The seemingly anti-gay thread
- Thread starter Dr Lou Natic
- Start date
Bells
Staff member
c20H25N3o
Lori_7
Mystech
'But'? What 'But'? There is not 'But' on this issue. No one deserves to be killed for what they are. While you did not say that they should all be kicked to death, the 'But' is quite telling of your sentiments.c20H25N3o said:
Are you sure?
Oh there are soooo many lewd things that could be said here, but I shall restrain myself this once. Anywho, while for you it rings true that a woman is made for a man, or you in particular, other men do not feel that way. Other men may not feel the attraction that you feel towards a woman. Other men may find that they are attracted to other men, as you are attracted to other women. That for homosexuals rings true. We aren't all of the same mold and we aren't all structured in such a way that we will be attracted to the same things.
How do you know that he/she finds it abhorrent? Did God appear to you and tell you that he/she finds it abhorrent? I'm guessing not. I'm guessing that a passage in the Bible, written by a man, tells you that he thinks God finds it abhorrent. One thing I'd want to ask you c20. God supposedly created man in his image. Why in that case, would God create something or someone that he/she finds abhorrent? What kind of cruel bastard would God be to create someone that would be tortured and abused by the rest of society?
I could never equate my beliefs to your particular teachings of Christianity. I don't call a religion that encourages people to hate others for their differences a religion. I don't view people saying 'I find it disgusting and abhorrent because God does too', using their religion as some sort of shield to give reason to their hate, with anything other than contempt.
I don't give a shit if people like me or not c20. To me it feels right to allow fellow human beings their rights, regardless of who they are. That doesn't make me liberal, only human. And I don't hate Christians c20, if I did so, I'd hate my own parents and family and friends. I may disagree with their religion, but I don't hate them. And funnily enough, my own parents, who are strict Catholics, don't hate homosexuals. They're quite happy that I have homosexual friends, and have had them since high school. In fact, I think my gay friends see my parents more than I do now, since I've moved further away, they still drop by for coffee and one of them goes fishing with my father quite regularly. Do my parents find their lifestyle abhorrent? Not that I'm aware of, especially when viewed in light of the fact that when they pop in to see my parents, they always take their partners, and the single ones always face a lecture about settling down with some nice guy, something my mother has never done with me... for some weird reason...
You don't condemn them but you just hate what they do. Hmmm.. Interesting... c20, they are prevented from the same benefits that straight couples have because they are gay. People with similar beliefs such as those held by you prevent them from having equal rights. They can't help being gay, just as you can't help being straight. They were born that way, just like you were born knowing that you were attracted to girls, they were born knowing that they were attracted to the same sex, no matter how much they tried to deny or fight it.
I don't consider it to be a perversion. I don't care if people don't like that I don't think it's a perversion. I think it is natural to the homosexual, just as it's natural for me to be attracted to men and not the same sex. Was I asking you to accept it? I was merely asking that they be allowed the rights they deserve as fellow human beings. Rights that you have and take for granted, they do not have.
No I'll call you an idiot and a bigot instead. So you think women are graceful and beautiful? Let me ask you this. Do you consider your ex-wife to be beautiful, graceful, sweet and the rest of the bollocks you just posted? Most men seek out women for sex and affection, in the hope of passing on their genes. And yes, to a man seeking out another man is terribly confusing. Ask the man who's seeking another man if he wasn't confused when he realised that he was attracted to another man. Look at the levels of teenage suicide rates and then look at the rates of teenage homosexual suicides and you'll see the level of confusion. Homosexuals go through enough hell when they discover their homosexuality, and your reaction only adds to the pain they go through. Do you seriously think that a homosexual will choose to be homosexual and go through all the pain and humiliation heaped upon them by a society of bigots such as yourself?
Ah a bigot and a chauvinist.
Lori_7
Best be careful Lori, or else the love poems from c20 will stop.Lori_7 said:
So to use your argument, it is God who allows us to be with who we are. So for a homosexual, it is God who allows that homosexual to be with their same sex partner. Interesting.
