June 26, 2012
-
“Straight” Bashing
I work with at least 3 people who are either gay or bisexual. And I get along just fine with all of them. I banter and talk with them like I would anyone else. I would never argue that they are outcasts – they’re not. They are human beings, for better or worse, like the rest of us. I’d even call one a good friend (the other two I haven’t known as long).
I state this to make one simple point. I am un-abashedly anti-homosexualiTY. And yet, even while making such a distinction, I am still called a bigot and homophobe. Even while I share my own views and discuss the matter with my opponents respectfully and stay to the topic, I am personally attacked (not all my opponents on this debate do so, of course; nor are all proponents who share my views as so kind as they should be – that, too, is noted).
For myself, at least, I want it to be understood: Don’t accuse me of being bigoted or hate-mongering or against “equal rights” just because I disagree with you. It’s horribly short-sighted and insulting. It’s misplacing focus on a non-personal topic to a personal focus, all to support one’s opposing argument. So in my further defense on the matter, if I’m going to be attacked, personally, get your facts straight. And the first paragraph of this post are the facts. Thank you.
Comments (142)
I am not so sure this effort will help you much. The calls that you are a bigot were never based on logic, they are simply emotional outcries. so logically pointing out that you are not a bigot is not going to change their minds.
@trunthepaige - *sighs* Yeah, I know you’re right. I felt I ought to at least point out the error in claims against me given that I actually have such relationships with three people who I know are gay. How can an anti-homosexuality person be okay with gay people if he’s a homophobe? UNLESS, he’s not actually a homophobe!
Unfortunately, illogical nonsense tends to prevail in matters like these.
It is great that you support gay marriage, gay adoption, and LGBT hate-crime protection despite your personal opposition to gay sex. I strongly feel that this putting principle and rights above personal sexual taste sets an example deserving the ighest priase.
@Celestial_Teapot - I should clarify. I do not support gay marriage nor gay adoption. I am not saying that gay couples could not support each other in certain loving ways. I’m not saying that they could not offer children important guidance and such as they grow. However, evidence has strongly shown that both gay marriages and a gay parenting lacks in many critical areas that are important to the health of the marriage and the child.
That said, in no way do I approve of people arguing these points at the expense of the gay community individuals. I believe in debating the merits of homosexuality, while equally showing respect and kindness to the persons on the other side of the debate. I will sooner shake the hand of a gay individual and call them friend than…well, there is no “than”. I won’t stoop to insulting gay people. If I did, I would have to stoop to insulting liars, gossips, thieves, adulterers, murderers, and others. Meaning, homosexuality has its own host of inherent problems which spark various levels of consequences, but it is otherwise on equal ground regarding all other moral no-nos.
So I will say yes to LGBT hate-crime protection in regards to not singling out people who do identify as gay/etc and doing deplorable things to them – be it insults or worse. But that does not mean I support homosexuality in any fashion. (PS – my tone here is meant to be firm, but not in-your-face. I hope you received it as such. And I do thank you for stopping by. Truly.)
I find it amusing when people call me a bigot just because I believe homosexual acts are a sin. I don’t hate gays, I don’t bash gays. Liberty-wise, I have no intent of infringing on their rights as Americans. I treat them like I would anyone else. I disagree with their sin. But I don’t treat them like crap or sub-humans. I have three close family members who are gay, one of which has married her partner. I don’t agree with it but it’s her choice – God gave her free will like anyone else.
Disagreement does not make one a bigot. Bigot is probably one of the most improperly overused terms out there. Just like racist.
@firetyger - Well said. And if we’re to make any laws regarding the issue, it ought to be done by the facts. I do think we ought to mind the Bible on this, too, but obviously, few people in America actually do that in a government setting. So, if the facts are there, let’s apply the facts.
@Rhindon - I understand. I have a friend who felt much the same way about blacks. African-Americans, he says, are of a genetically inferior stock. This friend would lambast that the diminished intelligence of blacks, their brutish demeanor, and their distinct culture make it such that inter-racial marriage is undesirable. Like you, this friend gets wrongly branded “bigot” when all he wants to do is to treat blacks with kindness.
@Celestial_Teapot - Except one’s skin color has absolutely no bearing on such things.
However, evidence has shown that homosexuality cannot naturally provide all that one’s spouse needs, nor does it provide the complete environment that children need.
See the difference? Skin color does not have any connection to intelligence, ability to raise children, or anything else. It’s just a color of skin pigment. Obviously.
But homosexuality is an ACTION that acts like a flood gate for problems – including STDs and psychological issues (such as increased proclivity towards suicide). Homosexuality is also a barrier to the complimentary nature that each gender offers one another as found in a heterosexual relationship. These are inherent characteristics found in homosexual relationships.
If a black man is stupid, brutish, or a terrible husband, it’s likely because of his failure to discipline himself and/or because his parents failed to teach him better. But it has nothing to do with his skin color. I’ve met great black people and horrible white people. Skin color is absolutely irrelevant to those matters.
But homosexuality is directly linked to the things I listed (and more). This isn’t mere talk, either. I can provide you with an article that providence definitive evidence that gay relationships are NOT healthy.
Homosexuality and racism are both moral issues, but they each deal with two different issues that are not on equal ground. You’re trying to justify homosexuality on the same ground that racism is fallibly based on. But once again, racism is discrimination of a person based solely of a skin color, which is just an object in one’s body and has no moral grounds inherent to it. But homosexuality is an ACTION which IS based on moral grounds (in a similar way that lying or murder are actions that have moral correlations).
So you really haven’t proved anything with your slight-of-word patronizing.
I wonder why gays are so intolerant about that shit. So intolerant they expect the church to change its views to accommodate their lifestyle. I just don’t get it.
The reason you catch so much flack is because gay rights is not about human rights at all. If it were, gay rights advocates wouldn’t be so hateful.
Gay rights by its very nature is a frontal assault on Christianity which is the source of our modern view of human rights and the sanctity of life.
Christians have got to wake up and smell the coffee.
Look at @Celestial_Teapot and his efforts to make you look like a bigot. Positively hateful.
You demonstrated you are a Bigot in your responses to CP.
Hate is hate and a crime is a crime. It is destructive to the whole of the law to make a crime to be punished more severely when done to a select “group” of people…..All men are endowed by their Creator with certain rights i.e. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and so all men/women/children are to be protected from those who would violate those basic rights. Period!
I think it’s dumb to judge others for what they believe.
I mean, everyone is predisposed and entitled to think what they do. If what you believe is not effecting my rights or our ability to talk on other unrelated matters, why should I call you any rude names?
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and if you are respectful of others, it really should earn you the title “bigot”.
“
@tendollar4ways - Thank you for proving my point. I disagree with the concept of “gay rights” and your response is the usual hateful name calling.
People will not give up their cherished culture and religious beliefs to a small band of people who preach hate.
@Rhindon - I think CelestialTeapot’s point is that you can’t have a negative view towards a group (which applies to every individual within that group), and expect them to not take it personally, and that’s true even if you interact with individuals within that group in a positive manner. In that sense, I think his analogy is correct. While calling you a “bigot” might not be fair, you do something which bigots do, which is to blame problems on a group identity, and then apply this to individuals such that you think it’s undesirable for an individual to be a member of said group. One can blame homosexuality for social ills in the same way that one can blame being black for social ills: with statistical correlations. Both positions could also be rebutted in the same way: by saying that despite the correlations, there’s no direct cause there, and that each individual case shouldn’t be prejudged by generalizations. After all, homosexuality in and of itself never gave anyone an std, and if homosexuals really felt they’d be happier and more fulfilled in heterosexual relationships, they’d be in them. Homosexuality is not an action. It’s a sexual orientation. And while having that orientation might be difficult due to environmental factors, I trust them to decide whether acting on it or contrary to it would make them happier. Neither homosexuality or racism seem to be moral issues when dealing with a secular morality derived from general principles. Both can be moral issues when dealing with a more arbitrary religious or cultural morality. I think the fact that ppl tend to agree with most of my views on this when they don’t already have a religious bias against homosexuality says a lot about this issue.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - So If I says Christians shouldn’t be allowed to Marry while Non-Christians can and gain the benefit…this wouldn’t be bigoted?
I find it interesting that the only ppl i’ve come across who describe homosexuality as an action are ppl who have a religious opposition to it. But yeah, you’re essentially prejudging the relationships of lots of ppl, most of which you will never even meet. Yet, you’re surprised when that’s interpreted as prejudice and when it’s taken personally.
@tendollar4ways - You or I don’t get to sez what marriage is. Nature’s law and the God of nature’s law sez what marriage is.
The idea of gay marriage is an assault on human nature which is the source of human rights.
Therefore, the idea of gay marriage is actually an assault on human rights. Thus all the hatred on your side. Hatred is the weapon of choice for those who wish to destroy human rights.
Such a thing is much worse than simple bigotry.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - The painted fingernails and ring while you are strangling the kitten gives me shivers and gives me flashbacks to Silence of the Lambs. I really need to call Animals Services to come check up on you for the sake of the poor felines.
@tendollar4ways - A personal, hateful attack instead of a rational argument.
How can you people possibly expect Christians to give up their culture to people who use such tactics routinely and without conscience?
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Who said you have to marry another man?
@tendollar4ways - The concept of men marrying is an absurdity.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - So is the idea that god impregnated a virgin and gave birth to himself to be born and die to forgive us for our sins but we let the people who beleive this silliness marry.
@tendollar4ways - So you claim. But where is your evidence of bigotry? I can provide evidence that homosexuality in action is a factor in more social problems than not. (A non-religious evidence, too.) And nothing else you’ve said so far has supported your claim. All you’re doing now is to offer cynical remarks that suggest you really have no logical argument to give. Frankly, that seems to be rather typical.
@zoetherat - My arguments against homosexuality, though, are both religious and scientific. In general, homosexuality may be an orientation – of which I’m not arguing against. But homosexuality in action is what I’m against.
See, one’s skin color could be any color. We also have to examine the history of how black people were treated by white people and how each have responded since then. Many black people have been wise and not let a history of racism keep them down. Being black doesn’t determine how one chooses to live his life. Many white people have chosen to live poor, uneducated lives, depraved of any sense due to no other factor than their very laziness. Circumstances aside, being black or white holds absolutely NO bearing on the issue.
But homosexuality in action has closely related repercussions. An action HAS a result. This is simple physics and/or philosophy.
@tendollar4ways - You seem to have a habit of criticizing what you don’t understand.
If God is real, if He created all of the universe and its contents, who’s to say He can’t manifest Himself in physical form through the very process He designed in order to bring forth human life? It’s actually very simple.
@tendollar4ways - You follow up a hateful personal insult with a stupid question. And then start raving about about an impregnated virgin.
Again, I think this shows why Christians are simply not going to stand by and hand their culture over to people who hate so deeply.
@Rhindon - CP explined it to you in a very clever way and you missed it. I will try this again….if I stated that Christains shouldn’t be allowed to marry because Christianity causes more social problems than good (with statistics or any other way to back it up) would you allow me to say this and not call me a bigot?
You cannot have it both ways homey. You cannot deprive a group rights and want to have them live as second class citizens AND at the same time not be a bigot. Impossible.
Yea…you and Prizoneroflove scare the shit outta me cuz you say stupid shit like this… I wanna kill gays but not be a murder, I wanna fuck a woman who doesn’t want me and not be labeled a rapist. I wanna Hurt Gays and make um live beneath me and not equal to me…but don’t call me a bigot.
Psychopaths….Jesus will be proud!!!
@PrisonerxOfxLove - It puts the lotion in the basket!!
@tendollar4ways - Except there are no such statistics for Christians causing more social problems. It’s the other way around – they HELP.
And the evidence for homosexuality being a relating factor to social problems, STDs, and more is concretely documented. I’m not about rounding up every gay and depriving them of simple living like anyone should have. Let gays have jobs. Let gays run for office. But gays aren’t a special group. Homosexuality isn’t even inherent to human nature. For crying out loud, mere biology proves this!
I absolutely understood what CP was trying to say, but his argument was flawed just by comparing racism with homosexuality. And yet you’re calling ME illogical and closed-minded (sorta)?
IF homosexuality was truly a natural part of human nature, I’d stand with you on this matter. But it’s not. It’s not because both God and the non-religious evidence both show this to be true.
@tendollar4ways - There is no such thing as group rights. And Celestial Teapot’s explanation demands the acceptance of a false premise.
Marriage is not a right. So gays not being able to marry in civil ceremonies is not an issue of rights.
Male and female are integral to human nature. That is, gender is integral to human nature.The idea of gay marriage demands the denial of gender which is integral to human nature.
Consequently, the idea of gay marriage is a denial of human nature. And since human rights are based on human nature, gay marriage is an assault on human rights.
@trunthepaige @Celestial_Teapot @firetyger @Whatsittastelike @PrisonerxOfxLove @tendollar4ways @quest4god@revelife @breaking_expectations @zoetherat
I highly recommend everyone read this article. It is not Christian in nature. It’s simply an overview of a survey done on children who grew up in gay-parent households and the stats of how they have fared since. This is not an attack on gay people – but an analysis of homosexuality and how it affects children. After reading it, share your thoughts. But ONLY after having read it. If you don’t, you have no right to call me closed-minded or bigoted if you’re so inclined.
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/06/5640
@Rhindon - Oh Contraire mon ami….The most religious states also boast the highest teen pregnancy rates, divorce rates, STD etc… Hell Utah has the highest per capita OnLine Porn rates.
Hey Look You ignorant Bigot, I’m not about rounding up every Christian and depriving them of simple living like anyone should have. Let Christians have jobs. Let Christians run for office. But Christains aren’t a special group. Christianity isn’t even inherent to human nature. For crying out loud, mere biology proves this!
I TOO absolutely understood what CP was trying to say, but his argument wasn’t flawed by comparing racism with Bigotry. YES, you are illogical and closed-minded (not sorta, but completely blinded by your hate)?
IF Christianity was truly a natural part of human nature, I’d stand with you on this matter. But it’s not. It’s not because both God and the non-religious evidence both show this to be true.
@tendollar4ways - Utah is also home to Mormonism, which isn’t even a Christian denomination. It doesn’t follow God’s laws properly. It’s about legalism rather than the freedom God meant for us to have. So, poor twist on my words, “buddy”.
Second, I never claimed Christianity was a “special group” inherent to human nature. It’s a faith, in simple terms. So once again, your attempt to counter my argument fails. (Sheesh, you can’t even properly interpret my context properly.)
Third, no, CPs argument WAS flawed because there is absolutely no moral context whatsoever to one’s skin color. None. It’s not wrong to be black. It’s a skin color, which makes making any sort of personal judgments asinine. But homosexuality is more than an orientation – for that orientation is a precursor to one’s inclination (not a guarantee, but it does influence) towards living a gay lifestyle. THAT is what makes homosexuality a moral issue. Then, when we investigate the results of a homosexual lifestyle, it’s evident to see how it fails to offer the best quality of life in all categories – even just in secular categories (meaning, not bringing spiritual context into the matter).
I’ll give you fair warning, though, sir. Rather than acting like a fool on my page, if you wish to continue commenting here, I recommend you STOP with the insulting comments and actually discuss the merits of homosexuality and provide rational evidence for your views. I have never once said a rude thing to any gay individual, or you. Do NOT continue your current track record. You may not know it, but I have debated with you before over the years (different account), and I’m frankly, quite sick of your illogical and senseless banter which adds nothing. If you refuse, I will simply block you. No sweat off your brow, I’m sure, but if you LIKE passing around nonsense, you’ll have to find somewhere else to do it. However, if you want to prove yourself correct on this matter, CHANGE YOUR TONE.
@Rhindon - Since studies can be biased and constructed to support any agenda, I don’t believe they are useful in issues that concern human rights and human nature. This is issue is best pursued through the language of reason and philosophy.
@tendollar4ways - But it’s not. It’s not because both God and the non-religious evidence both show this to be true.
Who appointed you Pope?
You know nothing of God and what “non-religious evidence” are you talking about?
@PrisonerxOfxLove - I recommend reading it anyway. The results are based on the children from gay parent families, not the gay individuals, themselves. There is far less bias (if any) that can be applied and simply surveys how such children have grown and what has resulted in their lives. The survey does not conclude that gay parents are the CAUSE of anything negative, but simply examines and compares grown children of gay parents to those of traditional male-female parents. The fact remains that we can discuss things all we want – offer our opinions until we’re blue in the face – but at one point, we ALL have to examine the evidence, right or wrong. And if we on the anti-homosexuality side are wrong, we need to know the facts just as much as the pro-gay side does. Opinions won’t settle this matter, for we all have various thoughts about it. Only the most foolish will ignore the facts, though.
@Rhindon - Since gay marriage is a violation of human human nature there isn’t any doubt about what authentic evidence will show about children trying to survive in such a dysfunctional environment.
It’s the same as what evidence shows about children trying to survive in any dysfunctional family.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Right. I agree with the reasoning. But to an opponent of that logic, it sounds like nonsense. That why it’s important to have evidence to show that the logic we claim to be true really is true. It’s not enough to simply SAY 2+2=4. We have to show it.
@Rhindon - I have never once said a rude thing to any gay individual, or you.
LOL !!!!!
You say Homosexuals should be treated as second class citizens. YOU should be allowed to marry and gain the finanical and social benefits yet those lowlifes…no…they are beneath us.
If I were gay, you calling me a faggot, queer, fairy wouldn’t bother me NEARLY as much cuz it is just words….
Homey, you are the worst of the worst kind of Bigot cuz you put your biggotry into action.
Shame you cannot see it.
@tendollar4ways - Show me where I said anything rude to you. Show me where I said gays should be considered second class. Show me where I said they should be denied basic human rights.
I would never and have never call(ed) a gay individual ”faggot”, “queer”, “fairy” or anything else derogatory. THAT is just plain rude…just as calling a black man a nigger is rude. It solves nothing. So I don’t know why you even bring that up.
Again, show me where I’ve been a bigot. Show me by my own words.
And have you read that link to the survey? Any further comments without having read it all WILL get you blocked. Then any hope you might have of convincing me of your views will be sorely lost (not that you have any hope anyway).
@Rhindon - You can show any proof you wish to an atheist like @tendollar4ways and he will simply deny it.
Atheism by its nature demands irrationality and blind faith and the denial of reality.
That’s because atheism is unprovable while the existence of God is provable. And atheism is completely unwitnessed whereas God was witnessed by hundreds of thousands of Hebrews in the time of Moses and thousands and thousands of inhabitants of Judea during the time of Jesus.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Again, I agree. And while people like TenDollar may continue to deny such evidence to the contrary of his arguments, others are not so like him. Others may come to see that there is genuine truth in the claims of Christianity. Thus, the importance of providing evidence is of the utmost. Even Paul and God encourages us to provide evidence for our claims and arguments. We can rationalize anything – we may even be right, and all the better if we are – but simply SAYING something is true does not make it true. It’s true regardless. The question is to provide evidence to give our minds the foundation upon which to know that it is true. Lies are many, but the truth is one. We need to show how the lies fail and why they fail. We need to show how the truth is distinguishable from the lies that surround it. That is why we must do more than simply discuss things logically and with philosophy.
@Rhindon - The NAZIs used all kinds of studies to prove the inferiority of various races of people. But understanding the philosophical truth that all men are created equal renders the NAZI studies false without even having to consider them.
Atheists and gay rights advocates can therefore call you a NAZI for advocating such studies, or they can provide 20 other studies showing exactly the opposite of what your study shows.
Further, Judeo-Christianity has taught against gay marriage for millenia without resorting to studies. Yet they were extremely effective. And Saint Paul argued almost exclusively via reason and scripture. I can’t think of one time where he actually provided evidence for any of his supernatural claims about Jesus.
By resorting to studies you are lowering yourself to level of atheists and Progressives and you will be beaten since you are fighting on their ground.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - But we can examine the authentic nature (or lack thereof) of such studies, as well. Paul even pointed out how people were witnesses to Christ’s resurrection. Is this not using evidence to support his arguments?
I’m not lowering myself to anyone, but using a wide assortment of resources to show my claims as valid. People think and are convinced with a wide variety of proofs – some respond to discussion (which you apparently are focused on) while others need evidence (Thomas was such). And does not even God, through the Psalms, testify to His own reality by His creation? EVIDENCE!
Good sir, God is not limited in the way He makes Himself known and how He establishes His truth apart from the lies. WE should not be so bold to think only one way is effective.
So, you’re against people living a happy life with each other and against them having rights to have a family or get married and you’re shocked that they call you names? You ARE against equal rights by being against those things because you are denying them the things that straight couples have, its just simple logic. Come on now…
As one of the “icky gays,” I find no fault at all with views like those of @firetyger.
I really don’t give a rat’s ass if some stranger thinks what I do in my bedroom is gross, unnatural, or morally questionable. I do have a problem with people, such as yourself judging by your comments, taking their idea of what is “best,” and not only wanting me to live by it, but wanting to create government policy that forces me to because …they cherry-picked a handful of studies and GOD SAID SO, OKAY?!
I am as married as a man can be to another man. Has your life suffered for it, been altered in any way? Are the children around you slowly going the way of the gay? Simple fact of the matter is, I work. I pay my taxes. My government (again, don’t care what individuals such as yourself think) has every responsibility to treat me just as it does anyone else. And if it doesn’t, I have every right to fight to change it until they do. Without question, I believe a child would be better off in our home, where he/she would be very loved and provided for, than they would in a state run foster system, and I find it seriously lacking in compassion (towards children, not gay people) that people seem to think “no parents are better than gay parents” by removing a considerable amount of people from those who are willing to adopt.
@Rhindon - “However, evidence has strongly shown that both gay marriages and a gay parenting lacks in many critical areas that are important to the health of the marriage and the child” -And this “evidence” is where? Citations are necessary when using such language.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J082v18n01_09 -Begs to differ
I’m still looking for more, but damnit if 90% of academic studies are blocked by pay-for services. Some of the abstracts aren’t enough to go by.
@Rhindon - You preach on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about “evidence” but never cite any. Tiresome.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Nazis? Already. Man, at least wait until page 4 before enacting Godwin’s Law. Silly troll.
@RazielV - He’s slipping.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Godwinn’s Law. You usually wait till the 4th page to shit that nugget out. You’re slipping, Curtis.
@Grtt - I had no idea you were gay. I admittedly thought you were a woman. Do not ask me why for even I don’t know.
@RazielV - I …get that a lot here, lol. I guess the lack of identifying profile picture doesn’t really help.
@Rhindon - Missed this. Rebuttal
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/13/opinion/la-oe-frank-same-sex-regnerus-family-20120613
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/13/gay-parenting-studies-disputed-by-association/
The entire APA has disputed the study. That says quite a lot.
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/parenting.aspx
Plenty of info to sift through here on Gay/Lesbian parenting.
I would also like to add that having a gay friend does not validate your opinion, they probably hate you.
Whether you believe that homosexuality is a sin or not is completely irrelevant when it comes to giving them basic human rights. The bible and the constitution are two separate things, and biblical rules do not apply to anyone who hasn’t accepted Jesus into their heart. That’s no different than Jews choosing not to eat pork. I’m not Jewish, so i can and will eat all the Bacon I want. By your logic, Baptists should start going to confession and everyone should pray to Allah alongside their own God. But that’s not how it works, is it? You govern yourself based on the rules of YOUR religion. And those of us who don’t have a religion are not obligated to follow any rules outside of our countries laws….which your religion should have NO bearing on.
Also, I fail to see any reason why two loving, caring people of the same sex can’t raise a perfectly happy, healthy child. Unless you consider all the hate they will hear from the Christian community who are supposed to love the sinner and not the sin. Outside of that, they are no less capable than any heterosexual couple.
The lgbt community should be embraced as human beings and allowed the same rights as the rest of us instead of being mistreated by people who are supposedly holding themselves to a ‘higher moral standard’ than the rest of us.
https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/270850_435370966485609_2082033479_n.jpg
Just some points to consider..
@RazielV - Godwin’s Law is made for fascists because it stifles debate by cutting off legitimate areas of inquiry. My reference to the NAZI studies of “inferior” races is totally legitimate and not meant to harm or demonize.
If you’re going to invoke stupid, try not to be stupid about it. Otherwise you just prove that you are stupid. But that’s obvious so you don’t have to go through any more formal proofs.
By name calling you are proclaiming yourself the loser. But even you know that, so there is no sense in stating the obvious again.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Aww, someone pissed in your cornflakes.
@Rhindon - Look at @RazielV ’s comment. He’s now going to suck you down the rabbit hole of studies. He’ll just deny any of your claims of authenticity.
I cited a fact about NAZI studies and like a Pavlovian dog he invoked the Law of Morons aka Godwin’s Law.
Reason is simpler and much more effective and wastes much less time.
Few people even bother reading your long, wordy comments anyway. So all your scholarship is a major waste of time.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Projecting much?
I hear ya. Whenever I say I’m opposed to blacks and jews people call me a bigot too.
It’s so unfair!
I mean I don’t want to take anyone’s rights away, I just don’t believe in being black or jewish. I think it’s a bad thing.
<—- not a bigot.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - I didn’t call you a troll, dummy. Oh, and you seem to be the one slinging shit, so, uh, great job making yourself look silly.
@Rhindon - So don’t accuse you of being against equal rights… even though you explicitly are against equal rights.
This isn’t about being fair, this is about wanting everyone else to agree with you or shut up and go away.
I checked out your link. First off, i don’t think you can take at face value studies that were financed and are being interpreted by an institute whose goal, among other things, is to oppose homosexuality. In any case, I read the article. It heavily criticizes previous studies of on gay and straight parenting. In particular, it criticizes them for comparing stable upper middle class homosexual families to broken heterosexual ones. But while i was reading it, I noticed what seemed to me to be a big problem with the Regnerus study. One of the qualifications the article lists for that study is that most of the children from the homosexual study group originated from a broken heterosexual marriage. In fact, it says that less than a quarter of the children who had a gay/ bi mother from the homosexual study group even “spent at least three years living in the same household with both their mother and her romantic partner.” So essentially, the Regnerus study makes the same mistake as the earlier studies it criticizes, but in reverse. It compares broken families where a parent had a homosexual relationship to intact/ stable heterosexual families. The fact that the stable families did better should come as no surprise. After doing a quick google search, i found other criticisms. The children were born from the 70s to mid 90s when gay marriage was illegal and a lot of gays were trying to pass as straight. And the further you go back in time, of course, the greater the social stigma (which the study can’t account for anyway). Frankly, the study doesn’t show what it appears to at first glance. Two more things. The fact that the website criticizes studies using white, stable, upper middle class lesbians kind of undermines your point. You presumably believe that gays shouldn’t have kids, not just ones that aren’t white, upper class, and in stable relationships. If other factors are equally or more important than sexual orientation, than why use that one factor as a sort of litmus test of parental ability? I don’t think someone who was really basing their opinion on the statistics would do that. Lastly, I’m not sure it’s a good idea to pre-judge the parenting skills of strangers based on statistics anyway. But especially given the importance of other factors in how well one raises a child, it’s definitely not good to judge them based on that one issue. I mean, a lot of qualities that make a good parent can’t even show up in statistics.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - The best part is that I imagined you saying this into a mirror. Only because it’s legitimately describing yourself. XD
Notice I never called anyone names, however you just blatantly called me stupid, then chastised me on “name calling”. Fail trolling fails.
No, your Nazi correlation was poorly timed and ill-attributed. The moment you bring in Nazi-ism to any discussion that it bears no legitimate context on you lose the debate immediately and must sit in the corner of the internet for no less than 9001 hours.
Unless you roll doubles.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - That’s not the only thing getting sucked tonight.
@zoetherat - If I could rec this more than once, I would.
@RazielV - The NAZIs are a textbook, lab rat case of what can go wrong with every possible thing in a society. So they are ALWAYS relevant in discussions about human rights, sexuality, race and religion.
@firetyger - Not marrying your rapist is also a sin, punishable by death too (just like homosexuality).
I’m so sick of christians selectively enforcing barbaric ideas from bronze age texts they can’t even be bothered to read. “It’s good because the bible says so!” Yeah so is slavery and capital punishment for children. “Homosexuality is an abomination, it says so in the bible!” So is eating shellfish and trimming your beard.
@Celestial_Teapot - Ah, I see you got there first.
@Rhindon -
“However, evidence has shown that
homosexuality cannot naturally provide all that one’s spouse needs,”
I don’t think you understand what being gay means. It means you’re not attracted to members of the opposite sex at all. If you’re gay a heterosexual relationship by definition wouldn’t fulfill your needs. I’m guessing you like dudes and tell yourself you’re not gay, that homosexuality is just “giving in” to the urges everyone has. Am I right? That seems to be the case usually when people can’t acknowledge that gay people even exist.
“nor
does it provide the complete environment that children need.”
I didn’t know a child needed a specific configuration of genitalia to be raised properly. And by your logic single parents should have their kids taken away because one parent doesn’t provide the “complete environment” they need. I’m sure for the vast majority of kids that never get adopted it’s comforting to know that at least in an orphanage they won’t be around any fags to nurture and support and love them.
“But homosexuality is an ACTION that acts like a
flood gate for problems”
No, sticking a dick up someone’s ass is an action (one straight people engage in much more frequently than gay people by the way).
“- including STDs”
Lesbians have lower rates of STD transmission than straight couples. So I guess that’s an argument that women should all go lesbian right?
“and psychological issues (such
as increased proclivity towards suicide).”
You know I think that might have more to do with people like you treating them like lepers their whole lives and their peers viewing their mere existence as evil and wrong.
“Homosexuality is also a
barrier to the complimentary nature that each gender offers one another
as found in a heterosexual relationship. These are inherent
characteristics found in homosexual relationships.”
Do you get that being gay isn’t an option? I’m guessing you don’t. You can live a heterosexual life if you’re a) bi, or b) are gay and want to go through the motions and pretend you’re straight. But a gay person can no more make themselves straight than I can make myself be gay, or make myself fall in love with a doorknob. These are hard-wired, unconscious, automatic responses that we’re born with, we can no more get rid of them than we can get rid of pain.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - “Curtis Bell is a textbook, lab rat case of what can go wrong with every possible thing in a society. So he is ALWAYS ir-relevant (and wrong) in discussions about human rights, sexuality, race and religion.”
Fixed it for you.
Also, http://xd4.xanga.com/2d3e125051033282504865/t225197230.jpg
I clicked and it linked me to your above comment that you obviously edited. If you’re going to insult me, don’t try to hide it. I’m much better at the internet than you are.
Lesbians have entirely too much power, especially the ones who have blocked me on Xanga; whereas LadyboyRevolution is a website that I totally agree with.
If women can marry other women then why can’t all the stalking perverted masturbating men bring in ladyboys from Thailand and the Philippines as their wives?
Women marrying other women is a spoiled thing, an antimale thing, a Bobbitizing thing. I think that the lesbians are in cahoots with Osama Bin Laden and I also think that Yasir Arafat was a lesbian. Did any of you ever seriously listen to his voice, or look at his tits????????
FUCK A$$ TOWEL HEAD.
@RazielV - You still haven’t addressed my point. The NAZIs created all sorts of studies to prove whatever point their agenda needed to be proven.
Since the same sort of fascist thinking dominates academia and science these days, studies are dubious.They tend to try and support hoaxes like homosexuality is normal, man-made global warming, DDT is killing birds, big government is good, social justice exists, etc.
@Rhindon -
Ah, so you would support gay marriage and gay adoption if studies show the family structure does not produce any significant difference among children?
Also, what are your thoughts on divorce, single parents adopting children, and people with low IQ’s and poor people having and adopting children? If all you’re relying on is a consequentilist argument about best environment for children, should we stop the dumbs and the poors from reproducing and raising children? It would not be hard to show that many people at the bottom of both spectrums produce relatively more harmful environments for children when compared to average intelligence/average wealth households.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - The Nazis also breathed air. I guess we should stop doing that too?
As a person who left homosexuality (at the time I was an atheist, and did not leave homosexuality for religious reasons) I have to say I completely agree with you. I am certainly not moved by all the emotional nonsense thrown around in the name of tolerance. And why is it no one ever talks about the horrible hatred shown those of us who’ve left homosexuality?? Why is it no one ever raises that as an issue? I’m not attacked as a homophobe the verbal (and only verbal attacks, thus far, thank God) attacks I receive are far worse than merely being called a bigot. Of course in the past I’ve been known to throw down from my own stash of venom. I have to say the only problem I have with being disagreeable is that it changes nothing. Holding that something is wrong is all good and well, but the one who has a solution for the problem is the one who is needed.
Nearly a year after leaving homosexual practice I was brought to salvation in Christ. Christ has the answer to the problem. But no one who names the name of Christ can find the right answer to give. The question of most importance isn’t, “Is this wrong,” but rather, “How does God overcome the wrong, and what part do people, who claim Christ, need to do in obedience to Christ. The great problem isn’t that homosexuality is wrong. The great problem is people who believe it is wrong can offer little more than, “That is wrong.” I’ve heard many a religious person say, “Hate the sin, but love the sinner.” Those who say such things, in my experience, (which is fairly broad) really mean, “Love hating the sin.” The problem isn’t homosexuality, the problem is, “Two wrongs do not make right.”
my former – he’s mad at me for some weird reason – gay friend kept slapping my arm for talking on the day of silence but he didn’t make it through the day either.
@RazielV - Breathing air is according to the nature of man, therefore, it is not a problem.
The racist practices of the Nazi regime are not according to human nature. Studies that are driven by an agenda like that are self serving.
@Such_are_you - What do you mean by you “left homosexuality”? You stopped having gay sex, or are you saying you became straight when you were 100% gay before?
@Such_are_you - Also, I’ve never heard a compelling reason why being gay is immoral. Just invocations of scripture nobody ever follows (gay or straight, otherwise we’d be executing gay men not just condemning them) or “it makes me feel icky”, as though things straight people do don’t make me feel gross to think about. Or foods people eat don’t make me want to puke. But that’s fine because they’re not forcing me to eat them or do them so it’s none of my business.
@Such_are_you - The fail is strong with you.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - The Nazis were also practicing Christians. Checkmate.
I too have been bashed for disagreeing with homosexuality.
@Rhindon - I would just like to point out that the criticisms linked in the article are referring to what the studies could have done better.
Yes, that is the fault of the researchers, but it doesn’t quite prove your (or the article’s) point to me. All it does is make a study invalid.
@PrisonerxOfxLove no one is saying you have to give up your Christian beliefs. All we (and I say we because I belong to this demographic) really want is to be treated equally in the eyes of the law. I would like the opportunity to marry my partner and have it legally recognized, I am not asking a church who disagrees with my lifestyle to perform the ceremony. I would like the opportunity to pay the same rate for insurance as other married couples through my employer (while I am thankfully able to cover my partner through my employer I am unfairly taxed for the benefit at the end of the year - imputed income which increases my tax bracket). I would like to protected from discrimination based soley on my orientation in matters of employment, housing and services. Did you know I can be kicked out of a public restaurant or fired from my job for no other reason than my orientation? I don’t expect you to agree with or even endorse my lifestyle just like I may not agree with yours. I just wanted to be treated with respect and dignity.
@Rhindon The point about gay parenting rubs me the wrong way (it is personal and I know this) because I myself have a child from a previous heterosexual marriage. I know I cannot sufficently prove my point, but my daughter has done so much better now that I am in a loving and supportive relationship (even if it is with another woman). I think she has benefited greatly from the fact that I am happier and mentally more stable now.
@RazielV - I have to jump in about the nazis thing…
Many of the nazis practiced Catholicism which, (even many catholics will tell you) is based more on tradition and rituals if you do not truly dig into it than anything.
Catholicism and Christianity are the same at the root, but even one of my best friends will tell you that as (a catholic) it stands, often the people of the church miss the message due to the practices being fairly tradition and ritualistic based. Catholics tend to believe (not all! Chrisitans have their own issues as well) – for instance that if they were baptized as a baby, then they are going to heaven (regardless of what mistakes or evil things they have done) they also don’t focus on having a relationship with Jesus Christ the way that Christians do, or following His words. Have you ever been to Catholic mass? Half the time you don’t even know what’s going on.
The point I’m trying to make is that you might say that a lot of nazis went to “church” but, you’d be wrong in saying that they were all “Christians”… A christian is someone who believes that in the end, they can not save themselves, and hence, need redemption and a savior to cover the mistakes and poor decisions that they’ve made in life before a perfect judge, hence, accepting Christ into their lives. A Christian is also someone who tries to be more “Christ like” … in this particular light, NONE of the nazis were really Christians at all since ya know, Christ was a Jew.
Now, I’d also like to bring up Hitler. Many people mis-believe that he was ALSO a Christian, however, further study into his life and beliefs reveal that while he went to a Catholic CHURCH, he was actually much deeper into the occult, New Age beliefs, and mysticism. Others will argue this, but it’s quite obvious when you compare things that he said with things that well known New age-ists believed at the time etc…
Also making the nazis people who followed Hitler’s beliefs, hence also following new age and occultic teachings. Actually, there is QUITE a bit of credible (un-christian/ biased) information on this all you have to do is research it.
I can’t say that I agree with the legitimacy of the argument that having two gay parents is worse than any other parenting situation, especially because there are so many different types of families in our world, ranging from families in which all generations live in the same household (grandparents,parents,children,grandchildren) and all adults have a share of taking care of children to single parent households. I think having two moms or two dads is just a different way of being brought up that is equally valid. If I had only my mother or my father bring me up, I would have different struggles and likely different beliefs. If my grandparents brought me up, I would have different struggles and different beliefs, also. If I was orphaned, the same would be true. If my parents were gay, the same is true.
Anyway, you don’t have to agree with someones lifestyle in order for to be friends and/or friendly with them. Its good that you can do that. I don’t agree with the lifestyles of people who do any sort of drug, or are promiscuous, but I can be friends/friendly with them. The problem, however, is when you condemn them because of this. Lets take alcohol as an example. You can get home from your job, and drink for the rest of the night, then wake up, go to work, and drink for the rest of the night, and so on for every night thereafter. I don’t agree, but I’m not going to take away rights or privileges just for this reason. It makes just as little sense to take away their marriage rights, as it does to take away gay marriage rights.
Now, I expect you to say that drinking and marriage are unrelated. Sure, I get it. But maybe the reason they aren’t allowed to get married is because they will be unfit parents. That may be true, but not all people who get married have children. So say they get married and do have children. The question is…are the good or not good parents? We have a whole field of workers who answer this question as a living. Physical and emotional abuse and neglect are handled by these people. Why should we make a judgement call so far in advance to not even allow them to get married?
So, I think its good that you can be friendly with those whose lifestyles you don’t agree with. I will not have ill feelings toward you for this, however, the argument that children will be affected in a negative fashion doesn’t make sense as a supporting reason for not supporting equal rights for homosexuals in the form of marriage.
Rhindon, Do you think my saying Christians shouldn’t be allowed to marry because they are immoral rude and offensive? You want it both ways…to be a dick and then to be able to claim you are not a dick at the same time. ANNOYING!! Pick one dude.
@LKJSlain - I am soooooo with ya sista. Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum and Romney are true Cultists…….and their religions are weird too.
Know what I think ultimately?
I think that regardless of opinion, that we need to stop bashing alltogether.
When someone tells me (as a Christian) that I’m crazy, stupid, dangerous (I’ve heard this… I’m very very dangerous) or that my Jesus was a false zombie… I don’t let it really bother me. I believe what I believe, and that’s the end of the story.
I think that if a gay person comes into contact with someone who believes homosexuality is wrong, they should still acknowledge, respect and even befriend them (as I have befriended certain people who have thought the above about me)… When a Christian sees a homosexual, they might see that this part of them is wrong, but remember, another person sees YOU and doesn’t think of you as “the homosexual/the gay” they see the whole person.
They’re not just a homosexual, there are MANY MANY MANY other parts of them… disagreeing with one part is not disagreeing with all parts. If it were, no one would ever have any friends. I disagree with something that every single one of my friends is…
So, I think ultimately on both sides, respect should be given because we are PEOPLE… Not “The Gay” “The Christian” “The Atheist” “The Muslim” etc.
@Grtt - Here, here.
The whole definition of homophobia has changed. There is something wrong with people who are worried about gay people being wrong. I would indeed label someone who thinks gay people aren’t getting into heaven as someone who is Homophobic. Usually those same people think liars, murderers, and child molesters can get into heaven (if they are forgiven), so duh… so too can gay people get into heaven. Although, I don’t believe the way homosexuality is practiced today is the same as the cults practicing it in Biblical times. So, I have no issue at all of gay people not being any more sinful than the rest of us or needing to be forgiven for being gay to get into heaven.
What’s the real point or motivation in declaring gays can’t get into heaven or are sinful? What real harm do gay people cause anyone? God would not have destroyed Sodom if there were ten righteous people in the city. Perhaps, the “unsinful” should be practicing not sinning more than they should be worrying about gay people and declaring that you don’t agree with homosexuality. Like it’s really important to not agree with it. It’s the same as saying, “I think America should be all white. I’m not saying anyone should be mean to black people, but they shouldn’t even be here.” Like what? Racist to the core, same as worrying about gay people being wrong.
@LKJSlain - I simply don’t see the point of disagreeing with homosexuality at all. I think simply disagreeing with it certainly makes someone homophobic. I don’t care that gay people exist and have gay sex at all. I’m not gay, nor am I going to become gay. So, it’s not an issue.
It’s not bigotry to think that homosexuality is wrong. But, if you actually vote against gays having equal rights as you, then yes, you would be a bigot. If you choose your political candidates based on how much they want to take away rights from gay people, then you’d also be a bigot. Notice i said “if.” If you either abstain from voting on gay rights referendums/constitutional amendments, etc., or don’t vote for “gay hating” candidates, then you’re not a bigot. Now, if a candidate happens to be vehemently against gay rights, but that’s not the main reason you’re voting for him, then I’d also not call you a bigot.
I hope I explained my point clearly.
@Whatsittastelike - I follow somewhat closely the plight of gays and their demands of equal rights. What you’re saying is news to me. If you have a link in which a legitimate LGBT group is actually saying that they want *churches* (any church) to marry them, I’d love to see it. From what I’ve seen, what they want is marriage to be recognized by the government as a legally-binding covenant, with all the rights that married couples have in the eyes of the law – not “in the eyes of god” as it would be spelled out in church lingo.
@TiredSoVeryTired - It’s more about conviction than anything. People believe what they believe, what they think is natural, and what they believe the bible says. It’s really that simple.
@LKJSlain - I agree but some of those beliefs make people bigots. Slave owners used the Bible for way too long to justify legal slavery. Anyone can use the Bible to support their own hate on probably just about any topic.
@TiredSoVeryTired - it’s true, they can. But, disagreeing and thinking that something is morally wrong is not the same as bigotry. I can be against hardcore drugs, and think that using them are morally wrong, however, I know a few people VERY close to me who have done them before and probably still do, and I don’t hate them in any way. I hate the fact that they do drugs.
The reality is that even without the bible, people would still have opinions on things like homosexuality and sexuality in general. I know a few atheists who are against homosexuality, a few of them have never read the bible.
Bigotry is in the heart, as is hatred… not the bible. (Well, okay, it is… but it doesn’t mean that God ever condoned it.)
@LKJSlain - Yes, but drugs cause real damage to the people doing them and to those around them. What damage does being gay cause other people? I’m understanding of people against things that make sense. But being against homosexuality (in a world that does all kinds of unnatural things) makes no sense and just looks like people being bigots for no reason.
@TiredSoVeryTired - What damage? Well, that’s debatable. Some people say that there is absolutely no damage whatsoever, and in certain cases, maybe there’s not. Other’s say that the damage is quite obvious. I think you’d have to do some study into which side you’d take. Then of course, if we’re going to go the biblical route, you could argue that a concerned Christian might believe that based on what the bible says, a gay person may go to hell. That might be a concern as far as “damage” because after all, “hell” is the worst damage of all I’m afraid. haha.
Regardless, many things cause problems for sure. It just depends on what you believe.
@LKJSlain - If hell is the damage a gay person suffers, it their own damage. I will not go to hell because gay people exist. So, what damage does being gay cause other people? Drug addicts often cause other people a lot of damage so it makes sense to not support drug addicts.
It simply doesn’t make sense to me for anybody to be against gay people at all. I’m not gay, so it doesn’t affect me at all. I take Jesus’s commandment to “Love thy Neighbor” very seriously, well sorta I don’t love my neighbor but I treat people as well as I can. I’m more afraid speaking false witness against my gay neighbors would put me in hell faster than being anti-gay would.
@TiredSoVeryTired - Ah, but, see you said something very telling in that last comment. “I don’t love my neighbor, but I treat people as well as I can” and that is still my point. We will have opinions about every matter on this earth, but respect is key.
As I said, “hell” might not be the only damage done to the person, but that would be more something that you’d have to decide based on what research you do and what you believe.
@LKJSlain - lol I don’t believe the Bible is perfectly translated or that we are meant to follow it literally. Technically, I haven’t even met most of my neighbors.
I know a lot of gay people and being gay does no damage to them at all. If anything, the damage is caused by people’s refusal to accept it. But we all are damaged by something someone else thinks we are doing that is wrong. The problem is still other people’s. Being gay doesn’t damage other people. My uncle is gay and nothing about him being gay has damaged me. Not a thing.
Being anti-gay or homophobic causes far more damage than being gay causes.
@TiredSoVeryTired - Again, it comes down to what you believe.
I think it boils down to acceptance. Everyone wants to be accepted
despite whatever they choose to do in their lives, understandably.
Every person deserves to be treated kindly, even the worst of the worst
bad guys. They deserve to be treated with respect and you have obviously
done so. I would say “take it with a grain of salt” but I actually know
just how you feel. My best friends in the world are gay and my husband
and I are Catholic. The only thing that we ever asked from them was that
they not hang all over each other and make out and stuff; things that
my husband and I don’t even do in front of our children. And they
understood and respected it. I spoke up about what I thought legalizing
gay marriage would open the doors to in regards to other types of
lifestyles wanting their rights to marry and our friendship went to
hell.
At least where I’m from,
there’s this mentality of “either you’re with us or you’re against us.”
No in-between. If you aren’t Pro-gay, then you’re anti-gay and an enemy
of sorts. >.<
@TiredSoVeryTired - Eh, I wouldn’t say that being anti-gay or homophobic cause more damage because there are people who don’t agree with homosexuality but they aren’t out announcing it to the masses, you know? I’ve come across both sides of the track though. The obnoxious “I’m anti-gay and every word that comes out of my mouth is about how horrible gay people are…” people and the equally as obnoxious “I’m gay and every word that comes out of my mouth is about how horrible people who aren’t gay or (more often) people who are against it are…” But I totally understand your point.
@Rhindon - Yikes. I knew I shouldn’t have signed onto Xanga.
This truly shows are you are a bigot.
It’s one thing to believe that having gay sex is wrong in the eyes of “God.” If you believe that in that specific isolated sense you could avoid being a “bigot”. But you would have to recognize that not ALL gay relationships are doomed to failure, that there are gay relationships that work and gay parents that have happy, healthy (adopted) children. Stereotyping and labeling people is what makes you a bigot.
Being against the homosexual act (because of personal belief) and stereotyping those who identify themselves as a “homosexual” is where you are getting confused. By your statement you are without a doubt stereotyping against a group of people, and justifying it by saying “I have proof”. A good way to illustrate why you are a bigot is say for example you disagree with the Muslim faith. You do not believe that Muhammad is the Prophet from Allah. That’s fine. You are not a bigot for believing that. But in addition to not agreeing with the Muslim faith you also believe that Muslim families are flawed – that by being Muslim means you are most probably a bad husband who beats and subjugates his wife and you have the statistics to prove it! BAM. Now you’re a bigot.
Moreover, there are plenty of correlations and studies that link race and culture to criminal statistics, genetic dispositions and illnesses etc… so it’s not just about skin color. For example, African Americans are more likely to get sickle cell anemia. Asians are less likely to get skin cancer than white people. Latinos have higher incarcerations rates than Jewish people. Does that mean we should use these stats and studies to say that Jews are better than Latinos? That Asians are better than white people? See where I’m going here?
I hope you stop being bigoted. As silly as that sounds I’m being sincere.
@TiredSoVeryTired – agreed.
@RazielV - I am so pleased you think so. If someone like you had a favorable thing to say something would be terribly wrong.
@LKJSlain - Hitler was, in a demographic sense, a christian. As are catholic. Christian is the broadest term, it refers loosely to anyone who follows christ or believes in his divinity. If you’re defining christian as someone who agrees with you on all points of christian doctrine, then that is a narrow way to define it and by hitler’s definition you wouldn’t be christian by the same token. You don’t think catholics are christian, catholics don’t think you’re christian, etc – that definition is arbitrary and meaningless. And if by christian you mean good person, well then that’s unfair because you’re equating being christian and being moral like they’re the same thing. Would you think I was a bigot if I defined atheist as “a good and decent person who doesn’t believe in god” and then declared all bad atheists are therefore christian?
Someone can be a christian and an asshole. Many, many christians are. You can say they’re a lousy excuse for a christian and that’s fine, but in some sense they are christian.
@lonelywanderer2 - You get that the term gay bashing originated literally with the practice of crushing the skulls of gay or effeminate men as sanctioned in leviticus, right? How exactly have you been bashed?
@Constant_Contradiction - Best to ignore prisoner of love, aka loborn. He is just a troll.
@In_Reason_I_Trust - I think it qualifies as bigotry to think it’s wrong that someone exists.
@LKJSlain - The bible says to kill gay men. Since when did christianity have anything to do with what the bible actually says? And something being natural or unnatural is irrelevant. Smallpox is natural. Air conditioning is unnatural. The end.
@LKJSlain - Yes, atheists can be homophobic too. I’ve never yet found a good, rational, consistent argument as to why homosexuality is immoral at all. People just think it’s “icky”.
@TiredSoVeryTired - The bible (and other philosophies) say not to love your neighbor in the sense of romantic love, but to love them as you love yourself. You don’t fawn all over yourself and adore yourself all the time I’m guessing. You just give a damn about yourself and what happens to you. That’s all that’s required of you by that edict – just give a damn about other people. So yeah, you do love your neighbor. People who think that we should act like we’re sooooo happy to see strangers and just fall all over ourselves and be sickly sweet are just creepy about it.
@MommaFish89 - What would legalizing gay marriage lead to?
@agnophilo - The polygamists wanting their marriages legalized. The 1st cousins wanting their marriages legalized (where it isn’t). It’s the same argument, “we deserve to be able to legally marry the person(s) of our choosing, and who’s to tell us we can’t?” Or the 13-year-olds wanting to marry the 30-year-olds because “age is just a number and love is love”. <— And I mean this without having to have parental consent because I think the youngest you can get married in the country (can’t remember the state) is 14 with parental consent. Just like that gay community says that they should have the same right to marry as the heterosexual couples, once gay marriage is legalized, everyone else is going to want the same rights as well and why not, right? It’s their right to the pursuit of happiness.
@Such_are_you - It would certainly mean my ability to discern logical beings from ridiculous ones is now invalidated and the world itself has begun to erode.
We can’t have that.
@MommaFish89 - That’s a weak slippery slope argument. You’re trying to compare two consenting, psychologically developed adults (those of homosexual persuasion) and a 13 year-old + 30 year-old. What’s different? In the latter case you have one individual who is psychologically developed and understands the gravity of his/her actions and what sex entails in terms of physical and emotional investment/consequence (30 year-old) versus one who is not yet developed and does not have proper cognizance of the act of sex (13 year-old).
Homosexuality doesn’t harm ANYONE. Having sex with an undeveloped minor can and has harmed countless children and pre-teens.
Also the minimum age of consent in the entire US is 16. Minimum.
Don’t try to compare developed adults to undeveloped children. It makes for a weak argument.
As for polygamy, the only reason that is being railroaded is because of religious reasons. While having multiple wives/husbands can cause legal snafus, there’s nothing inherently wrong with polygamy on a social or economical level. It is only arguable in a religious sense, and religion has no bearing on law and never should.
@AmeliaHart - Nice to see you around. =) (Even if it’s for this dreadful entry.)
@agnophilo - Well, that’s actually more my personal interpretation. But some folks like to interpret the Bible literally without giving it any logical thought.
@MommaFish89 - I agree that legalized gay marriage would open up the flood gates to people saying they should have the right to marry their dog and cousin’s sister all at the same time. BUT, those people are already saying that whether gay marriage is legal. Saying gay marriage should not be legal because brothers will want to marry their mother is just a crutch to support an anti-gay viewpoint. One battle at a time, one step at a time. Saying that two consenting adults should marry each other is not suggesting that children or dogs or family members should also be allowed to marry.
@RazielV - Polygamy becomes inherently wrong socially because then there’s all these children running around everywhere who can’t get married to each other. haha Just kidding, well sorta. Actually, I think polygyny is sexist when there is no equal practice of polyandry going on.
@Celestial_Teapot - Haha every now and then I like to pop my head out of my self imposed isolation.
Now back to my hermit cave!
@MommaFish89 - I don’t think you can compare homosexuality and child rape. A 13 year old getting “married” to (and therefore having sex with) a 40 year old is a matter of consent. And it’s actually scientifically documented that sexualizing teens early not only causes many emotional problems and disorders, but can be so emotionally traumatic it causes physical brain damage – this is why children who have been molested have higher rates of things like seizure disorders. Whereas homosexuality being wrong isn’t a matter of actually hurting anyone, it’s just “ew, I think that’s gross”. And the same goes for polygamy by the way, if someone wants to marry two people I care as much as if they want to have a threesome. But yeah, as you pointed out though the laws allowing a 14 year old to marry a 30 year old already exist and come from the era before anyone even thought to legalize same sex marriage. People in the era of same sex marriage support generally think those laws are insane. So how is one going to cause the other exactly?
It’s also worth mentioning that those age of consent laws most likely wouldn’t exist without the bible. You might also find this satirical video on biblical marriage informative.
@TiredSoVeryTired - Or even reading it.
@TiredSoVeryTired - And abortion being legal will lead to systematically killing the elderly and infirm… aaaaaany day now…
@TiredSoVeryTired - Yeah if four people want to marry each other there’s nothing sexist about it.
@RazielV - I’ll allow that you have ad hominem down very well. You may claim the ability to judge what is logical and/or ridiculous, but until you put off ad hominem attacks you have no credibility.
@agnophilo - Ya know, first us women all want to kill our own babies before they are born and next our aging mothers and fathers wear on our nerves and we want to kill them too! It’s the first thought that comes to a woman’s mind after she has an abortion, “Now, to get rid of the old people driving too damn slow in the fast lane!”
***Well, it wouldn’t be sexist if those four people were two men and two women, I reckon. All too often plural marriage is just about men getting to screw more women!
@TiredSoVeryTired - Which doesn’t even make sense, if you’re a dog why not just cheat? Why sign a contract and make yourself liable for alimony and losing a big chunk of your assets if she wants a divorce etc? I don’t see that kind of polygamy making a big comeback now that women have marriage rights. Back when only men could inherit etc it made sense, now the only bastard guy who’d do it is a religious nut thinking it’s okay to get double the booty so long as he is married to both of them.
@RazielV - I would actually disagree with your comment on polygamy. I met a polygamous tribe in Kenya that were marrying off their women younger and younger. The fundamentalist Mormon church has a documented history of abandoning teenage boys for trivial reasons. As long as female to male birthrates are similar, polygamous cultures and subcultures will be tempted to do unethical things to ensure that an excess of females to males exists.
@agnophilo - hahaha Canine Marital Rights!
@Such_are_you - And until you stop taking everything you read literally and seriously, you’ll never obtain credibility to begin with. <3
@agnophilo - All of this.
@RazielV - Thanks for playing. goodbye
@Such_are_you - Goodbye* — there I fixed it for you. Take this cream to help soothe the butthurt.
@RazielV - knew you’d have some parting shot, but I had to come visit since I can’t see your responses on my private page anymore. Blocking means I don’t have to see you…That soothes the discerning eye hurt, if you’d tried getting close to my butt I’d have hurt your eyes and teeth.
@zoetherat - Yeah so maybe it’s a bad idea in some tribal culture. We’re discussing it as a policy in first world countries.
@TiredSoVeryTired - By that I meant dog figuratively, as in sleazy man. I probably should’ve said something else since marrying animals was brought up.
@agnophilo - One of my examples was the fundamentalist Mormon church in the US.
@Such_are_you - And so begins “Last Word Round-up”! Who will win? Obvious troll OR High-Horse Hypocrite?! Stay tuned to find out.
@zoetherat - Was that anything that went on recently?
@agnophilo - Oh… I was laughing about a dog in court and his lawyer demanding he’s not obligated to pay alimony! haha
@agnophilo - It’s something that’s been going on for a long time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_boys_(Mormon_fundamentalism)
@TiredSoVeryTired - It’s what you get out of it I suppose.
@zoetherat - That doesn’t answer my question.
@zoetherat - I didn’t see your link – interesting stuff. Logistically it would have to be something like that in a polygamous society, but it never occurred to me.
@agnophilo - No response to this?
@agnophilo - Are you asking why you didn’t respond to yourself? *chuckles*
@Rhindon - No, I’m asking if you are going to respond to the tagged comment.
@agnophilo - Which one? I stopped paying attention to most of the comments some 100 comments ago.
Frankly, nothing I say will make much difference. I’ll be labeled closed-minded, a bigot, ignorant, hateful…the norm. I got tired of tossing more of my pearls to the swine.
So, whatever it was that I was tagged in, you can point it out to me, but don’t expect much. Not because I don’t have a good defense, I’m just not in the mood to try to defend myself further to idiots.
@Rhindon -
“Which one?”
The one I tagged, as I just said. In other words click the @agnophilo in the comment you mocked and it will take you to the comment I was asking about.
“I stopped paying attention to most of the comments some 100 comments ago.
Frankly,
nothing I say will make much difference. I’ll be labeled closed-minded,
a bigot, ignorant, hateful…the norm. I got tired of tossing more of
my pearls to the swine.”
Does it even occur to you as you write that how hypocritical it is to make a bigoted generalization while complaining about people calling you a bigot?
“So, whatever it was that I was tagged in,
you can point it out to me, but don’t expect much. Not because I don’t
have a good defense, I’m just not in the mood to try to defend myself
further to idiots.”
Yes, you’re not closed-minded at all. You just know that everything in my comment is wrong before reading it.
@agnophilo - Ah, that comment. (For the record, I didn’t know you could click the @username and it would take you to the comment it was in reply to. Go figure…all these years on Xanga and I just learned that. LOL)
And no, I was not being hypocritical or bigoted. Given that the vast majority of the comments aimed directly at me in response to my original post called me bigoted, etc, I’d say my assessment was on point. Gays and gay supporters want tolerance, but when I simply try to express my reasons for why I’m against homosexuality and the so-called rights they want to go along with it, I’m not given any of the same tolerance. It seems that such people mistake tolerance with acceptance. I don’t play that game.
And while I’ll give you your point about my assuming what your comment was about (since I didn’t remember which one you were referring), what you did happen to say did not prove anything. In fact, you failed to make any relevant points at all. Let’s put it this way: wrong is wrong. Period.
With that, I’ll keep my pearls to myself, as previously stated. Any further comments you might make will be ignored. You and most everyone else have APPARENTLY made up your mind about me so there’s no use trying to say anything more. My arguments will be dismissed and I’m done with this thread for the time being. I’ll revisit the the topic of homosexuality another day. I recommend not wasting your time further here.