Old 13th September 2005, 07:40   #81
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
Originally posted by mysterious_w
I'm just glad the people who are getting so angry at this are a hell of a lot older than me, so at least your views won't affect anything when my peers get in power.
If you guys have the skills to run the planet. Seems to me that the majority of you can't even keep your pants on.

Last edited by rockouthippie; 13th September 2005 at 08:19.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2005, 11:37   #82
ElChevelle
Moderator Alumni
 
ElChevelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: the MANCANNON!
Posts: 22,436
/me fears the future "leadership"
ElChevelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2005, 12:27   #83
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
/me thinks "No shit Sherlock!"
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2005, 13:26   #84
Mattress
Forum King
 
Mattress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 4,577
There's a big difference between tolerance and approval. That's really what this is about, as rockouthippie has made mention of. Most people in the US tolerate homosexuals. But at the same time the majority of people do not approve of homosexual activities.
Mattress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2005, 20:31   #85
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by MegaRock
California DID say no during a vote.



If this is true then it should never become law. Churches have said they do not recognize gay marriages, period. If the Constitution were to be recognized here that 'seperation of Church and State' should also be acknowledged which means the State cannot force the Church to recognize something it does not. Therefore if the Church does not recognize 'gay marriage' then that should be the end of it - and the Church don't recognize it. The State Legislatures and the Supreme Court have no place trying to dictate Church policy and that is what the gays are trying to force them to do.


Thank you. That is the first level headed post I've ever seen in this thread. You are right. The states should not force a ban. But The States cannot force it upon Religous communities. However, some legislators are taking their religion to the job when they make these kind of laws which is bad because the constitution specifically bars it.

The only reason gays want these kind of laws to begin with it so that gay unions would be acknowledged by the government and reap some of the same benefits as a hetero couple.

If they would just look at it like that, then there would be no need to set anything to a vote.
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2005, 20:39   #86
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Quote:
Originally posted by ertmann|CPH
Too me it's like saying; [insert random facist here] what a nice guy, voters wanted to keep torture, but the legislature overturned the vote, luckely our benvolent leader vetoed them out...

i know you don't agree, but that's my take on it, and hence I insist on my right to call him an asshole
That is comparing apples to oranges. You can't hide behind flawed logic.

Call him an asshole if you want. IDGAF! Post it here and I can respond to it.


Quote:
Originally posted by ertmann|CPH
you might want to read up on the word Liberal btw

Main Entry: liberal
Function: noun
: a person who is liberal: as a : one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways b capitalized : a member or supporter of a liberal political party c : an advocate or adherent of liberalism especially in individual rights

Main Entry: lib·er·al·ism
Pronunciation: 'li-b(&-)r&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
1 : the quality or state of being liberal
2 a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity b : a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties d capitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party

I don't see why anyone would be ashamed to be called a liberal
Gee thanks for those glowing definitions! I can see why you wouldn't be ashamed.

Try looking up the definition in about 10 years when the revisions to the dictionary have caught up to the politics of today. Text-book, you are right. But you and I both know there is a connotation of 'radical tree and bunny hugger' when you call someone a liberal.
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
I'm tired of activism. People squaking about how life isn't fair. Welcome to the club!.

The worlds woes are somehow my fault because I'm a heterosexual white guy.
...
I'm tired of the gay, race, gender card.

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2005, 22:00   #87
Cliff_Hopper
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3
Send a message via AIM to Cliff_Hopper
I feel dumber having read all that liberal shit...

Anyway, the legislature shouldn't undermine the people they are serving. If it has been voted on, they should not be allowed to make laws to the contrary, they should only be allowed to initiate a vote in the next election/vote/whatever.

And i'm 18, i'll be in the next generation of leaders, fighting the GOOD fight.
Cliff_Hopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2005, 22:27   #88
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by CaboWaboAddict
Try looking up the definition in about 10 years when the revisions to the dictionary have caught up to the politics of today. Text-book, you are right. But you and I both know there is a connotation of 'radical tree and bunny hugger' when you call someone a liberal.
The difference is not about dictionary differences as much as cultural ones. Liberalism is not American liberalism, they refer to different things. You people are referring to different things, is all. The "classic" idea of liberalism is still the definition of the word outwith the United States, although the prevailance of US media may mean it becomes that way.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 00:51   #89
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
The numbers on this issue were so slanted toward, the "no you are not married if you are gay" side that further votes are unnecessary. But that isn't what has happened. I doubt that anyone will try a vote again.

