Question about homosexuality

[cherokee]

I'll go with birth defect.

oh you are a birth defect you retard.........:mrgreen:




Now before someone wigs out Donkey and I joke around like this...
But we are not gay lovers. He wont shave his legs and get breast implants nor get a sex change.

But I do admire gays. Especially lesbians.....
What could be hotter then two girls kissing?

 

[Jerry]

oh you are a birth defect you retard.........:mrgreen:

Now before someone wigs out Donkey and I joke around like this...
But we are not gay lovers. He wont shave his legs and get breast implants nor get a sex change.

But I do admire gays. Especially lesbians.....
What could be hotter then two girls kissing?

And there you have it. Homosexuals exist because God is a male and thought “what could be hotter then 2 girls kissing”, and *poof*, Eve’s daughters never looked at each other quite the same since.

 

[alphamale]

ROFL, you really are an idiot. While it's not in the name Islam IS A JUDEO-CHRISTIAN RELIGION.


BTW i like how you latched onto the strawman argument. it shows that your truly incapable of arguing your point of view.

BLAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH HARRRRRRRR HARRRRRRRRRRR :2razz: ... "Islam IS A JUDEO-CHRISTIAN RELIGION" .... maybe Voodoo, too? YAAAA HARRRRRR HEEE HARRRRRR :mrgreen: .... (gasp!).... HOWABOUT Monkey Worship, that too??? GIGGGGGGGGLE HEEEEEEEE YAHAHAHA!!!!!!! :lol:

 

[alphamale]

You can try to lay it on one source after another until you turn blue, until you are capable of accepting the complexity of genetics and environment as something you just can't understand (I mean you specifically, educated scientists will figure it out someday) then your confusion will continue to haunt you.

Funny how libs are CERTAIN about the complexity of the environment vis-a-vis global warming, but when it comes to homosexuality, well, then, duh, "scientists will figure it out someday"! :rofl

Just go to a gay bar and get laid, maybe that will cure you.

"Cure" me of what? Heterosexuality? Uh, I think I'll just go with the ladies, thank you!

 

[alphamale]

You are showing your true colours by immediately suggesting a negative
influence ( "poor nutrition"). Why can't it be a completely neutral effect, just like
whatever it is that causes left-handedness?

How do you know a "neutral effect" causes left-handedness?

There is nothing abnormal or wrong about homosexuality. It's just a part of life.

Homosexuality IS abnormal - it isn't the norm, and I never said homosexuality is wrong. I am following up the homosexuals claims of innateness, and asking evolutionary questions, not making moral judgements. Due to my libertarian roots, I couldn't care less what homosexuals do, EXCEPT when they demand special privileges, as they have in the past.

 

[JustineCredible]

I'll go with birth defect.

I, as a left-hander, find that insulting and simply ignorant.

Left handedness was ONCE thought of as a birth defect that could be "trained" out of a person. Red heads were thought of as defective, although we know it's simply a mutation that is quite normal. ( yeah a normal mutation...)

I happen to believe homosexuality is simply a normal variant of human sexuality.
Whether by genetic mutation, environment or whatever, it should not be something allowed to be descriminated against or denied access to rights, benefits and protections.

It bothers me that there are those who would perfer to think of homosexuality as some sort of defect in a way to justify their dislike, even distain for their fellow human beings.
I find that disgusting actually.
Nothing personal, it's just my two cents.

 

[Sir_Alec]

How do you know a "neutral effect" causes left-handedness?



Homosexuality IS abnormal - it isn't the norm, and I never said homosexuality is wrong. I am following up the homosexuals claims of innateness, and asking evolutionary questions, not making moral judgements. Due to my libertarian roots, I couldn't care less what homosexuals do, EXCEPT when they demand special privileges, as they have in the past.

What special privileges? Oh, you mean wanting to express their love and make it official with god and the gov't?

 

[Blind man]

Funny how libs are CERTAIN about the complexity of the environment vis-a-vis global warming, but when it comes to homosexuality, well, then, duh, "scientists will figure it out someday"! :rofl



"Cure" me of what? Heterosexuality? Uh, I think I'll just go with the ladies, thank you!

