PDA

View Full Version : Homosexuality...



TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 10:30 AM
For quite some time, I have read umpteen posts on this respected and esteemed internet web community about persons, views or actions being "gay" or "ghey"... Remarks have been made about the "gaying of America" or various aspects of it... from art, to politics to literature.

Clearly, being gay is looked upon in this internet community with great derision, the 21st Century equivalent of leprosy so to speak.

And I wonder.... why? For most on here... is it a religious issue? Is it a moral issue? Does it make a difference if a person is genetically inclined to being homosexual?

Does being gay, in some ways, in your views, make a person seem, "less than human?" Would you employ gays in your company? Would you be comfortable if a gay person taught your children in school?

Is Michelangelo any less relevant or great because he was purportedly gay? Is the Sistene Chapel any less breathtaking because the genius who brought it to life, was gay?

Is Elton John's storied career any less respected, because he is gay?

Is it solely their sexual preference?.. that which they do behind closed doors?.. or... is it more a lifestyle choice?

Your views should be very interesting.....

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 10:32 AM
Hey, you're the one with the bow tie.
You tell us.

Hatfield
3/7/2006, 10:35 AM
live and let live.

TheHumanAlphabet
3/7/2006, 10:37 AM
I can sum it up for you Lid:

I could care less if you are gay. Just don't throw it in my face. I could care less what you do behind the closed door of your house. I don't discuss my sex life with you, I would appreciate the same courtesy.

Now if you do something outside the "norm" of society, i.e., wearing outlandish clothes, wearing makeup when your gender doesn't, etc. then you are opening yourself to ridicule because you are doing something different than everyone else, not becuase you are gay, ghey, or Liberace Gay.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 10:40 AM
Lid - what scent of Yankee candle did you have burning in the background when you posted this? :mack:

colleyvillesooner
3/7/2006, 10:40 AM
http://www.lakenetnwi.org/member/safetysigns/buckle-up.gif

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 10:40 AM
And I wonder.... why? For most on here... is it a religious issue? Is it a moral issue?

In this case the religious and "moral" issue is inseperable. The only reason people think being gay is immoral is because the Bible tells them so.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 10:41 AM
I think most of the gay talk on this board is just humor. Face it, gay dudes have a stereotype, and a lot of people find it funny. Just look at Bikerfox.

I've had good friends that have been gay, and I've had enemies that have been gay. The holes they stick their peckers in had nothing to do with our relationships.

picasso
3/7/2006, 10:45 AM
live and let live.

sincerely,

gay activist

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 10:46 AM
It's not a phobia, I just think the whole concept is both humorous AND repugnant.
And yeah, why do they gotta have parades about it?
Just do it.

picasso
3/7/2006, 10:48 AM
In this case the religious and "moral" issue is inseperable. The only reason people think being gay is immoral is because the Bible tells them so.
so you think only Christians are offended or threatened by said lifestyle?
you're wrong.

critical_phil
3/7/2006, 10:49 AM
i have a generous amount of discomfort just thinking about things going up my hiney hole.


imo, there's nothing wrong with being uneasy with people that practice such business for pleasure. same goes for people that get excited over nut stomping, scat, etc.....

crawfish
3/7/2006, 10:55 AM
My problem with the issue is that our society is trying to push it as normal, acceptable, mainstream behavior. It's not, and it's dangerous for society to view it as such. It is and should remain a subculture.

That being said, the very idea of gay cowboys is funny. Comedians should be thanking Ang Lee everyday for the material. :)

imjebus
3/7/2006, 10:55 AM
so you think only Christians are offended or threatened by said lifestyle?
you're wrong.


I'm sure all closed minded, idiotic people are threatened by said lifestyle, not just the christians.... ;)

picasso
3/7/2006, 10:59 AM
I'm sure all closed minded, idiotic people are threatened by said lifestyle, not just the christians.... ;)
I"ll give you close minded to a point but idiotic isn't it.

I'm not threatened, I know many. and I'm a card carrying Christian.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:00 AM
so you think only Christians are offended or threatened by said lifestyle?
you're wrong.

They same to be the main anti-gay force in this country. It's extremely rare to hear an anti-gay argument that doesn't start with "In the Bible it says...."

OklahomaRed
3/7/2006, 11:00 AM
For quite some time, I have read umpteen posts on this respected and esteemed internet web community about persons, views or actions being "gay" or "ghey"... Remarks have been made about the "gaying of America" or various aspects of it... from art, to politics to literature.

Clearly, being gay is looked upon in this internet community with great derision, the 21st Century equivalent of leprosy so to speak. BEING GAY DOES DECREASE AN INDIVIDUAL'S AVERAGE LIFE EXPECTANCY. THIS IS BASED OFF DATA, NOT OPINION.

And I wonder.... why? For most on here... is it a religious issue? Is it a moral issue? Does it make a difference if a person is genetically inclined to being homosexual? IF YOU ARE BASING IT OFF RELIGION, THE BIBLE VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT HOMESEXUALITY IS AN ABOMINATION TO THE LORD.

Does being gay, in some ways, in your views, make a person seem, "less than human?" Would you employ gays in your company? Would you be comfortable if a gay person taught your children in school? NO - EVEN REGLIGIOUSLY SPEAKING, IT DOES NOT MAKE THAT PERSON ANY LESS OF A PERSON, OR GIVE ANYONE ELSE THE RIGHT TO CONDEMN THEM. I WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE WITH A GAY PERSON TEACHING MY CHILDREN. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE WITH A MURDERER, A THIEF, A WIFE ABUSER, A PEDOPHILE, OR A ADULTERER FOR THAT MATTER.

Is Michelangelo any less relevant or great because he was purportedly gay? Is the Sistene Chapel any less breathtaking because the genius who brought it to life, was gay? NO - YOUR SEXUAL PREFERENCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR TALENT LEVEL.

Is Elton John's storied career any less respected, because he is gay? NO.

Is it solely their sexual preference?.. that which they do behind closed doors?.. or... is it more a lifestyle choice? GREAT POINT. DO IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. DO NOT TRY TO MAKE ME ACCEPT IT, AND DO NOT TRY TO MAKE IT ACCEPTABLE SO THAT THE NEXT GENERATION FEEL IT'S OKAY. IF HOLLYWOOD, MADISON AVENUE, COLLEGES, AND THE MEDIA SAY (FOR EXAMPLE) THAT PEDOPHILIA IS OKAY LONG ENOUGH, GUESS WHAT? THE NEXT GENERATION IS GOING TO ACCEPT IT AS NORMAL. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH HOMOSEXUALITY.

Your views should be very interesting.....


WHAT ARE YOUR OPINIONS?

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 11:02 AM
society is trying to push it as normal, acceptable, mainstream behavior. It's not, and it's dangerous for society to view it as such.

Why?

TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 11:02 AM
My problem with the issue is that our society is trying to push it as normal, acceptable, mainstream behavior. It's not, and it's dangerous for society to view it as such. It is and should remain a subculture.



ah.. but my old friend, what if and when, scientists discover that homosexuality is based on genetics. We know that the color of our eyes, our hair, or lack thereof, our skin color are genetically based.... alcoholism -- there seems to be some that are genetically more pre-disposed...

If homosexuality is genetic, then, in essence, is it.. normal.. at least for them, since they are merely living the acceptable predetermined for them?

At one point, mainstream society looked upon black Americans as mere chattel, property to be owned... are we at the same place in today's society with homosexuals?

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 11:02 AM
I'm sure all closed minded, idiotic people are threatened by said lifestyle, not just the christians.... ;)

Being rupulsed is not = being threatened.

I'm repulsed by S/M. I'm repulsed by poop/pee fetishists. I'm repulsed by beastiality. I'm repulsed by necrophelia. I'm repulsed by pedophilia. I'm repusled by homosexuality. All the same to me.

I'm not threatened by any of them though. Although the pedophilia thing is pretty much the only one I'll shoot you for. The others? Go **** your brains out ya ****ing weirdos. Just don't tell me, show me, brag about it, and try and get special rights and privledges for being a whack job.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:03 AM
My problem with the issue is that our society is trying to push it as normal, acceptable, mainstream behavior. It's not, and it's dangerous for society to view it as such. It is and should remain a subculture.


What's "dangerous" about it? Do you think it's contaigous or something?

yermom
3/7/2006, 11:03 AM
what if you change "Christian" to "religious"?

i'm thinking that would get a LARGE majority, but there are still going to be people that think it's weird or whatever, it's just part of our culture

OklahomaRed
3/7/2006, 11:03 AM
Question, if being gay is genetic, how can one identical twin be straight and the other gay? This is well documented in the literature.

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 11:04 AM
Originally Posted by OklahomaRed
DO IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. DO NOT TRY TO MAKE ME ACCEPT IT, AND DO NOT TRY TO MAKE IT ACCEPTABLE SO THAT THE NEXT GENERATION FEEL IT'S OKAY.

Some would say the same thing about religion.

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 11:05 AM
The homo argument doesn't start in the Bible for me. It starts in the underwear. The plumbing pretty much answers all the questions for me. The Bible does back it up though.

For those that don't know, guys have a dick. Girls have a pachina. Said dick is made to be inserted into said pachina - primarily for the purpose of procreation. It feels good too.

The End.

Skysooner
3/7/2006, 11:05 AM
I could care less if you are gay. Just don't throw it in my face. I could care less what you do behind the closed door of your house. I don't discuss my sex life with you, I would appreciate the same courtesy.

