PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Bozco on January 20, 2005, 08:02:30 PM
-
Here ya go (http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/01/20/sponge.bob.reut/index.html)
Entertainment
Christians issue gay warning on SpongeBob video
Conservative groups criticize maker\'s \'tolerance pledge\'
Thursday, January 20, 2005 Posted: 8:19 PM EST (0119 GMT)
LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- Conservative Christian groups accuse the makers of a video starring SpongeBob SquarePants, Barney and a host of other cartoon characters of promoting homosexuality to children.
The wacky square yellow SpongeBob is one of the stars of a music video due to be sent to 61,000 U.S. schools in March. The makers -- the nonprofit We Are Family Foundation -- say the video is designed to encourage tolerance and diversity.
But at least two Christian activist groups say the innocent cartoon characters are being exploited to promote the acceptance of homosexuality.
"A short step beneath the surface reveals that one of the differences being celebrated is homosexuality," wrote Ed Vitagliano in an article for the American Family Association.
The video is a remake of the 1979 hit song "We Are Family" using the voices and images of SpongeBob, Barney, Winnie the Pooh, Bob the Builder, the Rugrats and other TV cartoon characters. It was made by a foundation set up by songwriter Nile Rodgers after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in an effort to promote healing.
Christian groups however have taken exception to the tolerance pledge on the foundation\'s Web site, which asks people to respect the sexual identity of others along with their abilities, beliefs, culture and race.
"Their inclusion of the reference to \'sexual identity" within their \'tolerance pledge\' is not only unnecessary, but it crosses a moral line," James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said in a statement released Thursday.
Rodgers said he was astounded by the attack.
"That is so myopic and harsh," he told Reuters. "You have really got to look hard to find anything in this that is offensive to anyone. The last thing I am going to do is taint these characters."
Dobson was quoted by the New York Times on Thursday as having singled out the wildly popular SpongeBob during remarks about the video at dinner this week in Washington, D.C.
SpongeBob, who lives in a pineapple under the sea, was "outed" by the U.S. media in 2002 after reports that the TV show and its merchandise are popular with gays. His creator, Stephen Hillenburg, said at the time that though SpongeBob was an oddball, he thought of all the characters in the show as asexual.
It is not the first time that children\'s TV favorites have come under the critical spotlight of the Christian right. In 1999, the Rev. Jerry Falwell described Tinky Winky, the purse-toting purple Teletubbie, as a gay role model.
-
Conservative Christian groups accuse the makers of a video starring SpongeBob SquarePants, Barney and a host of other cartoon characters of promoting homosexuality to children.
F^cking morons...
But at least two Christian activist groups say the innocent cartoon characters are being exploited to promote the acceptance of homosexuality.
F^cking morons...
"You have really got to look hard to find anything in this that is offensive to anyone. The last thing I am going to do is taint these characters."
True dat. Barney is pretty teh ghey, though ;)
SpongeBob, who lives in a pineapple under the sea, was "outed" by the U.S. media in 2002 after reports that the TV show and its merchandise are popular with gays.
This is stupid. You could also say, reports shot that the show and it\'s merchandise appeals to straights. The damn show appeals to EVERYONE!! There\'s no need to isolate a certain group because of their preference :rolleyes:
-
Is this the only thing these bible douches can do? How bout actually helping people.
-
Helping people is good, attacking people is not. F^ck ignorance and all the stupid sh^t that comes with it.
-
Whats next?The holy testament of the medieval times?
-
Burn the witches at the stake!!
-
Wait... so is everyones issue with this that the group is \'bigoted\' against gays, or that they are reading too much into the video? It seems to me that they are reading too much into the video, but if it was openly preaching tolerance of gays, the group would have every right to be pissed. If my kids were forced to watch that in school, I\'d be pretty pissed myself.
-
You\'d be pretty pissed that your kids would be tolerant of gays?
-
SpongeBob, who lives in a pineapple under the sea, was "outed" by the U.S. media in 2002 after reports that the TV show and its merchandise are popular with gays.
What in the world does that mean? These Conservative Christian groups are to Christians as Michael Moore is to democrats.
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
You\'d be pretty pissed that your kids would be tolerant of gays?
Regardless of my feelings on that particular form of tolerance, it\'s not a schools place to decide. This isn\'t about tolerating a race or the opposite sex (the latter of which should be taught but to my knowledge, never has. That\'s a much bigger problem than gays IMO), this is about a lifestyle that is completely optional to act on, and violates many peoples beliefs. The school should not be shills for the gay rights groups, brainwashing kids to think only the way ultra liberals deem fit on the subject. If there was a parent/student workshop of some sort that was optional, I would have no problem with that, for parents who want their kids to be tolerant of certain lifestyles, but to go behind the parents backs and teach one set of values to impressionable children through an educational cartoon with well-known kid friendly characters is messed up.
That is of course assuming this video is openly doing that, which the article suggests it isn\'t.
-
Originally posted by THX
What in the world does that mean? These Conservative Christian groups are to Christians as Michael Moore is to democrats.
It was outed by an article in the media, how can you blame Christian groups for that? If I remember correctly, the article was in fact positive towards the \'revelation\', not putting it down even.
-
If there was a parent/student workshop of some sort that was optional, I would have no problem with that
I agree with you on that. I understand that if it was force-fed, than it would be a bad thing.
-
Originally posted by EThuggV3
this is about a lifestyle that is completely optional to act on
Um... so you\'re saying being gay is optional?? Tell that to the gay sons of ultra conservative people.
*decides to be gay for a week because it\'s such a great lifestyle, everybody loves da gay man*
-
this is about a lifestyle that is completely optional to act on
And that is also completely an opinion.
*decides to be gay for a week because it\'s suck a great lifestyle, everybody loves da gay man*
I certainly wouldn\'t go that far, but more power to ya ;)
-
WTF? an educational video that tells kids to respect everybody\'s life choice is bad?!?! :eek:
you guys are seriously screwed in the head! I guess sexual education should be banned to since it promotes heterosexuality!
-
Originally posted by politiepet
WTF? an educational video that tells kids to respect everybody\'s life choice is bad?!?! :eek:
you guys are seriously screwed in the head! I guess sexual education should be banned to since it promotes heterosexuality!
^^WORD
-
http://www.wearefamilyfoundation.org/Article_PR_ChildDVD.htm
thats yet another article on it...
The lessons aim to put the video\'s themes of respect, understanding and appreciation of diversity into practice and are designed for pre-K through first grade audiences with additional teaching guidelines for grades two to six.
Ok, so its for pre-K through first... THEY AREN\'T GONNA GET JACK ABOUT GAY PEOPLE OUT OF THAT VIDEO...
but whats "additional teaching guidelines for grades two to six." supposed to be???
now, i can see some 4th 5th 6th graders watching barney...:rolleyes:
-
How the Fark did they get the idea that Spongebob is gay? Last I heard, Sponges were asexual. and so are starfish. so in reality, if spongebob and patric were to knock uglies, it still wouldn\'t be homo oceanic lovin\'
There must be a group of these morons sitting around smokin the gonge, just looking for something to point the finger at... Well, Ive got a finger to point back at them
-
Originally posted by MPTheory
Last I heard, Sponges were asexual. and so are starfish. so in reality, if spongebob and patric were to knock uglies, it still wouldn\'t be homo oceanic lovin\'
:laughing: lol...oceanic lovin\'
-
Originally posted by Halberto
Is this the only thing these bible douches can do? How bout actually helping people.
There are millions of christians in the US alone. The only time they are mentioned on this site is when some of them do something that most of us disagree with. Would a random church helping others(something that happens thousands of times everyday) be brought up as a national story?
Originally posted by EThuggV3
This isn\'t about tolerating a race or the opposite sex (the latter of which should be taught but to my knowledge, never has. That\'s a much bigger problem than gays IMO)
How so?
-
When you voted for George W. Bush, you also voted for this agenda. Why are you all complaining now? Second thoughts? You can only expect to see more of the same in the next few years. Next time think before you vote.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2027&ncid=2027&e=3&u=/chitribts/20050121/ts_chicagotrib/christianrightmarksstartofagood4years
Christian right marks start of `a good 4 years\'
A couple of hours after President Bush took the oath of office, the indefatigable Rev. Lou Sheldon, founder and chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, was more upbeat than usual.
"Religion and morality," Sheldon repeated. "That\'s what is happening--that fusion of religion and morality and public policy has now come about."
Sheldon\'s parties were an opportunity for Bush supporters to enjoy a hard-fought victory. They also were a celebration of Christian political muscle and a reminder of what this important constituency expects from the White House in Bush\'s second term.
-
This is BS. Doesn\'t religion teach people to be tolerant to others no matter what their ethnicity, sexual preference is? It just boggles my mind that they teach morality and tolerance and they speak out against the gays (narrowed specifically towards the extreme fanatics). I really don\'t get it. When I went to religion school, they always taught us tolerance between races and homosexuality and that the church says its ok to be gay.
-
Originally posted by Coredweller
When you voted for George W. Bush, you also voted for this agenda. Why are you all complaining now? Second thoughts? You can only expect to see more of the same in the next few years. Next time think before you vote.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2027&ncid=2027&e=3&u=/chitribts/20050121/ts_chicagotrib/christianrightmarksstartofagood4years
^^Word WORD :D
-
Eh....
The only class I can think of that is truly on ONLY fact is math class....
Other then that everything else has topics hand picked by the state, and the state leaves out choice material.
-
didn\'t read the thread but I gotta hand it to Boz for my favorite title of a thread ever. :D
-
These people really need to read up on some Social Psychology... the last thing these kids are thinking about is sexuality when watching these shows.
Although I would rather have my kid watching something more badass like war and vampire movies instead of Barney anyways.
-
These "extremists" are actually contradicting themselves. What Christians believe is that homosexuality is a sin, just like any other sin, and should be taken as that. The bible says that this sort of thing shouldn\'t be blown out of proportioin like these morons are doing, and pointing out one sin, when the extremists themselves have many sins. A sin is a sin in the bible, and it doesn\'t matter what it is. You can\'t point at one person and say "You\'re a sinner!" when in reality, we ALL are, and that\'s what the God of the bible wants us [if you\'re a Christian] to realize. If you were a true Christian, you\'d understand that.
