 |
| |
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Unfortunately, that's not true. The anti-sodomy laws have been enforced against gays, as a recent example in Texas showed.
And the other things he mentioned are still happening. One of the most egregious examples is hospitals refusing to grant the partner visitation rights, even when their lover lies dying in a hospital bed. |
Can you provide me with links please?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Provost Harrison
|
 |
The farce is strong with this one.
Feb 2000
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
Comparing blacks to gays is fallacious. You can't do anything about being black (unless you're Michael Jackson). You can choose not to have homosexual sex, which in turn makes you not a homosexual. If you have sex with people of the opposite sex, it doesn't matter what you think, you are heterosexual. You are defined by your actions, not by your thoughts. |
What bulls**t. Homosexuals do not have a choice in their sexuality. The concept of sleeping with a woman may be as unappealing to them as sleeping with a man is to you. Why should people live a lie? This invariably leads to unhappiness, discontentment and depression, in severe forms. No one should be expected to live a lie, that is the only fact of this situation.
quote:
I think it is fine if some states want homosexuality to be 100% legal and allow marriages and everything, so long as it's okay for other states to make it completely illegal and force people who practice it in their states to leave and go to a state where it is legal. |
No, it's not fine at all. It should be the right of every man to express his sexuality free from persecution. Just like it is the right of the black man to have equal rights to the white man, the same should be true of gay and straight, no matter where in the US, or for that matter, the world they live. It is no one else's decision, and no authority has the right to decide the course of their life for them!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
You can choose not to have homosexual sex, which in turn makes you not a homosexual. If you have sex with people of the opposite sex, it doesn't matter what you think, you are heterosexual. You are defined by your actions, not by your thoughts. |
You are being a complete idiot. Now did choose to be so, or were you born that way? 
Since you're not homosexual (well, I wonder, but we'll say that is the case), you can't say a damn thing about whether or not a gay can choose to be so. Homosexuality is NOT defined by the sex act, it is defined by the attraction towards the same sex. The definition you are using is a fictional one you have made up in your head to somehow (weakly) rationalize your absurd beliefs.
quote:
I think it is fine if some states want homosexuality to be 100% legal and allow marriages and everything, so long as it's okay for other states to make it completely illegal and force people who practice it in their states to leave and go to a state where it is legal. |
Except that the latter is blatantly unconstitutional. You seem to have little regard for that document, so I'm not surprised you would say it. So are you an actual member of the fascist party, or have you not had the time to join them yet?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dimorier Maximus
|
 |
of Apolyton
May 2001
time: 05:21
|
|
I could explain to you why homosexuality is wrong, but you would not understand. So I will not waste my time explaining it. In fact, if I did explain it, you would laugh at my explanation. It is far too deep, and you have to believe in certain things that y'all obviously don't believe in to see that it is wrong.
As for being the 'chosen ones' and me being in for a shock, how the heck would you know Prov? Every knee shall bow. Some willingly and happily, some will be saying, "Oh $&#@, Jesus is Lord."
To be frank with you, I don't care what you think. You are all as thick skulled as any brainwashed, new age Westerners. You don't give a @%#$ about God and it will come back to bite you in the @$$.
I'm done here. I told you enough, and I can see that no one here is willing to believe so any more time I spend here would be wasted on deaf ears. I dust my feet off as I leave this place.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Giancarlo
|
 |
Los Angeles
Apr 2000
time: 02:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
I could explain to you why homosexuality is wrong, but you would not understand. So I will not waste my time explaining it. In fact, if I did explain it, you would laugh at my explanation. It is far too deep, and you have to believe in certain things that y'all obviously don't believe in to see that it is wrong. |
Homosexuality is not wrong because you argue on a baseless case.
quote:
As for being the 'chosen ones' and me being in for a shock, how the heck would you know Prov? Every knee shall bow. Some willingly and happily, some will be saying, "Oh $&#@, Jesus is Lord."[/quote
What? I lost you there.
[quote]
To be frank with you, I don't care what you think. You are all as thick skulled as any brainwashed, new age Westerners. You don't give a @%#$ about God and it will come back to bite you in the @$$. |
No it won't because god doesn't exist. And I will say this: If you want to challange my opinion do it with a case that actually holds merit not one predating the middle ages.
quote:
I'm done here. I told you enough, and I can see that no one here is willing to believe so any more time I spend here would be wasted on deaf ears. I dust my feet off as I leave this place. |
Deaf ears is a characteristic of yourself, not us.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
moomin
|
 |
Moo Like In Moomin
Jul 2000
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
But can you seriously say that inappropriate gay PDAs outnumber straight ones? Not even close.
|
If by PDAs you refer to Public Displays of Affection, then I agree it's not even close. Given that the hetero population vastly outnumbers the homo one, it's be downright strange it wasn't so.
