| Homosexuality, etc..-Wrong? |
| No, it's not wrong. It's abnormal, but not wrong necessarily |
|
13% |
[ 17 ] |
| Not wrong, just weird but I don't mind it |
|
22% |
[ 28 ] |
| Yes, it is WRONG! Die HOMOs, DIE! |
|
3% |
[ 4 ] |
| I believe it is wrong for religious reasons. |
|
17% |
[ 22 ] |
| It's just wrong, that's all there is to say. |
|
8% |
[ 11 ] |
| I'm gay-GAY PRIDE! |
|
18% |
[ 23 ] |
| Its not wrong or abnormal |
|
16% |
[ 21 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 126 |
|
| Author |
Message |
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
 Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:15 am |
|
| Puck wrote: | | We can't compare sexuality between animals and humans. Animals engage in sex for physical pleasure and to reproduce. Humans are completely different. Sexual intercourse between humans is all about love, something that makes us distinct from animals. For us, sex for is about (at least when it is healthy) the complete giving of ones self to one other person out of love for them. To make a comparison between humans having sex and animals having sex incredibly degrades human sexuality, and humans themselves. |
Its naive to think we humans are above other animals. Sure in intelligence, but not in emotional capabilities.
Animals can love, they might experience it different from us(a bit more clear and logical) but htey can definitly love.
But then again, what is love?
Oh, and craign. You better fix that post quick because i'm about to get medieval on you.
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Valathous
The Canadian, eh
Joined: 31 Aug 2002
Posts: 19074
Location: Centre Bell
|
| Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:46 pm |
|
| lionhead wrote: | | Oh, and craign. You better fix that post quick because i'm about to get medieval on you. |
Do and I'll go all Admin on you, 
Nothing wrong with his post other than a different matter of opinion. I do remember you saying what he claims you said.
Craign, I can't really see the validity of the statement that all people are bisexual. There are too many people in the world that are just so adamently against homosexuals to even consider your statement as true. Even those who are straight who don't have any problems tolerating homosexuals could have absolutely no inkling of bisexuality at all. Given ancient cultures I can see where you'd get the idea, but it's just not believable in my opinion.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:03 pm |
|
| lionhead wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | We can't compare sexuality between animals and humans. Animals engage in sex for physical pleasure and to reproduce. Humans are completely different. Sexual intercourse between humans is all about love, something that makes us distinct from animals. For us, sex for is about (at least when it is healthy) the complete giving of ones self to one other person out of love for them. To make a comparison between humans having sex and animals having sex incredibly degrades human sexuality, and humans themselves. |
Its naive to think we humans are above other animals. Sure in intelligence, but not in emotional capabilities.
Animals can love, they might experience it different from us(a bit more clear and logical) but htey can definitly love.
But then again, what is love?
Oh, and craign. You better fix that post quick because i'm about to get medieval on you. |
I disagree, and I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. Humans are above other animals, in both intelligence and emotional capabilities. Sometimes, certain species may appear to show some basic emotion, but I would never concede that this is anywhere near the level on which humans do. I don't think animals love. Not the way humans do.
I can understand Craign's argument to an extent. There is data to support his claim (in polls) that people will concede that they have had some kind of sexual 'venture' with a person of the same sex. That being said, I do not agree that you can therefore draw the conclusion that must of us are actually bisexual. I think you can draw the conclusion that people have trouble controlling lust, hormones, and themselves in general.
|
|
|
craign
Senior Cadet
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 20
Location: USS Voyager NCC-74656
|
| Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:02 pm |
|
| Puck wrote: | | lionhead wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | We can't compare sexuality between animals and humans. Animals engage in sex for physical pleasure and to reproduce. Humans are completely different. Sexual intercourse between humans is all about love, something that makes us distinct from animals. For us, sex for is about (at least when it is healthy) the complete giving of ones self to one other person out of love for them. To make a comparison between humans having sex and animals having sex incredibly degrades human sexuality, and humans themselves. |
Its naive to think we humans are above other animals. Sure in intelligence, but not in emotional capabilities.