What gay activists are trying to do is slide this past us with legal trickery.

Here it was some county commissioners that took it on themselves to marry gay people, quoting the Oregon State constitution.

That legal theory was not only wrong in the first place, it was closed by a vote of the citizens permanently by revisions to the statutes.

You can stand on one foot, you can jump up and down, but NO means NO. California voted the same way and the governor did what they told him.

I think that's his job. I wish more politicians would do what we told them to.

Thank you Governor Swartzenegger. The people spoke, and you did what they told you.

Rather refreshing considering the California legislature wanted to go against what we told them.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 02:13   #90
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,854
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
Quote:
Originally posted by Omega X
The only reason gays want these kind of laws to begin with it so that gay unions would be acknowledged by the government and reap some of the same benefits as a hetero couple.
They already have that as well and the government already acknowledges their unions:
Quote:
California already gives same-sex couples many of the rights and duties of marriage if they register with the state as domestic partners.

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 02:24   #91
Omega X
Forum King
 
Omega X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: A Parallel Dimension
Posts: 2,252
Send a message via AIM to Omega X Send a message via Yahoo to Omega X
Quote:
Originally posted by MegaRock
They already have that as well and the government already acknowledges their unions:

California already gives same-sex couples many of the rights and duties of marriage if they register with the state as domestic partners.
Well, I didn't know that. It explains a lot now. Then...why in the hell are they striving for "Marrage" then?
Omega X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 03:30   #92
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
In Oregon, almost all, if not all, of those rights can be had by some paper work too.

The agenda is looking for "validation". That we think being gay is just another normal lifestyle choice.

I have paperwork with my elderly mother, that gives me rights to make decisions about her life, that exceed "marriage". A living will and a durable power of attorney.

I can write her checks and make almost any decision on her behalf, should she become incapable of making those decisions herself.

I don't have anything against gays. I just will not support the lifestyle as "just another choice".

This is what they wanted, and what they don't have.

The agenda is that they want this taught in schools as "just another lifestyle choice".

I will even defend your right be be gay, but I am not going as far as to encourage it and call it marriage.

Sorry.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 05:13   #93
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,854
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
Damn, looks like people are starting to get it.

This is not about rights. They already have that. This is not about insuring protection from discrimination either.

This is about forcing the rest of the civilized world to accept that being gay is 'normal'. It's about forcing churches who consider a gay marriage an abomination to marry them anyway and accept their lifestyle into the church.

No law is going to do that. No Supreme Court decision is going to do that. Indeed as has been posted before some people tolerate their lifestyle but the vast majority of people still don't think and probably will never think it's normal.

So the only way they think they can make people believe it's normal is by having words like 'marriage' apply to their unions and by forcing churches to recognize their unions.

On a seperate note if that fucking corpse bride banner pops up one more time I'm downloading adblock and getting rid of all the banners on this damn site. I can't fucking post when that idiotic shit banner is displayed. Someone get rid of it.

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 12:58   #94
mrthchemp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Holy Blackburn Lancashire!
Posts: 203
Quote:
...but the vast majority of people still don't think and probably will never think it's normal.
yeh, seems that way (until the "dinosaurs" become extinct anyway)
Quote:
Originally posted by ElChevelle
I'm smart enough to know that my dick goes in the little pink hole as are the rest of us smart enough to know that therefore we resoundingly say............you guessed it.......
NO!
i guess this guy wasn't smart enough then...
link
mrthchemp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 13:06   #95
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
The numbers on this issue were so slanted toward, the "no you are not married if you are gay" side that further votes are unnecessary. But that isn't what has happened. I doubt that anyone will try a vote again.

What gay activists are trying to do is slide this past us with legal trickery.
Isn't this the distinction between a pure democracy and a "republic" that is often brought up? In a "republic" (this is the word used, but I'm putting it in quotes since I think it's ambiguous) the rights of the individual are respected as well as the will of majority. In an extreme example, if 60% of the people had voted that all gay men should be imprisoned, this would not happen because their rights are respected. In cases such as this legislature is allowed to step over popular opinion for what is essentially a question of rights and fairness.