Mystech
Like all fathers, he's probably praying that his grandchildren come forth from an immaculate conception.Mystech said:
bizzaroSquirrel
Registered Member
c20H25N3o said:
c20H25N3o said:
sounds like judging to me...
bizzaroSquirrel said:
Are you saying I should love the though of being penetrated by a man? Do you people not see what you are asking of me? I said "I hate what they do" i.e. I hate the thought of being penetrated by a man because I am a man.
I also said that I would love the homosexual as long as there was no thought in his heart that was lustful after me. If the homosexual does not lust after me then he is just a man as I am.
Do you still judge me to be 'judging'?
peace
c20
bizzaroSquirrel
Registered Member
c20H25N3o said:
c20H25N3o said:
Do you not see what you're saying? The negative feedback is coming from the fact that you appear to only accept men that are exactly like you.
And to remove benefits on the basis of homosexuality alone isn't fair.
Yes. If a homosexual isn't just a man as you are, what is he? Something disgusting, or inferior perhaps?c20H25N3o said:
bizzaroSquirrel said:
Oh why do you not see it? I am STRAIGHT!!! If I didn't find it abhorrent I would be a homosexual. Now the reason that Gay people are denied the rights is because it is primarily a homophobic bunch of straight people making the laws. There is no judgement here. All I hear is the complaints of the homosexual but I am describing why their cries for justice are falling on deaf ears.
I hate spiders. Sometimes I crush them underfoot. Sometimes I have mercy on them and let them live. I do not however take a spider and put it in bed with me or give it any special consideration. I do not make a room for it in my house and say "Live there" but you know what, that's just me, thats just how I am. Some people however buy huge tanks and keep a pet spider in there. They feed that spider all kinds of disgusting insects and watch it devour them. That is their pleasure. As for me I hate spiders.
Let him who has ears to listen
peace
c20
(Insert Title Here)
Feel as repulsed at the thought of performing the act as you wish. Let's consider it in a context of Dr. Lou's topic post:
What strikes our topic poster as funny is actually symptomatic of something he either has not considered, or else has decided is simply unimportant: that sense of righteousness comes in response to being routinely compared to child molesters, necrophiliacs, and horsef@ckers. When I was in high school, before the rise of my Satanic phase--and perhaps a driving force of that early theological exploration--there was an occasion that some horses were slaughtered, allegedly by Satanists, in a mountain town forty minutes away (speeding along the highway, no less) from my home, and something like two hours from a friend's. Just imagine, if you would, being asked where you were Friday night in the middle of theology class in a Catholic school. Remember, this is before--before--the rise of my Satanic phase. The justification? My friend and I listened to heavy metal.°
I don't care that Lou sees gay sex as sleazy. Hell, all the fun things to do heterosexually are sleazy, too. I mean, I wish I could find a way to express double-dipping "beautifully", but there's no way to eat that ice cream sandwich neatly. So in the end, it's not that big a deal.
You have the right to feel what you feel. That's the point.
Additionally, the shiver that certain religions send through me does not mean I can simply throw out the First Amendment and deny a person their Constitutional right based solely on a condition protected against such discrimination in the first place (e.g. religion).
Likewise, just because you don't like the way Bolt A is fitting into Hole B doesn't mean you can simply throw out the Fourteenth Amendment and deny a person their constitutional right based solely on a condition protected against such discrimination in the first place (e.g. gender).
Part of the severity of the backlash against the topic post has arisen not from our topic poster's classification of gay sex as sleazy, but the idea that gays are somehow overstepping themselves in wishing to not be the object of repeated, damn-near constant political and legal abuse (going on fifteen years next year, and only four years before that was Bowers, and before that was Ronald Reagan doing nothing about AIDS because he thought it was a "gay measles").
You should have seen Oregon in 1992. How I wish I'd saved the voter's guide. Phillip Ramsdell of the Christian-derived Oregon Citizens' Alliance submitted a statement in favor of rescinding civil rights for gays° in Oregon that listed an astounding array of sexual fancies: to read the pamphlet one might believe heterosexuals don't have anal sex, give rimjobs, enjoy the occasional golden shower or even a faceful of ... never mind. You get the picture. Trust me, it was an amazing entry, and unlike the strange statements in this year's Oregon voter's guide, genuine.
In the end the real slap in the face came not from the idea of gay sex as sleazy--that got a thorough disclaimer--but the underlying theme that demeans the struggle to fulfill the U.S. Constitution and decent equality. Add to that the idea that said theme appears to be based in an arguably inaccurate depiction tailored to an "arbitrary" starting point that is calculated for a framing effect. It's sort of the feeling that if someone wants to be repulsed and go out of their way to be repulsive, they ought to at least do it for the right reason. And there are myriad reasons that should suffice, but an artificially-constructed freeze-frame of a dynamic experience just isn't it.
I don't know if you've ever suffered through the experience of an adult casting a fantasy about you in order to place you at the butt of a joke that simply would not hold up if it recognized reality. It's something that children do and should be encouraged to do until they get bored with it. It's hard to explain, but it goes something like, "Wouldn't it be funny if you ... and then this happened ... because that would mean (punchline)." You know, it happens when you have the perfect punchline for a joke that's never going to come about.
And the tone of the joke was such to set people off.
Nobody here can tell you what to feel. But at the same time, I'm not asking how old the other boy was because I really don't want to have to think of a response if that number comes in under about 11.
But this, for some people, is bigger than how any one person--or, in the end, any voter--feels. Society has found a way to be--superficially, at least--an equal-opportunity discriminatory. If, God forbid, your lovely wife should be stricken with some horrid disease, you would at least be able to visit her in the hospital, and hold her hand and tell her everything will be okay when the need arises.
Macho, sexist conditioning only brings out the gayness in gay people. Put a closet gay in the company of spiteful traditionalists, and you won't see the gayness surrender; rather, for lack of a better term (or the inclination to find one), you'll see a hardening of resolve.
By the way, if a woman invited you for coffee--and here we can disregard your marital status, as it wasn't a factor in all your listed experiences--and started masturbating in her kitchen, would you bolt? Would you at least be a little more polite on the way out the door? Would you have played doctor in the tree with a girl?
_____________________
° heavy metal - Funny story. It's the way of Catholics, I guess. I skipped half a day once, a day after storming out of my first-period bioethics class the day before in an effort to avoid throwing the mother of all tantrums all over a friend. So five classes missed, total, which rings to the tune of twenty-five hours in detention. However, to keep the story short, I managed to confound school officials by simply telling the truth about the half-day and forgetting to mention the one period spent in the library reading Neil Simon. I honestly had forgotten it by that point, all things being equal. However, the magnitude of my excuse was such that I got passed up the ladder until I was sitting face to face with the priest in charge of keeping us all sane. He asked about my friends; I mentioned one of them, and he showed concern. "How is ____?" he asked. "I've worried about him since he started listening to that demonic music." Whoops. He was a country boy until we got 'hold of him. I didn't cop to that, although I doubt the fact was lost on this particular priest. It's nearly one of those "had to be there" moments, but with all else going on at the time, the bit about heavy metal strikes me funny to this day.
° rescinding civil rights for gays - Let us be clear: Measure 9 aimed at all civil rights, and started over a goddamned library book. A similar measure in Colorado, called Amendment 2, passed and was shot to hell by the courts, which also, coincidentally, marked the advent of what is actually the latest round of complaining about "activist liberal judges". Oregon passed a gay-marriage ban this year. That's about the fourth win since 20-08 for the haters, and the first statewide win in the fifteen-year fight.
c20H25N3o said:
Feel as repulsed at the thought of performing the act as you wish. Let's consider it in a context of Dr. Lou's topic post:
Dr. Lou said:
What strikes our topic poster as funny is actually symptomatic of something he either has not considered, or else has decided is simply unimportant: that sense of righteousness comes in response to being routinely compared to child molesters, necrophiliacs, and horsef@ckers. When I was in high school, before the rise of my Satanic phase--and perhaps a driving force of that early theological exploration--there was an occasion that some horses were slaughtered, allegedly by Satanists, in a mountain town forty minutes away (speeding along the highway, no less) from my home, and something like two hours from a friend's. Just imagine, if you would, being asked where you were Friday night in the middle of theology class in a Catholic school. Remember, this is before--before--the rise of my Satanic phase. The justification? My friend and I listened to heavy metal.°
I don't care that Lou sees gay sex as sleazy. Hell, all the fun things to do heterosexually are sleazy, too. I mean, I wish I could find a way to express double-dipping "beautifully", but there's no way to eat that ice cream sandwich neatly. So in the end, it's not that big a deal.
You have the right to feel what you feel. That's the point.
Additionally, the shiver that certain religions send through me does not mean I can simply throw out the First Amendment and deny a person their Constitutional right based solely on a condition protected against such discrimination in the first place (e.g. religion).
Likewise, just because you don't like the way Bolt A is fitting into Hole B doesn't mean you can simply throw out the Fourteenth Amendment and deny a person their constitutional right based solely on a condition protected against such discrimination in the first place (e.g. gender).
Part of the severity of the backlash against the topic post has arisen not from our topic poster's classification of gay sex as sleazy, but the idea that gays are somehow overstepping themselves in wishing to not be the object of repeated, damn-near constant political and legal abuse (going on fifteen years next year, and only four years before that was Bowers, and before that was Ronald Reagan doing nothing about AIDS because he thought it was a "gay measles").
You should have seen Oregon in 1992. How I wish I'd saved the voter's guide. Phillip Ramsdell of the Christian-derived Oregon Citizens' Alliance submitted a statement in favor of rescinding civil rights for gays° in Oregon that listed an astounding array of sexual fancies: to read the pamphlet one might believe heterosexuals don't have anal sex, give rimjobs, enjoy the occasional golden shower or even a faceful of ... never mind. You get the picture. Trust me, it was an amazing entry, and unlike the strange statements in this year's Oregon voter's guide, genuine.
In the end the real slap in the face came not from the idea of gay sex as sleazy--that got a thorough disclaimer--but the underlying theme that demeans the struggle to fulfill the U.S. Constitution and decent equality. Add to that the idea that said theme appears to be based in an arguably inaccurate depiction tailored to an "arbitrary" starting point that is calculated for a framing effect. It's sort of the feeling that if someone wants to be repulsed and go out of their way to be repulsive, they ought to at least do it for the right reason. And there are myriad reasons that should suffice, but an artificially-constructed freeze-frame of a dynamic experience just isn't it.
I don't know if you've ever suffered through the experience of an adult casting a fantasy about you in order to place you at the butt of a joke that simply would not hold up if it recognized reality. It's something that children do and should be encouraged to do until they get bored with it. It's hard to explain, but it goes something like, "Wouldn't it be funny if you ... and then this happened ... because that would mean (punchline)." You know, it happens when you have the perfect punchline for a joke that's never going to come about.
And the tone of the joke was such to set people off.
Nobody here can tell you what to feel. But at the same time, I'm not asking how old the other boy was because I really don't want to have to think of a response if that number comes in under about 11.
But this, for some people, is bigger than how any one person--or, in the end, any voter--feels. Society has found a way to be--superficially, at least--an equal-opportunity discriminatory. If, God forbid, your lovely wife should be stricken with some horrid disease, you would at least be able to visit her in the hospital, and hold her hand and tell her everything will be okay when the need arises.
Macho, sexist conditioning only brings out the gayness in gay people. Put a closet gay in the company of spiteful traditionalists, and you won't see the gayness surrender; rather, for lack of a better term (or the inclination to find one), you'll see a hardening of resolve.
By the way, if a woman invited you for coffee--and here we can disregard your marital status, as it wasn't a factor in all your listed experiences--and started masturbating in her kitchen, would you bolt? Would you at least be a little more polite on the way out the door? Would you have played doctor in the tree with a girl?
_____________________
° heavy metal - Funny story. It's the way of Catholics, I guess. I skipped half a day once, a day after storming out of my first-period bioethics class the day before in an effort to avoid throwing the mother of all tantrums all over a friend. So five classes missed, total, which rings to the tune of twenty-five hours in detention. However, to keep the story short, I managed to confound school officials by simply telling the truth about the half-day and forgetting to mention the one period spent in the library reading Neil Simon. I honestly had forgotten it by that point, all things being equal. However, the magnitude of my excuse was such that I got passed up the ladder until I was sitting face to face with the priest in charge of keeping us all sane. He asked about my friends; I mentioned one of them, and he showed concern. "How is ____?" he asked. "I've worried about him since he started listening to that demonic music." Whoops. He was a country boy until we got 'hold of him. I didn't cop to that, although I doubt the fact was lost on this particular priest. It's nearly one of those "had to be there" moments, but with all else going on at the time, the bit about heavy metal strikes me funny to this day.
° rescinding civil rights for gays - Let us be clear: Measure 9 aimed at all civil rights, and started over a goddamned library book. A similar measure in Colorado, called Amendment 2, passed and was shot to hell by the courts, which also, coincidentally, marked the advent of what is actually the latest round of complaining about "activist liberal judges". Oregon passed a gay-marriage ban this year. That's about the fourth win since 20-08 for the haters, and the first statewide win in the fifteen-year fight.
Last edited:
My point concerning The 'rights issues' is that Gay's are lobbying people who 'feel' that homosexuality is disgusting. How are you going to convince them that homosexuals will do them no harm? How will you convince them that homosexuality is a really positive thing for society? Because in my view, I do not think concessions will be made until homosexuality can be portrayed as a really positive beneficial thing.
People, rightly or wrongly associate AIDS and HIV with homosexuality and therefore the homosexual is on the back foot from the word go.
Rather than saying it's unfair on the homosexual (which it may or may not be) can the homosexual present themselves in such a way that families feel that there is no threat, given that the very thought of homosexual acts repulses them.
As I have tried to point out, this is about majority voting but you seem to reject this method as unfair. If you want to bring voters over to your side, how will you convince them?
Peace
c20 :m:
People, rightly or wrongly associate AIDS and HIV with homosexuality and therefore the homosexual is on the back foot from the word go.
Rather than saying it's unfair on the homosexual (which it may or may not be) can the homosexual present themselves in such a way that families feel that there is no threat, given that the very thought of homosexual acts repulses them.
As I have tried to point out, this is about majority voting but you seem to reject this method as unfair. If you want to bring voters over to your side, how will you convince them?
Peace
c20 :m:
c02,
I haven't read all of this thread so if I repeat questions or make comments that have already been made I apologize.
I'd like to ask you though- when you meet people do you say, "Hi, my name is c02, before I can make a judgment call on how I should feel about you as a person could you please tell me if you are heterosexual or homosexual?"
You know I'm truly sorry for the things that happened to you. I have a friend who had gone through a hard time as a child too. Her great grandfather molested her for 4 years. Now if she were to use your logic she should view men as nothing but disgusting because of what her great grandfather did to her, right? However, I must say my friend is 100% heterosexual.
The point I'd like to make is just as your gender preference does not define who you are as a person- nor does it for the homosexual. Just because I'm a lesbian does not make me a murderer, a child molester, or a person with no morals, or one who spews green pea soup. I'm sorry but it seems to me you would rather believe the outdated stereotype view of homosexuals than to judge a person according to their heart.
It just amazes me at how some think just because one is a homosexual means we are out to convert the world and all the children too. It is really sad to me that some view it that way. Let me ask you- do you have sexual urges toward small girls? Do you have sexual urges toward every single female you see out there? What makes you then think homosexuals do?
I haven't read all of this thread so if I repeat questions or make comments that have already been made I apologize.
I'd like to ask you though- when you meet people do you say, "Hi, my name is c02, before I can make a judgment call on how I should feel about you as a person could you please tell me if you are heterosexual or homosexual?"
You know I'm truly sorry for the things that happened to you. I have a friend who had gone through a hard time as a child too. Her great grandfather molested her for 4 years. Now if she were to use your logic she should view men as nothing but disgusting because of what her great grandfather did to her, right? However, I must say my friend is 100% heterosexual.
The point I'd like to make is just as your gender preference does not define who you are as a person- nor does it for the homosexual. Just because I'm a lesbian does not make me a murderer, a child molester, or a person with no morals, or one who spews green pea soup. I'm sorry but it seems to me you would rather believe the outdated stereotype view of homosexuals than to judge a person according to their heart.
It just amazes me at how some think just because one is a homosexual means we are out to convert the world and all the children too. It is really sad to me that some view it that way. Let me ask you- do you have sexual urges toward small girls? Do you have sexual urges toward every single female you see out there? What makes you then think homosexuals do?
heart said:
For the last time. I do not judge anyone upon meeting them. If they are cool, then they are cool. All my bad experiences have started out with me thinking the person is cool to start with. It was not until they revealed their homosexual nature to me that I became like a child, wanting to run as far from it as possible. I treat everyone as friend until they attack me personally and then by their own hand they become my enemy. Note I do not take any revenge, I just run away so that I do not come to any harm.
Thanks
c20
Michel Foucault is God?
Oh no, that is not good.
chno:
I'm confused - musician Varg Vikernes once wrote that he could understand lesbianism, it was female heterosexuality he could not understand. Women are beautiful, he wrote, why would they want to have sex with men?
By your standards, the lesbians are the only ones with their head on straight. A woman like me, who finds male beauty to be one of the miracles of life, is unnatural.
We don't so much "throw them out the window" but suggest Paxil.
Who cares about your feelings? It is fine that you find homosexuality disgusting. Just so long as you do not try to impose your preference on others.
But you do, and that's where the objection comes in.
American government, unlike the governments that came before it, is dedicated not to a personality, not to a king or a general or a God, but to a proposition. Our government and way of life, our democracy is an experiment. Our founders started the experiment with protecting the status quo. Of more recent days, we have changed, we have taken a broad construction of what they meant to do and we are saying: "what happens if we abandon many aspects of that status quo?"
That is our experiment, that is what makes America great. And that is what dour, sexually obsessed little fascists so object to.
"Experiment?! But you cannot experiment, we must have tradition and force!"
Yon 'conservative', upholder of new (Jewish, not 'traditional' at all for the white race) values, cannot see beyond their own personality. They like rigidity, strict rules and the freedom from constant thought. How could anything else work?
These - Enlightenment thought versus Christian - these are the values that we are warring over. Homosexuality is only a side issue.
Xev said:
As What768's signature says
"My ways are not your ways"
Simple as that.
Isaiah 55:8
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD .
You talk of things that I find disgusting and repulsive, as beautiful and pure.
I talk of eternal life with God
You talk of death.
You talk of the Holy Scriptures as though they are lies and fake.
I hear God talking to me through them.
You tell me to go and see the doctor for my delusions.
I tell you to believe in Our Father.
You say Jesus was a lie.
I say Jesus is my brother.
You say there is no hope for me
I say there is hope for you.
You reap exactly what you sow.
But you know this surely?
peace
c20
Bells said:
Don't make fun...I can't help it...lol.God allows all of us free will. That doesn't mean that our will is always in His will. His will in your life is something that you have to seek from Him in prayer, and He will show you....help you...provide for you. He has done this for me in many ways. What I pray is that I give my life to Him completely. I tell Him that I don't want my life unless it is He that is living through me...unless it is lived in His will...and I mean it. Without Him, I have found life to be meaningless and unfulfilling at best...Miserable and destructive at worst. I'll tell you a little bitty story...
When I first saw my ex-husband, I was in a loud crowded bar. I looked at him and he at me, and I knew something was there...he just had that look. I knew it was all over. And in my head I heard a loud voice yell at me. It said, "NO!" It startled me. At the time I wasn't really accustomed to hearing God speak to me. I thought it to be strange...what I heard. But I shrugged it off, and proceeded to make out with him by the end of the evening.
Hearing voices means hearing voices to that internal witness who is hearing the voices.
It's no different from you hearing my unique voice as you read this text.
Each human has a different life experience but that life's experience will be shaped by your thoughts. You scientists aren't responsible for human thought now are you? Tell me how you did it?
I know whose voice I listen to and thank God it is there. This is a terribly difficult life for a man to bear.
peace
c20
It's no different from you hearing my unique voice as you read this text.
Each human has a different life experience but that life's experience will be shaped by your thoughts. You scientists aren't responsible for human thought now are you? Tell me how you did it?
I know whose voice I listen to and thank God it is there. This is a terribly difficult life for a man to bear.
peace
c20