Animals can love, they might experience it different from us(a bit more clear and logical) but htey can definitly love.
But then again, what is love?
Oh, and craign. You better fix that post quick because i'm about to get medieval on you. |
I disagree, and I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. Humans are above other animals, in both intelligence and emotional capabilities. Sometimes, certain species may appear to show some basic emotion, but I would never concede that this is anywhere near the level on which humans do. I don't think animals love. Not the way humans do.
I can understand Craign's argument to an extent. There is data to support his claim (in polls) that people will concede that they have had some kind of sexual 'venture' with a person of the same sex. That being said, I do not agree that you can therefore draw the conclusion that must of us are actually bisexual. I think you can draw the conclusion that people have trouble controlling lust, hormones, and themselves in general. |
In a way that is exactly what I meant =]
Im not saying it as in everyone is attracted to any gender. I am saying that everyone is bisexual, for the reason that it is not impossible for someone to have a crush on someone of their own / opposite gender.
Although I also see how that is flawed...
But anyways 
| Quote: | | Oh, and craign. You better fix that post quick because i'm about to get medieval on you. |
Now now now. Are you trying to say that you did not say that?
hmm...
| Quote: | | Its just wrong, its should be stopped because its not natural. But they don't have too die or anything. Its disgusting too (although lesbians are a different case, Bi-seksual women too.). |
Strike 1!
| Quote: | Of course there is something wrong with them. God, nature, Boadha or whomever Intended Men and women too be Straight, being gay doesn't help the population, the morale, cultures, religions or peace.
however, lesbians.... Thats just for fun. Or its just fun. Female Gays don't tend too be all different from a normal person but most Men gays are so Disgusting, wierd, extreme. *Shiffers down my spine*
What would you rather see, as a man or a woman doesnt matter: Seeing 2 Men kiss or Seeing 2 women kiss (just a normal kiss)? |
Strike 2!
I find that a bit disturbing...
It is only Disgusting in your own opinion. Because you dont like the thought of two men together. But because you like women, you think obviously that two together is "for fun. Or its just fun".
And I am awfully sorry: | Quote: | | Female Gays don't tend too be all different from a normalperson but most gays are so Disgusting, wierd, extreme. *shiffers down my spine* |
*Ahem*
That is called Stereotyping. You are judging us all based on what you have seen / heard of. For instance, most people see lesbians as really butch american musclemaniacs. And most people see gay men as soppy girl acting sex-craving kiddie-raping *beep*.
To update you: We are not all wierd and extreme. And if you do not like it, guess what? The only flaming reason we do that is because we are treated like mass murderers everyday. Most of us think that by having "Gay Pride" they are showing that they are not offended by what people think, and are proud to be what they are. If this was the other way around here, gays = straight + straights = gays, then the same thing would happen. Would it not?
And, NORMAL person? There is no normal. There is no ab-normal. These words are too subjective.
According to "Normality" Everyone is Abnormal. Because everyone is different from Everyone else:
Names, Appearances, physical strength, brain size, mucas amount covering brain, IQ, abilities, spelling ability, mathematics ability, artistic ability, musical ability, scientistic ability, design ability, eye colour, skin colour, hair colour, hair type, favourite clothing, hobbies, friends ammount, friends names, cooking tastes, schools, hometown, city, country, mobile, computer, tv, voice type, voice pitch, voice sound, hair ammount, favourite colour, favourite animal, ammount of pets, favourite pet, most wanted pet.
I really could go on all day:)
| Quote: | | being gay doesn't help the population, the morale, cultures, religions or peace. |
Whether you like it or not, being gay is a way of life. It is also a part of the population. And guess what? You were mostly wrong there:
Population: The world is already over-populated by humans. If everyone were straight, and had the ability to procreate, the word would be in chaos. Also, according to this theory, all straight persons without the ability to reproduce do not help the population?
