• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What is your take on gays?

democrat17

New member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
non ya business
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I am gay so I am a little biased when I say that there is nothing wrong with us. The Bible says it is wrong but really, who cares, the Bible is just a bunch of stories written by people.
What is your opinion, This should be good.
 

ashurbanipal

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
7,030
Reaction score
2,051
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
I have no problems with gay people or gayness whatsoever. People ought to be able to have consensual sex of any kind with anyone, period.
 

saffron

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2005
Messages
164
Reaction score
0
Location
South Cal, Calif.
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
democrat17 said:
I am gay so I am a little biased when I say that there is nothing wrong with us. The Bible says it is wrong but really, who cares, the Bible is just a bunch of stories written by people.
What is your opinion, This should be good.
Maybe you shouldn't read the Bible then. I mean, if you are gay that is.:shock:
 

Attachments

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
ashurbanipal said:
I have no problems with gay people or gayness whatsoever. People ought to be able to have consensual sex of any kind with anyone, period.
Anyone is a pretty broad sweeping statement

Do you also include a 9 year old and 31 year old in that equation....if the sex is consensual ?
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
democrat17 said:
I am gay so I am a little biased when I say that there is nothing wrong with us. The Bible says it is wrong but really, who cares, the Bible is just a bunch of stories written by people.
What is your opinion, This should be good.
Depends on what you are asking

What do I think of Men who are Homosexual....or what do I think of the act of sex between two men ?

My answer would depend on the point of the question.
 

ashurbanipal

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
7,030
Reaction score
2,051
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Do you also include a 9 year old and 31 year old in that equation....if the sex is consensual ?
Well, we really don't understand sex now. To quote my favorite clever Englishman, we'll never understand sex until we view it as a branch of athletics.

Now, can a 9 year old give consent to sex? In an ideal world, sure, but not with things currently as they are. I think that, probably, if we as a society understood sex, there would be no 9 year olds willing to give consent to have sex with someone, at least in any society of which I am aware.

But none of that is practical. If I were dictating laws, no, I would not legalize sex with 9 year olds. Nor do I advocate or condone sex with children. However, once a person reaches their majority, authorities of all stripe ought to step aside.
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
ashurbanipal said:
Well, we really don't understand sex now. To quote my favorite clever Englishman, we'll never understand sex until we view it as a branch of athletics.

Now, can a 9 year old give consent to sex? In an ideal world, sure, but not with things currently as they are. I think that, probably, if we as a society understood sex, there would be no 9 year olds willing to give consent to have sex with someone, at least in any society of which I am aware.

But none of that is practical. If I were dictating laws, no, I would not legalize sex with 9 year olds. Nor do I advocate or condone sex with children. However, once a person reaches their majority, authorities of all stripe ought to step aside.
I am glad you feel that way.

Most times I find that it is not a question of wether or not a "line should be drawn" but rather "where is the line drawn".

As a Christian, I don't have an issue if someone does not agree with where I draw my lines. But I do have an issue with someone who "judges" me for having drawn a line. Because it has been my experience that at some point, most everyone draws a line. Although, there are some that do believe and do argue that no lines should be drawn.

And I would say, that if a person does not believe in a personal infinite God...then they are most consistent and logical if they do not draw any lines. For if there is no God, then there are no moral absolutes.....and if there are no moral absolutes....then there is no right and there is no wrong. There is simply opinion and perception with no opinion having more value than any other.
 

HU-210

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Maastricht - Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Do you also include a 9 year old and 31 year old in that equation....if the sex is consensual ?
Of course, because the parents bear responsibility of the child until it reaches maturation (the point of the latter which is discussable (age-wise)), and thus the parents will be the one's giving consent.

Mr U
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
HU-210 said:
Of course, because the parents bear responsibility of the child until it reaches maturation (the point of the latter which is discussable (age-wise)), and thus the parents will be the one's giving consent.

Mr U
Your post brings to mind some interesting points.

But...when you say of course...what are you saying.

Are you saying...of course it is ok. Or..of course it is not ok ?
 