But PDAs are not what we - or, at least, what I - discuss here. I couldn't care less about a couple holding hands, pecking each other on the cheek or hugging. Regardless of what couple it is. What I object to are PDIs (indecency, if you please): serious petting, nudity, gross sexual innuendo and french kissin' - again regardless of what kind of couple we're talking about. And homos win that contest hands down, almost entirely due to the the parades.
quote:
What do you mean "officially?" I don't recall there being an official doctrine of homosexuality that I had to ascribe to...
|
I mean public events staged by acknowledged representatives of a group with massive participation of said group and without serious dissent within said group. Gay parades fit this bill - whereas the KKK, for instance, does not even come close to represent all whites as a group in this respect. The rather inept exemples you brought up (Jerry et al) fail to impress for the same reason.
quote:
Homo paraders don't "throw them out" because it would be utter hypocrisy to tell a group they can't participate based upon whatever their particular style was.
|
Then you'll just have to make peace with the thought that people will inevitably draw conclusions about all of those participating in these events from what they see. And given how the high extent these parades represent the gay movement at large, these infavourable impressions will certianly taint the image of all gays.
quote:
But to organize a parade whose origins comes from promoting tolerance and acceptance of something seen by society as abnormal and then say to a group within the parade "you either act normal or get lost" is ludicrous, anyway.
|
Oh, come on. You're already drawing the line somewhere. I bet you don't think a "catholic gay priests who like to fondle little boys" float would make it, no matter how much tolerance you're out to display and no matter how much society regards that as abnormal. And this even if they made nothing more shocking than holding up banners proclaming thier believes.
quote:
There is a certain point where we can make logical assumptions based on continuing behavior. Given your attitudes on this subject, any other assumption would be illogical.
|
Quite. Now apply your own reasoning above to my argumentation in this thread and see where it leads you.
quote:
Nope. You yourself it's not a problem to judge someone based on the acts of a minority of their groups. Since you have given a rationale justifying stereotypes (which astounds me), then obviously stereotypes of whatever nature are just fine.
|
I've already given you a fair rationale of when I think it's not only possible but reasonable to apply stereotypes above. My conditions were a heck more stringent than this floppy ***-fot-tat attempt.
quote:
You seem to want gays to actively refute any connection to their "extreme" elements in order to avoid your stereotyping them.
|
Actually, much as I'm sure this astounds you, I expect everyone to actively denonunce the cranks and extremists in their ranks, not only gays.
quote:
I'm saying nobody should have to do that.
|
That's your opinion. Out in the big world where you can't attempt to cover up your shortcomings by throwing PC accusations of ignorance and bigotry around, it's a long-established tenet that all communication is happens by the terms set up by the recipient or not at all. However unfair this seems to gay activists and direct marketeers, if you have a message beyond "nya-nya, I can show my pope and you can do nothing about it!" you'll have to dress your message up to suit the audience.
quote:
Well, good for you. But that is an obvious point wherein the point of view of those groups was, in your opinion, harmful to others. How can you possibly equate that to some guy walking down 5th avenue in buttless leather chaps?
|
I'm certainly not equating these. The guy walking down 5th Ave. is displaying tastlessness and a monomanical disregard for others, and those marching with him display a severe lack of tact and so much as a shred of clue to what serves their interest, but on the large scale of things it really doesn't matter. But it's quite as damning, in an area of interest much less pressing and serious than the political one, as far as making an unfavourable impression on in the mind of the onlookers as a Social Democrat first may parade with the hammer and the sicle would be.
So, Boris, you want to shake me up, make me re-evaluate my bigoted ways and make me take gay issues more seriously? Here's a tip: next time you join a parade, make sure it's a parade where you all wear three-piece suits, eat ice-cream, play cool music and have a good time without looking like a bunch of inmates escaped from a 1920s freak show. Honest to god, I'd be more astounded than any amount of butt flaps would ever accomplish.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Provost Harrison
|
|
The farce is strong with this one.
Feb 2000
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
I could explain to you why homosexuality is wrong, but you would not understand. So I will not waste my time explaining it. In fact, if I did explain it, you would laugh at my explanation. It is far too deep, and you have to believe in certain things that y'all obviously don't believe in to see that it is wrong. |
Not good enough. You haven't provided me with a good reason.
quote:
As for being the 'chosen ones' and me being in for a shock, how the heck would you know Prov? Every knee shall bow. Some willingly and happily, some will be saying, "Oh $&#@, Jesus is Lord."
To be frank with you, I don't care what you think. You are all as thick skulled as any brainwashed, new age Westerners. You don't give a @%#$ about God and it will come back to bite you in the @$$. |
Ah yes, thickheaded, despite the fact that on these issues, especially those such as evolution vs. creation I am extremely well versed. But because I do not agree with you, it is me who is 'thick headed'...we don't win brownie points by trying to bawl out the opposition 
quote:
I'm done here. I told you enough, and I can see that no one here is willing to believe so any more time I spend here would be wasted on deaf ears. I dust my feet off as I leave this place. |
Belief, faith, what you rely on for your world model simply not sufficient an explanation. To quote Nietzsche: 'A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything'.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dimorier Maximus
|
|
of Apolyton
May 2001
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by moominparatrooper
I'm certainly not equating these. The guy walking down 5th Ave. is displaying tastlessness and a monomanical disregard for others, and those marching with him display a severe lack of tact and so much as a shred of clue to what serves their interest, but on the large scale of things it really doesn't matter. But it's quite as damning, in an area of interest much less pressing and serious than the political one, as far as making an unfavourable impression on in the mind of the onlookers as a Social Democrat first may parade with the hammer and the sicle would be.
So, Boris, you want to shake me up, make me re-evaluate my bigoted ways and make me take gay issues more seriously? Here's a tip: next time you join a parade, make sure it's a parade where you all wear three-piece suits, eat ice-cream, play cool music and have a good time without looking like a bunch of inmates escaped from a 1920s freak show. Honest to god, I'd be more astounded than any amount of butt flaps would ever accomplish. |
ROFL! 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
It doesn't matter what his reasons for thinking homosexuality is wrong are! It is his right to hold any opinion he wants.
Some of you guys are just as bigotted in your anti-Christian beliefs as he is in his view of homosexuality.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-07-2002 01:16
|