I still believe that if marriage is not allowed between homosexual couples that the concept of marriage should be removed from legislation altogether. Whether or not you call it "marriage", if heterosexuals have more rights with their partners than homosexuals, then the law is wrong.

The argument here appears to be about the meaning of the word "marriage". Marriage is a term which was inherited from religion, yet I hear you can have non-religious marriages legally now. Either allow homosexual marriage, or remove the legal concept of "marriage" and replace it with something equal. Stop arguing about a word and start discussing rights. If the existing word doesn't fit, replace it.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 14:23   #96
will
Nullsoft Newbie (Moderator)
 
will's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sheffield, England
Posts: 5,569
America!
Land of the Free!

Keep that in mind when trying to reduce personal freedom.

DO NOT PM ME WITH TECH SUPPORT QUESTIONS
will is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 15:16   #97
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm


I still believe that if marriage is not allowed between homosexual couples that the concept of marriage should be removed from legislation altogether.If the existing word doesn't fit, replace it.

In the history of mankind, except for Sparta, and the rest of the greeks slayed them like a bunch of dogs in the dirt, this has been forbidden.

Take your human tradition and 20,000 years of human evolution and ever major religion and every thought from every philosopher since Rome (which collapsed of it's decadence) and you will find homosexuality as very frowned on.... even in Rome .....

I see nothing in my experience to contradict the lessons of history. I do not see homosexuality as a healthy or happy lifestyle.

I could go further, but I see no purpose. Go meet some gay people and see how happy it makes them. They have always been some of the most miserable, unhappy people I ever met.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 15:28   #98
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
Take your human tradition and 20,000 years of human evolution and ever major religion and every thought from every philosopher since Rome (which collapsed of it's decadence) and you will find homosexuality as very frowned on.... even in Rome .....
After 20,000 years of evolution, aren't we just reaching the point where we can realise that homosexuality is morally acceptable?

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
I see nothing in my experience to contradict the lessons of history.
I don't see a "lesson" that history is trying to teach us here.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
I do not see homosexuality as a healthy or happy lifestyle.
Perhaps if you were gay you'd have a different opinion here. Perhaps if you'd met a loving homosexual couple (or many, as I have) you'd have a different opinion. I'm really not sure where you're getting this from, to be completely honest.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
I could go further, but I see no purpose. Go meet some gay people and see how happy it makes them.
All the ones I know are quite happy for it . I mean, as happy as the heterosexuals I know are for being that way.

As for "I could go further, but I see no purpose", is this because the rest of your arguments are as vacuous as the ones you've presented thus-far?

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 15:42   #99
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Wait 20 years young man. Your attitudes about all of the liberal choices you are making now will be a distant memory.

You will find that not only will you want to conform to some sort of moral norm, but that you want people around you to do the same. You will find them failing.

My dead gay friend is a good example. Where any of his "lovers" there to bury him?. Not a chance. I guess just a little too busy being gay and spreading the aids they gave him elsewhere.

As you will find, you will need people of caliber in your life. Not the "party and get laid" kind of caliber either. People that work and raise their children and respect their own dignity enough not to "take it in the ass", just because they have some need to have some sex and "double their odds" by being bi or gay.

Gay men are usually guys that will screw anything that holds still long enough, and lesbians are usually extreme "man-haters".

Get a clue that your utopian gay relationship isn't real. If it were, I'd be all in favor of it.

It's hard enough to figure out decent relationships between men and women, add gay, and ????
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 15:47   #100
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,854
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
After 20,000 years of evolution, aren't we just reaching the point where we can realise that homosexuality is morally acceptable?
Ummm..fuck no? If we had it certianly wouldn't be the hot button topic it is.

If we were to look at it from a non religious but scientific way then one would have to ask why we were not given the ability for men and men and for that fact women and other women to bear children. It takes a man and a woman to bear children and that's all there is to it. There is no dusputing that and no changing that. So the gay lifestyle goes against the laws of nature in itself.

And although it's not clearly written out in religious terms religious organizations also do not regognize the gay lifestyle as acceptable. It's been that way since the dawn of days and continues to be thousands of years later. So the gay lifestyle is against the laws of religion as has been dictated for thousands of years.