ROFl, i just got called a liberal because your ignorant. That's GENIUS. (if you were less reactionary and motivated to educate yourself you'd realize that liberal is a horrible description of my political beliefs. of course it's easy to just lump people together rather than actually understanding them coughnazisrcough)

I challenge you to find one post of mine corroborating global warming (not that that's the subject here, but it seems that you'll do anything to change the subject)

And YES scientists will understand it someday. And just in case your confused

wikipedia.com scientist

Scientists are motivated by a desire to understand why the world is as we see it and how it came to be, often from childhood. They exhibit unrelenting curiosity.

See, a scientist is somebody who yearns to understand the world and is willing to put effort into achieveing that goal, unlike you who just spews the crap others have whispered in your ear.

BLAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH HARRRRRRRR HARRRRRRRRRRR :2razz: ... "Islam IS A JUDEO-CHRISTIAN RELIGION" .... maybe Voodoo, too? YAAAA HARRRRRR HEEE HARRRRRR :mrgreen: .... (gasp!).... HOWABOUT Monkey Worship, that too??? GIGGGGGGGGLE HEEEEEEEE YAHAHAHA!!!!!!! :lol:

Dictionary.com Judeo-Christian

adj : being historically related to both Judaism and Christianity; "the Judeo-Christian tradition

Wikipedia.com Judeo-Christian

Christians believe in the Gospel but not Jewish Oral Torah, Jews believe in the Written and Oral Torah (and not the Gospel) and do not recognize Jesus, while Muslims believe in the Written Torah, the Gospel and believe in Jesus. They also argue that Islam had a major influence on bringing Europe out of the Dark Ages into the Age of Enlightenment, through the culture and sciences that the Europeans learned from the Muslims during that period.

Regardless of features in common, in a practical sense, these three religions stemming from common roots, their cultures, and their mutual interactions, have together been responsible for shaping much of the modern world, so a common inclusive term for the combined traditions of all three is often seen as an appropriate umbrella term.

While some scholars quibble over the fact; the term judeo-Christian has, in the modern vernacular, come to mean a religion that derives it's roots in the traditions of Judaism and Christianity.

(If you had attempted to educate yourself before responding you could have prevented the ownage that just occured.)

And what you need cured of is your ignorance, latent hatred and most importantly YOUR FEAR!

 

[ngdawg]

I, as a left-hander, find that insulting and simply ignorant.

Left handedness was ONCE thought of as a birth defect that could be "trained" out of a person. Red heads were thought of as defective, although we know it's simply a mutation that is quite normal. ( yeah a normal mutation...)

I happen to believe homosexuality is simply a normal variant of human sexuality.
Whether by genetic mutation, environment or whatever, it should not be something allowed to be descriminated against or denied access to rights, benefits and protections.

It bothers me that there are those who would perfer to think of homosexuality as some sort of defect in a way to justify their dislike, even distain for their fellow human beings.
I find that disgusting actually.
Nothing personal, it's just my two cents.

Damn, as a lefthanded redhead, I would have been labelled a witch and hanged, I guess.....
Which is probably why it disgusts me as well that people such as the OP have been so vocally proclaiming their own disgust for those unlike themselves instead of truly going about what they falsely state at first: to understand.
There have been a few hypotheses, all rejected by the OP....some would much rather embrace their narrow-mindedness than change it, but lie and say they 'might' change it if given what they ask for...then change the question and circumstance. There's no winning....

 

[Independent Patriot]

yes, but not with eachother obviously. the pressure to be straight is huge in this country, especially in more religious areas, and many homosexuals actually date and get married before coming out as being gay.

I know it's late but thanks for the answer, that certainly makes much more sense.

 

[FallingPianos]

And there you have it. Homosexuals exist because God is a male and thought “what could be hotter then 2 girls kissing”, and *poof*, Eve’s daughters never looked at each other quite the same since.

ok, so the devil created gays and god created lesbians?

 

[alphamale]

I, as a left-hander, find that insulting and simply ignorant.

Left handedness was ONCE thought of as a birth defect that could be "trained" out of a person. Red heads were thought of as defective, although we know it's simply a mutation that is quite normal. ( yeah a normal mutation...)