The morale: The morale? HA! What is it that happens daily? Oh yeah:
- Homophobic attacks
- Homophobic chants
- Homophobic murders
- Homophobic suicides
And lots more...
Now try saying which does not help the morale of the population. The only way we could not is if we were in some way heterophobic, which is beggining to happen to some I admit. But still...
Cultures: Explain.
Religions: Out of order. Religions are the cause of almost all the worlds bigotry and hatred. Homophobia especially. LGBTQ people do nothing to religions, besides retalliate against them. For reasons justified.
Peace: Once again, out of order. Peace is to treat everyone with respect. Respect is when you do not care how different someone is.
Guess what? That was quite hypocritical =] Because you are homophobic =] Which means you do not help the population: Morale and peace. Hmm interestingly contradictory...
I could proove failures, contradictions and other things in what you say forever, but I believe I shall leave it there =]
One more thing though:
http://www.turtlezen.com/diversity.html
xxCR41Gxx
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:36 pm |
|
| craign wrote: | But anyways
| Quote: | | Oh, and craign. You better fix that post quick because i'm about to get medieval on you. |
Now now now. Are you trying to say that you did not say that? |
craign, Valathous clearly warned lionhead about acting on that statement, so it wasn't really necessary for you to address it, now was it?
IMO, the word "homophobic" is the word homosexuals use in the same manner that true homophobes use derogatory homosexual terms. I think the act of homosexuality is wrong. I am not a homophobe. I do not fear a homosexual, nor their actions. I find the actions gross, whether done by males or females. But, since they don't require me to watch, it's really none of my business, though I am still entitled to my opinion.
As for your comments about "religion causing this", and such, it did no such thing. It's how man (people) used it to support their own agendas. The two main religions in the world, Christianity and Islam, both teach tolerance and compassion, and both have been skewed by man. Through no fault of the religion itself.
So let's blame lay the blame where it should be, shall we? IMO, that's the biggest problem today. No one is responsible for anything they do.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Dirt
Exercise Boy
Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 2086
Location: a tree
|
| Fri Mar 16, 2007 4:10 pm |
|
You should all watch the latest southpark episode, sheds some light on this subject 
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Fri Mar 16, 2007 4:15 pm |
|
Do you need an "acountabilibuddy"? Since it's not a real word, I spelled it just like it sounded, *cough*
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
craign
Senior Cadet
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 20
Location: USS Voyager NCC-74656
|
| Sat Mar 17, 2007 3:27 pm |
|
| Theresa wrote: | | craign wrote: | But anyways
| Quote: | | Oh, and craign. You better fix that post quick because i'm about to get medieval on you. |
Now now now. Are you trying to say that you did not say that? |
craign, Valathous clearly warned lionhead about acting on that statement, so it wasn't really necessary for you to address it, now was it?
IMO, the word "homophobic" is the word homosexuals use in the same manner that true homophobes use derogatory homosexual terms. I think the act of homosexuality is wrong. I am not a homophobe. I do not fear a homosexual, nor their actions. I find the actions gross, whether done by males or females. But, since they don't require me to watch, it's really none of my business, though I am still entitled to my opinion.
As for your comments about "religion causing this", and such, it did no such thing. It's how man (people) used it to support their own agendas. The two main religions in the world, Christianity and Islam, both teach tolerance and compassion, and both have been skewed by man. Through no fault of the religion itself.
So let's blame lay the blame where it should be, shall we? IMO, that's the biggest problem today. No one is responsible for anything they do. |
True...
OK, I was wrong in saying it was religions fault and that it is the cause of it.
But the part about Homosexuals using the word "homophobic" in the same manner that true homophobes use derogatory terms is not true. Maybe in america, but not here.