Now imagine this - if the entire world went gay and all men dated men only and all women dated women only do you know what would happen? The end of humans on earth. There would be no more children. You cannot have children without involvement of both sexes. There is no way around that either.

Quote:
mrthchemp This person is on your Ignore List.
Someone let me know if he said anything remotely worth reading. Probably not but there's always a chance.

Quote:
Keep that in mind when trying to reduce personal freedom.
If we allow everyone personal freedom based solely on something they want to do then kiss this world goodbye. There are people who want to have sex with little children. It's not much different than being gay. There are indeed ten year olds who WANT to do it and people who want to do it to them. Should we afford them that personal freedom too while we're at it? There is nothing unhealthy about it outside of possible STD's much like gay sex but something inheriently immoral about it in most peoples eyes. So why not allow ANYONE who wants to have sex and/or get married to do it. Brothers, sisters, cousins, nephews should all be allows to marry too! If people want to hook up with their donkeys too - go for it! Want to screw a corpose - why not - it's a personal freedom right?

Sounds insane but this is why there is even a limit on personal freedoms when it is against the standards of a normal society. If living by the laws of God it's wrong. If living by the laws of nature it's wrong too. It was that way 20,000 years ago and it still is. Allowing it isn't going to change a thing. Changing the meaning of a word won't either.

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 15:55   #101
mysterious_w
Forum King
 
mysterious_w's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Good ol' Britain
Posts: 2,750
I think of the people here fail to realise that sexuality is not a choice.




mysterious_w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 15:58   #102
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Quote:
Originally posted by mysterious_w
I think of the people here fail to realise that sexuality is not a choice.
Oh really. Like keeping your pants on isn't a choice. Doesn't seem very hard to me. I like sex, but I'm not out banging anything that will hold still long enough.

They are genetically gay.... Bullshit.

More like just incapable of keeping their pants on. And perhaps incapable of having to deal with real relationships.

Like where you have children and love them and raise them.

I suppose the phony ass lisp is also genetic. Seems like it goes away very promptly should the need arise. Like when they need to talk to straight people in a business situation.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 16:12   #103
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,854
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
Quote:
Originally posted by mysterious_w
I think of the people here fail to realise that sexuality is not a choice.
If this was true then explain why there are lesbians who were once straight. Got in a bad relationship with a guy and went lesbian or got talked into a three way and went bi or lesbian afterwards. Obviously they were not gay before hand since it was a man and a woman but once the lifestyle was introduced to them they liked it.

The choice of being gay or not is due to what turns you on sexually. For some that might be bondage, being spanked, screwing in public, sex with children - whatever. These are all choices and you make your choice on one simple thing - what turns me on sexually. It's a moot point that people are 'born gay' until it is proven clinically and it hasn't. Saying 'I was born gay' is just a lame excuse to make people believe it's normal. There is no gay gene, no biological reason for it and no difference in the physique or brain. It is simply a decision one makes.

If you take the sexual factor out of it how does a gay person know they're gay outside of the fact they may get along with a certian sex better than the other?

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 16:13   #104
mysterious_w
Forum King
 
mysterious_w's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Good ol' Britain
Posts: 2,750
You seem to be stereotyping a lot there. All gays are promiscuous, all gays are camp. That is the bullshit.

It's like me saying, you are a redneck, you're obese, you're a Christian fundamentalist, just becuase you live in America.. It's blatently false.




mysterious_w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 16:16   #105
Mattress
Forum King
 
Mattress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 4,577
if being gay was genetic then it would have been bred out of the human race since, in general, homosexuals do not reproduce.
Mattress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 16:17   #106
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,854
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
You seem to be sidestepping the question above. Can you explain how people are 'born gay'. How does this happen? Since it's from birth there must be some scientific reason or proof that people are born gay. Is it hereditary? Is there something in the DNA? Please enlighten us.

Hell, I'd love to see ANYONE answer that question including any gay people who want to step up to the plate.

Face it - homosexuality is against the laws of nature, the laws of God and the laws of the people. People tolerate it but few if any accept it as normal. That's all I need to base my views of it on. If you want to change my mind prove the above and maybe I'll change my mind. Since I know no one can that leaves it as what it is - a personal and lifestyle choice and it is nothing more.