"Normal variant" - oxymoron of the day! :mrgreen:

I happen to believe homosexuality is simply a normal variant of human sexuality.

Nobody cares what you "believe", especially those involving oxymorons! :2razz:

Whether by genetic mutation, environment or whatever, it should not be something allowed to be descriminated against or denied access to rights, benefits and protections.

That's beside the point of the thread - try to stay on track.

 

[alphamale]

What special privileges? Oh, you mean wanting to express their love and make it official with god and the gov't?

Nobody needs to "make official" their love nor anyone else's. The idea of government making homosexuals "official" strikes me as a howler! :rofl Aren't they the ones who said for decades the government should stay out of their affairs??

What I mean about special privileges is, for example, lobbying for vastly more funds from the government for AIDS than for other diseases, or as another example, making crimes against homosexuals a "hate crime", irrationally obtaining more severe penalties for crimes against homosexuals than heterosexuals, a brazen violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Like I said, special privileges.

 

[alphamale]

While some scholars quibble over the fact; the term judeo-Christian has, in the modern vernacular, come to mean a religion that derives it's roots in the traditions of Judaism and Christianity.

When learned people say judeo-Christian, they mean in the traditions of the Jewish or Christian religions. When the want to use a categorical expression to express the commonalities of the islamic, jewish, and christian religions, they say Abrahamic religions. Chrisitianity and Judaism are far closer than islam - Christianity and Judaism assert the same god, Yahweh, whereas Islam asserts that "There is no god but Allah". Find me an islamic cleric who will agree that Islam is a "judeo-Christian" religion. :lol: Or better yet, don't waste your time.

 

[Tashah]

http://www.debatepolitics.com/318010-post22.html

ROFL, you really are an idiot. While it's not in the name Islam IS A JUDEO-CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/318226-post33.html

ROFl, i just got called a liberal because your ignorant.

And what you need cured of is your ignorance, latent hatred and most importantly YOUR FEAR!

Moderator's Warning:

Blind Man... at least three times in this thread you have called someone ignorant. Personally attacking a poster violates the forum rules. If I see one more valid reported post on you, I will raise your warning level significantly. Capiche?

 

[JustineCredible]

Nobody needs to "make official" their love nor anyone else's. The idea of government making homosexuals "official" strikes me as a howler! :rofl Aren't they the ones who said for decades the government should stay out of their affairs??

The "howler" is you, your narrow mindedness and lack of understanding of concepts. Those with brains not located below their waists (concervatives and liberals both) know exactly what Sir Alec was talking about and it's impact.
No, gays and lesbians have ONLY said the government should not make laws which descriminate against homosexuals or make homosexuality or homosexual sex ilegal, to stay out of the BEDROOMS of ALL people REGARDLESS of sexuality.
Your complete and utter ignorance of this only shows everyone here your lack of the ability to understand simple concepts let alone complex ones.

"Normal variant" - oxymoron of the day!

Indeed I agree the term may SEEM as if an oxymoron, but you have to agree (if you're an inteligent humanoid) that it does accurately reflect the concept of minorities in general.
Left-handedness, Red Hair, Dislexics, Indigo children, Baldness...etc.

These are varients in our society which we (at least most of us) all agree are quite normal. None of these things can be "cured" or do they need to be. These variations do not affect a persons ability to assimilate into average society although it does make them stand out.
Homosexuality is no different. We work average jobs, we live average lives all we want are the same AVERAGE access to rights, benefits and protections any other average citizen is afforded.

Yes, this is what its all about. The truth is those who think homosexuals are devient, sick, mutated or in need of change are the SAME people who would deny us equal access to those rights of which we are fighting for.

What I mean about special privileges is, for example, lobbying for vastly more funds from the government for AIDS than for other diseases,

So you believe AIDS is a "gay" disease?
Do you deny it affects more heterosexuals globally than homosexuals?
Are you one of those who claim AIDS/HIV is "Gods rath against Homosexuals?"

Why am I not suprised?

or as another example, making crimes against homosexuals a "hate crime", irrationally obtaining more severe penalties for crimes against homosexuals than heterosexuals, a brazen violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Like I said, special privileges.

When one specific group of citizens are targeted because of perseved differences and attacked and even killed due to motivations based in hate of that difference, yes there do need to be more strict regulations and penalties. But I would say that about antisemitism and racism as well as homo-hatred.
There is NO equal protection until all citizens are seen, treated and afforded equal accesses! PERIOD!

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Martin Luther King Jr.

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
Martin Luther King Jr.

 

[Sir_Alec]

Nobody needs to "make official" their love nor anyone else's. The idea of government making homosexuals "official" strikes me as a howler! :rofl Aren't they the ones who said for decades the government should stay out of their affairs??

What I mean about special privileges is, for example, lobbying for vastly more funds from the government for AIDS than for other diseases, or as another example, making crimes against homosexuals a "hate crime", irrationally obtaining more severe penalties for crimes against homosexuals than heterosexuals, a brazen violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Like I said, special privileges.

I don't think you get it. When people get married they get less taxes. To take that away from homosexuals is depriving them of a right.

 

[jallman]

I don't think you get it. When people get married they get less taxes. To take that away from homosexuals is depriving them of a right.

I think an equal civil union would be a fair compromise. That way marriage as a religious institution would not be infringed upon and all the rights of inheritance, medical decision, and tax breaks would be granted without making any conflict. Anything less would be discrimination based on moral disapproval, which is not allowed under the law.

 

[JustineCredible]

I think an equal civil union would be a fair compromise. That way marriage as a religious institution would not be infringed upon and all the rights of inheritance, medical decision, and tax breaks would be granted without making any conflict. Anything less would be discrimination based on moral disapproval, which is not allowed under the law.

I agree, but realistically I don't see it happening anytime soon. Too many of those who already are legally "Married" simply wouldn't agree to having their unions "downscaled." Or at least that's how they would see it.

 

[jallman]

I agree, but realistically I don't see it happening anytime soon. Too many of those who already are legally "Married" simply wouldn't agree to having their unions "downscaled." Or at least that's how they would see it.

True...but there is no downscaling...if marriage is a religious sacrament, recognized and benefited by the state as a matter of tradition, then let that continue in order to appease the spiritual sensibilities of the majority. However, if there are benefits given by the state that are denied a group based on their excercising of personal choice, then that benefit should be extended through a state endorsed compromise which has nothing to do with/no opposition to the exercising of religious tradition. A state sanctioned civil union...reflecting all the binding benefits and responsibilities without the overture of religious sacrament is the only acceptable answer. Otherwise, the state is giving preference to a religious tradition and that is not acceptable nor legal under the constitution.

 

[tecoyah]

I fully support a civil union, as I am not religious per se. Had this option been available to my wife and myself we would have never been married and would have instead gone this route. Any denial of this legislation can only be attributed to Bigotry, or Religious Dogma....neither of which should be in Government descisions.

 

[JustineCredible]

True...but there is no downscaling...if marriage is a religious sacrament, recognized and benefited by the state as a matter of tradition, then let that continue in order to appease the spiritual sensibilities of the majority. However, if there are benefits given by the state that are denied a group based on their excercising of personal choice, then that benefit should be extended through a state endorsed compromise which has nothing to do with/no opposition to the exercising of religious tradition. A state sanctioned civil union...reflecting all the binding benefits and responsibilities without the overture of religious sacrament is the only acceptable answer. Otherwise, the state is giving preference to a religious tradition and that is not acceptable nor legal under the constitution.

As I said, I agree, I understand fully what you are saying. I did say it would be a matter of perspective on the part of those who already have legal unions.
I didn't say it was a real change at all. Nor do I believe it is.

 

[Jerry]

ok, so the devil created gays and god created lesbians?

Oh no no no, God made a proportionate % of men gay so that they would keep their grubby hands off His lesbians.

 

[Jerry]

*Whistles innocently*.........

When gay marriage becomes Federally legal, on what grounds could 2 gay first cousins be denied a union?

 

[alphamale]

I don't think you get it. When people get married they get less taxes. To take that away from homosexuals is depriving them of a right.

I DO get it, and you aren't reading carefully - NOBODY should get different taxes or other special privileges just for being married.