r...

This a few pages back really got me

you keep on saying ignorant cause I'm not accepting it so I can call you ignorant too cause you're not accepting the Bible?

Pretty much the story of the thread and conservative religious bullshit. I can't stand this elitist attitude simply because you "believe in the Bible." Funny how the Bible seems to conform to every conservative, sheltered, religious valued household views. I saw a few pages back.. "Being gay is disrespectful to Christians" and I almost shitted on myself.. Its amazing how some people really can't take a step back and look at some of the horseshit they really say because of their so called "faith." The sad part is... the majority Christians (meaning traditional Christian teachings) are offended by atheists, gays, and anything else that isn't Christian really... Yet we don't give a flying fuck about what they do and actually find it humorous when they lash out at other groups like all these recent bullshit tirades in this thread about gays...

So for the sake of the topic... I do believe homosexuality needs to be taught in sex eduaction. I myself am completely ignorant to the entire situation, and it really needs to be taunt because unless you actually interact with gay people or have the initiative to do some research there is no way of really understanding. My attitude towards gays is rather indifferent... I really don't care if gay marriage is legalized or makes a big push, but in the spirit of whats fair and right everyone must be granted equality and I don't condon any of the discrimination. Most black people are conservative and my dad has his anti-gay tirades and I usually find myself telling him to stop because hes doing the same shit to gays as white people did to blacks during his childhood.

But anyway... how does one become gay? Is it natural? Is it nutured? Common questions and discussions that come up with straight people and while most choose a judgement, like with spirituality, I just don't slap a name on something I have no way of proving or knowing because of my own ignorance.

 

[Brain]

There's just one thing I'd like to say here: what does it matter whether being gay is a choice or not? I mean, seriously. It doesn't change jack shit whether a man naturally likes other men or "chooses" to like other men. It's a red herring. They should get the respect and rights they deserve regardless. Homosexuality, as it happens in the privacy of consenting adults and does not threaten society in any way, is a "choice" that should not be condemned or discriminated against.

 

[ivar]

2. Postmodernism actually has roots in pre-Socratic philosophy, which predates Marx by about...2500 years. Your attempts to be clever succeed in nothing but exposure of gross ignorance.

I don't quite understand how postmodernism could have roots in the pre-Socratic era, and if so, it is only because the term is so vaguely defined that one can make the argument that it even has roots in pre-civilization.

I've interpreted postmodernism as an extreme exaggeration of modernism, or a return to some traditional or classical elements of thought. Regardless of your understanding of postmodernism, it necessarily proceeds modernism, which is a phenomenon introduced in the early 20th century, late 19th century (and that cannot be debated, for it is a branch of thought concerned with post-industrialism).

At least you've said postmodernism is meaningless (which it is), but c'mon it is a bit absurd to say it has roots in the pre-Socratic era--anything can have roots in anything if the definitions are ambiguous and interpretative enough, but if we define postmodernism according to a somewhat more precise definition, your statement appears to be, at best, flimsy, and, at worst, patently false.

I don't quite understand why Deck Knight is drawing parallels between postmodernism and homosexuality; it seems as though he has an utter hatred for anything vaguely left (postmodernists, one can say, lie somewhere in the left, typically) and since liberalism is left, he believes homosexuals should be denied the right to marriage. And then he also claims that he wants equality.

I will have to give him credit for the ability to contradict himself, while maintaining his overall point and seeming at least somewhat credible (mixing in some claims of equality with claims of sexual dysfunction amongst homosexuals). I'm going to put my money on Deck being involved with politics somehow; it seems as though he's inherited that gift of rhetoric where you can kinda keep your head above water, without actually saying anything substantial or convincing.

 

[orangekows]

i'm not even gonna bother reading this whole topic, and i'm not gonna bother arguing with people who are saying it's a choice and what not. all i have to say no matter how legitimate your argument sounds, it's not gonna stop people from being gay. it's not gonna change anything at all. it's just spreading hate for no reason whatsoever. i'm gay and no matter how many people tell me how they think my lifestyle is 'wrong', i'm not gonna change, and i can speak for basically everyone by saying this.

 

[Luduan]

There's just one thing I'd like to say here: what does it matter whether being gay is a choice or not? I mean, seriously. It doesn't change jack shit whether a man naturally likes other men or "chooses" to like other men. It's a red herring. They should get the respect and rights they deserve regardless. Homosexuality, as it happens in the privacy of consenting adults and does not threaten society in any way, is a "choice" that should not be condemned or discriminated against.

This is a great point that I believe has been overlooked thus far. I think the hardline Christian (here I mean particular interpretations of Christianity, lest I be accused of overgeneralizing) desire for homosexuality to be a 'choice' is rooted in their conception of free will and sin. Its being a choice would make it O.K. for them to discriminate, as homosexuals willfully choose to ignore (outdated interpretations of) biblical morality. I highly doubt that that would bother many homosexuals, but it is a convenient, slippery justification for their views.

Off topic:

I don't quite understand how postmodernism could have roots in the pre-Socratic era, and if so, it is only because the term is so vaguely defined that one can make the argument that it even has roots in pre-civilization.

I've interpreted postmodernism as an extreme exaggeration of modernism, or a return to some traditional or classical elements of thought. Regardless of your understanding of postmodernism, it necessarily proceeds modernism, which is a phenomenon introduced in the early 20th century, late 19th century (and that cannot be debated, for it is a branch of thought concerned with post-industrialism).

At least you've said postmodernism is meaningless (which it is), but c'mon it is a bit absurd to say it has roots in the pre-Socratic era--anything can have roots in anything if the definitions are ambiguous and interpretative enough, but if we define postmodernism according to a somewhat more precise definition, your statement appears to be, at best, flimsy, and, at worst, patently false.

I agree that it is vague, but the connection with the pre-Socratics is certainly present, especially in the work of Nietzsche and Heidegger, on whose shoulders practically all major subsequent continental philosophy rests. The general indefinability of 'postmodernism' as a movement lends to some confusion, I believe. I am not saying that pre-Socratics were postmodern, but that postmodernists generally see the openness of the question of being (which Heidegger developed) as preceding Socratic dialectic and Platonism, and that the privileging of questioning is an inherent Greek (i.e. post-Socratic) phenomenon. (Hopefully that isn't too abstruse.) That postmodernism crystallized as a 'movement' in the twentieth century as an outgrowth of modernism and structuralism is obviously true; I am not denying that. (Derrida and Foucault, for instance, always self-identified as structuralists and rejected the label entirely.) I was merely pointing out the idiocy of saying that postmodernists regard any philosophy preceding Marx as 'anachronistic', as the work of the pre-Socratics experienced a sort of revival through Heidegger's questions, and Marxists and postmodernists generally tend to be highly critical of each other. It's also an idiotic thing to say considering the important of, e.g., Spinoza to Deleuze, who is usually considered 'postmodernist' for some reason. I was just caviling Deck Knight for speaking authoritatively and derisively about something he understandably has no knowledge of. It is a bit like if I were to lecture someone on, say, computer science and mathematics, topics in which I have little interest and even less knowledge.

I don't quite understand why Deck Knight is drawing parallels between postmodernism and homosexuality; it seems as though he has an utter hatred for anything vaguely left (postmodernists, one can say, lie somewhere in the left, typically) and since liberalism is left, he believes homosexuals should be denied the right to marriage. And then he also claims that he wants equality.

I assume it has to do with my post on homosexuality and gender discourse in the evolution thread.