Now consider this: If we were all allowed to act however we wanted dependent solely on our sexual desires what kind of world do you think we would be living in?

Consider also that when a man of say 21 years old has sex with a WILLING 10 year old they are jailed. Maybe they were born child fuckers too? Seriously - if one can be 'born gay' then isn't it also logical that a person can be born 'attracted to little children' and if the other party is willing what exactly is wrong with that?

Later in life when all you little kiddies have children of your own imagine walking into the room and finding your little kid being banged by some hairy assed old man! Not a nice thought, is it? Well allow the morals to be decayed by sexual choices and you'll have a world just like that.

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 16:52   #107
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
Wait 20 years young man. Your attitudes about all of the liberal choices you are making now will be a distant memory.
Please don't use that interpretation of "liberal" when addressing me, it's not the meaning of the word in my country. Just a thought.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
You will find that not only will you want to conform to some sort of moral norm, but that you want people around you to do the same. You will find them failing.
I conform to some moral norm, to a large degree. There are many people who are 20+ years older than me who also hold similar morals.

I will never conform to moral norms that are not fair, however. This is, to me, the essence of morality. I do not see anything unnatural in homosexuality, and I do not believe they should be systematically discriminated against.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
My dead gay friend is a good example. Where any of his "lovers" there to bury him?. Not a chance. I guess just a little too busy being gay and spreading the aids they gave him elsewhere.
Wow, it's a good thing your friend was exactly the same as every gay person.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
As you will find, you will need people of caliber in your life. Not the "party and get laid" kind of caliber either. People that work and raise their children and respect their own dignity enough not to "take it in the ass", just because they have some need to have some sex and "double their odds" by being bi or gay.
I thought you said you'd met a gay person before?

I must have misread that part.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
Gay men are usually guys that will screw anything that holds still long enough, and lesbians are usually extreme "man-haters".
Yep. You've definately never met a gay person before.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
Get a clue that your utopian gay relationship isn't real. If it were, I'd be all in favor of it.
Clearly not true. I didn't imply anything on the level of "utopian gay relationships" anyway. I just tried to equate heterosexual and homosexual relationships as as valid as one another.

Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
It's hard enough to figure out decent relationships between men and women, add gay, and ????
I can't reply sensibly to this. I really can't. I mean, the silliness of that line is just mind-boggling.

It's hard enough to figure out decent relationships between white people. Add blacks, and ????

It's hard enough to figure out physics without quantum physics. Add that, and ????

Dear God. I do not consider adding complexity to societal rules, when it clearly exists anyway, with or without government "approval" a bad thing.

Quote:
Originally posted by MegaRock
You seem to be sidestepping the question above. Can you explain how people are 'born gay'. How does this happen? Since it's from birth there must be some scientific reason or proof that people are born gay. Is it hereditary? Is there something in the DNA? Please enlighten us.
Well, the "born gay" catchphrase is to differentiate it from the idea that people "turn gay" (or, its more specific corollary, "are turned gay") at some point in their lives. Regardless of when it becomes part of a personality, it is likely not to manifest fully until puberty (just as heterosexual boys and girls do not become "interested in" the other sex until that point).

The fact, however, is that (for example), the American Psychiatric Association has not considered homosexuality a mental disorder since 1973. My gut feeling is that this group of experts may know what they're talking about. If it is not a disorder, chances are it is a perfectly normal way to feel.

But is it "natural", or caused by outside effects? Wikipedia has a quite interesting article on the subject. It mentions, amongst other things, that the brains of homosexuals (in particular homosexual men) are closer to those of the opposite sex. This is certainly the sort of discrepancy that could occur through genetics ("the gay gene" is a meaningless generalisation). The scientific consensus on the issue is that genetics is not the only cause, but that in any case homosexuality is innate - that is, natural. Some details of the studies that have been carried out are available here.

Furthermore, there is a branch of medicine devoted to changing the sexuality of homosexuals "back" to heterosexuality. It is known as "reparative" therapy. This is clearly of relevance if one wishes to prove that, instead of being homosexual naturally, one "turns" homosexual (if they can be turned homosexual, surely they can turn back?).