J

Just A Guy

I don't think I can state my opinion any clearer than by just quoting the teaching the church I follow believes in gets from the bible:

"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition."

I must say, though I completely disagree with the practice of homosexuality, it is not something that should ever be held against a person by another. If you want to have sex with some of the same gender I will tell you it is wrong, but in the end, it is your choice to make, not mine. I will respect your decision even if I happen to disagree.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
democrat17 said:
I am gay so I am a little biased when I say that there is nothing wrong with us. The Bible says it is wrong but really, who cares, the Bible is just a bunch of stories written by people.
What is your opinion, This should be good.
Okay, why are people harping on what ashurbanipal said? I know what he/she meant--that two consenting adults should be able to engage in sex. What's the big deal?

democrat, I don't give a rat's butt what the stupid Bible says. Our sexuality is something we are born with. I support gay people, I support their getting married, their adopting children, etc. Most heterosexuals do not question to whom they are attracted, so some of them are quick to judge gay people.

P.S. I am not gay. ;)
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
Okay, why are people harping on what ashurbanipal said? I know what he/she meant--that two consenting adults should be able to engage in sex. What's the big deal?

democrat, I don't give a rat's butt what the stupid Bible says. Our sexuality is something we are born with. I support gay people, I support their getting married, their adopting children, etc. Most heterosexuals do not question to whom they are attracted, so some of them are quick to judge gay people.

P.S. I am not gay. ;)
What constitutes and adult ?
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Mike 1967 said:
What constitutes and adult ?
18 and older. Mike, don't harp on this. Molestation, pedophilia, etc. are disgusting. I think any two people should be able to be intimate with each other, whether it's a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, and a man and a man.

Let's not get into the orgy stuff. Blech.
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
18 and older. Mike, don't harp on this. Molestation, pedophilia, etc. are disgusting. I think any two people should be able to be intimate with each other, whether it's a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, and a man and a man.

Let's not get into the orgy stuff. Blech.
"Are disgusting" :- ) *** The ones you have questioned would make the same argument in support of thier position.

"I think any two people should be able to be intimate (sexual relations)" ***

You don't think any two people. You have drawn a line...a standard.

I thought homosexual sex was "wrong behavior" before I became "religious".

When it comes to sex, most of us draw lines. The question is not normally about the existence of lines...it is about where the line is drawn.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Mike 1967 said:
"Are disgusting" :- ) *** The ones you have questioned would make the same argument in support of thier position.

"I think any two people should be able to be intimate (sexual relations)" ***

You don't think any two people. You have drawn a line...a standard.

I thought homosexual sex was "wrong behavior" before I became "religious".

When it comes to sex, most of us draw lines. The question is not normally about the existence of lines...it is about where the line is drawn.
I think any two consenting adults (18 and older) should be able to be intimate with each other.

The lines I have drawn are ones that are against the law. I can understand how people can be grossed out at the thought of two members of the same sex having sex, but just because it's gross to these people does not make it wrong. Two adults should be able to do whatever they want as long as both consent.
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
I think any two consenting adults (18 and older) should be able to be intimate with each other.

The lines I have drawn are ones that are against the law. I can understand how people can be grossed out at the thought of two members of the same sex having sex, but just because it's gross to these people does not make it wrong. Two adults should be able to do whatever they want as long as both consent.
But you also think that a 17 year old should not be able to have sex with a 31 year old ? ( I agree with you if you do....I am simply pointing out that you also have standards that others would not agree with)

So you have drawn the line because

(1) You think it is right
(2) It is against the Law

Sodomy was once against the law....and may still be in some states (I'm not sure). So if the law were to change back..then you would be against it ?

I am not meaning to be a jerk here. I am just pointing out something that you may not be aware of. Perhaps it will help you be more understanding and gentle with those "religious folks" who think differently than you.

Not to say that you will agree...because we will nevel all agree....but just to stay that you are not as different from them as you might think.
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Just A Guy said:
I don't think I can state my opinion any clearer than by just quoting the teaching the church I follow believes in gets from the bible:

"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition."

I must say, though I completely disagree with the practice of homosexuality, it is not something that should ever be held against a person by another. If you want to have sex with some of the same gender I will tell you it is wrong, but in the end, it is your choice to make, not mine. I will respect your decision even if I happen to disagree.
This was a good post IMO. I also think it is a good indication of what the Bible has to say on the subject.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Mike 1967 said:
But you also think that a 17 year old should not be able to have sex with a 31 year old ? ( I agree with you if you do....I am simply pointing out that you also have standards that others would not agree with)
Well, it would depend on the situation.

So you have drawn the line because

(1) You think it is right
(2) It is against the Law

Sodomy was once against the law....and may still be in some states (I'm not sure). So if the law were to change back..then you would be against it ?
I guess I see your point to some extent. For me, if it's legal sex between two members of the opposite sex, it should be legal sex for members of the same sex. No matter what the law was, it would not change my feelings about sodomy (between two consulting people who are of legal age to be able to decide to have sex).

I am not meaning to be a jerk here. I am just pointing out something that you may not be aware of. Perhaps it will help you be more understanding and gentle with those "religious folks" who think differently than you.

Not to say that you will agree...because we will nevel all agree....but just to stay that you are not as different from them as you might think.
I don't think you're being a jerk at all. I just don't like it when people discriminate against gay people. In fact, it infuriates me. Why should I be entitled to more rights/acceptance just because I am heterosexual?

Being homosexual is a "trial"? Does that mean that someone will "try" out to see what it is like to be with members of the same sex, but you assume that they will go back to being a heterosexual? Most of us heteros don't think about our sexuality in that we just knew we were attracted to the opposite sex. For gay people, they struggle with that because they realize they are different. It's not a decision they make consciously. I don't think they should be frowned upon because of this.
 

Mike 1967

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
Well, it would depend on the situation.



I guess I see your point to some extent. For me, if it's legal sex between two members of the opposite sex, it should be legal sex for members of the same sex. No matter what the law was, it would not change my feelings about sodomy (between two consulting people who are of legal age to be able to decide to have sex).



I don't think you're being a jerk at all. I just don't like it when people discriminate against gay people. In fact, it infuriates me. Why should I be entitled to more rights/acceptance just because I am heterosexual?

Being homosexual is a "trial"? Does that mean that someone will "try" out to see what it is like to be with members of the same sex, but you assume that they will go back to being a heterosexual? Most of us heteros don't think about our sexuality in that we just knew we were attracted to the opposite sex. For gay people, they struggle with that because they realize they are different. It's not a decision they make consciously. I don't think they should be frowned upon because of this.

Personally, I agree with you on in much of what you have said here.

And, know that I am a Bible fundamentalist whacko :- )

But, I cannot accept "Gay Marriage" as a legal family institution. However, if it were law, then I would accept it under the law even while still viewing it as immoral.

But in either case, the man or woman who is homosexual is just as valuable as I am. I am no better than an individual that is homosexual just because I am heterosexual.

But I do realize that my position still does not go enough for the Homosexual who views his/her sexual activity as correct. At the end of the day we do disagree on that. And at the end of the day I cannot change my position on that. Because at the end of the day I cannot accept sin...regardless of what sin we are talking about.

But that is ultimately the crux of the argument......what is "sin".
 

ashurbanipal

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
7,030
Reaction score
2,051
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Most times I find that it is not a question of wether or not a "line should be drawn" but rather "where is the line drawn".
The only line that should be drawn has to do with the definition of sex. I can think of some acts that some people might consider sexual that have nothing, or only incidentally, to do with sex per se.

That said, we exist under special conditions, so a line must be drawn. But it's those conditions that should be eradicated. However, until they are, I'm for existing within them.

As a Christian, I don't have an issue if someone does not agree with where I draw my lines. But I do have an issue with someone who "judges" me for having drawn a line.
I believe that people ought to be absolutely free in this regard so long as they don't impinge the freedom of others. So whatever you want to do or believe about sex in your private life is fine with me; in fact, I will celebrate your right to so decide.

Because it has been my experience that at some point, most everyone draws a line. Although, there are some that do believe and do argue that no lines should be drawn.
Well, again, I'm for definitional lines. Beyond that, it's not for me to decide what people do.

And I would say, that if a person does not believe in a personal infinite God...then they are most consistent and logical if they do not draw any lines. For if there is no God, then there are no moral absolutes.....and if there are no moral absolutes....then there is no right and there is no wrong.
I think any of the reasonable interpretations of this bit of locution turn out to be incorrect. Suppose there is a personal and infinite God and there are also moral absolutes that God does not agree with? This may seem strange, but there is no necessary logical contradiction implied. Suppose there is not a God, but there are moral absolutes. Suppose there is a God, but no moral absolutes. And so on. God is not a necessary guarantor of morals.

There is simply opinion and perception with no opinion having more value than any other.
Again I'm not completely sure about this. Even supposing there are no moral absolutes (I tend to think there are not), that doesn't mean that we can't judge moral opinions via other standards. I might object to a person's morality because it so offends me that I can't help it. Again, this may seem strange, but let's stop talking about morals for a moment, and talk about what Oranges (the citrus fruit) are worth. A person who owns a 5,000 acre Orange orchard might not be convinced to buy any oranges at any price--and if they don't sell oranges for a living or depend on them in any way, then oranges are surely worthless. On the other hand, a starving man will pay dearly for one.

So questions of value, of judgement, of justification, are all artifacts of a worldview that assumes moral absolutes. If we truly subtract moral absolutes from the equation, then those things, and the grounds for objection they form, must also go. So, I might acknowledge that a child molestor's moral code has no more absolute moral worth than my own (as a non-child molestor)--not because I make a value judgement, but because I reject the very notion of a value judgement to begin with. Instead, I judge the child molestor on my terms, and as it happens, I judge them quite harshly. The authority to do so comes from me and me alone.

This system works out quite beautifully if you follow it to its logical conclusion.
 

liberal1

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I think the subject of homosexuality is all too often interelated with sex. Sex is one part of the attraction, but certaintly not the whole. Gays are all too often portrayed as "dirty, unclean damned souls" by the Church, which is nonsense, why can't homosexuals be treated as humans, not objects? Of course some Americans are too small minded to understand this, cause they're "good Bible lovin God fearin people," whatever man.
 

HU-210

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Maastricht - Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I feel that is somewhat of a false accusation, liberal, they condem homosexuals on their acts, not their nation. It is their acts that the book Leviticus damns as an abomination, and I believe many judge homosexuals based on their acts, not their nature.

Now, on the level of sociology, I do not believe in Gestalt. I do not believe that society is more than a sum of all the individuals in it. I do not believe that the level, purity, or faith of a society should be protected. That is, when that level, purity or faith requires defence on an individual level, it should naturally be protected, but surely no Christian can believe he has the power to wield might and power over another being of God? Only God can command and order..

Mr U
 

democrat17

New member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
non ya business
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
liberal1 said:
I think the subject of homosexuality is all too often interelated with sex. Sex is one part of the attraction, but certaintly not the whole. Gays are all too often portrayed as "dirty, unclean damned souls" by the Church, which is nonsense, why can't homosexuals be treated as humans, not objects? Of course some Americans are too small minded to understand this, cause they're "good Bible lovin God fearin people," whatever man.
Dude, your absolutely right, why can't we be treated as people,(i'm not assuming that you are gay just to let you know) It is amazing that you came up with that.
 

democrat17

New member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
non ya business
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
saffron said:
Maybe you shouldn't read the Bible then. I mean, if you are gay that is.:shock:
for your information, i don't read the bible, i think that is the most disgraceful peice of literature i have had the displeasure to see. and yes i really am gay.
 

democrat17

New member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
non ya business
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Mike 1967 said:
Anyone is a pretty broad sweeping statement

Do you also include a 9 year old and 31 year old in that equation....if the sex is consensual ?
i agree but sex is not everything when it comes to our relationships, it is really only as big a part as with straight couples.
 
Top Bottom