Now if you do something outside the "norm" of society, i.e., wearing outlandish clothes, wearing makeup when your gender doesn't, etc. then you are opening yourself to ridicule because you are doing something different than everyone else, not becuase you are gay, ghey, or Liberace Gay.

I agree. When I say something is ghey or gay, I am referring to acting outside the norm of society. I have gay friends and attend church with openly gay members. Does it bother me a little bit when there are men with their arms around each other? Sure it does since I am heterosexual. However I also believe in live and let live. I see nothing wrong with it morally, religiously or in any other way.

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 11:06 AM
Behavior considered strange - circa 1950:
2 men having anal intercourse.

Behavior considered strange - circa 2006:
2 men having a Bible study.

My, how we have grown.

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 11:06 AM
Some would say the same thing about religion.

And some are ****ed up.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:06 AM
i'm thinking that would get a LARGE majority, but there are still going to be people that think it's weird or whatever, it's just part of our culture

Well hell, I even think it's weird. Being left-handed is "weird", too, from a biological point of view. That doesn't make it dangerous or immoral.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:08 AM
Question, if being gay is genetic, how can one identical twin be straight and the other gay? This is well documented in the literature.

How can one identical twin be taller than another?

KaiserSooner
3/7/2006, 11:08 AM
At one point, mainstream society looked upon black Americans as mere chattel, property to be owned... are we at the same place in today's society with homosexuals?

yes

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 11:09 AM
yes

Fags who claim the "what about the blacks" argument are pathetic.

mrowl
3/7/2006, 11:11 AM
Question, if being gay is genetic, how can one identical twin be straight and the other gay? This is well documented in the literature.

exactly. The genetics (I was born this way) arguement doesn't work.

My problem with it is that its disgusting... the human body was not designed or meant to be used in that way.

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 11:11 AM
Originally Posted by TexasLidig8r
At one point, mainstream society looked upon black Americans as mere chattel, property to be owned... are we at the same place in today's society with homosexuals?
I don't want to own one.

TopDaugIn2000
3/7/2006, 11:11 AM
my best friend since 5th grade came out about 5 years ago. Being raised in a Baptist church, I of course "preached" to him at first about how wrong and sick it is. Over time, I came to accept it. He is who he is. I love him for who he is, not for what/who he does in the bedroom. I wasn't going to give up my best friend simply because he liked boys. We are still best friends and he comes to visit me quite often (he lives 2.5 hours away). In fact, he's at my house now.
I'll go out with him to the bars on 39th in OKC. At first I was a bit uncomfortable, but they don't bother me now. In fact, they serve really cheap drinks and have the BEST music by far. I'd rather go to Angles than ANY of the clubs in Bricktown any day.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:14 AM
the human body was not designed or meant to be used in that way.

Anal sex, hummers, or both? There are a lot of disgusting heterosexuals out there.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 11:14 AM
Why?

Because it's a lie. Homosexuality is an unstable basis to build a societal basis on, it's a deviation of the normal sexual functioning based on errant physiological and emotional conditions. The backbone of ANY society is the family; when you break apart that foundation by destroying its core assumptions, replacing them with unstable assumptions, you are dooming society as a whole.

The only real compelling argument behind the societal acceptance of homosexuality as normal is that it's just "the way some people are". I can GUARANTEE there are plenty of people even the gay community won't accept who fall under that umbrella statement.

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 11:16 AM
Because it's a lie. Homosexuality is an unstable basis to build a societal basis on, it's a deviation of the normal sexual functioning based on errant physiological and emotional conditions. The backbone of ANY society is the family; when you break apart that foundation by destroying its core assumptions, replacing them with unstable assumptions, you are dooming society as a whole.

The only real compelling argument behind the societal acceptance of homosexuality as normal is that it's just "the way some people are". I can GUARANTEE there are plenty of people even the gay community won't accept who fall under that umbrella statement.

Wurd.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 11:17 AM
Anal sex, hummers, or both? There are a lot of disgusting heterosexuals out there.

You're assuming that homosexuality is the only behavior that we view as unhealthy, which would be wrong.

There are HUGE health reasons to be concerned that anal sex is becoming more mainstream, and we should definitely try and keep that behavior closeted.

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 11:17 AM
Oral?

http://www.pamspaulding.com/graphics/Oral.jpg

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:20 AM
The only real compelling argument behind the societal acceptance of homosexuality as normal is that it's just "the way some people are".

No, the compelling argument is "it's nobody's business." Tell me how gay people have any effect whatsoever on your life.

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 11:20 AM
Because it's a lie. Homosexuality is an unstable basis to build a societal basis on, it's a deviation of the normal sexual functioning based on errant physiological and emotional conditions. The backbone of ANY society is the family; when you break apart that foundation by destroying its core assumptions, replacing them with unstable assumptions, you are dooming society as a whole.

The only real compelling argument behind the societal acceptance of homosexuality as normal is that it's just "the way some people are". I can GUARANTEE there are plenty of people even the gay community won't accept who fall under that umbrella statement.

Now see folks, that's a good argument. You failed to slide down the pedophilia, beastiality slope and defended the survival of the species without playing the religion angle.

Gold star for you!

crawfish
3/7/2006, 11:21 AM
No, the compelling argument is "it's nobody's business." Tell me how gay people have any effect whatsoever on your life.

It's my business when the government steps in and rubber-stamps it, and makes it equal to heterosexuality.

I'm all for keeping the closet door shut.

Hamhock
3/7/2006, 11:22 AM
How is this argument different than polygamy? Why can't consenting adults have more than one spouse?

In my view, it comes down to relative truth. I see homosexuality as morally wrong. My basis is the Bible, and I'm not ashamed of that. I also think God designed it that way for a reason. Deviations of traditional marriage are not in the long-term good of a society.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:23 AM
You're assuming that homosexuality is the only behavior that we view as unhealthy, which would be wrong.

What do homosexuals do that heteorsexuals do not do?





There are HUGE health reasons to be concerned that anal sex is becoming more mainstream, and we should definitely try and keep that behavior closeted.

If anal sex is "unhealthy" shouldn't we do more than keep it closeted?

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 11:24 AM
Homosexuality is wrong because it will lead to the end of the species. Polygamy won't. And if you're stupid enough to marry more than one woman at a time you should eat a 12 gauge.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:27 AM
It's my business when the government steps in and rubber-stamps it, and makes it equal to heterosexuality.



That doesn't answer the question. Why is it your business? If gay people can get "married" are you going to be compelled to leave your wife for another man?

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 11:28 AM
No, the compelling argument is "it's nobody's business." Tell me how gay people have any effect whatsoever on your life.For instance, I had the misfortune of being at Disney World on GAY DAY.
I promise you, it was disgusting and disturbing.
So you're gay - can't you behave in public?
Lewd and Sick.
Their parents must be so proud.

Hamhock
3/7/2006, 11:28 AM
Homosexuality is only wrong because it will lead to the end of the species? Only absolute homosexuality would result in the end of the species.

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 11:30 AM
Homosexuality is only wrong because it will lead to the end of the species? Only absolute homosexuality would result in the end of the species.

Don't we all have an obligation to propagate the species (1tc is excluded of course)? Give back what you were given?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:31 AM
For instance, I had the misfortune of being at Disney World on GAY DAY.
I promise you, it was disgusting and disturbing.
So you're gay - can't you behave in public?
Lewd and Sick.
Their parents must be so proud.

Heterosexuals can't be lewd and sick in public? I worked a double shift AstroWorld on Gay Day, and I didn't see anything worse than I did from the heterosexuals every other day.

SoonerAtKU
3/7/2006, 11:34 AM
Well hell, I even think it's weird. Being left-handed is "weird", too, from a biological point of view. That doesn't make it dangerous or immoral.

Actually, being left-handed leads to a shorter life expectancy as well. I for one say that we do not support this left-handed lifestyle choice, since they are making our insurance premiums skyrocket. Stupid people using the wrong-side of a can opener or pair of scissors...

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 11:34 AM
Actually, being left-handed leads to a shorter life expectancy as well. I for one say that we do not support this left-handed lifestyle choice, since they are making our insurance premiums skyrocket. Stupid people using the wrong-side of a can opener or pair of scissors...

:mad:

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 11:34 AM
Polygamy won't. And if you're stupid enough to marry more than one woman at a time you should eat a 12 gauge.


That's true, even if you are or aren't religious. I can barely deal with ONE wife. More than one would put me over the top.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 11:35 AM
What do homosexuals do that heteorsexuals do not do?

Homosexuals are a heterogenius group (it's fun to say it that way!) that we can address as one. It's tougher to target the behaviors of a larger group directly.


If anal sex is "unhealthy" shouldn't we do more than keep it closeted?

So is smoking, overeating, binge drinking, etc. The proper thing to do is what's being done...inform the public of the dangers and let them decide.


Well, gonna take my wife out for a birthday lunch...I bet this is four pages when I get back!

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 11:35 AM
Heterosexuals can't be lewd and sick in public? I worked a double shift AstroWorld on Gay Day, and I didn't see anything worse than I did from the heterosexuals every other day.And so we disagree.
Many of these folks were obviously there to make a spectacle.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 11:37 AM
Heterosexuals can't be lewd and sick in public? I worked a double shift AstroWorld on Gay Day, and I didn't see anything worse than I did from the heterosexuals every other day.


I've heard that the gay pride parades are a riot. Although, how many times can you hear "It's raining men" in one 8 hour period?

OklahomaRed
3/7/2006, 11:39 AM
That doesn't answer the question. Why is it your business? If gay people can get "married" are you going to be compelled to leave your wife for another man?


Look at it financially. If gay people are allowed to marry, then it's going to push down to others having to financially support their lifestyle through taxes, increased healthcare costs, or increased related costs.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:39 AM
Homosexuals are a heterogenius group (it's fun to say it that way!) that we can address as one. It's tougher to target the behaviors of a larger group directly.

It sounds like you mean homogeneous.

So, you're saying that's it okay to be anti-homo because all of them have butt sex, but it's not okay to be anti-hetero because only some of them have butt sex? I guess you're okay with lesbians then.

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 11:41 AM
And why a "Gay Day"?
Why not just go to the park and have fun like a normal human being?
Because - they want to be seen in mass and promote their lifestyle.
Why?

TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 11:44 AM
I've seen a number of people make reference to, or allude to, ". . a normal life." And yet, I wonder, what constitutes a "normal life?"

Is it the traditional, Christian based family unit, two parents, children under one household, paying their bills, worshipping their Lord on Sundays, father working, mother staying at home?

What of divorced people?

What of Jews or non-Christian people?

What of people who choose not to propogate?

Who sets the standard for "normalicy?"

And, is it abnormal to seek or embrace a life other than that which society dictates as "normal?"

At what point is our "tolerance" for others (i.e., Bring us your poor.. your weak, your huddled masses) exhausted?

OUinFLA
3/7/2006, 11:46 AM
I guess you're okay with lesbians then.

I am.
In fact, I have a video................


:P

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:46 AM
Look at it financially. If gay people are allowed to marry, then it's going to push down to others having to financially support their lifestyle through taxes, increased healthcare costs, or increased related costs.

I don't buy that letting an additional 10% (at most) of the population get married is going to bankrupt the country.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:48 AM
What of people who choose not to propogate?



What about people who can't propagate? They don't contribute to our social fabric by squeezing out kids, either, so why should we let them get married?

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 11:50 AM
In this case the religious and "moral" issue is inseperable. The only reason people think being gay is immoral is because the Bible tells them so.
perhaps some of us with plumbing experience understand what "male" and "female" fittings were meant to do.

Only a home depot employee would try to get you to put to male fittings together.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 11:52 AM
I've seen a number of people make reference to, or allude to, ". . a normal life." And yet, I wonder, what constitutes a "normal life?"


Not sure what is normal, but I can't imagine it involves a man buying Yankee candles. :mack:

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 11:53 AM
I've seen a number of people make reference to, or allude to, ". . a normal life." And yet, I wonder, what constitutes a "normal life?"

Is it the traditional, Christian based family unit, two parents, children under one household, paying their bills, worshipping their Lord on Sundays, father working, mother staying at home?

What of divorced people?

What of Jews or non-Christian people?

What of people who choose not to propogate?

Who sets the standard for "normalicy?"

And, is it abnormal to seek or embrace a life other than that which society dictates as "normal?"

At what point is our "tolerance" for others (i.e., Bring us your poor.. your weak, your huddled masses) exhausted?
And if there are to be no norms in society, then where do you draw the line?
Child molesters?
Incest?
Beastiality?
Cannibals?
Many of these folks enjoy their behavior and find nothing wrong with it.
I guess they get a free pass too.
I mean, who are YOU to say what's right?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:53 AM
perhaps some of us with plumbing experience understand what "male" and "female" fittings were meant to do.


In plumbing terms, any hole is a female fitting....

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 11:56 AM
And if there are to be no norms in society, then where do you draw the line?


Is there a victim?




Child molesters?


Is there a victim? Yes.



Incest?


Is there a victim? Yes.



Beastiality?


Is there a victim? Probably.



Cannibals?


Isn't this murder?

BlondeSoonerGirl
3/7/2006, 11:57 AM
:les: IT STARTS IN THE UNDERWEAR!!!

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 11:58 AM
In plumbing terms, any hole is a female fitting....
bullcrap.

In plumbing terms, a female fitting receives another fitting....a male fitting, which is designed to be inserted.

Don't let the hole fool you. If you didn't realize it there's one in the end of your pecker(assumption of standard anatomy)

Hamhock
3/7/2006, 11:59 AM
And if there are to be no norms in society, then where do you draw the line?
Child molesters?
Incest?
Beastiality?
Cannibals?
Many of these folks enjoy their behavior and find nothing wrong with it.
I guess they get a free pass too.
I mean, who are YOU to say what's right?


What he said. Either there is an absolute truth or a relative truth. As the relative truth is adapted, the line keeps shifting further and further.

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 11:59 AM
You know what cracks me up? The people who immediately roll their eyes and disregard the whole "deviancy is deviancy" argument. It's like all the fags have finally got a bunch of people to believe that homosexuality is a "different and acceptable" form of deviancy therefore it should be automatically accepted and embraced.

Nope. It's jacked up. It's not normal. It doesn't fall anywhere on the normal continuum in fact.

Having said that, and understanding that people will be people, go ahead and knock yourselves out with it. JUST DON'T TELL ME ABOUT IT. Deal?

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 12:00 PM
You know what cracks me up? The people who immediately roll their eyes and disregard the whole "deviancy is deviancy" argument. It's like all the fags have finally got a bunch of people to believe that homosexuality is a "different and acceptable" form of deviancy therefore it should be automatically accepted and embraced.

Nope. It's jacked up. It's not normal. It doesn't fall anywhere on the normal continuum in fact.

Having said that, and understanding that people will be people, go ahead and knock yourselves out with it. JUST DON'T TELL ME ABOUT IT. Deal?
AND don't lump yourselves in the same category as other minorities, or sell your product to my kids in the school.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:01 PM
In plumbing terms, a female fitting receives another fitting....a male fitting, which is designed to be inserted.



So, all anal sex should be outlawed?

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 12:03 PM
So, all anal sex should be outlawed?
If it keeps horns from procreating.

Madd Dawg
3/7/2006, 12:04 PM
ah.. but my old friend, what if and when, scientists discover that homosexuality is based on genetics. We know that the color of our eyes, our hair, or lack thereof, our skin color are genetically based.... alcoholism -- there seems to be some that are genetically more pre-disposed...

If homosexuality is genetic, then, in essence, is it.. normal.. at least for them, since they are merely living the acceptable predetermined for them?

At one point, mainstream society looked upon black Americans as mere chattel, property to be owned... are we at the same place in today's society with homosexuals?

Didnt feel like reading on, so sorry if something similar has been posted.

i don't think its genetics, if it were, we would probably see gay dog and monkeys, etc. humpin it up.

its a mind thing, they start to think its alright and then think about gay things and pretty soon the're sharin purple satin sheets with another man.

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 12:05 PM
So, all anal sex should be outlawed?

After you've engaged in anal sex, don't you feel a little dirty? Doesn't your conscience send off those little messages? C'mon, be honest here.

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 12:06 PM
Is there a victim?

Is there a victim? Yes.

Is there a victim? Yes.

Is there a victim? Probably.

Isn't this murder?

I would say except for the poor sheep, you could find willing children, sisters, and sacrificial offerings.
Who are you to judge who's a victim or even the age of consent?
I'm off to flash my peter at some nuns now because that's what I like doing.

TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 12:07 PM
Not sure what is normal, but I can't imagine it involves a man buying Yankee candles. :mack:

Next Dallas lunch, I'm brining you a Yankee Candle votive candle.. and it will be pink... NOT pink like 1TC's hat.. but. pink, pink. :D

yermom
3/7/2006, 12:08 PM
Didnt feel like reading on, so sorry if something similar has been posted.

i don't think its genetics, if it were, we would probably see gay dog and monkeys, etc. humpin it up.

its a mind thing, they start to think its alright and then think about gay things and pretty soon the're sharin purple satin sheets with another man.

monkeys (okay, apes) and penguins do it ;)

have you never seen a male dog mount another male dog?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:11 PM
i don't think its genetics, if it were, we would probably see gay dog and monkeys, etc. humpin it up.


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html


However, it doesn't matter if it's genetic or a choice. If there's not a victim, it's nobody's business.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:12 PM
have you never seen a male dog mount another male dog?

That's usually a dominance thing, not a sexual thing. I've seen a female dog mount a male dog. :eek:

SoCal
3/7/2006, 12:13 PM
Look at it financially. If gay people are allowed to marry, then it's going to push down to others having to financially support their lifestyle through taxes, increased healthcare costs, or increased related costs.
Bull's-eye...and Social Security benefits and so on. Don't mess with the purse (:P) strings.

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 12:14 PM
When you hump a corpse, is there a victim? When a whack job beats off over picture of little boys on the internet is there a victim? When somebody watches bodies being dismembered while copping a jizz is there a victim?

Would you not agree that all of these behaviors are whack? Same damned thing. Deviancy if deviancy. Endofstory.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 12:14 PM
Next Dallas lunch, I'm brining you a Yankee Candle votive candle.. and it will be pink... NOT pink like 1TC's hat.. but. pink, pink. :D


Again, not sure what is normal, but I can't think that it involves a man using the word "votive" in a sentence. :texan:

Okla-homey
3/7/2006, 12:14 PM
I say let 'em marry. More divorces will result, especially since having two men in the marriage exponentially increases the odds of marital infidelity and resultant alienation of affection. Why should only straight people get to go thru that pain and pay all those lawyer fees, particularly since gheys as a class have more income and property to sort out.

Now, as far as it being genetic or a choice, I'll put it to you this way (no pun intended). Is there another species of mammal known to demonstrate homosexuality as a preferred form of sexuality? Specifically, is there a male or female species of mammal if given a choice between a willing member of the opposite sex and a willing member of its own sex that will choose the latter for copulation?

I don't think so.

If I'm correct in that view, then that seems to me seems to be pretty persuasive evidence that homosexuality is not genetic but instead is a deviant preference based on some mental defect or mental/emotional problem precipitated by their environment, life experience, a response to an emotionally traumatic experience or some combination of all three.

That said, as long as they don't parade down the street in front of my house wearing g-strings flying rainbow flags and singing showtunes, I say let them have at each other. Just please, for the love of all that's holy, be discrete about it.

that is all.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:17 PM
I would say except for the poor sheep, you could find willing children, sisters, and sacrificial offerings.


Children do not have the capacity to consent to sex. Incest produces screwed up kids. If there's a willing victim what's wrong with cannibalism?

yermom
3/7/2006, 12:19 PM
Children do not have the capacity to consent to sex. Incest produces screwed up kids. If there's a willing victim what's wrong with cannibalism?

i've heard some weird stories out of Germany on that :eek:

IB4OU2
3/7/2006, 12:19 PM
I say let 'em marry. More divorces will result, especially since having two men in the marriage exponentially increases the odds of marital infidelity and resultant alienation of affection. Why should only straight people get to go thru that pain and pay all those lawyer fees, particularly since gheys as a class have more income and property to sort out.

Now, as far as it being genetic or a choice, I'll put it to you this way (no pun intended). Is there another species of mammal known to demonstrate homosexuality as a preferred form of sexuality? Specifically, is there a male or female species of mammal if given a choice between a willing member of the opposite sex and a willing member of its own sex that will choose the latter for copulation?

I don't think so.

If I'm correct in that view, then that seems to me seems to be pretty persuasive evidence that homosexuality is not genetic but instead is a deviant preference based on some mental defect or mental/emotional problem precipitated by their environment, life experience, a response to an emotionally traumatic experience or some combination of all three.

That said, as long as they don't parade down the street in front of my house wearing g-strings flying rainbow flags and singing showtunes, I say let them have at each other. Just please, for the love of all that's holy, be discrete about it.

that is all.

I guess you did't' read Dean's gay bull thread awhile back-

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38281&highlight=Gay+Bull

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 12:20 PM
So, all anal sex should be outlawed?


I think it is in most states.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:21 PM
Is there another species of mammal known to demonstrate homosexuality as a preferred form of sexuality? Specifically, is there a male or female species of mammal if given a choice between a willing member of the opposite sex and a willing member of its own sex that will choose the latter for copulation?

I don't think so.


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

Do birds count?



Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now. They display classic pair-bonding behavior—entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest. They also have sex, while ignoring potential female mates.






Just please, for the love of all that's holy, be discrete about it.


I'd like all couples--straight or gay--to be discrete about it. TMI isn't just for homos.

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 12:21 PM
When you hump a corpse, is there a victim? When a whack job beats off over picture of little boys on the internet is there a victim? When somebody watches bodies being dismembered while copping a jizz is there a victim?

Would you not agree that all of these behaviors are whack? Same damned thing. Deviancy if deviancy. Endofstory.

1tc is dealing with his personal demons in his own way and frankly I think it's rude for you to drag it up on a message board.

1stTimeCaller
3/7/2006, 12:22 PM
1tc is dealing with his personal demons in his own way and frankly I think it's rude for you to drag it up on a message board.

He said he'd keep my secrets quiet...:mad:

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 12:24 PM
He said he'd keep my secrets quiet...:mad:

You're humming Alicia Keys' Diary right now, aren't you?

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 12:25 PM
Just my two cents, but I don't think gays are any different than I am IMO.

I think gender roles and sexuality are learned behaviors influenced by anatomy, chromosomes, etc. Can there be outliers or mutations?? Sure. Are they some race of people different than everyone else? No.

However, I believe strongly that sex with someone of the same gender is very wrong and is a sin, just like any other sin. I think every Christian should remember to hate the sin, but not the sinner.

What I do not care for is this made-up culture they are trying to spread of sexual promiscuity and blurring gender roles. I think this hurts kids development and will cause a fall in the birthrate. Infact, it already is falling.

Also hate that people are so damn obsessed with this topic.

Oh well, so much for my right-wing bigoted hate filled opinions. Back to work. ;)

1stTimeCaller
3/7/2006, 12:25 PM
You're humming Alicia Keys' Diary right now, aren't you?

nah, it's that Chameleon song by Boy George.

SoonerAtKU
3/7/2006, 12:27 PM
Look at it financially. If gay people are allowed to marry, then it's going to push down to others having to financially support their lifestyle through taxes, increased healthcare costs, or increased related costs.

I agree...let's also not let left-handed people marry other lefties. This can only lead to left-handed kids, which is even WORSE than gay marriage, since they can procreate and pass on their defective genes to their kids. This leaves us with a whole mess of people who are more accident prone and live shorter lives, as well as just being "unnatural". ;)

But for serious now, the slippery slope argument cuts both ways and is equally meaningless on both sides.

Okla-homey
3/7/2006, 12:28 PM
I guess you did't' read Dean's gay bull thread awhile back-

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38281&highlight=Gay+Bull

What was happening there (it seems to me) was a situation involving a hot bull who couldn't get enough which tried to mount bulls because there wasn't enough cow poo-nanny around.

That is not the same as a bull which actually prefers bull butt to cow-poonanny.

After all, I'm told there are convicts who will happily do other convicts, not out of preference mind you, but because no women are available, and revert to heterosexuality once they get out of prison. That's "conditional homosexuality" which is not the same as preferring your own sex when given a choice.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:29 PM
When you hump a corpse, is there a victim?

Possibly the family of the corpse if they find out.



When a whack job beats off over picture of little boys on the internet is there a victim?


Regular pictures or pornography? If there's pornography involved there's a victim. If not, that's not illegal no matter how disgusting it is.



When somebody watches bodies being dismembered while copping a jizz is there a victim?


This is in the same cateogory as sex with a corpse.




Would you not agree that all of these behaviors are whack? Same damned thing. Deviancy if deviancy.

Yes, these are all deviant behavior. Homosexuality is a deviant behavior. But homosexuality is a harmless deviant behavior; or at least no more harmful than heterosexuality.

Okla-homey
3/7/2006, 12:30 PM
[QUOTE=mdklatt]http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

Do birds count?

No. Only mammals. Ands the article says the lezbo monkeys only do it to be more attractive to male monkeys for enhanced breeding opportunities. So there.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 12:33 PM
[QUOTE=mdklatt]http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

Do birds count?

No. Only mammals.


Stick to the topic, we are discussing homosexuality, not beastiality. We can start a thread on that if there is enough interest. :mack:

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:34 PM
No. Only mammals.

Why?


Same article:



The team caught female Japanese macaques engaged in intimate acts which, if observed in humans, would be in the X-rated category.

"The homosexual behavior that goes on is completely baffling and intriguing," says National Geographic Ultimate Explorer correspondent, Mireya Mayor. "You would have thought females that want to be mated, especially over their fertile period, would be seeking out males."

royalfan5
3/7/2006, 12:35 PM
What was happening there (it seems to me) was a situation involving a hot bull who couldn't get enough which tried to mount bulls because there wasn't enough cow poo-nanny around.

That is not the same as a bull which actually prefers bull butt to cow-poonanny.

After all, I'm told there are convicts who will happily do other convicts, not out of preference mind you, but because no women are available, and revert to heterosexuality once they get out of prison. That's "conditional homosexuality" which is not the same as preferring your own sex when given a choice.
It would be hard to prove what a bull prefers as a bull is generally either with all females or all males at a given time. Bulls aren't given a choice, most of the time.

Okla-homey
3/7/2006, 12:36 PM
Why?


Same article:

read on...it says the lezbo monkeys do it to be more attractive to the male monkeys. At best, they are bi-sexual and NOT homosexual.

yermom
3/7/2006, 12:39 PM
so it's ok to be bi, just not gay?

you doing anything later? ;)

IB4OU2
3/7/2006, 12:43 PM
read on...it says the lezbo monkeys do it to be more attractive to the male monkeys.

Still cost the males a few bannanas to watch....though.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:44 PM
read on...it says the lezbo monkeys do it to be more attractive to the male monkeys.

That's one hypothesis.



At best, they are bi-sexual and NOT homosexual.

And...that's okay?

Okla-homey
3/7/2006, 12:44 PM
so it's ok to be bi, just not gay?

;)

Only if the bisexual looks like Catherine Zeta Jones.

Okla-homey
3/7/2006, 12:49 PM
That's one hypothesis.




And...that's okay?

that is the theory of the monkey scientist. The previous quote about it being inexplicable was the view of the journalist (who presumably is not a monkey scientist and is prolly a lesbian) who wrote the story.;)

My point was merely that bi-sexual behavior calculated to lead to heterosexual activity in monkeys as theorized by the monkey scentist is not the same thing as a monkey preferring its own sex.

TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 12:51 PM
Now, as far as it being genetic or a choice, I'll put it to you this way (no pun intended). Is there another species of mammal known to demonstrate homosexuality as a preferred form of sexuality? Specifically, is there a male or female species of mammal if given a choice between a willing member of the opposite sex and a willing member of its own sex that will choose the latter for copulation?



Apples and onions. For example, do animals have souls? Do animals have the ability to discriminate between that which is right vs. that which is wrong? Do animals make a conscious decision to commit an act which is wrong even when they know they should be doing an act which is right?

yermom
3/7/2006, 12:52 PM
i just think we are diverging a bit

are they sinners? or is it just not cool for them to hang out in public?

if i see where Tuba is going, it's like wanting to have pre-marital sex, the urge is there, you just have to fight it. feeling gay isn't the problem, it's acting gay (correct me if i'm wrong here Tuba)

i think if you put that out there, "being gay" is a choice, "feeling gay" might not be

personally, i can see the economic side of marriage or "civil unions", personally, not being religious, i'm thinking "civil unions" that aren't tied to god, or whatever sounds like a more valid option for a straight relationship

i'm basically ok with it up to the kid thing, i get lost on the kid thing

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 12:53 PM
that is the theory of the monkey scientist.

That is the hypothesis of the monkey scientist.




My point was merely that bi-sexual behavior calculated to lead to heterosexual activity in monkeys as theorized by the monkey scentist is not the same thing as a monkey preferring its own sex.

Why are you dismissing the gay penguins?

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 12:54 PM
Do animals have the ability to discriminate between that which is right vs. that which is wrong?


Some do. My cats know when they are doing something that ****es me off. I know that some dogs know to bring the bird back to you after you shoot it.

I think that some animals know right from wrong.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 12:55 PM
i just think we are diverging a bit

That would be a first for the SO.

Okla-homey
3/7/2006, 12:57 PM
Apples and onions. For example, do animals have souls? Do animals have the ability to discriminate between that which is right vs. that which is wrong? Do animals make a conscious decision to commit an act which is wrong even when they know they should be doing an act which is right? My dogs do that sort of thing. Cat pulls that crap too.

I see your point, but I still maintain at a fundamental level, sexuality and sexual orientation (human and animal) is more unconscious than conscious.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 01:04 PM
Apples and onions. For example, do animals have souls? Do animals have the ability to discriminate between that which is right vs. that which is wrong? Do animals make a conscious decision to commit an act which is wrong even when they know they should be doing an act which is right?


My dog ****s on the carpet every now and then. She knows immediately that she did something wrong, and feels bad, but did it anyway.

That being said, humans should no longer be compared to birds, monkeys, sheep, etc.. The behavior of a wild squirrel has absolutely nothing to do with what a human being should or should not do.

handcrafted
3/7/2006, 01:04 PM
Most of you know where I stand on this one, and the arguments have been well made by others, so let me just take a bit of perspective here.

I don't see homosexuality as the main problem, per se. It's always been around, as has every sin in the book, since the human race was created. The problem is the overall move toward sexual promiscuity being acceptable, in general. The openness of gays and the feeling that they can press their agenda is just a symptom of the overall lack of moral center we are now experiencing.

Any sex outside of marriage is wrong, doesn't matter who it is or what they think their so-called "orientation" is. And BTW "marriage" is, always has been, and always will be between a man and a woman, regardless of how the government eventually decides to define it. I think the primary responsibility for this whole mess lies with the churches in this country which have, over the past 100 years or so, largely abdicated their responsibility to influence the culture in a positive way. Some are trying to do so now, with varying degrees of success. Only time will tell whether it will work, or if the genie is already out of the bottle.

Sexual immorality has brought down many a civilization in the past. Will we be next?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 01:05 PM
Sexual immorality has brought down many a civilization in the past.

Such as?

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 01:12 PM
Such as?


I've always heard Rome and Greece.

usmc-sooner
3/7/2006, 01:12 PM
I think whorns are gay, and I have no problem with that.

SCOUT
3/7/2006, 01:13 PM
My dog ****s on the carpet every now and then. She knows immediately that she did something wrong, and feels bad, but did it anyway.


I would speculate that your dog understands the causal relationship between peeing on the carpet and a punishment that generally follows. I would say the same is true for the bird dog example mentioned earlier. Those dogs are conditioned to retrieve the downed bird by positive and negative reinforcement. I don't think the dogs understand the right and wrong of it.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 01:15 PM
I would speculate that your dog understands the causal relationship between peeing on the carpet and a punishment that generally follows. I would say the same is true for the bird dog example mentioned earlier. Those dogs are conditioned to retrieve the downed bird by positive and negative reinforcement. I don't think the dogs understand the right and wrong of it.


Possibly, well probably likely, but it sure seems like she's generally hurt and embarassed by the whole ordeal. For that reason, the only punishment she gets is getting put outside anyway.

Frozen Sooner
3/7/2006, 01:16 PM
Thanks for bringing it up, Lid.

Some have said that they don't mind people being gay, but that they don't want gays to discuss it openly. I wonder how many of those selfsame people have bragged about their heterosexual conquests with their friends? I wonder how many of them have walked down the street with their arm around their girlfriend?

Some have said that homosexuality is unnatural and leads to an erosion of society. There's honestly no debate with this position, because it can't be discussed logically-either your postulates match or they don't. I don't happen to agree that homosexuality is unnatural and leads to the downfall of society, and at that point the conversation breaks down.

Is sexual promiscuity bad? I believe so. Is a monogamous, long-term relaionship with someone you're not married to promiscous? No.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 01:18 PM
I've always heard Rome and Greece.

Didn't the rest of Europe have something to do with this?

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 01:19 PM
Didn't the rest of Europe have something to do with this?

Huns, I blame the huns.

handcrafted
3/7/2006, 01:23 PM
I've always heard Rome and Greece.

Correct. You can also throw ancient Egypt in there, as well as many of the other cultures of the ancient world. Most of the ancient near-eastern pagan societies were involved in sexual immorality and human sacrifice as part of their religion.

The corruptness of the Roman Catholic church in the Middle Ages, including the sexual immorality of many of the priests and church leaders, was part of what led to the Protestant Reformation and the corresponding decline in the Roman church's authority.

Mjcpr
3/7/2006, 01:24 PM
Huns, I blame the huns.

I'm sorry, the correct answer was the 'Moops'.

handcrafted
3/7/2006, 01:26 PM
Didn't the rest of Europe have something to do with this?

In the end, yes. But the physical destruction of the Roman Empire was only made possible after it had decayed from within to the point that it could no longer hold itself together. The more depraved the society got, the less people cared about anything except their own personal gratification.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 01:28 PM
In the end, yes. But the physical destruction of the Roman Empire was only made possible after it had decayed from within to the point that it could no longer hold itself together. The more depraved the society got, the less people cared about anything except their own personal gratification.

What does this have to do with homosexuality?

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 01:29 PM
What does this have to do with my homosexuality?

:eek:




:D

handcrafted
3/7/2006, 01:31 PM
What does this have to do with homosexuality?

Simply this: that the permissiveness of a society in regard to homosexuality is a symptom of permissiveness of sexual immorality in general.

slickdawg
3/7/2006, 01:33 PM
Simply this: that the permissiveness of a society in regard to homosexuality is a symptom of permissiveness of sexual immorality in general.


Does that have anything to do with the recent hike in gas prices?


:D

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 01:35 PM
Simply this: that the permissiveness of a society in regard to homosexuality is a symptom of permissiveness of sexual immorality in general.

So you don't think it had anything to do with the Roman Empire's eventual expansion beyond an amount of territory it could control?

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 01:36 PM
So you don't think it had anything to do with the Roman Empire's eventual expansion beyond an amount of territory it could control?
They could have controlled more territory if they weren't busy manhumping in the bathhouses.

handcrafted
3/7/2006, 01:43 PM
And SAS beats me to it. :D

Lemme pose another one to all you evolutionist-types, and those who think that being gay is genetic.

Gayness would be a detrimental trait, genetically speaking, because it would reduce the chance for the species to procreate. Therefore, according to natural selection, would not one have expected for gayness to have been bred out of the human race a long time ago, if in fact it's inherited?

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 01:44 PM
I'm sorry, the correct answer was the 'Moops'.

I'll take The Rapist for $800.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 01:55 PM
Well, gonna take my wife out for a birthday lunch...I bet this is four pages when I get back!

I WAS RIGHT!!!!

As if that's any surprise. ;)

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 01:58 PM
I WAS RIGHT!!!!

As if that's any surprise. ;)
so a homo thread made you feel the need to spend time with the wife?

She didn't mind stepping into your closet?:D

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 02:01 PM
Hey Moe!

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/ATA/7539M.jpg

Taxman71
3/7/2006, 02:11 PM
In the end, yes. But the physical destruction of the Roman Empire was only made possible after it had decayed from within to the point that it could no longer hold itself together. The more depraved the society got, the less people cared about anything except their own personal gratification.

I thought Rome collapsed because the lead poisoning in their plumbing led to mentally-inferior offspring. Kind of like Joaquin Phoenix in Gladiator.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 02:12 PM
so a homo thread made you feel the need to spend time with the wife?

She didn't mind stepping into your closet?:D

Shaddup and gimme a kiss.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:18 PM
Gayness would be a detrimental trait, genetically speaking, because it would reduce the chance for the species to procreate. Therefore, according to natural selection, would not one have expected for gayness to have been bred out of the human race a long time ago, if in fact it's inherited?


Genetics doesn't preclude abnormalities. Why are people born infertile?

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:19 PM
I don't happen to agree that homosexuality is unnatural
If homosexual sex is natural, than why isn't the human body built to allow for it then???

Hamhock
3/7/2006, 02:21 PM
Genetics doesn't preclude abnormalities. Why are people born OSU fans?


fixed

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:21 PM
If homosexual sex is natural, than why isn't the human body built to allow for it then???


It's not? :confused:

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:23 PM
Perhaps homosexuality isn't genetic?

Again, I thought sex and gender roles were learned and influcenced by hormones, culture etc?

walkoffsooner
3/7/2006, 02:23 PM
when you hump a corpse do you have to hug it when your done.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 02:24 PM
If homosexual sex is natural, than why isn't the human body built to allow for it then???

I wonder if it's nature's way of discouraging some life from reproducing? Kind of a fail-safe method when something goes wrong.

This hardly matters to my argument, though. I feel homosexuality is inherently unstable because the factors that make one gay are unstable. I say let 'em bang things out in their own closets as much as they want, but leave it there.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:26 PM
It's not? :confused:
How is it then?

crawfish
3/7/2006, 02:26 PM
Genetics doesn't preclude abnormalities. Why are people born infertile?

Infertility isn't behavioral. Why does our society feel the need to legitimaize abnormalities?

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:28 PM
I wonder if it's nature's way of discouraging some life from reproducing? Kind of a fail-safe method when something goes wrong.

This hardly matters to my argument, though. I feel homosexuality is inherently unstable because the factors that make one gay are unstable. I say let 'em bang things out in their own closets as much as they want, but leave it there.I dunno. I guess it could be.

Regardless, I agree 100% with you, and so do most people.

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 02:28 PM
How is it then?
He's suggesting it's perfectly fine to probe the exit.

I bet his kids toys are put together funny since it doen't matter how something is assembled.

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 02:29 PM
Infertility isn't behavioral. Why does our society feel the need to legitimaize abnormalities?
EXACTLY.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:30 PM
How is it then?

If the human body was incapable of butt sex then butt sex wouldn't produce gratification.

imjebus
3/7/2006, 02:30 PM
Maybe homosexuality is nature's way of stoping overpopulation. Maybe we should calm down on procreating until we get this food, air deal figured out.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 02:32 PM
If the human body was incapable of butt sex then butt sex wouldn't produce gratification.

If the human body was meant for butt sex then butt sex wouldn't transmit disease so easily.

Face it, Mother Nature is homophobic.

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 02:33 PM
Maybe homosexuality is nature's way of stoping overpopulation. Maybe we should calm down on procreating until we get this food, air deal figured out.
great idea.

Everyone should turn homo to be more environmentally concious.

You need beat with a stick.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:33 PM
Infertility isn't behavioral.

The argument that homosexuality can't be natural or else it would have been bred out is falsified by the existence of infertility, among any number of other disorders that preclude reproduction.

crawfish
3/7/2006, 02:33 PM
Maybe homosexuality is nature's way of stoping overpopulation. Maybe we should calm down on procreating until we get this food, air deal figured out.

I would have, but I felt the future needed a FEW intelligent, well-adjusted adults.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:34 PM
If the human body was incapable of butt sex then butt sex wouldn't produce gratification.
So if something produces gratification, its OK huh?

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 02:35 PM
In the end, yes. But the physical destruction of the Roman Empire was only made possible after it had decayed from within to the point that it could no longer hold itself together. The more depraved the society got, the less people cared about anything except their own personal gratification.


That sounds eerily similar to what is happening in these United States. :(

crawfish
3/7/2006, 02:35 PM
The argument that homosexuality can't be natural or else it would have been bred out is falsified by the existence of infertility, among any number of other disorders that preclude reproduction.

Nature tends to make it more difficult, or impossible for some lifeforms to reproduce when abnormalities occur.

Artificial insemination may be the death of us all.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:36 PM
If the human body was meant for butt sex then butt sex wouldn't transmit disease so easily.

Face it, Mother Nature is homophobic.

Doesn't butt sex cause lots of damage to the butt??

Perhaps more evidence that this isn't a natural thing.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:38 PM
Face it, Mother Nature is homophobic.

No ****--ya think? Nature also has something against left-handed people or there would be more of them. Natural is not the same as normal.

The nature/nurture argument is irrelevant, anyway.

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 02:38 PM
The choice for me is butt sex free!

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 02:38 PM
If the human body was incapable of butt sex then butt sex wouldn't produce gratification.


I'm seriously thinking about making this my new sig.

An armpit is capable of gratification (not that I would know). A hand is capable of gratification (as all of us know). Hell, a canteloupe is capable of producing gratification. Any soft, moist somewhat enclosed area is capable of producing gratification.

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 02:39 PM
I'm seriously thinking about making this my new sig.

An armpit is capable of gratification (not that I would know). A hand is capable of gratification (as all of us know). Hell, a canteloupe is capable of producing gratification. Any soft, moist somewhat enclosed area is capable of producing gratification.
warm apple pie?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:40 PM
Nature tends to make it more difficult, or impossible for some lifeforms to reproduce when abnormalities occur.


Which should have no effect on the legal rights of people born with abnormalities.

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 02:40 PM
No ****--ya think? Nature also has something against left-handed people or there would be more of them. Natural is not the same as normal.

The nature/nurture argument is irrelevant, anyway.
is the disease rate higher among lefties?

TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 02:42 PM
I I feel homosexuality is inherently unstable because the factors that make one gay are unstable.

ah... but what are those factors? What aspects of the environment, or relationships, effect that?

Granted, it is not most person's interest or orientation on this website. Many believe it to be amoral and/or unnatural.

Now. should companies be allowed to discriminate against gays simply because of their orientation?.. Should companies be allowed to fire employees who "come out of the closet?".. or should companies be allowed as part of their hiring practices to not employ gays simply because of their orientation?

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 02:42 PM
warm apple pie?


You know it.

http://www.sillimancollege.org/downloads/SilliflicksMovieList/images/786f.jpg

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 02:42 PM
Which should have no effect on the legal rights of people born with abnormalities.
The debate from the other side of the fence is that homosexuallity is not an abnormality. You have to define normal to have abnormal and that group will not define it in the way we are discussing.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:42 PM
An armpit is capable of gratification (not that I would know). A hand is capable of gratification (as all of us know). Hell, a canteloupe is capable of producing gratification. Any soft, moist somewhat enclosed area is capable of producing gratification.

And?


Tuba said the human body is incapable of butt sex, which obviously it isn't or there wouldn't be butt sex. You people know what "incapable" means right? Do I need to post a definition?

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 02:43 PM
dead laptop battery...........bye

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 02:44 PM
It's time we put the "Oh!" back in "Orifice".

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 02:44 PM
Now. should companies be allowed to discriminate against gays simply because of their orientation?.. Should companies be allowed to fire employees who "come out of the closet?".. or should companies be allowed as part of their hiring practices to not employ gays simply because of their orientation?


Sure, why not? Coke can fire people for drinking Pepsi. Companies can fire people for smoking. These are all behaviors aren't they.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 02:45 PM
Artificial insemination may be the death of us all.


I imagine the cows and bulls find it much less satisfying.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:46 PM
The debate from the other side of the fence is that homosexuallity is not an abnormality. You have to define normal to have abnormal and that group will not define it in the way we are discussing.

They say it's not a choice. It's clearly an abnormality, but as I've said a number of times so is being left-handed. Is it "wrong" to be left-handed?

I don't think it is a choice (because why the hell would you choose to a lifetime of discrimination?), but it doesn't matter if it is or not. Who is the victim?

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 02:47 PM
And?


Tuba said the human body is incapable of butt sex, which obviously it isn't or there wouldn't be butt sex. You people know what "incapable" means right? Do I need to post a definition?


What was your point? My only point was to show that capability of producing gratification is moot to this discussion.

I'm not sure what Tuba's angle was, perhaps capable of reproduction? Not sure.

imjebus
3/7/2006, 02:48 PM
great idea.

Everyone should turn homo to be more environmentally concious.

You need beat with a stick.


I didn't say we should all turn gay, I said maybe it's nature's way of compensating for overpopulation....Thanks for reading though...:rolleyes:

Pieces Hit
3/7/2006, 02:48 PM
Homosexuality thread... Why cain't I quit you?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:48 PM
is the disease rate higher among lefties?

I don't know, is it? Why aren't there more of them?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:50 PM
My only point was to show that capability of producing gratification is moot to this discussion.


So is claiming that the human body is incapable of butt sex.

TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 02:51 PM
Sure, why not? Coke can fire people for drinking Pepsi. Companies can fire people for smoking. These are all behaviors aren't they.

Drinking Pepsi and smoking are clear and obvious choices that do not involve one of the, if not the most personal, aspect of our life.. our sexuality (1TC and his carpet-p ing routine excepted)...

Is our sexuality based on environmental factors.. learned behavior.. and outside factors?.. or... can we be possibly genetically pre-disposed?

For that matter, why can't we fire people because of their religious orientation? No one has ever argued that religious orientation is genetic. Yes, you look at people in Jewish families, but there are many non-practicing Jews and many who convert and yet, no discrimination because of religious beliefs is not only ingrained in our culture, but is in the Constitution.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:56 PM
Tuba said the human body is incapable of butt sex, which obviously it isn't or there wouldn't be butt sex. You people know what "incapable" means right? Do I need to post a definition?

No, what I said was that butt sex was not natural.

People are fully capable of sticking their goods in anything obviously.

Just cause someone likes to stick their meat in some dudes butt doesn't give them automatic special rights IMO.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 02:56 PM
They say it's not a choice. It's clearly an abnormality, but as I've said a number of times so is being left-handed. Is it "wrong" to be left-handed?

I don't think it is a choice (because why the hell would you choose to a lifetime of discrimination?), but it doesn't matter if it is or not. Who is the victim?


You left-handed analogy is kinda lame.

I'm not going to pretend I know if homosexuality is a choice or genetic because I have no clue. I do know that people get off, so to speak, on portraying themselves as being different.

I went to my wife's cousin's quincienara last year in El Paso. She thinks she is gay and all of her friends that came to the dance also believe that they are gay. She was 15, hence the quincienara, and her graduation class at her school is probably 300 or so. There were at least fifty 15 year old girls at that dance that claim to be lesbians. It's apparently the cool thing to do now. We sat there for 3 hours and watched teenage girls grinding on each other, and I felt dirty and scarred after walking out of that place.

Perhaps later on in life, some of these girls will realize that it was just a adolescent phase they were having to fit in at the time. Will they feel immoral for doing what they did back then? I don't know, but I can see it. Would they themselves be victims of their own actions then?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 02:57 PM
Just cause someone likes to stick their meat in some dudes butt doesn't give them automatic special rights IMO.

What special rights are they asking for?

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 02:58 PM
What special rights are they asking for?
Changing the definition of marriage, protecting and promoting the homosexual lifestyle, etc

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:01 PM
Drinking Pepsi and smoking are clear and obvious choices that do not involve one of the, if not the most personal, aspect of our life.. our sexuality (1TC and his carpet-p ing routine excepted)...

Is our sexuality based on environmental factors.. learned behavior.. and outside factors?.. or... can we be possibly genetically pre-disposed?

You can ask the same questions about nicotine addiction, and probably get the same answer....nobody knows.



For that matter, why can't we fire people because of their religious orientation? No one has ever argued that religious orientation is genetic. Yes, you look at people in Jewish families, but there are many non-practicing Jews and many who convert and yet, no discrimination because of religious beliefs is not only ingrained in our culture, but is in the Constitution.

Exactly, this country was founded on freedom of persecution based on religious beliefs, not on freedom of persecution based on your want to skewer another dude's poopchute.

imjebus
3/7/2006, 03:02 PM
No, what I said was that butt sex was not natural.

How is something that happens in nature, not natural?

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:03 PM
You mean skewer what ever gives gratification beanbag.

We should be more inclusive and open-minded.

Octavian
3/7/2006, 03:04 PM
In the end, yes. But the physical destruction of the Roman Empire was only made possible after it had decayed from within to the point that it could no longer hold itself together. The more depraved the society got, the less people cared about anything except their own personal gratification.

I'm sorry but thats simply not true. There's no evidence to suggest Roman society was more "immoral" in 450C.E. than in 50C.E. or 50 B.C.E.

Ovid depicted an incredibly decadent Roman urban society in the age of Augustus. The Empire expanded and lasted for another half-millenium.

No, decadent and deviant sex didn't "decay Rome from within" and cause it's fall. It over-expanded physically. Her enemies grew accustomed to the Legion's tactics and technology, neutralizing Rome's battlefield advantages. It split into competing power centers between the East and West, had inefficient and inept management of economic matters....it wasn't social immorality.

Actually, its pretty widely accepted that Rome fell in large part b/c of the rise of Christianity and the drastic social effects it had in store for daily life and society.

yermom
3/7/2006, 03:05 PM
butt-skewering isn't the real issue, is it?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:05 PM
You left-handed analogy is kinda lame.

No, that's the heart of the issue. If abnormality is not accpetable why draw the line at homosexuality?



We sat there for 3 hours and watched teenage girls grinding on each other, and I felt dirty and scarred after walking out of that place.


Would you have felt better if it was 15-year-old boys grinding on 15-year-old girls?



Would they themselves be victims of their own actions then?

You can't be a "victim" of your own actions. What happened to personal responsibility?

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:06 PM
I think most people blame corruption, over-expansion, and competition.

Blaming Christians for the fall of rome is as stupid as blaming it on butt sex.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:07 PM
Actually, its pretty widely accepted that Rome fell in large part b/c of the rise of Christianity and the drastic social effects it had in store for daily life and society.


Did the rise in Christianity and the accompanying rise in moral awareness have anything to do with the splitting apart of society from the hedonistic segment of the population? Honest question, Roman history isn't my strong point.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 03:07 PM
butt-skewering isn't the real issue, is it?


Notice the wimmens of the board are notably absent from this thread. Just sayin...:mack:

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:08 PM
How is something that happens in nature, not natural?Butt sex happens in nature?

Have you been hiding out at those rural truck stops again??

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:09 PM
Changing the definition of marriage

To get equal rights.



protecting and promoting the homosexual lifestyle, etc

Don't you try to promote and protect the Christian lifestyle?

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:11 PM
Exactly, this country was founded on freedom of persecution based on religious beliefs, not on freedom of persecution based on your want to skewer another dude's poopchute.

So the Constitution is the ultimate moral authority?

Octavian
3/7/2006, 03:11 PM
Did the rise in Christianity and the accompanying rise in moral awareness have anything to do with the splitting apart of society from the hedonistic segment of the population? Honest question, Roman history isn't my strong point.

you bet.

or really...their percpetions of right and wrong began to change. To say that paegan Romans had no morals is incorrect, they were just different than later (more rigid and devoutly followed) Christian ones.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:13 PM
To get equal rights.
they have equal rights. Nothing stops anyone from getting married, nothing.






Don't you try to promote and protect the Christian lifestyle?Of course, since it is the bedrock or our culture and country.

Butt sex is not.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:13 PM
Butt sex happens in nature?


Where do you think it's happening? In a laboratory setting?


So, is butt sex between a man and a woman wrong?

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:13 PM
No, that's the heart of the issue. If abnormality is not accpetable why draw the line at homosexuality?

You seriously think being left-handed is the same as man-on-man butt loving?




Would you have felt better if it was 15-year-old boys grinding on 15-year-old girls?

I wouldn't say better, probably less shocked.




You can't be a "victim" of your own actions. What happened to personal responsibility?

That's what I'd like to know. There isn't much value placed on personal responsibility these days. It's all Bush's fault, or TV violence made me do it, or the government isn't taking care of me, etc..

You can be led to believe something is okay, then find out later that who or whatever was influencing you had ulterior motives or an agenda that wasn't looking out for your best interests. Children, being naive, are most susceptible to this.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:15 PM
they have equal rights. Nothing stops anyone from getting married, nothing.



It's not about marriage, it's about the government rights that come with marriage.




Of course, since it is the bedrock or our culture and country.

Butt sex is not.

They have every right to lobby for their lifestyle as you do for yours.

JohnnyMack
3/7/2006, 03:15 PM
Again, from a purely secular point fo view, homosexuality is bad because it will lead to the end of the species. I'm not making a value judgment, I'm just pointing out that other than when 1tc fell out of some dudes ***, not too many babies are made by poop-chute lovin'.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:15 PM
So the Constitution is the ultimate moral authority?


Who said it was? Lid and I were speaking in legal terms I believe.

Octavian
3/7/2006, 03:16 PM
So, is butt sex between a man and a woman wrong?

bite your tounge. ;)

crawfish
3/7/2006, 03:16 PM
[QUOTE=mdklatt]To get equal rights.[QUOTE]

Thus, making the homosexual union equal to the heterosexual union in the eyes of the government.

Homosexuals can get married now in their own eyes, at churches that support such things. They can live together and have sex any way they want. They can write wills to leave their possessions to their partners. They can create living wills and other documents giving their partner full rights to see to their hospital care.

Hamhock
3/7/2006, 03:17 PM
So the Constitution is the ultimate moral authority?


No, the Bible is.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:17 PM
Damn, this is a fast moving thread.

GDC
3/7/2006, 03:18 PM
Figures, the faggot-*** whorns starting gay threads on no whorn Tuesday.

Octavian
3/7/2006, 03:18 PM
Again, from a purely secular point fo view, homosexuality is bad because it will lead to the end of the species. I'm not making a value judgment, I'm just pointing out that other than when 1tc fell out of some dudes ***, not too many babies are made by poop-chute lovin'.

yeah but that's assuming that you have a 100% gay population.

thats not realistic....that one of the things I dont get about the gay-scare...

like young teen males and females are all of the sudden gonna wanna stop bangin each other :rolleyes:

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 03:19 PM
Damn, this is a fast moving thread.

That's rapidly approaching it's demise.

Hamhock
3/7/2006, 03:19 PM
No, that's the heart of the issue. If immorality is acceptable why draw the line at homosexuality?






A different angle...

crawfish
3/7/2006, 03:19 PM
That's rapidly approaching it's demise.

It's the butt sex talk, isn't it?

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:21 PM
Where do you think it's happening? In a laboratory setting?


So, is butt sex between a man and a woman wrong?

I think it is wrong, based on the fact that this isn't what that body part was built for.

But I guess if they are married, thats their deal, not mine.

GDC
3/7/2006, 03:21 PM
I can think of one whorn in particular who needs a good beatdown one day.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:22 PM
It's not about marriage, it's about the government rights that come with marriage.And they have many of those. We both agree that marriage is a relgious matter MDK. 2 dudes or 2 chicks do not equal marriage.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:25 PM
You seriously think being left-handed is the same as man-on-man butt loving?


In that they are both naturally ocurring abnormalities? Yes. In that neither of them are worthy of discrimination? Yes.





I wouldn't say better, probably less shocked.


Then this isn't a homo/hetero issue, but one of teen sexuality.





You can be led to believe something is okay, then find out later that who or whatever was influencing you had ulterior motives or an agenda that wasn't looking out for your best interests. Children, being naive, are most susceptible to this.

Then isn't it a good idea to talk about sexuality so that adults can help children sort their feelings out? Maybe a kid would be less likely to "experiment" if he knew he could talk to is parents about it without being told he was going to burn in hell.

GDC
3/7/2006, 03:25 PM
Some of you actually defend the whorns' right to clutter a Sooner board with bs like this, pervs.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:26 PM
Thus, making the homosexual union equal to the heterosexual union in the eyes of the government.

Homosexuals can get married now in their own eyes, at churches that support such things. They can live together and have sex any way they want. They can write wills to leave their possessions to their partners. They can create living wills and other documents giving their partner full rights to see to their hospital care.

Agreed.

Anything more would equal special protection for this certain class of people. The government would then be promoting this type of lifestyle over a natural child producing relationship.

TexasLidig8r
3/7/2006, 03:26 PM
Figures, the faggot-*** whorns starting gay threads on no whorn Tuesday.

You know... there have been some very well thought out and insightful posts on this thread which have articulated some very respectful thoughts and opinions on the topic.

Before you continue to ramp down the interaction and exchange by parading your droll and parochial biases, you may wish to read.. and learn. :rolleyes:

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 03:27 PM
mdklatt is to queerness what tuba is to Bush.

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:27 PM
And they have many of those.

Then why not give them the rest? Which marriage rights do you specifically have a problem with homo couples having?

GDC
3/7/2006, 03:27 PM
You may wish to...kiss my ***, whorn.

Stoop Dawg
3/7/2006, 03:28 PM
I've seen a number of people make reference to, or allude to, ". . a normal life." And yet, I wonder, what constitutes a "normal life?"

Is it the traditional, Christian based family unit, two parents, children under one household, paying their bills, worshipping their Lord on Sundays, father working, mother staying at home?

What of divorced people?

What of Jews or non-Christian people?

What of people who choose not to propogate?

Who sets the standard for "normalicy?"

And, is it abnormal to seek or embrace a life other than that which society dictates as "normal?"

At what point is our "tolerance" for others (i.e., Bring us your poor.. your weak, your huddled masses) exhausted?

Sorry, this thread is too long to read every reply. Lid has hit the nail on the head here. Anyone who thinks homosexuality will destroy society should set their sights on much worse problems. Once you've outlawed divorce (the #1 enemy of the "traditional family"). Next, turn your attention to flat-out poor parenting (due to drugs, lack of income, etc). Finally, go ahead and solve the problem of child abuse. Once you've got all that straightened out, I guess you could start on homosexuality.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:30 PM
Then why not give them the rest? Which marriage rights do you specifically have a problem with homo couples having?What else do they need? Special tax breaks to enourage homosexual acts?

Can we call that the ***-sex tax? ;)

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:30 PM
In that they are both naturally ocurring abnormalities? Yes. In that neither of them are worthy of discrimination? Yes.

Still not working.




Then this isn't a homo/hetero issue, but one of teen sexuality.

WTF are you talking about? When was the last time you saw fifty 15 year old "lesbians" groping each other?





Then isn't it a good idea to talk about sexuality so that adults can help children sort their feelings out? Maybe a kid would be less likely to "experiment" if he knew he could talk to is parents about it without being told he was going to burn in hell.

Why would they experiment? I thought homosexuality was a naturally occurring abnormality?

Stoop Dawg
3/7/2006, 03:31 PM
Agreed.

Anything more would equal special protection for this certain class of people. The government would then be promoting this type of lifestyle over a natural child producing relationship.

So couples that can't (or won't) have children shouldn't be "married" under the law? That seems crazy to me. Surely you mean "The government would then be allowing this type of lifestyle - which I don't like".

GDC
3/7/2006, 03:31 PM
Sorry, this thread is too long to read every reply. Lid has hit the nail on the head here. Anyone who thinks homosexuality will destroy society should set their sights on much worse problems. Once you've outlawed divorce (the #1 enemy of the "traditional family"). Next, turn your attention to flat-out poor parenting (due to drugs, lack of income, etc). Finally, go ahead and solve the problem of child abuse. Once you've got all that straightened out, I guess you could start on homosexuality.

Some combination of drugs and/or alcohol are usually responsible for or are part of every other factor you mention here. Take Lid and his amyl nitrate poppers, for instance.

OklahomaTuba
3/7/2006, 03:33 PM
Sorry, this thread is too long to read every reply. Lid has hit the nail on the head here. Anyone who thinks homosexuality will destroy society should set their sights on much worse problems. Once you've outlawed divorce (the #1 enemy of the "traditional family"). Next, turn your attention to flat-out poor parenting (due to drugs, lack of income, etc). Finally, go ahead and solve the problem of child abuse. Once you've got all that straightened out, I guess you could start on homosexuality.

I agree 1000000%.

People obsess way to much about this topic. People will sin. I'm a sinner, you're a sinner, we are all sinners.

Hate the sin, love the sinner. Thats all I got.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:33 PM
Sorry, this thread is too long to read every reply. Lid has hit the nail on the head here. Anyone who thinks homosexuality will destroy society should set their sights on much worse problems. Once you've outlawed divorce (the #1 enemy of the "traditional family"). Next, turn your attention to flat-out poor parenting (due to drugs, lack of income, etc). Finally, go ahead and solve the problem of child abuse. Once you've got all that straightened out, I guess you could start on homosexuality.


I've got no problems with divorce. The day my divorce became final was the second happiest day of my life. You get rid of divorce, I guarantee the murder rate will increase proportionally.

BeetDigger
3/7/2006, 03:34 PM
Can we call that the ***-sex tax? ;)


They're now taxing it? :eek:

Stoop Dawg
3/7/2006, 03:34 PM
Thus, making the homosexual union equal to the heterosexual union in the eyes of the government.

Homosexuals can get married now in their own eyes, at churches that support such things. They can live together and have sex any way they want. They can write wills to leave their possessions to their partners. They can create living wills and other documents giving their partner full rights to see to their hospital care.

So can heteros. I say abolish the concept of "marriage" in the eyes of the govt. No special considerations for "marriages" of any kind. I'd be okay with that.

Stoop Dawg
3/7/2006, 03:37 PM
I've got no problems with divorce. The day my divorce became final was the second happiest day of my life. You get rid of divorce, I guarantee the murder rate will increase proportionally.

You're a sinner and will burn in hell. Sorry.


I wouldn't be in favor of outlawing divorce, but it is certainly a bigger threat to society than homosexuality ever was.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:38 PM
You're a sinner and will burn in hell. Sorry.


Are you serious?

crawfish
3/7/2006, 03:40 PM
Sorry, this thread is too long to read every reply. Lid has hit the nail on the head here. Anyone who thinks homosexuality will destroy society should set their sights on much worse problems. Once you've outlawed divorce (the #1 enemy of the "traditional family"). Next, turn your attention to flat-out poor parenting (due to drugs, lack of income, etc). Finally, go ahead and solve the problem of child abuse. Once you've got all that straightened out, I guess you could start on homosexuality.

If you think there's no concern in these areas by the conservative faction, then you're dead wrong. In fact, IMO I'd say they get significantly more play in most Christian crowds than homosexuality by a large count.

Of course, that kind of stuff never gets reported by the press. :rolleyes:

mdklatt
3/7/2006, 03:43 PM
Thus, making the homosexual union equal to the heterosexual union in the eyes of the government.


And that's bad because? How does legalizing gay marriage discourage straight marriage?




Homosexuals can get married now in their own eyes, at churches that support such things. They can live together and have sex any way they want. They can write wills to leave their possessions to their partners. They can create living wills and other documents giving their partner full rights to see to their hospital care.

Then why the objection to putting that all of that together in one package?

sanantoniosooner
3/7/2006, 03:43 PM
Are you serious?
no he's not serious.

He'd given up on the christian faith and is mocking it.

Frozen Sooner
3/7/2006, 03:43 PM
Are you serious?

"What God has joined let no man sunder."

crawfish
3/7/2006, 03:44 PM
So can heteros. I say abolish the concept of "marriage" in the eyes of the govt. No special considerations for "marriages" of any kind. I'd be okay with that.

As I said before, family is the backbone of any society. I hardly see why discouraging or weakening that will be beneficial.

Harry Beanbag
3/7/2006, 03:44 PM
"What God has joined let no man sunder."


You mean like butt cheeks? :)

Frozen Sooner
3/7/2006, 03:47 PM
Heh. Well, yeah.

For the record, I don't think that divorced people will go to Hell. I just think it's odd that people have a tendency to say "Oh, well, MY sins are just minor peccadillos and should be legal. THAT sin? That's gross."

C&CDean
3/7/2006, 03:50 PM
I just locked this one down. Why? A couple reasons.

1) It has shot it's wad

2) It just ain't every day somebody uses "peccadillo" in a thread. Bravo Froze!!