Here is a 1999 statement on reparative therapy:
Quote:
The most important fact about 'reparative therapy,' also sometimes known as 'conversion' therapy, is that it is based on an understanding of homosexuality that has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a 'cure.' ...health and mental health professional organizations do not support efforts to change young people's sexual orientation through 'reparative therapy' and have raised serious concerns about its potential to do harm.
(emphasis mine)
This statement was delivered jointly by the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, American School Health Association, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Social Workers, and National Education Association.

But if you say it's unnatural and people have a choice in the matter, fair enough.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 17:39   #108
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
I have known many gay men. I have met 2 that might fall into the category of a healthy relationship.

I've also seen the "old perves" my age out recruiting young men for sex. I've also seen what happens in the gay clubs, promiscuity which far exceeds heterosexuals and I mean FAR EXCEEDS. There is even a considerable amount of organized promiscuity in the form of sex parties and orgies. Something far less normal in the hetero community. I understand, not that it doesn't exist there too.

This is why the disease rate is high, as is the mortality from the risky sexual behaviors.

Because this becomes a community, and because the tendency is that promiscuous behavior is accepted and tolerated We see disease rates that are multiples of the hetero population. It also follows that these guys have many more partners than we average hetero's.

The reason that I said men and women have a tough enough time, is that we have some social pressures which reduce our promiscuity. In the gay community, no such pressure exists. Obviously they didn't care about what 99% of us think anyway, their gay!.

This is why you see alarming numbers for STD with these guys.

So if this is just another, sweet innocent lifestyle... why do we see so much STD?.

Maybe BECAUSE IT ISN'T SUCH A SWEET, INNOCENT LIFESTYLE!.

Even the 2 gay men that I know that apparently have a loving, monogamous relationship, were not always monogamous, and did participate in some risk behaviors when they were younger. I think self preservation may be a major factor in their monogamy.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 18:01   #109
mrthchemp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Holy Blackburn Lancashire!
Posts: 203
Quote:
Originally posted by MegaRock
Quote:
mrthchemp This person is on your Ignore List.
Someone let me know if he said anything remotely worth reading. Probably not but there's always a chance.
"eyes down...your IQ, 22!"
mrthchemp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 18:17   #110
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by rockouthippie
So if this is just another, sweet innocent lifestyle... why do we see so much STD?.

Maybe BECAUSE IT ISN'T SUCH A SWEET, INNOCENT LIFESTYLE!.
Or maybe BECAUSE LACK OF SOCIETAL ACCEPTANCE OF SOMETHING LABELS IT TABOO AND TENDS TO EXTREMISE ITS PRACTICIONERS. Failing to accept homosexuality makes the problem worse, not better.

The fact that the gay people you met of your age and those I've met of mine being different in terms of extremism only exemplifies this. You are, I assume, older than me (you've implied this, I'm 22 for the record, though). The gay people you met lived and grew up in a society which was less tolerant of their nature than today's one, which is very likely to be the differentiating factor here.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 18:20   #111
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
^So, by that logic, failing to accept child molesters as having a valid alternative lifestyle is making the problem worse?

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 18:54   #112
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Child molesters are infringing upon the rights of others. Homosexuals are consenting.

Additionally, child molesters are listed as having mental problems.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 18:58   #113
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,854
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
Quote:
Originally posted by mrthchemp
"eyes down...your IQ, 22!"
Quote:
Posts containing personal attacks on another user will be edited or deleted with no warning or consent.
I'll leave it to the mods to let me know if the flaming you're doing is ok. If it's ok for you to do it then that gives me clearance to do it as well. Subject closed until they let me know. If mrthchemp has such an issue with what I am discussing maybe he/she/it should use the ignore button and stop replying to my posts.

With that said:

Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
Child molesters are infringing upon the rights of others. Homosexuals are consenting.

Additionally, child molesters are listed as having mental problems.
Slow down a sec - we're not taking about child molesters. We are talking about a willing adult and a willing child.

In essence we are discussing both a lifestyle choice and a sexual choice. Sex with a WILLING child is no different. Both want to do it. Both make a decision to do it. There are no more risks involved with *******child sex as their is with hetero or homo sex.

But unlike a homosexual lifestyle one who has sex with a WILLING child goes to jail. Prison no less. They get branded for the rest of their life as a sexual offender. They get put on lists and have people protest outside of their house. Some get beaten to death.