And yes, tolerance is a big thing in the bible...
-
I ve never seen these...so called Christians protesting against war, againts prostitute legalization, or againts rich people who arent helping homeless etc
But I wouldnt find it strange that many of them supported the war in Iraq, went to prostitutes, or that some of them are rich.
For Bush\'s vowing there were hundreds of milions spent despite the country\'s economical problems, and at the same time there are millions of tsunami victims without food, medication and houses.
Who of them complained?But I wouldnt find it strange tham many of them were cheering and present at Bush\'s presidential vowing useless good for nothing ceremony
But ofcourse they feel great for theirselves judging and protesting against "sinners" and cartoon shows. :mad:
I mean WOW!!SPONGEBOB COULD BE GAY!!ITS THE END OF THE WORLD!!
-
But ofcourse they feel great for theirselves judging and protesting against "sinners"
That\'s because they\'re idiots that don\'t read the bible, or they read it and don\'t follow it\'s teachings...because they\'re idiots. Everyone is a sinner in the eyes of God [if you\'re a Christian, and have these beliefs], and it is wrong for someone to point out another\'s sins when everyone has their own demons to battle. People who do that crap aren\'t humbling themselves and becoming loving and tolerant and bettering themselves everyday, like you\'re supposed to as a Christian. All these people are hypocritical morons, and they need to start focusing on their own lives, or taking time to help others, not being the cause of hate and prejudice idiocy.
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
.....they need to start focusing on their own lives, or taking time to help others, not being the cause of hate and prejudice idiocy.
exactly
-
where has that smilie gone :D
-
Woopsies.
;)
There we go. What the heck happened?
-
I dont know :p
-
lmao, that\'s it blame Boosh, it\'s the American way! :bounce:
-
What are we blaming Bush for again??
-
Um...for having a speech impediment?
-
I\'m not blaming Bush directly. Just saying that when you vote for Bush, you\'re voting for a guy who\'s going to be listening to these religious zealots and often following their orders. The fact that he\'s in office encourages them to take action against everything they perceive (real or imaginary) as contrary to their personal moral compass.
-
The fact that he\'s in office encourages them to take action against everything they perceive (real or imaginary) as contrary to their personal moral compass.
These people don\'t know what they\'re talking about. They\'re just kidding themselves while in turn being contradictive. They are the stereotype for which all other Christians are judged, and it makes me nauseas. They need to pull their heads from the rearside and should try and help the world, not make it worse by attacking people who are "sinning," even though these hypocrites sin every single day.
-
Originally posted by Coredweller
When you voted for George W. Bush, you also voted for this agenda. Why are you all complaining now? Second thoughts? You can only expect to see more of the same in the next few years. Next time think before you vote.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2027&ncid=2027&e=3&u=/chitribts/20050121/ts_chicagotrib/christianrightmarksstartofagood4years
Isn\'t it awesome?
Bush\'s victory has opened up all kinds of doors for this nut jobs.
There has even been an article about the possible overturning of the Roe vs. Wade. Seriously, how can people be so stupid?
Our soldiers die each day after the "mission accomplished" and all this conservatives have to worry about is how stupid can they be?
I guess they figured Iraq was a lost cause. But they do send their Christian minions to try to convert those people over there. That should really make the Muslims happy.
Honestly, how many times have you witnesses a 7 year old kid even take note of Spongebob\'s sexuality or even wonder about it?
But I really wouldn\'t be surprised if this crap is spread through all of the churches and that cartoons suddenly becomes satan.
Christian Groups is to Republicans as Moore is to Democrats.
Except Republicans are mostly controlled, run and funded by their groups.
We just worship Moore.
-
Moore>Christian Groups
Moore>Bush
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
I agree with you on that. I understand that if it was force-fed, than it would be a bad thing.
Well that was my point, and people have a tendency to misunderstand me... for example...
Originally posted by Samwise
Um... so you\'re saying being gay is optional?? Tell that to the gay sons of ultra conservative people.
*decides to be gay for a week because it\'s such a great lifestyle, everybody loves da gay man*
First of all, I said ACTING on it is optional. I know it\'s 3 letters long, and you probably got bored, but I said ACT. A - C - T. Unless you of course are asserting that you can find yourself having sex against your will...
Second, the human genome has been decoded. A \'gay gene\' has been searched for. There is none. All homosexuality is the result of three possibilities: 1) Choice. Plain and simple, and I know people who have done it, do it, and have thought of doing it, so save your incredulous denial. 2) Chemical/hormonal imbalances that create unnatural levels of estrogen or testosterone. Both sexes have both, it\'s very simple (and scientifically \'provable\') that such hormones can be imbalanced. There are probably other things that can be imbalanced, but those two hormones make the most sense as the main cause of this route. 3) Mental trama, usually from childhood.
In nature homosexual acts are commited nondiscriminantly because a dog, a frog, a monkey (pick your animal) will **** anything. Cannibalism, pedophilia, incest and more also occur in nature with the same regularity, so I suggest not using the animal kingdom as some sort of defense (if you were feeling so inclined).
Originally posted by EviscerationX
And that is also completely an opinion.
See: the first thing I said to Sam.
Originally posted by politiepet
I guess sexual education should be banned to since it promotes heterosexuality!
I and any responsible parent would be very happy with leaving all sexual education up to the family. The problem arises from the fact that many people are horrible parents, who will never give their kids \'the talk\', and the burden falls on the school system to explain at least the basics. Teaching children to be tolerant of lifestyles, however, is not a responsibility that the school has (or should have).
-
So what is your problem
Even if it is a choice.
It\'s a choice they make. We don\'t need conservative Christian Bible thumpers to tell us what is morally correct according to what they believe to be true.
What exactly where you trying to prove anyways?
Sex is for pleasure and reproduction. Simple. If it\'s more pleasing for a man to have sex with another man then they are going to do it. It\'s nature at it\'s best. Now is it "natural" maybe maybe not. It\'s not natural because sex is supposed to be for reproduction but then again we would have never thought of having sex if it wasn\'t pleasureable.
Or something like that...
-
Teaching children to be tolerant of lifestyles, however, is not a responsibility that the school has (or should have).
This is an important part of school I would say. Why should they not teach these kind of things?
Of course they should only teach to be tolerant against \'lifestyles\' that does not harm others. I mean they should not teach to be tolerant to nazis and racists and other hate people etc. No one gains from hate.
-
Second, the human genome has been decoded. A \'gay gene\' has been searched for. There is none.
Actually, scientists have only searched through 90% of the human genome, not 100%, so there is some chance of still finding something. If they don\'t, then there is nothing left to discuss. But what they search for isn\'t exactly clear. You can\'t just point out and say, hey...there\'s a gay gene!!
Gene Linkage Studies
Dean Hamer and his colleagues had performed a common type of behavioral genetics investigation called the "linkage study." Researchers identify a behavioral trait that runs in a family, and then:
a) look for a chromosomal variant in the genetic material of that family, and
b) determine whether that variant is more frequent in family members who share the particular trait.
To the layman, the "correlation" of a genetic structure with a behavioral trait means that trait "is genetic"-in other words, inherited.
In fact, it means absolutely nothing of the sort, and it should be emphasized that there is virtually no human trait without innumerable such correlations.
Scientists Know the Truth about "Gay Gene" Research
But before we consider the specifics, here is what serious scientists think about recent genetics-of-behavior research. From Science, 1994:
Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale\'s [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it\'s hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute."{1}
http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html
Here\'s some articles for you:
http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentwork/cns/2002-06-10/591.asp
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/07/MNG3N4RAV41.DTL
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4352011/
If animals can be gay in nature, and humans are more advanced, then why couldn\'t homosexuality be a normal thing? Are you just afraid of people who are different?
Anyway...I don\'t really care anymore. But nothing is for certain as of yet. I\'m sure that when computers advance a great deal [like in the next coming years], scientists will be able to scan through the human genome with great ease.
I have a headache.
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
That\'s because they\'re idiots that don\'t read the bible, or they read it and don\'t follow it\'s teachings...because they\'re idiots. Everyone is a sinner in the eyes of God [if you\'re a Christian, and have these beliefs], and it is wrong for someone to point out another\'s sins when everyone has their own demons to battle. People who do that crap aren\'t humbling themselves and becoming loving and tolerant and bettering themselves everyday, like you\'re supposed to as a Christian. All these people are hypocritical morons, and they need to start focusing on their own lives, or taking time to help others, not being the cause of hate and prejudice idiocy.
That or think too much into it.
-
Saying that homosexuality is \'unnatural\', ie outside of the bounds of the subset of behaviour that would occur in a controlled group of human beings with no external input (testing the human \'animal\' as it were) is unsupportable. Empirical evidence of societies that existed outside of the bounds of a moral perspective that homosexuality is wrong disprove it.
So the condemnation of homosexuality is always based on a moral perspective. Those who oppose homosexuality can never say that it is only a symptom of abnormality (due to the large numbers of historical homosexuals who were, in all other respects, functional and ordinary). But they will fall back on the position that it is a personal choice, and that it is a choice for a morally wrong mode of behaviour.
So you have to inquire as to the basis for that moral belief (ie what is the set of beliefs giving rise to the comparison) and test how infallible that moral code is or has been in the past.
Take christianity for example. It appears to be a tennant of that faith that homosexuality is wrong. So, you have to ask "has christianity always been right?". I however think that the better question is "has christianity always been consistent?".
Christians believe that their moral beliefs come straight from god. That, by its nature, should be an immutable truth. God doesn\'t change his mind or the interpretation of his words. So, if thats true, then christianity should have retained a single immutable unchanged set of values and beliefs throughout the entirity of its history. After all, they\'re never wrong, and its gods own words. Sadly, that isn\'t the case. It seems that the tenants of the christian faith have changed and developed over time (eg women are no longer seen as the progenitors of original sin who had to cover their heads in gods church), albeit not with respect to homosexuality.
Its enough to say that the christian moral code is variable and therefore serves as a poor basis for judging a type of behaviour that predates the religion itself. Not that christianity is bad, I\'m a christian myself, but rather that christians should realise when they have been handed a moral compass and programmed to use it. I mean really, how many people here came up with the idea that homosexuality is wrong all on their own?
So, if homosexuality occurs when there is no forced moral taboo on it, it is scientifically within the group of \'normal human behaviours\'.
And to validly compare a particular behaviour to a moral code and to demarcate that behaviour as an absolute wrong, that moral code must have the qualities of consistency and objective universal validity.
Homosexuality is not a choice. No sexuality is a conscience choice. You choose who to engage in sex acts with but not to whom you are innately attracted to. You do not decide to be attracted to a handsome specimen and then decide to not be attracted to some morbidly obese one; you just are or are not attracted (love at first sight?). If one could decide who really turns them on then you should be able to enjoy sex or at least be as equally excited by the prospect of sex with anyone, regardless of appearance; which we know* is absolutely not the case.
-
I\'m pretty sure the Catholic Church doesn\'t have a problem with people being gay and having gay members (I don\'t think they can become priests) but they have a problem with marrying them because of morals. I dunno. If anyone knows anything about it tell me.
-
Catholicism isn\'t Christianity. They have different beliefs, such as the Pope. The pope isn\'t in the bible. The bible says that anyone who changes the word of God [which is what the Pope does, and where the idea of "Purgatory" came from"] is anathema, and is cursed to the darkest depths of hell, and is the worst thing you could ever do. The Pope thinks his word is just as good as God\'s, if not better.
I\'m pretty sure the Catholic Church doesn\'t have a problem with people being gay and having gay members
They do have a problem with it, but I\'ve heard they\'re trying to allow gay priests in the church, but whatever. Catholicism doesn\'t allow for priests to be married, so that messes them up metally. The bible actually says that priests should be married, and have lots of kids ;)
(eg women are no longer seen as the progenitors of original sin who had to cover their heads in gods church)
People also use to burn witches at the stake, but we don\'t do that anymore.
You can\'t compare Christianity from what it is today. Back then, bibles were in foreign languages, and the Pope used to read to people what it said, or what he felt like saying, for that matter. That\'s where all these crazy ass ideas came from, and different branches of one religion, because they didn\'t want to believe the BS that the Pope was saying. But what they were doing was just as bad, creating their own personal ideals of religion, still neglecting to understand the bible. But, once the bible became printed in languages that people understood, individuals could judge for themselves [and humans tend to have misinterpretations].
Meh, I can\'t articulate my thoughts very well right now.
-
meh, still doesn\'t change my arguement that any and all objections to homosexuality is based on moral perspective.
-
In older days, priests had prostitutes and could have sex. Now they can\'t. Weird how things change.
-
In older days, priests had prostitutes and could have sex. Now they can\'t. Weird how things change.
That\'s also NOT allowed in the bible. But ok then...
meh, still doesn\'t change my arguement that any and all objections to homosexuality is based on moral perspective.
People who aren\'t religious are against homosexuality. I, for one, am not. I\'m no longer a Christian due to lingering doubts, but I like for the facts to be straight. There\'s no point in assuming something when you don\'t know what the heck you\'re talking about [that\'s a generalized statement not directed at you ;)].
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
People who aren\'t religious are against homosexuality.
I\'m not arguing that, the core of my post was to simply point out that anyone who claims homosexuality to be unnatural has no foundation other than moral implication, no matter the orgination. The post goes further to challenge those morals/values as to their validity. Christianity was an easy example.
-
Originally posted by EThuggV3
First of all, I said ACTING on it is optional. I know it\'s 3 letters long, and you probably got bored, but I said ACT. A - C - T. Unless you of course are asserting that you can find yourself having sex against your will...
Fair enough. Although then of course your acting on your heterosexuality is also optional...
Second, the human genome has been decoded. A \'gay gene\' has been searched for. There is none.[/B]
Because scientists are never wrong and picking out a "gay gene" is as easy as finding a black ball in a bowl of white balls.
All homosexuality is the result of three possibilities: 1) Choice. Plain and simple, and I know people who have done it, do it, and have thought of doing it, so save your incredulous denial. 2) Chemical/hormonal imbalances that create unnatural levels of estrogen or testosterone. Both sexes have both, it\'s very simple (and scientifically \'provable\') that such hormones can be imbalanced. There are probably other things that can be imbalanced, but those two hormones make the most sense as the main cause of this route. 3) Mental trama, usually from childhood.[/b]
So what are you arguing here? If someone is gay because of imbalanced hormones, then you don\'t have a say in the matter - you just \'are\' gay. If we link that back to what you said earlier - you wouldn\'t want your children to learn about being tolerant of people who are gay and can\'t help the way they are? Should they also be intolerate of handicapped people, retards etc.?
In nature homosexual acts are commited nondiscriminantly because a dog, a frog, a monkey (pick your animal) will **** anything. Cannibalism, pedophilia, incest and more also occur in nature with the same regularity, so I suggest not using the animal kingdom as some sort of defense (if you were feeling so inclined).[/B]
Let me be honest and say I\'m not really sure what you mean by that. I might be wrong, but are you saying that "homosexuals will f*** any man" whereas heterosexuals won\'t f*** any woman? Gays are attracted to their own sex just as straigt people are attracted to the opposite sex - but neither are attracted to ALL the specimen, only the \'attractive\' ones (and what\'s considered attractive is individual as we all know).
If by any chance you didn\'t mean what I thought you did, I apologize.
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
These "extremists" are actually contradicting themselves. What Christians believe is that homosexuality is a sin, just like any other sin, and should be taken as that. The bible says that this sort of thing shouldn\'t be blown out of proportioin like these morons are doing, and pointing out one sin, when the extremists themselves have many sins. A sin is a sin in the bible, and it doesn\'t matter what it is. You can\'t point at one person and say "You\'re a sinner!" when in reality, we ALL are, and that\'s what the God of the bible wants us [if you\'re a Christian] to realize. If you were a true Christian, you\'d understand that.
And yes, tolerance is a big thing in the bible...
Amen, you hit the nail on the head.
For some reason, there seems to be this tremendous hatred towards gay\'s in the church, and I have no idea why. There is too much condemnation within the church on this very subject and I have no idea why. Jesus preaches love and acceptance, not acceptance of sin, but acceptance of everyone. Every human, every sinner, and every ******. Jesus would not treat fags the way the majority of right wing Christian activists do, its crazy, they just make themselves and everything they apparently stand for look stupid. I just don\'t know why there is such hatred so deeply rooted. Where did it come from? They also make Christians who don\'t hate fags also look bad. Not all Christians believe the way they do!
We are all sinners. Regardless of what we do, we are going to continue to sin, however hard we try not to. These people (homosexuals) are simply trying to make a life for themselves. They don\'t want to live through years of misery by not truly being who they really are. Jesus understands. Its realising that we are sinners and asking for forgiveness thats important, and realising that only through Jesus can we truly be better people.
And by the way, what does a video on tolorance have anything to do with Focus On The Family? Why are they sticking their noses into this? By complaining about this they are stating that they have no tolorance towards fags. What a joke. They are just making themselves look so stupid.
-
Something about gays.Its not always a matter of choice or fetish.Thats BS actually.I happened to listen to gay people.And they just feel attraction for the same gendre but not for the opposite since their teen life.They just are like that.
Their "homosexual orientation" developed just as "heterosexual orientation" has developed in us.Almost as if it was nature\'s way.As if they were ment to be like that.
Even if they try to feel attraction for the opposite sex they will feel just like a heterosexual who is trying to force his self to feel attraction for the same sex.
Also gay people arent some crazy people that will seek sex whenever they get the chance with another gay.They act just as we do.They seek love and understanding as well.They will often seek the appropriate partner just as we do with the opposite sex.
-
I don\'t understand how people can say that its a matter of choice. What you feel attracted to is not something that you can just \'make happen\' or force. Ask any heterosexual man to have feelings for another guy and he\'ll go \'ewww\'. Its just not something you can force.
And besides, why would someone choose to be gay if they really weren\'t? I do believe that there are some people out there who are just so stupidly horny and slutty that they\'ll just have sex with whatever comes their way, male or femaile. These people are not true homosexuals, they are just sluts, and they are the ones who are commiting true sin.
-
the only reason priests are not allowed to marry is simple.
In the old days, catholic priests were allowed to marry. But since
they often were the most wealthy people in the land, often being
akin to "lords" with their own peasantry and such, the papalcy didn\'t want them leaving their fortunes to their families. So the pope made it so that they couldn\'t marry or have sex. Convenient, huh? I\'ll try to cite sourcesa when I\'m not so hungover.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
Also gay people arent some crazy people that will seek sex whenever they get the chance with another gay.They act just as we do.They seek love and understanding as well.They will often seek the appropriate partner just as we do with the opposite sex.
Not on the real world :D...even though that isn\'t even an example since it is TV...
-
Originally posted by DeAnna
Not on the real world :D...even though that isn\'t even an example since it is TV...
ahm...what?Dint get what you are trying to say there :confused:
-
You\'ve never heard of The Real World???
ON MTV?!?!
DO YOU LIVE IN A CAVE?!?!?!
-
No.At both.I dont live in USA you know.If I want to see foreign channels I ll have to pay for NOVA or Orbit services
-
Oh sorry...well the real world is this show where they stick a bunch of people together in a house to live and there are 2 gay guys this season...
One of them "longs for a mans affection"
*pukes*
-
:laughing:
Whats so strange?I mean I ve seen heterosexuals seeking for some heterosexual love in Big Brother or Fame Story etc too :D
-
yeah, but I don\'t like watching two dudes make out...
-
Originally posted by DeAnna
yeah, but I don\'t like watching two dudes make out...
Strange, most guys here would pay to watch two women make out. :laughing:
-
:laughing:
Hey perhaps DeAnna would have paid too
-
No thanks...
-
Everyone would be happy if it weren\'t for the religious wingnuts we\'re talking about. Gay people aren\'t the problem in this case.
It\'s like if being black was a sin. Would the black people really be the one\'s ****ing up, or would it be the intolerant, prejudiced people lashing out under the guise of religion?
-Dan
-
Hey, I don\'t want to see 2 guys making out either, but if they want to stick each other in the pooper thats their business not mine, and to be honest gay people should have every right as we do to live a normal life, but I don\'t believe they can be married from a legal stand point, but ceremony wise go ahead.
-
I like cherry cheese cake...
-
[size=8]I like tossing salad.[/size]
-
[size=12]I like "battling the cyclops"[/size]
-
I like to sumo wrestle...
And I\'m good at it too
-
Uh...that\'s not really a hobby that you should share ;) *runs away in fear*
-
You know as strange as it may sound not all gays engage in anal sex....
-
Uhhhh...thanks for that random tidbit of information :stick:
EDIT: Oh...from the statement above...yeah, well...yeah. Whatever floats their boat...whatever they do in private is their business.
-
I just don\'t see what\'s such a big deal. Heaps of chicks take it up the ass every now-and-then, and do they get pursecuted for it? No, its totally fine and dandy, because they are women. Get a guy to do it and its disgusting.
People should just learn to mind their OWN business.
-
People should just learn to mind their OWN business.
Yeah...that\'s pretty much it...
-
Originally posted by ##RaCeR##
No, its totally fine and dandy, because they are women. Get a guy to do it and its disgusting.
People should just learn to mind their OWN business.
Minding their own business and thinking it\'s disgusting are two seperate things. Also it\'s not disgusting cause it\'s the ass..........
-
But feces comes out of there. It\'s gross no matter what\'s going on with it (https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Finstagiber.net%2Fsmiliesdotcom%2Fcontrib%2Fedoom%2Ftheyareontome.gif&hash=9afb0291d94ca747ad5ba86f6081eac435221473)
-
^^
And you eating out a chicks p*ssy, how is that any different? Friggen blood and babies comes out of there.
I\'m not having a go at you, but c\'mon, think about what your saying.
-
That\'s pretty nasty, too. But I wasn\'t really making a point anyway [blood and babies and urine; thanks for that ;)]. It\'s nobody\'s business what people do behind closed doors.
-
Originally posted by ##RaCeR##
And you eating out a chicks p*ssy, how is that any different? Friggen blood and babies comes out of there.
Heh. Not every day it doesn\'t.
If it does then you are messing with the wrong chicks.
-
Originally posted by Bjorn
This is an important part of school I would say. Why should they not teach these kind of things?
Of course they should only teach to be tolerant against \'lifestyles\' that does not harm others. I mean they should not teach to be tolerant to nazis and racists and other hate people etc. No one gains from hate.
Lifestyles are not an absolute thing, such as race or gender; they are subjective in their merit and danger. I could just as easily say no one gains from forcing children to respect freaks of nature like gays, whose open presense in a society can and will cause gender, sexuality and family role confusion in young people. And while you might not want the nazi lifestyle (is there such a thing?) to be tolerated by young people, I\'m sure plenty of people feel just as strongly that tolerance of that should be taught as you do about gays. That\'s the point; none of these things are necessary to teach youths to tolerate, and none will be agreed upon. Selective tolerance is a lateral baby step to intolerance. It\'s best to keep all lifestyles out of the classroom, along with religion. They are personal things and schools have no place dictating which ones should be tolerated.
Originally posted by EviscerationX
Actually, scientists have only searched through 90% of the human genome, not 100%, so there is some chance of still finding something. If they don\'t, then there is nothing left to discuss. But what they search for isn\'t exactly clear. You can\'t just point out and say, hey...there\'s a gay gene!!
Consider my statement withdrawn for the time being, but I must say, in all fairness to my argument, the \'gay gene\' has been at the top of the list of things they are trying to find in the field, even before things that could actually benefit human health, so to say the least, at 90% and with so much effort going into it, the fact that they don\'t have it says a lot. Thank you for the links.
If animals can be gay in nature, and humans are more advanced, then why couldn\'t homosexuality be a normal thing? Are you just afraid of people who are different?[/b]
It\'s not normal in nature. It happens in nature, and I adressed this issue already. Pedophilia, infanticide, incest, etc. all occur in nature with the same regularity as homosexuality. IF you wish to make the \'it happens in nature...\' argument, are you ready to defend these other abnormal acts as well? We are arguably more advance (though I\'d argue mearly more complex), and it is because of this, not despite it, that I think we can control ourselves, and hold ourselves to slightly higher standards than say, a dog.
Originally posted by Samwise
Fair enough. Although then of course your acting on your heterosexuality is also optional...
I would never argue otherwise.
Because scientists are never wrong and picking out a "gay gene" is as easy as finding a black ball in a bowl of white balls.[/b]
See my above response to EviscerationX. Also, I should think such a thing would be rather simple, just keep comparing straight guy DNA to gay guy DNA, and a pattern should emerge if it\'s truely 100% hardwired within our genetics, right?
So what are you arguing here? If someone is gay because of imbalanced hormones, then you don\'t have a say in the matter - you just \'are\' gay.[/b]
Agreed. If you burn a batch of cookies, that was a natural response to cooking them too long (or at too high a heat), but they are useless, burnt cookies, nonetheless, are they not. You bin them.
If we link that back to what you said earlier - you wouldn\'t want your children to learn about being tolerant of people who are gay and can\'t help the way they are? Should they also be intolerate of handicapped people, retards etc.?[/b]
I am not tolerant of the handicapped (my mother) nor the retarded (my cousin Ricky). In fact, I make fun of them, often. Ricky doesn\'t know though, because I insult him in a baby voice while smiling and clapping my hands, and he laughs. I\'m so cruel...
Well, ok, I don\'t really insult my mom, and if Ricky understood me, I might feel bad, but that\'s not the point! No, I don\'t think a school should be concerning itself with teaching tolerance like that. In fact, I think its my right as an American to be as inteolerant, mean, and hateful as I want, and I was being nice saying schools should be teaching even racial tolerance. If I create a child, I can teach that child to hate anyone I want, and its no ones business. Everyone hates someone, selectively enforced tolerance indoctornation would make the founders of this country I live in vomit in disgust.
Let me be honest and say I\'m not really sure what you mean by that. I might be wrong, but are you saying that "homosexuals will f*** any man" whereas heterosexuals won\'t f*** any woman? Gays are attracted to their own sex just as straigt people are attracted to the opposite sex - but neither are attracted to ALL the specimen, only the \'attractive\' ones (and what\'s considered attractive is individual as we all know).
If by any chance you didn\'t mean what I thought you did, I apologize. [/B]
It\'s quite alright. No, I hadn\'t meant that. I\'m saying merely that just because something (in this case homosexuality) is practiced by a minority of animals in nature doesn\'t mean we as a civilized society need to emulate that. They (animals) do quite a few things that no civilized human being would do. Last time I checked, acting like a monkey was not on the agenda for bettering ourselves as a species.
Originally posted by ##RaCeR##
I don\'t understand how people can say that its a matter of choice. What you feel attracted to is not something that you can just \'make happen\' or force. Ask any heterosexual man to have feelings for another guy and he\'ll go \'ewww\'. Its just not something you can force.
Wrong. I know people who have admitted to doing it. And I\'m 100% attracted to females, but I could force myself to not only be attracted to, but indeed fornicate with... oh... lets say Brad Pitt, Will Smith or Johnny Depp. *sighs dreamily* And if you were here, right now, just to prove my point, I\'d kiss you.
And besides, why would someone choose to be gay if they really weren\'t? I do believe that there are some people out there who are just so stupidly horny and slutty that they\'ll just have sex with whatever comes their way, male or femaile. These people are not true homosexuals, they are just sluts, and they are the ones who are commiting true sin. [/B]
I agree with most of that, however the same reason some people choose to be goth, stab slivers of metal through every availible flap of skin, get drunk until they pass out... really... lots of people do things that make no sense, in the first to examples, sometimes even exclusively for the sake of shocking family and being \'different\'.
Originally posted by Samwise
Strange, most guys here would pay to watch two women make out. :laughing:
Not something to brag about. :p
Let me make it clear, since others I haven\'t quoted have discussed this: my opinions apply to lesbians, straight sexual acts of sodomy, etc. I feel contraceptives shouldn\'t be taught without parental permission either. I think most of these things should fall under parental prerogative, just teaching it without the parents knowledge may very well be undermining the values they teach at home.
-
I choose to be straight. I could be gay in a heartbeat if I put my mind to it.
I merely prefer not to because I find it revolting.
There is no gay gene, nor is there anything else forcing gays to be gay. They\'re gay because they want to be, and those that claim otherwise are full of shit. They\'re weak and incapable of decision, so they claim to be unable to be attracted to the opposite gender.
-
There is no 100% way of knowing either way at this point. So I\'m not going to touch this one with a 40 foot pole...
Ricky doesn\'t know though, because I insult him in a baby voice while smiling and clapping my hands, and he laughs. I\'m so cruel...
Dude...WTF?
And I\'m 100% attracted to females, but I could force myself to not only be attracted to, but indeed fornicate with... oh... lets say Brad Pitt, Will Smith or Johnny Depp. *sighs dreamily* And if you were here, right now, just to prove my point, I\'d kiss you.
...
Agreed. If you burn a batch of cookies, that was a natural response to cooking them too long (or at too high a heat), but they are useless, burnt cookies, nonetheless, are they not. You bin them.
Human beings aren\'t cookies.
I choose to be straight. I could be gay in a heartbeat if I put my mind to it.
I couldn\'t...what the hell is wrong with you?
-
I couldn\'t...what the hell is wrong with you?
The only thing wrong with me is that I\'m honest. I\'m straight, but I wasn\'t born straight and there\'s nothing in my genes that forces me to be straight. I am straight because I choose to be. I choose not to have greasy buttsex with guys, but if I decided for whatever reason to do so, there\'s not a damned thing my genes could do to stop me.
-
Weltall, your being a dumbass. If you seriously believe what your saying then that goes beyond all manner of common sense. Why are women \'automatically\' attracted to men and why are men \'automatically\' attracted to women? Do you think that is purely formed because of what society tells us to be attracted too? If that was the case then people who grew up with gay parents would be presumed to also be gay, living in that environment. This has been dis-proven time and time again. Its instilled within you, you can\'t change it.
EthugV3, people like you should not be allowed to walk this earth. Your kind should be carstrated. Your nothing but a redneck, a waste to society. To think you treat memebers of your family the way you do just because they are not as privlidged as you is downright sickening.
Do you think Ricky had a choice to be retarded? Can he make himself better?
And by the way, I don\'t understand how heterosexuals can truly comment on homosexuality if you\'ve never gone through the confusion and frustration that comes with it.
-
Originally posted by ##RaCeR##
Weltall, your being a dumbass. If you seriously believe what your saying then that goes beyond all manner of common sense. Why are women \'automatically\' attracted to men and why are men \'automatically\' attracted to women? Do you think that is purely formed because of what society tells us to be attracted too? If that was the case then people who grew up with gay parents would be presumed to also be gay, living in that environment. This has been dis-proven time and time again. Its instilled within you, you can\'t change it.
There\'s bullshit proof of it. Men and women are naturally attracted because it\'s necessary for reproduction. People who are gay deny that biology. Even still, it\'s not automatic. When we\'re young, we are actually, for the most part, repellent to the opposite sex. Boys and girls avoid each other. Cooties. Children, for the most part, are sexually-neutral. Sexual attraction begins at puberty. It\'s not hardwired. There\'s no gay gene. There is no magic gay impulse. It\'s no more natural than being a wife-beater or liking the color red.
And even in some traits that are genetically-influenced, such as obesity and alcoholism... having the wrong genetic traits makes one more susceptible to those maladies, but it in no way is a 100% certainty that a person will suffer them.
Now, gays can do whatever they want in their own privacy. I don\'t mind that. ut I do take offense to the notion that they\'re a special group of genetic victims that requires special protections because they\'re too either weak to accept proper biology, or outright enjoy denying it, as many gays do.
So, in closing, I\'m not close-minded. I used to be obese, and I can rightly blame genetics for it (since my parents were also both obese), but I was obese because I didn\'t control myself. Once I took control of my bad habits, I lost weight. Now I\'m trim, fit and sexy. My genetic predispositions couldn\'t stop me. So screw that shit about genetics being inescapable.
-
I am trying to understand what you people discuss here.If gays are gays because they are weak or because they just choose to be?GET REAL!
Homosexual orientation occurs normally.Just as heterosexual orientation does.We have no right to criticize or blame them for what they are.If they want they can..-but NOTICE the word-...can FORCE theirsleves to engage only on heterosexual acts...but dont expect them to feel as happy about it as some poeple develop self control to lose weight become sexy or whatever
edit:also some research indicate that future sexual orientation could be defined before the child is even born.And I am not talking about gendre definition.With other words not thanks to a gene but it could be thanks to an anomaly that occurs as the embryo grows in its mother
-
There\'s no point in arguing as this is a discussion that is stuck in an infinite loop. People have their opinions, and nobody can change them. I am neutral on this subject matter, because I can\'t be 100% sure of anything at this point. However, I\'ve known some people\'s kids [of a straight, normal family in a happy environment] showing homosexuality as early as 4. This would be one of my friends. She isn\'t f*cked up in the head and she doesn\'t battle her sexuality because she\'s been this way her entire life. Her sister accepts it, and it took her parents even longer to accept it, but they knew about it since she was a toddler.
Some homosexuals do seem to be a perversion of humanity [they want to act in freaky ass ways, like the whole transvestite thing], but there are many well-rounded ones as well, who are perfectly normal.
But again, there isn\'t 100% truth to anything regarding this matter, even the "gay gene" search, as not 100% of the human genome has been thoroughly looked through.
I don\'t mind people living the way they want to live, and it\'s not effecting my life in any way, so I don\'t feel the need to maliciously attack people I don\'t know anything about. People seem to raise homosexuality way the hell higher up than anything else that people do "wrong"...if it in fact, ends up being "wrong." Just let it be.
-
And even in some traits that are genetically-influenced, such as obesity and alcoholism... having the wrong genetic traits makes one more susceptible to those maladies, but it in no way is a 100% certainty that a person will suffer them.
Now, gays can do whatever they want in their own privacy. I don\'t mind that. ut I do take offense to the notion that they\'re a special group of genetic victims that requires special protections because they\'re too either weak to accept proper biology, or outright enjoy denying it, as many gays do.
So, in closing, I\'m not close-minded. I used to be obese, and I can rightly blame genetics for it (since my parents were also both obese), but I was obese because I didn\'t control myself. Once I took control of my bad habits, I lost weight. Now I\'m trim, fit and sexy. My genetic predispositions couldn\'t stop me. So screw that shit about genetics being inescapable. [/B]
They are still victims of somehing that remains undefined.And asking them to accept "prober biology" its like asking someone who is not gay to engage in "homosexual acts".If you like you can try it.Force yourself.But you wont be pleased thats for sure.
-
*headache*
This isn\'t going to stop...
-
lets lock it before someone disagress with me :p
-
I\'m not locking it, but I already stated my thoughts at the top of the page which you must not have read or something. But I think people could discuss things with a little more intelligence with an issue such as this.
-
EvX, I agree with you. As with the whole \'tranny\' thing, I believe they only act the way they do is because they want acceptance. They\'ve been ignored and told that they are wrong their entire life, so they think that they need to act as crazy as possible just to get some attention, regardless of what that attention is.
They just want love.
-
Originally posted by Weltall
I choose to be straight. I could be gay in a heartbeat if I put my mind to it.
I merely prefer not to because I find it revolting.
Being gay doesn\'t mean just having gay sex, it also includes the feelings for the same sex. You admitted that you couldn\'t bring yourself to have sexual relations with a man, could you have intimate feelings for a man? I\'m betting no, not even if you tried to force yourself. It would never feel right to you, same goes for a homosexual trying to love the opposite sex.
So, in closing, I\'m not close-minded. I used to be obese, and I can rightly blame genetics for it (since my parents were also both obese), but I was obese because I didn\'t control myself. Once I took control of my bad habits, I lost weight. Now I\'m trim, fit and sexy. My genetic predispositions couldn\'t stop me. So screw that shit about genetics being inescapable.
Everyone is built differently, all you had to do was figure out how your body works in order to get in shape. That\'s why there isn\'t any one answer to weight problems, everyone is a special case. Bravo on figuring yours out.
ut I do take offense to the notion that they\'re a special group of genetic victims that requires special protections because they\'re too either weak to accept proper biology, or outright enjoy denying it, as many gays do.
They shouldn\'t be singled out in the first place, then there wouldn\'t be a need for special protections.
Something you probably missed two pages back...
Saying that homosexuality is \'unnatural\', ie outside of the bounds of the subset of behaviour that would occur in a controlled group of human beings with no external input (testing the human \'animal\' as it were) is unsupportable. Empirical evidence of societies that existed outside of the bounds of a moral perspective that homosexuality is wrong disprove it.
Men and women are naturally attracted because it\'s necessary for reproduction. People who are gay deny that biology.
Biological Varation, look it up. No two people, with the exception of identical twins, is hard-wired the same. There are variations in phenotypes(physical appearance) and genotypes(genetic make-up).
Also, we happen to be one of the few species who have sex for pleasure (sex without the intentions of making a baby). Would you deem that unnatural as well? Then why deem two consenting same sex adults seeking pleasure from one another unnatural?
-
Anyway, back on topic. I saw the guy who created this video on O\'Reilly last night and I have to say the overzealous Christians are totally wrong about this one. The interview was very fair and even O\'Reilly was on the guys side. Apparently, the website that these religous fanatics went to was .org and not .com as the .org is a gay site. So rather then admit their mistake and apologize to the creator of the video they searched his site looking for something they could take issue with - the pledge to be "tolerant" of others, which isn\'t even part of the video.
Some people just have too much time on their hands.
-
Some people just have too much time on their hands.
There\'s nothing wrong with too much time, but it\'s how you spend that time is what really matters.
-
Originally posted by EThuggV3
Wrong. I know people who have admitted to doing it. And I\'m 100% attracted to females, but I could force myself to not only be attracted to, but indeed fornicate with... oh... lets say Brad Pitt, Will Smith or Johnny Depp. *sighs dreamily* And if you were here, right now, just to prove my point, I\'d kiss you.
Gayest quote since Racer\'s shower post. Dude, you are gay.
-
He\'s 100% attracted to females, yet he would have sex with guys...
Riiiight...
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
He\'s 100% attracted to females, yet he would have sex with guys...
Riiiight...
Exactly.
-
EUREKA!!!
London, England
Top scieintist found that if you keep your children away from the website: http://www.psx2central.com they have a greater chance of not catching teh ghey.
Local news:
Several agencies have found a user with the alias ooseven to be the leader of a group of homosexuals that have been linked to catching the ghey and giving it to cartoon characters. As quoted by thier there brown ring leader " It has nothing to do with being teh ghey I needed to was my yanker and he is a yellow sponge."
More news to follow....
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Exactly.
thats not the absolute case.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
thats not the absolute case.
Huh? He posted an oxymoron - He stated he was 100 percent attracted to females, but he would have sex with guys. You don\'t see what is wrong with that statement?
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Huh? He posted an oxymoron - He stated he was 100 percent attracted to females, but he would have sex with guys. You don\'t see what is wrong with that statement?
Sometimes you arent 100% sure what someones intentions are when they say something
You would have noticed that a couple of users earlier stated that nobody is gay by nature but that they choose to become later
-
He stated he was 100 percent attracted to women - I don\'t see how that part could be misinterpreted to mean 98 percent, 80 percent or whatever...
I think people are born gay. If one would do anything sexual with a guy or play in the shower with other guys - you are gay IMO.
-
You, some members and I believe gay people are born gay.A couple of others dont.
Since they dont believe that there is a gay gene or an undefined cause that makes poeple attracted to the same gender then its evident that they believe there is no kind of attraction to the same gender in anyone.=100% attraction to the opposite sex
Thats why I am not sure if Giga was sarcastic or serious
-
Thus EThugg was born gay. ;)
-
exactly :D
Not that I believe that thats also an absolute case
-
EThugg is just a very angry, hateful and somewhat prejudiced person who is painfully battling his sexuality everyday with much confusion and chaos fabricated in the dark recesses of his mind from a lonely and violent childhood brought on by the voices inside his head.
-
:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
-
That was a nice analysis EviscerationX :laughing:
-
Thanks, Bjorn :p
-
I\'m not sure in which context Ethugg posted that, (I mean that I am not sure if he is trying to support homosexuality or support something else)
But he is right. Sex and attraction can be seperate.
-
But he is right. Sex and attraction can be seperate.
What do you mean by that, DH?
When\'s the last time you had sex with someone you weren\'t attracted to (while sober)?
-
heh,
I\'m just saying, you can force yourself to do anything in the world. Even if you have no reason to do it.
-
I couldn\'t force myself to engage in homosexual acts. That is something that is just beyond me. But if you could, more power to you ;)
Other things though, if the situation called for it, I could do crap I wouldn\'t normally do [like saving someone\'s life, or being held at gunpoint :eek:].
-
Who cares what you could FORCE yourself to? I mean, if I got a zillion dollars I could have sex with 50 Cent, but that doesn\'t mean I\'m gay because I\'m not ATTRACTED to dudes, even rich black dudes with one hand.
So in effect - sleeping with a guy because you FORCED yourself to do it = you\'re not gay, because you are ATTRACTED to women, not men.
And you know... having sex and being attracted to a certain sex isn\'t the same (as in, OMG HE HAD SEX0RZ WITH A GUY THEN HE WAS BORN GAY!!!! - means nothing if you FORCED yourself).
-
But if homosexuality is uncontrollable, then bestiality, bisexuality, polygamy, transsexuality, pedophilia, and, by extension, every possible sexual deviation MUST be genetic and therefore uncontrollable, therefore, we are wrong to deny them.
Of course, it\'s not genetic. People who do those kinds of things do it by choice. No one is born attracted to anything at all. Attractions, likes and dislikes, are results of environmental reaction. Sexuality is no different.
I\'ll be so happy when they finish mapping the human genome, find once and for all that there is no gay gene, and we can put this stupid argument to rest.
-
No one is born attracted to anything at all.
That still doesn\'t, and never will make any logical sense whatsoever. That\'s one of the dumbest statements I\'ve heard in a long time. If you want your thoughts to be valid, then please don\'t say things like that.
But if homosexuality is uncontrollable, then bestiality, bisexuality, polygamy, transsexuality, pedophilia, and, by extension, every possible sexual deviation MUST be genetic and therefore uncontrollable, therefore, we are wrong to deny them.
This is where I begin to question humanity. We\'re all f^cked.
I\'ll be so happy when they finish mapping the human genome, find once and for all that there is no gay gene, and we can put this stupid argument to rest.
Whatever the outcome, I\'ll be glad when it\'s over [even though that could be a long time from now].
-
Originally posted by Weltall
I choose to be straight. I could be gay in a heartbeat if I put my mind to it.
I merely prefer not to because I find it revolting.
This statement seems to stand out. I think you may have some deep seeded issues with your own sexuality. This may be your way of denying those feelings that you don\'t want to overtly display. The fact that you say you find homosexuality revolting yet could yourself be a homosexual, if you put your mind to it, speaks volumes.
For some people deep seeded personal feelings that people do not want to accept manifest themselves as hatred.
D\' nile isn\'t just a river in egypt.
Originally posted by Weltall
Attractions, likes and dislikes, are results of environmental reaction. Sexuality is no different.
If this was the case why would so many different kinds of people turn out to be homosexuals? If it was the result of an environmental reaction only certain people would be gay. This is not the case. You have black, white, hispanic, asian, rich, poor, catholic, baptist, jewish, hindu, buddhist, agnostic, athiest, rural, urban, 1-parent, 2-parent, no-parent, etc. homosexuals. What is the common link between all homosexual environments?
-
I hate to say this but your a bunch of misguided little pricks... actually I didnt hate saying that..
Funny how I went through 6 years of college to get my bachloers degree in science and not once was the ghey gene brought up?
As a matter of fact I have worked 10 years as an RN in different hospitals and never once has someone been found to have teh ghey gene? It it some sort of gay gene cover up conspiericy?
Evi your a fliping DOLT... The fact that you made the statement that Weltall statement about not being born with an attraction is in fact the most disturbind thing I have ever heard. I guess if we will follow your hypothoisis (evi for you that means your educated guess) that means I was born liking women? If so that means I was also born liking chocolate, the color red, blondes and the matrix? Oh crap how is this possible I was born liking something that wasnt even created yet.....
Everyone tries to find an excuse for things that others find socially unaccepted gay people are trying the ole we were born this way theory...
-
Originally posted by Black Samurai
If this was the case why would so many different kinds of people turn out to be homosexuals? If it was the result of an environmental reaction only certain people would be gay. This is not the case. You have black, white, hispanic, asian, rich, poor, catholic, baptist, jewish, hindu, buddhist, agnostic, athiest, rural, urban, 1-parent, 2-parent, no-parent, etc. homosexuals. What is the common link between all homosexual environments? [/B]
Its called prefrences..... Why do people like chocolate Ice cream they come from all those different places to are they born liking chocolate ice cream?
-
Originally posted by Cyrus
Its called prefrences..... Why do people like chocolate Ice cream they come from all those different places to are they born liking chocolate ice cream?
You ve been in college for all these years yet you make the mistake to compare sexual orientation with everyday preferences?HORMONES
Chocolate has certain substances that arouse the brain.You cant just compare the two of them
You dont enjoy to have sex with a woman more just because your society is build this way to make you prefer it more.There are hormones.Your body is made to prefer the gender of the opposite sex.Its not always a matter of preferences
You dont prefer chocolate till you taste it.You want to have sex with a certain gender before you even try it
And not everything has to be a result of a gene.Take the faceless child.Is there a facelss gene?No.There was an anomaly.No need of a characteristic gene.
Science also haven
t denied the possibility of such a gene.Also researchers say that there must be something still undifined that causes that.
And this could be something that happens even as the child is in its mother.
As for beastiality pedophilia etc these people are pervs.Sometimes are schizophrenic, have mental problems or come from a closed society.There are gays that choose to be gays because they are also fucked up in he mind but NOT ALL OF THEM ARE LIKE THAT!
Their sexual orientation comes as naturally as it appears in straight people.
Is it so hard to understand?
-
Originally posted by Cyrus
Its called prefrences..... Why do people like chocolate Ice cream they come from all those different places to are they born liking chocolate ice cream?
Yes, because "choosing" to be a virtual pariah in most of society is TOTALLY synonamous with liking chocolate.
-
Okay, i don\'t care about this argument. At all. Not one bit.
If someone chooses to be gay, and you try and segregate them because of that choice, then you are a power hungry bastard.
-
Originally posted by Black Samurai
Yes, because "choosing" to be a virtual pariah in most of society is TOTALLY synonamous with liking chocolate.
Thier not choosing to be a pariah. The are choosing to be gay. Socitey makes them a pariah. Wich I am totally against I feal as long as your not hurting someone else then go for it.
But just understand your choosing to be a man lover your not born that way. stop with the excuess own up and then society will follow.
-
Man gays feel attraction to men since kids.Not because they choose.That just happens.Have you talked to a 16 year old kid who feels attraction to men?You know how many kids feel attaction to men for years without a reason and are scared to tell their parents??
Give up.
-
Originally posted by Cyrus
Thier not choosing to be a pariah. The are choosing to be gay. Socitey makes them a pariah.
If they are choosing to be gay and society makes a gay person an outcast then they are choosing to be an outcast.
I just don\'t understand why someone would actually CHOOSE to be ostracized from society at-large.
-
Originally posted by Cyrus
Thier not choosing to be a pariah. The are choosing to be gay.
Give it up bible humper, no one chooses to be gay. :)
-
Originally posted by Black Samurai
This statement seems to stand out. I think you may have some deep seeded issues with your own sexuality. This may be your way of denying those feelings that you don\'t want to overtly display. The fact that you say you find homosexuality revolting yet could yourself be a homosexual, if you put your mind to it, speaks volumes.
For some people deep seeded personal feelings that people do not want to accept manifest themselves as hatred.
D\' nile isn\'t just a river in egypt.
Common response, but patently incorrect. The reason I both know this and am willing to admit it is because I am very capable of examining my own character and behavior. I was brought up taught that homosexuality was wrong and improper. I was never exposed to any homosexuality, and never had an encounter. Thus, I never even consider it as a venue for myself. I never look at a man with even the slightest sexual consideration. I don\'t look at guys and think "I\'d never do him". A guy is a guy. However, every single woman I see, no matter what, I always immediately evaluate their sexual attraction the first time I have contact with them. This, I believe, is the result of my life experience, and not something I was born with, because not everyone does this. I believe that if I were brought up in a family that was more tolerant of the idea of homosexuality, or I associated with gay people more often in my formative years, I would be more likely to consider it. But I wasn\'t. So I don\'t.
If this was the case why would so many different kinds of people turn out to be homosexuals? If it was the result of an environmental reaction only certain people would be gay. This is not the case. You have black, white, hispanic, asian, rich, poor, catholic, baptist, jewish, hindu, buddhist, agnostic, athiest, rural, urban, 1-parent, 2-parent, no-parent, etc. homosexuals. What is the common link between all homosexual environments?
That they are impressionable humans. That many ideas are common to all kinds. Slavery was practiced independently among many, many groups of people that never had contact with one another. Religions formed independently everywhere, et al.
A look at Greece and Rome will show two societies where homosexuality was rampant. Was it because Greco-Romans were more genetically-inclined for homosexuality? Doubtful, otherwise their descendants would be too, and they are not. It was much more acceptable in those societies, therefore, there was much more of it.
-
Originally posted by Weltall
Common response, but patently incorrect. The reason I both know this and am willing to admit it is because I am very capable of examining my own character and behavior. I was brought up taught that homosexuality was wrong and improper. I was never exposed to any homosexuality, and never had an encounter. Thus, I never even consider it as a venue for myself. I never look at a man with even the slightest sexual consideration. I don\'t look at guys and think "I\'d never do him". A guy is a guy. However, every single woman I see, no matter what, I always immediately evaluate their sexual attraction the first time I have contact with them. This, I believe, is the result of my life experience, and not something I was born with, because not everyone does this. I believe that if I were brought up in a family that was more tolerant of the idea of homosexuality, or I associated with gay people more often in my formative years, I would be more likely to consider it. But I wasn\'t. So I don\'t.
BS. Being attracted to something isn\'t because you\'re \'taught\' to be attracted to that something.
A look at Greece and Rome will show two societies where homosexuality was rampant. Was it because Greco-Romans were more genetically-inclined for homosexuality? Doubtful, otherwise their descendants would be too, and they are not. It was much more acceptable in those societies, therefore, there was much more of it. [/B]
I believe it\'s a case of men being much more worth than women at that time. It was socially better to be with a man than a woman. Does this mean that all those guys were naturally attracted to guys instead of woman? I don\'t believe so.
-
Originally posted by Weltall
Common response, but patently incorrect. The reason I both know this and am willing to admit it is because I am very capable of examining my own character and behavior. I was brought up taught that homosexuality was wrong and improper. I was never exposed to any homosexuality, and never had an encounter. Thus, I never even consider it as a venue for myself. I never look at a man with even the slightest sexual consideration. I don\'t look at guys and think "I\'d never do him". A guy is a guy. However, every single woman I see, no matter what, I always immediately evaluate their sexual attraction the first time I have contact with them. This, I believe, is the result of my life experience, and not something I was born with, because not everyone does this. I believe that if I were brought up in a family that was more tolerant of the idea of homosexuality, or I associated with gay people more often in my formative years, I would be more likely to consider it. But I wasn\'t. So I don\'t.
But what about people who were brought up the exact same way but are homosexual. There are people who were brought up thinking homosexuality is not only improper but evil. There are people from families COMPLETELY intolerant of homosexuals who have come out of the closet and been disowned.
"I was brought up taught that homosexuality was wrong and improper."
This quote can probably be found in the autobiography of every closet case in history.
-
BS. Being attracted to something isn\'t because you\'re \'taught\' to be attracted to that something.
That\'s not all of it, no. The rest of it is exposure. As stated above, you\'re not born liking chocolate. There\'s nothing in your genetics that determines this. You aren\'t born liking coffee, or beer, or sunny days or football. You develop attractions to these things because you are exposed to them, and you find the experience pleasant.
Humans are born with a sexual drive (that lays latent until puberty), but it is a raw, unfocused sexual drive. Baby humans can barely function on their own. They are born with hunger, they are born knowing how to eat, but they are not born knowing what to eat, which is why an unsupervised child is as likely to drink Drano as he is to drink apple juice. Babies are born with nerves, and the ability to feel pain when something harms it, but the baby isn\'t born knowing that stepping on a thumbtack or putting glass it his mouth is going to stimulate the pain. Babies are born with a sex drive, but they aren\'t born knowing to have sex exclusively with the opposite sex, or the same sex, or with trees or dogs or other babies. They learn this, like they learn everything else, through life experience.
On the flip side, you aren\'t born with the knowledge that fire will burn you, that sharp objects will cut you, and that poison will hurt you and kill you. You learn this either by being taught, or by experience. And most people react the same way: Pain. And most people handle this by protecting themselves from these painful experiences.
There are of course some people who deliberately hurt themselves in these ways. Is that a genetic thing too? of course not.
It just makes no sense that specific sexual preference is a hard-wired trait when there isn\'t a single other specifc preference that is.
It\'s a cop-out by gays. Nothing more. Science will ultimately vindicate me.
But what about people who were brought up the exact same way but are homosexual. There are people who were brought up thinking homosexuality is not only improper but evil. There are people from families COMPLETELY intolerant of homosexuals who have come out of the closet and been disowned.
"I was brought up taught that homosexuality was wrong and improper."
This quote can probably be found in the autobiography of every closet case in history.
Being brought up isn\'t the only experience a child gets. You completely ignored the rest of what I said. Children meet other people, experience things that parents cannot control, and sometimes do exactly the opposite in rebellion. I was brought up taught that it was wrong, but I also know people who disagree. If I knew them in my more formative days, and if I placed more value on their beliefs than my parents, I could easily be gay right now. It didn\'t happen that way. I didn\'t know anyone who espoused the gay life, and I did place value on my parents\' beliefs. Therefore, I\'m straight. I wasn\'t born straight. I wasn\'t born gay. I\'m straight because of life experience. And whatever you are, it\'s the same for you.
As for closet cases, of course closet cases are exposed to insensitivity from one major factor in their lives. If everyone they knew were accepting, they wouldn\'t be closet cases. Dur.
-
Originally posted by Black Samurai
If they are choosing to be gay and society makes a gay person an outcast then they are choosing to be an outcast.
I just don\'t understand why someone would actually CHOOSE to be ostracized from society at-large.
If you choose to kill someone and society chooses that killing means prison than you choosing to go to prison.
I dont understand that either.
I have no idea what uni said becasue all I got was this yes i still think your a bastard..
Unicron! This person is on your Ignore List.
and as for Sam i am far from a bible thumper and I never said I thought being a man lover was wrong. I personally dont see any wrong in it whatseover.
All I saying is they arent born that way.
The brain is a marvelous thing and as far as Im concrend its the 9 wonder of the world. It obsurb to think that it is even possible to pass on personality trait genitcally or even to say they are genically familar
-
BS. Being attracted to something isn\'t because you\'re \'taught\' to be attracted to that something.
Yeah, no kidding. I don\'t how the hell anyone can think different otherwise. Has anyone ever taken biology? And Cyrus, you have a Bachelor of Science Degree...yet you have no idea what you\'re talking about. You also misinterpret a lot of things that people say.
And to think that a male and female of a species aren\'t naturally supposed to be attracted because of genetics, then you are a moron. That\'s nature and human hormones...what the hell are you people smoking? Comparing human sexuality to chocolate is the stupidest things I\'ve ever heard of. ALl of your comparisons have nothing to do with human sexuality. "I don\'t know why people pick their nose until it bleeds. So people must be gay because of their surroundings" :eek: That is the same level of stupidity that is radiating from your idiotic posts.
All I saying is they arent born that way.
Again, that is completely an opinion at this point in time, because we cannot be 100% of that. Science hasn\'t disproved this yet.
If I knew them in my more formative days, and if I placed more value on their beliefs than my parents, I could easily be gay right now.
I\'ve been around gay people all my life and have seen some disturbing things when I was a child, and I still can\'t get myself to find any attraction to the same sex. I also had nobody to tell me that homosexuality is wrong or right, and I still have strong attraction to the opposite sex.
But what about people who were brought up the exact same way but are homosexual. There are people who were brought up thinking homosexuality is not only improper but evil. There are people from families COMPLETELY intolerant of homosexuals who have come out of the closet and been disowned.
Yeah, that happens all the time.
Discuss ;)
-
That they are impressionable humans. That many ideas are common to all kinds. Slavery was practiced independently among many, many groups of people that never had contact with one another. Religions formed independently everywhere, et al.
Can you tell me why a teen that know that his parents friends and society wouldnt accept him, would want to be gay?
There are many gays that are scared to tell anyone!We are talking about people who since were kids homosexual attraction developed inside them without even wanting to be like that.
A look at Greece and Rome will show two societies where homosexuality was rampant. Was it because Greco-Romans were more genetically-inclined for homosexuality? Doubtful, otherwise their descendants would be too, and they are not. It was much more acceptable in those societies, therefore, there was much more of it.
It was rambant because nobody was scared to show his/hers sexual orientation.
Also in Greece every teenager boy had to be shown the art of love by a man who WAS NOT ALLOWED TO DO ANY KIND OF INSERTION OTHERWISE HE SHOULD HAVE FACED A PUNISHMENT!
Also since homosexual act wasnt anything strange nobody was scared to try something different.But that was just an idea.Seek of a diferent experience.Something that happens in some degree today BUT THATS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE.There are people who have a miserable life because they cant feel sexual attraction to the opposite sex NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY TRY.Its not a matter of choice for them or a matter of a different experience or of impressionism or of rebellion
You take the example of people that choose to have sex just like that with the same gender as if its the absolute case with everyone.Please!Stop being such an ignorant
edit:What you said isnt wrong!But thats not always the case!You are wrong that everyone chooses to be gay only for the reasons you said.But its not always a result of conscious choice
-
Originally posted by Cyrus
Unicron! This person is on your Ignore List.
Seems some people dont want TO ACCEPT that they are wrong ;)
Pathetic
I thought I was already ignored almost a year ago.:rolleyes:
-
Why does it matter if they choose to be gay or not?
If we are going to have this conversation I think everyone should atleast acknowledge a persons ability to chose an alternative lifestyle, and for choosing such a lifestyle, they should be legally allowed to persue their interests as someone who does NOT choose such a life style.
Or is this debate purley scientific? in which case, I\'d say being gay is:
25% genetics,
75% experience.
I think most people are born with the capacity to be attracted to ANYTHING(hormones push towards women) but, through experience, these hormones and natural drives can come to mean different things to different people.
-
Just like if turtles fall on their back, they die cuz they can\'t turn over. <----- *has nothing to do with anything*
Or is this debate purley scientific? in which case, I\'d say being gay is:
25% genetics,
75% experience.
That\'s not scientific. If being are in fact born gay, it\'s going to be 100% genetic.
"The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. See Laumann, et al, The Social Organization of Sex: Sexual Practices in the United States (1994). This amounts to nearly 4 million openly gay men and 2 million women who identify as lesbian."
I\'m bored...
-
Originally posted by Deadly Hamster
Why does it matter if they choose to be gay or not?
If we are going to have this conversation I think everyone should atleast acknowledge a persons ability to chose an alternative lifestyle, and for choosing such a lifestyle, they should be legally allowed to persue their interests as someone who does NOT choose such a life style.
Or is this debate purley scientific? in which case, I\'d say being gay is:
25% genetics,
75% experience.
I think most people are born with the capacity to be attracted to ANYTHING(hormones push towards women) but, through experience, these hormones and natural drives can come to mean different things to different people.
I agree totally with your post.But personally the reason why I am discussing that some are just like that is because some people despite that they say they dont care seem to refer to gay people as weak, impressionists, people that choose to be like that because they ate pervs, or because of a rebellious attitude.I mean that shows lack of respect towards them, and racial thinking.
People can ignore what they are doing but its not polite to have this kind of opinion about these people.Its not right.Especially when some people are like that because they cant help it
-
Originally posted by Deadly Hamster
Why does it matter if they choose to be gay or not?
If we are going to have this conversation I think everyone should atleast acknowledge a persons ability to chose an alternative lifestyle, and for choosing such a lifestyle, they should be legally allowed to persue their interests as someone who does NOT choose such a life style.
Or is this debate purley scientific? in which case, I\'d say being gay is:
25% genetics,
75% experience.
I think most people are born with the capacity to be attracted to ANYTHING(hormones push towards women) but, through experience, these hormones and natural drives can come to mean different things to different people.
Because if its genitics that for some reason helps people be more accepting of it like the person cant help but to be ghey. I accept them even if the choose it.
And Evi I love the fact that I actually studied it yet your the expert on genitics what exaclty is your backgorund that gives you any knowledge whatsoever to call anbody an idiot when your speaking through your ass??? Besides the fact that your a patricpate in dry anal sex with your "signifigant" other?
-
The whole "Is it a choice" debate is such a bullshit scam.
Basically the left tried to push the religious-conformists(51% of this country) to allow equality to grow, but when equality grows, RELIGION AND TRADITION DIE. And we can\'t have that now.
Sooo, the RC\'s(Religious Conformists) Once again, as always, got the PUSSY ASS LIBERALS to compromise on equality, and hence this stupid debate of genetics is created.
Because the alternative to this debate for the democrats, is the debate that eventually leads to "WE SUPPORT POLYGAMY" and the democrats dare not cross the moderate\'s with such an absurd suggestion. (The suggestion of allowing CHOICE, of course)
So that leaves them with only one path. The genetics path, to try and portray homosexuality as genetic.
Bullshit. all of it. from every way you look at it.
-
And Evi I love the fact that I actually studied it yet your the expert on genitics what exaclty is your backgorund that gives you any knowledge whatsoever to call anbody an idiot when your speaking through your ass??? Besides the fact that your a patricpate in dry anal sex with your "signifigant" other?
You always say something intelligent and than follow with a dumb ass comment like that. But at any rate, I agree with you on some points, and I don\'t really have any strong views one way or the other. I believe people can choose to live the way they want to live and should be left alone. The human mind is very complex, and certain situations and surroundings lead people to do things that the majority of people deem strange or disgusting. But it shouldn\'t be for us to judge other people. On your other comment, I\'m pursuing my PhD of Science degree, alongside a few others.
Also, I have nothing against you, I was just being an ass on purpose, for the most part, because it creates longer posts. :D
-
Originally posted by Cyrus
The brain is a marvelous thing and as far as Im concrend its the 9 wonder of the world. It obsurb to think that it is even possible to pass on personality trait genitcally or even to say they are genically familar
There are several documented cases of identical twins growing up in drastically different environments but following almost the exact same paths in life. Is that pure coincidence or proof of some kind of hard-wired genetic trait they both shared. Who knows but one thing is for sure, you can not completely rule one or the other out.
FWIW, The nature vs. nurture debate has been going on for decades and we sure as hell aren\'t going to resolve it in a couple of days on a PS2 forum.
I just know that there are homosexual men who HATE the fact that they are homosexual more than anything (some even to the point of suicide). To think that someone made a choice like that really confuses me.
I grew up in a family that while not exactly tolerant of homosexuality is completely tolerant of the homosexual(if that makes sense). I have been exposed to homosexuals and even had a gay K1-K2 teacher. I never made a conscious choice to be straight. I just am. IMO, The fact that Weltall thinks HE chose to be straight means that homosexuality was an option for him. Which leads back to the idea that he himself has issues with his own sexuality.
-
Originally posted by Black Samurai
There are several documented cases of identical twins growing up in drastically different environments but following almost the exact same paths in life. Is that pure coincidence or proof of some kind of hard-wired genetic trait they both shared. Who knows but one thing is for sure, you can not completely rule one or the other out.
FWIW, The nature vs. nurture debate has been going on for decades and we sure as hell aren\'t going to resolve it in a couple of days on a PS2 forum.
I just know that there are homosexual men who HATE the fact that they are homosexual more than anything (some even to the point of suicide). To think that someone made a choice like that really confuses me.
I grew up in a family that while not exactly tolerant of homosexuality is completely tolerant of the homosexual(if that makes sense). I have been exposed to homosexuals and even had a gay K1-K2 teacher. I never made a conscious choice to be straight. I just am. IMO, The fact that Weltall thinks HE chose to be straight means that homosexuality was an option for him. Which leads back to the idea that he himself has issues with his own sexuality.
Word
-
I never made a conscious choice to be straight. I just am. IMO, The fact that Weltall thinks HE chose to be straight means that homosexuality was an option for him. Which leads back to the idea that he himself has issues with his own sexuality.
Actually, I am very much at peace with my sexual habits, enough so that I openly admit that it is a choice for me (I believe it is for everyone).
You say I\'m in denial, but I\'m not really denying anything. I won\'t deny that I could have been gay if circumstances led me that way. They didn\'t. I\'m not gay. I choose not to be. I don\'t believe for a second that I was born straight.
What else I don\'t understand is those of you who call people like me \'bible-thumpers\' and intolerant and so forth. The Bible has nothing at all to do with my thoughts and ideas. I hold them because they make sense to me, and I came up with them by taking the scenario and applying my knowledge to it. I am Christian, but I do not read the Bible, nor am I a subscriber to most Christian dogmatic tripe. Also note that I have never said, or even hinted at being intolerant of gay people. I merely do not believe that a person is fated to it from birth, that\'s all.
Take your own advice and don\'t judge. Kthxbi.
-
You are at peace now but it appears that you might have been "searching" inside you in the past since you believe that its only a matter of choice.
Otherwise how can you be so sure?
Although studies show that someone can be affected by the "enviroment" it doesnt mean that someone who is exposed to certain circumstances he/she will show the expected behaviour in every case.Even if a child is adopted by gay parents you cant say that this child will end up being gay.
There are two types of people that have sexual contact with the same gender.People who choose to engage in homosexual acts for reasons like different experience, and people that cant do otherwise.
What you describe is the choice that has to do with conscious preferences.These are virtually gays
But you ignore that there are people that cant do otherwise.That didnt choose to be gay.These are real gays.
If a child that is entering the stage of puberty feels an unexplained attraction towards the same gender and continuous to feel like that for the rest of its life then it has nothing to do with choice.Certain hormones are supposed to make you feel attraction mostly to the opposite sex.So its not about choice.But for some reason some dont
We all passed through that preteen stage where sexual arousement started developing and we know how it feels.Its not something we choose.Our body is forcing us.Before that we had no idea of sexual arousement and desire no matter how much our parents were trying to explain.
Well these people just like us have this feel.But strangely it seems to evolve towards homosexual attraction.These people like us couldnt comprehend completely something that was unfelt, or unseen.They werent attracted towards the same gender because someone taught them.
If someone chooses to be gay only then its a matter of "enviromental" affection
-
I am Christian, but I do not read the Bible
You\'re not a Christian then, nor do you know what it means to be a Christian.
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
You\'re not a Christian then, nor do you know what it means to be a Christian.
I\'m guessing he meant "I\'m Christian by name" and by those standards so am I (haha, and that\'s twice true... since my name really IS Christian... and I\'m Christian... haha, get it... ok... meh).
;)
-
I don\'t think that\'s what he meant, but um...hmph...er...uh...:eek: :confused:
I guess you know exactly what it means to be "Christian" then, Sammy ;)
-
damn,
SamWise is hilarious. He is good at jokes. I think I gotten his bad habits...in a good way I hope.
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
You\'re not a Christian then, nor do you know what it means to be a Christian.
"Do not read" does not equal "Have not read".
The Bible was controlled by the Catholics forever, and now has countless different versions, some with different meanings. I don\'t know what to trust, and I can\'t take a book written by man as the unquestionable Word of God.
I am not religious. That is not the same as lacking faith.
-
So back on topic.
/me looks a samwise
So I take it you too watched lot of spongebob square pants in your spare time ;)
Originally posted by Paul2
damn,
SamWise is hilarious. He is good at jokes. I think I gotten his bad habits...in a good way I hope.
Everyone in here has had a little bit of samwise in them from time to time.
Errr influence I mean … influence
p.s.
Ever notice how al they ghey threads..sorry threads about the ghey. are always the most popular around here...
Strange ;)
-
yeah
that\'s the word i am looking for. Influence...
-
I don\'t get sponge bob. I\'ve watched most of a couple of them and I never even smiled. It\'s just stupid.
-
Thanks guys. :D
I aim to please my fans... in a completely non-sexual way of course. :p
-
Originally posted by videoholic
I don\'t get sponge bob. I\'ve watched most of a couple of them and I never even smiled. It\'s just stupid.
I couldn\'t agree more man. It never had the flare of Ren and Stimpy.
-
The only thing I liked about sponge bob is that The Flaming Lips did a song for the movie.
-
It never had the flare of Ren and Stimpy.
I\'m sorry, but I\'m just gonna have to agree with you there. :)
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
You always say something intelligent and than follow with a dumb ass comment like that. But at any rate, I agree with you on some points, and I don\'t really have any strong views one way or the other. I believe people can choose to live the way they want to live and should be left alone. The human mind is very complex, and certain situations and surroundings lead people to do things that the majority of people deem strange or disgusting. But it shouldn\'t be for us to judge other people. On your other comment, I\'m pursuing my PhD of Science degree, alongside a few others.
Also, I have nothing against you, I was just being an ass on purpose, for the most part, because it creates longer posts. :D
I have nothing against you I just love to debate..... and I purposly throw in the stupid remarks to try and keep you off balance
-
and I purposly throw in the stupid remarks to try and keep you off balance
:laughing: Same here. I guess we\'re both victims of the same game. :D
-
Originally posted by EviscerationX
:laughing: Same here. I guess we\'re both victims of the same game. :D
Trying to cover up your stupidity again? ;)
-
Not really, man.
;)
-
what if u want gay kids????
sammy\'s parents must have been thinking that exact thing.