Thats like me saying that straight people are homophobic and bigots in some way or other.
xxCR41Gxx
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:35 am |
|
 , oh my god. Why do i have to expalin my past posts to every new member that reads them. I got angry, alright? i said some stupid things and i'm embarrased and ashamed of them. But don't think you can proof me wrong by taking those old posts and giving oh so intellectual(too bad i don't know many english proverbs) opinions about them because then you obviously haven't read the entire topic yet and know thats NOT how i think about it.
so that mile long post you mae quoting me has been for nothing as it doesn't proof, learn or informs anything.
| Quote: | | Do and I'll go all Admin on you, |
i know. No harm done. i just felt like quoting Pulp Fiction.
| Quote: | I disagree, and I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. Humans are above other animals, in both intelligence and emotional capabilities. Sometimes, certain species may appear to show some basic emotion, but I would never concede that this is anywhere near the level on which humans do. I don't think animals love. Not the way humans do.
|
Perhaps other Animals don't need to express their emotions as much as humans do as they are more focussed on what is really important. Survival.
Humans have such a different life style from all other animals that it most likely has blocked out the insitinct and opened up the emotions. I don't know if you have noticed but a Killer Whale for example curls his dorsal fin when in captivity, no emotions yuo say? Did you know that Flipper, the famous dolphin commited suicide because he was alone? No emotions you say? Ever saw a Bear stuck in a small cage in an Asian country where they use the puss that comes out of a wound on his paw for pharmaceutical purposes? Can you look into the eyes of that bear and swear that bear isn't depressed and sad? No emotions you say?
If animals can't have emotions like humans do, then why can you see it in their eyes, like you do other humans?
Animals can feel. They can feel depressed, happy, sad, confinent, scared, in love. and they can definitly express it, why else can they experience it?
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Sam Kenobi
Not a Duke
Joined: 13 Jun 2003
Posts: 10373
Location: The 'Verse
|
| Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:10 am |
|
Humans have the ability of reason, that puts them way above the animals psychologically. And you can't really have emotions without reason. You can have states of being.... a cat purrs not because it's necessarily happy, but it's content. A dog bites not because it's angry but because it is threatened. And even those are most basic states.
|
|
|
Tyvek
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Jul 2001
Posts: 2821
Location: Mississippi, USA
|
| Mon Mar 19, 2007 7:27 pm |
|
| lionhead wrote: |
Name one instance of homosexuality in nature, humans excluded. |
| Wikipedia wrote: |
Homosexual behavior does occur in the animal kingdom, especially in social species, particularly in marine birds and mammals, monkeys and the great apes. Homosexual behavior has been observed among 1,500 species, and in 500 of those it is well documented.[13] Georgetown University professor Janet Mann has specifically theorized that homosexual behavior, at least in dolphins, is an evolutionary advantage that minimizes intraspecies aggression, especially among males.
* Male penguin couples have been documented to mate for life, build nests together, and to use a stone as a surrogate egg in nesting and brooding. In 2004, the Central Park Zoo in the United States replaced one male couple's stone with a fertile egg, which the couple then raised as their own offspring.[14] German and Japanese zoos have also reported homosexual behavior among their penguins. This phenomenon has also been reported at Kelly Tarlton's Aquarium in Auckland, New Zealand.
* Courtship, mounting, and full anal penetration between bulls has been noted to occur among American Bison. The Mandan nation Okipa festival concludes with a ceremonial enactment of this behavior, to "ensure the return of the buffalo in the coming season."[citation needed] Also, mounting of one female by another is common among cattle. (See also, Freemartin. Freemartins occur because of clearly causal hormonal factors at work during gestation.)
* Homosexual behavior in male sheep (found in 6-10% of rams) is associated with variations in cerebral mass distribution and chemical activity. A study reported in Endocrinology concluded that biological and physiological factors are in effect.[15] These findings are similar to human findings studied by Simon LeVay.
* Male bighorn sheep are divisible into two kinds, the typical males among whom homosexual behavior is common and "effeminate sheep" or "behavioral transvestites" which are not known to engage in homosexual behavior.[16][17] |
Just a reference... for more info visit htttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality
|
|
|
Tyvek
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Jul 2001
Posts: 2821
Location: Mississippi, USA
|
| Mon Mar 19, 2007 7:44 pm |
|
| Valathous wrote: | | Craign, I can't really see the validity of the statement that all people are bisexual. There are too many people in the world that are just so adamently against homosexuals to even consider your statement as true. Even those who are straight who don't have any problems tolerating homosexuals could have absolutely no inkling of bisexuality at all. Given ancient cultures I can see where you'd get the idea, but it's just not believable in my opinion. |
I think what he means by the statement that all people are bi-sexual, is that everyone can look at a member of the same sex, or opposite sex, and tell if they are attractive or not. And on that same premise straight men and women can watch other straght men and women have sex and find it attractive that two attreactive people are having sex. That in itself can be considered a form of bi-sexuality, granted it is light.
On another note...
I tend to agree with T. When it comes to this subject... I don't have sex with my boyfriend or make out with him in front of people, and I don't want to see straight people do it either. You may not like what is done behind closed doors, but it is none of your business to tell me that I am wrong for loving someone so much physically as well as emotionally. Now people can argue religion all the time, but not everyone is Christian, nor does all religions claim that homosexuality is wrong, that is a difference of opinion. I do know one thing though, natural or not, Homosexuals have existed in every culture, throughout time... they may have had to hide, but they were there.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:41 am |
|
| Tyvek wrote: | | Valathous wrote: | | Craign, I can't really see the validity of the statement that all people are bisexual. There are too many people in the world that are just so adamently against homosexuals to even consider your statement as true. Even those who are straight who don't have any problems tolerating homosexuals could have absolutely no inkling of bisexuality at all. Given ancient cultures I can see where you'd get the idea, but it's just not believable in my opinion. |
I think what he means by the statement that all people are bi-sexual, is that everyone can look at a member of the same sex, or opposite sex, and tell if they are attractive or not. And on that same premise straight men and women can watch other straght men and women have sex and find it attractive that two attreactive people are having sex. That in itself can be considered a form of bi-sexuality, granted it is light.
On another note...
I tend to agree with T. When it comes to this subject... I don't have sex with my boyfriend or make out with him in front of people, and I don't want to see straight people do it either. You may not like what is done behind closed doors, but it is none of your business to tell me that I am wrong for loving someone so much physically as well as emotionally. Now people can argue religion all the time, but not everyone is Christian, nor does all religions claim that homosexuality is wrong, that is a difference of opinion. I do know one thing though, natural or not, Homosexuals have existed in every culture, throughout time... they may have had to hide, but they were there. |
WRONG. Same sex can easily determine an ugly/obese/hideous/etc person from a 'normal' person. Something�s only the opposite sex can gauge attractiveness from not. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder they say.
|
|
|
Tyvek
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Jul 2001
Posts: 2821
Location: Mississippi, USA
|
| Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:37 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Tyvek wrote: | | Valathous wrote: | | Craign, I can't really see the validity of the statement that all people are bisexual. There are too many people in the world that are just so adamently against homosexuals to even consider your statement as true. Even those who are straight who don't have any problems tolerating homosexuals could have absolutely no inkling of bisexuality at all. Given ancient cultures I can see where you'd get the idea, but it's just not believable in my opinion. |
I think what he means by the statement that all people are bi-sexual, is that everyone can look at a member of the same sex, or opposite sex, and tell if they are attractive or not. And on that same premise straight men and women can watch other straght men and women have sex and find it attractive that two attreactive people are having sex. That in itself can be considered a form of bi-sexuality, granted it is light.
On another note...
I tend to agree with T. When it comes to this subject... I don't have sex with my boyfriend or make out with him in front of people, and I don't want to see straight people do it either. You may not like what is done behind closed doors, but it is none of your business to tell me that I am wrong for loving someone so much physically as well as emotionally. Now people can argue religion all the time, but not everyone is Christian, nor does all religions claim that homosexuality is wrong, that is a difference of opinion. I do know one thing though, natural or not, Homosexuals have existed in every culture, throughout time... they may have had to hide, but they were there. |
WRONG. Same sex can easily determine an ugly/obese/hideous/etc person from a 'normal' person. Something�s only the opposite sex can gauge attractiveness from not. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder they say. |
I said it was a form of bi-sexuality... finding any attractiveness in a member of the same sex can be considered a form of bi-sexuality... however it does depend on the person. However it is not WRONG that is a personal statement, and as we know personal statements can be considered opinion... and are therefore only WRONG depending on the point of view of the person.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:50 pm |
|
I won't say you are wrong, but I will say that I disagree. Finding beauty in anything is natural, especially if it's something in nature. There are women that I know that I think are beautiful, but by no means am I attracted to them. To be aware of something is different than being "attracted" to something. I'm saying this very badly, but I hope you get where I'm going. People get turned on by vehicles, so we can't really judge a physiological response to mean anything.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:05 am |
|
| Tyvek wrote: | | PrankishSmart wrote: | | Tyvek wrote: | | Valathous wrote: | | Craign, I can't really see the validity of the statement that all people are bisexual. There are too many people in the world that are just so adamently against homosexuals to even consider your statement as true. Even those who are straight who don't have any problems tolerating homosexuals could have absolutely no inkling of bisexuality at all. Given ancient cultures I can see where you'd get the idea, but it's just not believable in my opinion. |
I think what he means by the statement that all people are bi-sexual, is that everyone can look at a member of the same sex, or opposite sex, and tell if they are attractive or not. And on that same premise straight men and women can watch other straght men and women have sex and find it attractive that two attreactive people are having sex. That in itself can be considered a form of bi-sexuality, granted it is light.
On another note...
I tend to agree with T. When it comes to this subject... I don't have sex with my boyfriend or make out with him in front of people, and I don't want to see straight people do it either. You may not like what is done behind closed doors, but it is none of your business to tell me that I am wrong for loving someone so much physically as well as emotionally. Now people can argue religion all the time, but not everyone is Christian, nor does all religions claim that homosexuality is wrong, that is a difference of opinion. I do know one thing though, natural or not, Homosexuals have existed in every culture, throughout time... they may have had to hide, but they were there. |
WRONG. Same sex can easily determine an ugly/obese/hideous/etc person from a 'normal' person. Something�s only the opposite sex can gauge attractiveness from not. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder they say. |
I said it was a form of bi-sexuality... finding any attractiveness in a member of the same sex can be considered a form of bi-sexuality... however it does depend on the person. However it is not WRONG that is a personal statement, and as we know personal statements can be considered opinion... and are therefore only WRONG depending on the point of view of the person. |
Admiration and sexual attraction are two very distinct and different things. Because I find a quality about someone of the same-sex admirable does not mean that I am sexually attracted to them, and therefore does not mean that I am bisexual.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:07 am |
|
| Theresa wrote: | | People get turned on by vehicles |
I would say (for expensive ones) a compensation for men, and an appeal for women 
|
|
|
craign
Senior Cadet
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 20
Location: USS Voyager NCC-74656
|
| Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:36 pm |
|
For those saying that we differ from "normal":
No-one is normal. My post earlier claimed that.
Talk about stuff later. I have another Headache...
 st00pid Dyspraxia...
xxCR41Gxx
|
|
|
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?
|
| Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:16 pm |
|
I am finally going to post now that I can say what I am trying to get out.
In my opinion homosexuality is wrong. But, if they want to choose that life then they will have live with the consquences. I have an Aunt that is gay and two friends that are gay. I don't agree with their life style but doesn't mean that I love them any less cause I love them with all my heart.. I love them unconditionally. I just don't agree but it is their life and choice. I can't be the judge of it. There is only one judge but I will not bring no religion into this. That is for a topic about if god is real and so on and not this topic. But may as well a little bit. Not too much. God don't send anyone to hell, it is free will and people make that choice themselves. But that's all the religion thing I am going to say about that part.
People really shouldn't fight over if gay being right and wrong anyway... People going to choose their life style no matter what we say. Just accept gay or straight for who they are cause who are we to judge?
I know it is coming out of my mouth saying all this. Shocking huh? Cause I use to be so mean about it. But , I have looked at it in a nicer way of saying things now.
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:06 pm |
|
| Leo Wyatt wrote: |
People really shouldn't fight over if gay being right and wrong anyway... People going to choose their life style no matter what we say. Just accept gay or straight for who they are cause who are we to judge?
|
If yuo don't beleive in god, as i do. Then who else is there to judge then people?
I think if you have an opinion it should mean something. You should have the right to express that opinion just the way that opinion is. Don't turn it into something small and pointless by saying something as "Its their choice" and "I'm not the one to judge".
You, as all people are born and raised with morales and values. You should respect those values like those around you do. So, when you think its wrong it means something. Don't you want it to change? Don't you want to work it out? How can you say you don't care while you think its wrong?
Sorry if i seem to come on strong, but i'm tired of people with opinions backing down to not hurt someones feelings. They are humans, they'll get over it.
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:23 pm |
|
I agree with lionhead for the most part. Furthermore, even if you do believe in God, you still must judge peoples actions. Being Christian demands fraternal correction when you see another person committing a sin. Christians are called to be their brothers keeper. If someone is participating in a bad, or evil action, it is your duty to charitably bring this to light. That does not mean being forceful, but it does mean making a judgment, and telling someone who is doing something wrong that they are doing something wrong. There is absolutely nothing wrong with judging the actions of others. The only time you run into a problem is when you try to judge the state that ones heart and soul is in. It is impossible for us to know another persons heart, and we therefore should not make judgments about it, nor should we judge how they are viewed in the eyes of God. But to say, "Objectively, this action that you are doing is wrong."...there is nothing wrong with that. Loving people does not mean condoning, or being ok with everything they do. All of this of course, is my opinion.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:08 am |
|
| Leo Wyatt wrote: | | But, if they want to choose that life then they will have live with the consquences. |
IMHO, a hetrosexual relationship (more so in young people and teens), has a much major possible consequence, and that is possibility of an unwanted pregnancy. Just being on the subject of consequences.
It's been proved in many articles before IIRC, that HIV/AIDS infection for hetrosexual pair vs homosexual pair given both equal frequency of intercourse is both fairly equally chanced.
|
|
|
harrykims#1fan
Fan Girl Muskateer
Joined: 08 Feb 2002
Posts: 2916
Location: Leicester UK
|
| Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:21 am |
|
ANY Sexual relationship be it straight or gay is not without its risks
No sex is ever totally risk free
-------signature-------
Stoke me a clipper i'll be back for christmas
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:50 am |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: |
It's been proved in many articles before IIRC, that HIV/AIDS infection for hetrosexual pair vs homosexual pair given both equal frequency of intercourse is both fairly equally chanced. |
We read an article on homosexuality in my political science class, one intersting fact that came up is that the least at risk couples (least - not immune) for HIV/AIDS are lesbians.
I think the best article/argument I have ever read concerning homosexuality is John Corvino's Homosexuality: The Nature and Harms Arguments.
It was orignially published in The Philosopy of Sex: Contemporary Readings in 1997. I'd repost it here, but I can't due to copyright.
[edit]Here's the quote:
| Quote: |
For if it is wrong for men to have sex with men because thir doing so puts them at a higher AIDS risk than heterosexual sex, then it is also wrong for women to have sex with men because their doing so puts them at a higher AIDS risk than homosexual sex (lesbians as a group have the lowest incidence of AIDS). Purely from the standpoint of AIDS risk, women ought to prefer lesbian sex. |
Part of a larger argument trying to show that the argument against homosexuality based on AIDS risk isn't an effective one.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