Yet in the end all they did was make a sexual lifestyle choce - the same one gay people want us to accept. They want us to accept something which has been considered immoral and against most religions since the beginning of man. Sex with a willing child is no different - these are two consulting humans who have made a sexual choice one that has also been considered immoral since the beginnings of man.

How can you persecute one choice and not the other? The only argument one has would be that a 14 year old that gets pregnant couldn't take care of a child but that's been proven dead wrong because of the teen pregnancy rate in the country already. Under the right circumstances they can give birth to and raise a child just as good as someone can a few years older.

So if one is ok, why isn't the other. If we accept to remove one moral blockade where exactly does it and and why?

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!

Last edited by MegaRock; 14th September 2005 at 19:26.
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 19:20   #114
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Ever sorry you ever said anything in a thread?. This one went that way quite a while ago.

I'm convinced, so whatever you want, the point is moot anyway.

To all, be happy.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 19:20   #115
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
You flamed him first, so I doubt it applies.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 19:21   #116
mrthchemp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Holy Blackburn Lancashire!
Posts: 203
Quote:
Originally posted by MegaRock

Someone should really read those rules. If they dislike what I am saying so much they should use ignore like I did. But if they continue to direct flames at me as they have done in the past then mods - expect the biggest flame war you've ever seen because I will consider not stopping this individual clearance to proceed with it.

At least everyone else here can simply discuss the subject irregardless of what your opinions are. My good friend mrthchemp on the other hand only seems to be able to occupy himself with flaming me directly. It was against the rules to do that last time I read them. Maybe things have changed. Can a mod clear this up?
just a joke...that being said i apologise for my last remark and assure everyone most profoundly that such an appalling act of defamation (as it has been interpreted) will NEVER occur again (not in my posts anyway).
mrthchemp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 19:40   #117
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,854
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
You flamed him first, so I doubt it applies.
Not paying attention again? The first flame was right here:

http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....767538#1767538

No deal though. Ignore works pretty good. Once someone attacks me I'll definately attack back. My fault anyway for even taking the time to see what they posted.

Anyhoo...

People decide to be gay. They decide who they want to have sex with and why. They decide who they get along with and don't. No one can say they just sat up one day and bingo - they were gay. You have to have made a concious decision if you're gay or not and one decides that upon which gender they get along with the best and which gender they enjoy sex with.

A decision is a choice. It doesn't just happen. You decide it. Why do you think some women have 'turned' lesbian after a bad relationship. Why do you think some men have 'turned' gay after being molested as a child. They weren't born that way - something happened in their life and they decided to live their life that way afterwards.

There is nothing biological about it. Nothing medical involved. Nothing in the DNA. It is a decision and a decision is a choice. That is why I call it a lifestyle choice - because they chose that way of life to live.

And I'm not going to worry about it anymore. I think being gay is sick and I'll continue to do so. A small majority will continue to think it's ok and I'm sure they'll continue to do so as well. So long as the people have their say in the matter I believe most will continue to vote to ban gay marriage so I don't think anything will change anytime soon.

Nuff said. I'm done.

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 20:28   #118
Mattress
Forum King
 
Mattress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 4,577
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
Or maybe BECAUSE LACK OF SOCIETAL ACCEPTANCE OF SOMETHING LABELS IT TABOO AND TENDS TO EXTREMISE ITS PRACTICIONERS. Failing to accept homosexuality makes the problem worse, not better.
So the fact that homosexual activity is taboo causes them to have a much higher incidence of STDs?

I'm confused.
Mattress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 20:57   #119
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by Mattress
So the fact that homosexual activity is taboo causes them to have a much higher incidence of STDs?

I'm confused.
Extremist tendancies such as lack of safe sex can come from lack of education (as, particularly in the past, the topic of safe gay sex just wasn't discussed). Making more sense?

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2005, 21:22   #120
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Quote:
Originally posted by zootm
Child molesters are infringing upon the rights of others. Homosexuals are consenting.

Additionally, child molesters are listed as having mental problems.
I was thinking about willing partners as Megarock said.

But since you seem to dismiss that, what about bestiality? Why should someone go to jail for screwing sheep?

How about the mortician that screws your dead grandmother? Should he go to jail?

Hey, its just a lifestyle choice, right?

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > Breaking News

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump