If you’re concerned about the risk of gays spreading disease, why not support educating homosexuals about their increased risk and advocating safe sex among homosexuals? [/quote]
You don’t want to go there do you?
Since 1986 tens of millions of dollars has been spent in attempts to educate “homosexuals” regarding safe sex. And what’s happened? The cases of HIV positive have doubled and then doubled again!
Take a look at the San Francisco study.
Don’t make me post volumes of data from the CDC. This education you speak of has been tried over and over again and the results are no better than educating alcoholics on the evils of drinking.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on in this argument no matter which side you approach it from.
You’re kidding again right?
If the big “born that way” lie were to be totally unmasked then more would go to therapy, and there would be many more who change.
Come Cap 2+2=4. This stuff is not that difficult when you take off the liberal blinders.
I have a question for all you haters. I am a happy gay man, disease free, enjoying life to the best of my ability, drug free, do my best to treat others as I would like to be treated, I have lots of great friends, some in which happen to be gay as well as disease free, I pay my taxes, and I’m a law abiding citizen. Does this count for anything. Or am I an immoral person just because I have safe sex with another man.[/quote]
I’m not a hater, so this wasn’t directed to me, but please allow me to re-frame the question. Instead of focusing on the person, I think the relevant inquiry is to the nature of the act: Why is gay sex, in and of itself, immoral? Is it immoral?
I don’t think this can be effectively answered solely by referencing the homosexual lifestyle, or disease risk - morality is a separate issue. It’s not immoral to go skydiving, or to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but just ask your insurance agent what either of those activities does to your life expectancy.
[quote]BlaKistKneeGrow wrote:
John S. wrote:
Looks like I struck a cord with you huh? The fact is 2 naked women is going to attract us because guess what, unlike the gay guy I will turned on by chicks. The whole thing is if it feels good it has to be right is bullshit. I hear meth makes you feel fucking awesome that must be right too.
Who made what is moral and immoral, well infact you did, see there is this thing that you have called a conscience, and when you listen to it, it tends to tell you what’s right and wrong, but as anything over time environmental factors may come into play to change them, but I believe these are some that will not change for most people.
You “strike a cord with me” because someone I love has gone through fucking hell growing up because of people like you.
You being the fucked up person that you are and having read my posts on my brother shows that you are an antagonizing self righteous person who enjoys “striking cords” with others knowing full well the struggles they’ve faced.
Still not addressing men having anal with women huh?
My conscience tells me to not condemn gay people. Gay people don’t hurt me. My gay brother is an awesome guy. So please, don’t try to tell me I don’t have a conscience.
I’m a happily married man with a beautiful daughter and my gay brother doesn’t spread his “gayness” all over the place. He’s just a person. If you met him, you wouldn’t even know he’s gay. So what happened if you ended up being good friends with him only to find out that he’s gay. You would not be his friend anymore? If that’s the case, then you are truly a fucked up person.
This notion that you must be “against” gay people is bullshit.
What “immoral” acts do you perform? None of my business you say? Same goes for you, none of your fucking business what others do as long as they aren’t hurting anyone else.
I have a reason to be passionate. Accept others as long as their actions aren’t hurting anyone. If two people want to do something that they both enjoy, who the fuck are you to tell them they are wrong?
[/quote]
When the fuck have I said I hate gay people? Just because I disagree with there choice does not mean I hate them as a whole. Ever disagreed with one of your friends on a certain part of there lifestyle? Its the same thing.
The fact of the matter is it is Immoral/against are basic biology, and I will always hate the CHOICE does not mean I will hate the person. Come back when you can understand the difference and maybe you will be able to keep up with me.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I think the authors are lying because of a biased approach to the study resulting in questionable results.
Every one of the authors is lying? Every single one?
Come on Cap, you don’t even believe that. Could it be that the big “born that way” lie is wrong? Yes, in fact it is.
[/quote]
Every one of them performed the test with a biased approach. Thus, the studies are not legitimate.
I’m not sure you’re smart enough to have this conversation.
How do I make this as simple as possible? Hmmm. Ok, I’ll explain this first: if someone puts an equal sign, followed by a backslash, followed by another equal sign, it means “is not equal to”. With me so far?
Now, as to the issue at hand:
Calling something a serious problem =/= it is a serious problem.
Your faulty, bigoted logic is what all of your little “tests” were run on, again, making them completely illegitimate.
Answer: biased, nonobjective studies are not legitimate data. Or did you not get that the first 3 or 4 times?
sigh 5: A biased study provides no legitmate data.
Aw. Silly little bigot is sooooo wedy to beweve that dem mean ol gays is just doin it to be mean to him that he’ll beweve ANYTHING that says they is the problem.
Face it, Zeb, a biased study is unreliable. Show me one objective one and maybe we could talk. Oh wait-- THEY DONT EXIST.
Keep calling it a lie, its a good excuse to be a bigot, Zeb.
hahaha. WAAAHA LIBERALS LIBERALS LIBERALS UNIVERSITIES MEDIA THE LIBERAL MEDIA LIBERAL PROFESSORS WAAAHHH. You sound like every other dumbshit bigot conservative: if they dont agree that faggots are ruining the world, they’re liberal liars.
Seriously, shut the fuck up.
Gays have no more reason to change than, and are as inelligible for changing as, straights.
Do you believe that, with therapy, YOU could change from straight to gay?
But of course, you’re not a bigot, no…not you… you just wish homosexuality could be eradicated because… well, you’re just not a bigot and anyone who says you are is a lying liberal!
Yes, Zeb, clamoring for all homosexuals to get “the treatment” is certainly going to change SO MANY minds. You’re having such a profound effect, its incredible… who the fuck are you, CaliforniaLaw?
You’re not going to change the mind of anyone with half a brain by waving around laughable “studies” that prove absolutely nothing.
Again, Zeb, with proper therapy, could you “turn gay”? Do you think you have it in you?
[quote]ModernLifeIsWar wrote:
John S. wrote:
BlaKistKneeGrow wrote:
John S. and Primalfear(of homosexuals) -
It’s not just the naked women though, it’s the fact that two or more naked women are together. These women are having sex together. This is not “natural”. Being turned on by this is “immoral” in your book of immorality.
So you are both guilty of being attracted to something that is “immoral”.
You lose.
By the way who wrote the book on immorality? You? If so, why is it ok to “kick someone to the curb”? Doesn’t sound to “moral” to me. I think you’re fucked up.
Also, let’s not forget the topic of men having anal sex with women. It keeps being ignored. Is sticking a dick in a woman’s ass immoral? Like I said, the FACT is, many, many, many men are into this. It easily spreads disease as well. Is it “immoral” if both people are consenting?
Common, give is your judgment. However you might have to question yourself, and you wouldn’t want that now would you? Keep the focus on others, not yourself, right?
Looks like I struck a cord with you huh? The fact is 2 naked women is going to attract us because guess what, unlike the gay guy I will turned on by chicks. The whole thing is if it feels good it has to be right is bullshit. I hear meth makes you feel fucking awesome that must be right too.
Who made what is moral and immoral, well infact you did, see there is this thing that you have called a conscience, and when you listen to it, it tends to tell you what’s right and wrong, but as anything over time environmental factors may come into play to change them, but I believe these are some that will not change for most people.
Bakistkneegrow made a really good point. In fact I agree with you, you did strike a cord with him. A cord that brought out some logic and intelligence behind his statements, unlike you.
So you say meth makes you feel fucking awesome but you chose not to do it because it is immoral. That’s a bad example. You admit that gay sex would make you feel fucking awesome. You just don’t do it because your conscience says it’s wrong.
Btw, Meth along with other street drugs ruin peoples lives. Crystal Meth is addicting and can ruin relationships. The addiction takes over your body and causes you to be chemically dependent. Being addicted to Meth is serious because once you’re addicted, you have strong cravings for it, and you begin to experience stomach pain, headaches, drowsiness, and depression if you DO NOT receive this drug. I have not experienced any of this from having sex with men.
I have a question for all you haters. I am a happy gay man, disease free, enjoying life to the best of my ability, drug free, do my best to treat others as I would like to be treated, I have lots of great friends, some in which happen to be gay as well as disease free, I pay my taxes, and I’m a law abiding citizen. Does this count for anything. Or am I an immoral person just because I have safe sex with another man.[/quote]
My friend, you read way to far into my meth statement. If you want to talk about shit being dangerous, You are more likely to get aids then me just because the fact that your gay. And I am going to go in depth with this one because with this subject you seem to either read to far into shit or not far enough. I am not saying hetros don’t get aids, but they are far less likely then the homos. Neither Primal or I have ever said you where completely immoral just because you where gay, all we said was that action, that one part of your life is immoral.
Just because you are gay does not mean I will not say to you I think being gay is wrong/I hate the action. I will also say this to you tho, I do not think you are wrong as a whole/hate you just because of this one part of your life.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
If the big “born that way” lie were to be totally unmasked then more would go to therapy, and there would be many more who change.
Come Cap 2+2=4. This stuff is not that difficult when you take off the liberal blinders.
[/quote]
ZEB,
You’ve been ignoring my questions for some reason.
You cannot know if someone chooses an attraction to something without being inside the persons mind. Are you claiming that you are capable of telepathy?
I realize that you are driven by your religion and that you look at homosexuality as a sin, so how can God make someone gay, right?
Ok, I’ve been asking this over and over again with no response at all -
Why do men like having anal sex with women? It is not “natural”. These men just like to do it. They don’t know why, but they do. Sounds to me like they aren’t “choosing” this attraction to a womans asshole. Hmm, the old penis in the asshole bashing from the gay haters some how fades away when I speak of men doing it to women. Are you all saying that a penis does indeed belong in a womans asshole because it’s a woman and not a man? There are many, many, many straight men who like doing this. We’re talking about a mass scale here. Is this “immoral”? Are men who like having anal sex with women “sinful”? Do you put them in the same boat as homosexuals? Is it kind of less than “sin” but still “sin”? Please explain.
You all say, “where do you draw the line on morals”? Simple, you draw the line when the actions of a person negatively effect another person. Men having anal sex with women easily spreads disease and isn’t natural. Does this mean that it is “immoral”. Should or shouldn’t this be happening? If you say it shouldn’t be happening, then there are a hell of a lot of straight men who would either disagree with you, or “stay in the closet”.
Also, you really like to post statistics and studies. What experiences of your own have you had with someone close to you being gay? Please share.
If you’re concerned about the risk of gays spreading disease, why not support educating homosexuals about their increased risk and advocating safe sex among homosexuals?
You don’t want to go there do you?
Since 1986 tens of millions of dollars has been spent in attempts to educate “homosexuals” regarding safe sex. And what’s happened? The cases of HIV positive have doubled and then doubled again!
Take a look at the San Francisco study.
Don’t make me post volumes of data from the CDC. This education you speak of has been tried over and over again and the results are no better than educating alcoholics on the evils of drinking.
You really don’t have a leg to stand on in this argument no matter which side you approach it from.
By the way, how would “proving” that its a choice reduce any risks or negative outcomes?
You’re kidding again right?
If the big “born that way” lie were to be totally unmasked then more would go to therapy, and there would be many more who change.
Come Cap 2+2=4. This stuff is not that difficult when you take off the liberal blinders.
[/quote]
I’ve explained several times how and why all your little “studies” are bullshit.
Heres the truth:
If everyone buys into the “being gay is a choice and it’s wrong” lie, bigots like you will have free reign to discriminate against homosexuals for any reason whatsoever. This means landlords can refuse gay tenants, employers can refuse to hire gay applicants, bars and restaurants can proudly display NFA signs, schools can refuse gay students, etc etc.
Considering the amount of systemic homophobia we have in our society today, its not suprising that 20-30% of homosexuals have “changed”; that is, after intense brainwash–err-- “therapy”, they saw the light and decided to claim to be straight to (a)get the therapists to leave them alone and (b)to fit in with a homophobic society.
So maybe you’re right, Zeb. I’m sure if the general hardships gays face these days are enough coerce 20-30% into “changing”, who knows how many will be willing to “change” when being gay means you cant work or rent an apartment or vote (I mean, hell, they’re immoral criminals… we dont let rapists vote, so why should they?!!).
Look, Zeb, I dont know if people are “born gay” or if they “become gay”. I dont know if its genetic or a result of upbringing or a potential that some have triggered and some dont, I dont know. I just know that some people “are gay” and some aren’t. Unlike you, though, it is not my intention to force gays to be straight, or straight people to be gay, or for any two consenting adults to be forced to stop doing what makes them happy as long as it doesnt directly harm anyone else.
I’ve just come across this discussion, and have a bit to add.
If homosexuality is genetic then that would mean that ALL sexual orientations, no matter how evil, are also genetic. I for one think that would be a very dark path to walk along.
[quote]Mr. Intensity wrote:
I’ve just come across this discussion and have something to add.
If homosexuality is genetic, then that would mean that all sexual orientations are also genetic, even the most evil ones, that is a dark path that I for one would not like to walk down. [/quote]
Good point! This would also mean that straight people that are into anything that isn’t natural like oral sex, anal sex, bondage, anal beads, etc. is also caused by genetics.
I’m not claiming that homosexuality is caused by genetics, who really cares? Anything could have “caused” anyone to be into anything. However the fact remains, people are attracted to things one way or another.
We ALL have things that we’re into. IT’S SEX!!! As long as the person you’re doing it with is happy and you are happy, who cares about genetics/choice etc.? It’s supposed to be enjoyable! So who is anyone to tell another person that they are “immoral” for doing what they are into as long as it’s not hurting anyone else and they are responsible? No matter how you try and argue about it, it doesn’t matter. I’m sure every person reading this and posting has some kind of “fetish” that they are into. Of course they will keep it private because it shouldn’t be any of anyones business. Same goes for the lives of homosexuals.
That’s the difference though. The men on here saying that homosexuals are immoral like to keep the focus on gays because it’s an easy target. It’s not natural man, it goes against nature, it’s not moral. Is sticking anal beads up a woman’s rectum natural?
People also said that blow jobs were immoral back in the old days, are they still? What about anal sex with women? Is that still immoral? I could go on and on.
Also, I must add that homosexuals are not all about sex, sex, sex. If you talk with most gay people, they will tell you it’s about the relationship with their partner, not just sex. Same as straight people - relationships.
Are men that have ass/anal fetishes with women caused by genetics or do they “choose” this attraction? How about feet, bondage, spanking, choking? Can anyone answer this please? Nobody wants to answer it because it opens up the door for way too much logic to flow in.
[quote]Mr. Intensity wrote:
I’ve just come across this discussion, and have a bit to add.
If homosexuality is genetic then that would mean that ALL sexual orientations, no matter how evil, are also genetic. I for one think that would be a very dark path to walk along. [/quote]
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Look, Zeb, I dont know if people are “born gay” or if they “become gay”. I dont know if its genetic or a result of upbringing or a potential that some have triggered and some dont, I dont know. I just know that some people “are gay” and some aren’t. Unlike you, though, it is not my intention to force gays to be straight, or straight people to be gay, or for any two consenting adults to be forced to stop doing what makes them happy as long as it doesnt directly harm anyone else.
[/quote]
[quote]Mr. Intensity wrote:
I’ve just come across this discussion, and have a bit to add.
If homosexuality is genetic then that would mean that ALL sexual orientations, no matter how evil, are also genetic. I for one think that would be a very dark path to walk along. [/quote]
No and - No.
For one, why would that mean that ALL sexual orientations were genetic?
And also, there would be no dark path.
Our culture is complex enough to deal with the little differences and subtilities. In fact, we already do, as pedophiles are often assumed to be mentally ill (from a genetic disposition) and therby excused from prison. That doesn’t mean we let them go, but force feed them with narcotics and lock them away in a mental clinic.
As for the other “evil forms” you mention (I assume Necrophilia and Sodomy), where’d be the difficulty in dealing with them if we find the “corpse-lover-gene” or the “inter species erotica-gene”?
Saying that pedophiles are born that way suggests they are not entirely to blame for their actions. Do not kid yoursel they choose to do what they do and therefore there is no excuse there should be no time in a mental clinic for them, they should be thrown in prison in isolation until they are deemed ready for life around other people.
If you like to kid yourself and think that these people do not choose what they do, thats fine, bury your head in the sand and hope that science will solve the problem.
Let’s think beyond the realm of homosexuals for a minute.
Every porno company that puts out any kind of straight porno has a staggering percentage of anal sex in it. Next time you are watching porno, record the number of times a man puts his penis in a woman’s anus. I think you will find that it far outweighs the number of times a man will put it in her vagina. Just about every straight male that has the ability to watch straight porn on this planet should notice this.
What is it that porn company’s put out? They put out what sells. ANAL SEX SELLS.
You know that most of you have seen it, masturbated to it. You must have, it sells. Straight men are buying it. Many of you who have had sex has either done it or wants to do it very badly. I’m sure there are woman at your jobs, school, so on that you would love to walk up behind them, lift their skirt up and stick it where the sun don’t shine.
So you are indeed immoral by your own standards and argument, speaking of the “Homosexuality is not natural and wrong” crowd. I hate to break it to all you anal lovers, anal sex ain’t natural either.
I would go even further on to say that MOST straight people are “immoral” by YOUR own standards. I don’t think your immoral, you do! You should already know this about yourself however, you buy the films, you talk about it with your friends, you fantasize about it, you do it.
That would mean the “homosexuality is immoral” crowd on here are hypocrites by their own standards. Don’t try to pick and choose either, anal sex is not “natural” as you so often state. It doesn’t matter whether it’s with a woman or not, it is what it is.
Also, I must make it clear that I don’t claim to understand why homosexuals are homosexuals. I don’t “get it”. However, I don’t care. I don’t need to understand why a man would be attracted to a man in order to accept them and treat them as I would want to be treated. Do I think they are “immoral”? As a whole, no, I don’t. I’m sure there are gay people out there that aren’t good people just as any crowd has bad people. I personally don’t like thinking about men being with men. To me it’s not something I like to think about. However I also don’t like to think about obese people or dwarfs having sex either. Does that mean that they are “immoral”? Nope, it just means that I’m not into it.
I think you need to be a little more reasonable in your ideas. There is nothing wrong with a gay wanting to change, regardless of social pressure. Many, many, many adults do things because of social pressure; the newest car, the best looking house on the block, etc… Everyone does things to support their view of society. We are all social beings and that cannot be changed.
So a gay wanting to change due to social pressure is no different and perfectly legitimate, just like doing anything else for social reasons.
And you are right, I believe mainstream society would like being gay to be a choice, because it offers more options. But I also think that only some gays would prefer that it not be a choice so they can feel better about their lifestyle, and coerce those gays who are not so sure.
I don’t think this issue is as black and white as you would like it to be.
[quote]BlaKistKneeGrow wrote:
John S. and Primalfear(of homosexuals) -
It’s not just the naked women though, it’s the fact that two or more naked women are together. These women are having sex together. This is not “natural”. Being turned on by this is “immoral” in your book of immorality.
So you are both guilty of being attracted to something that is “immoral”.
You lose.
[/quote]
I think you may be missing the point. Being attracted to lesbians may very well be immoral and “not natural” for a heterosexual male, however, that doesn’t mean they act on it. Having “deviant” thoughts is much different than acting on those thoughts. That is the distinction.
I have no issues with a guy who has homosexual thoughts, but that is not what causes the problems. The poor mental and physical outcomes come from acting on homosexual thoughts, not just thinking them.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
BlaKistKneeGrow wrote:
John S. and Primalfear(of homosexuals) -
It’s not just the naked women though, it’s the fact that two or more naked women are together. These women are having sex together. This is not “natural”. Being turned on by this is “immoral” in your book of immorality.
So you are both guilty of being attracted to something that is “immoral”.
You lose.
I think you may be missing the point. Being attracted to lesbians may very well be immoral and “not natural” for a heterosexual male, however, that doesn’t mean they act on it. Having “deviant” thoughts is much different than acting on those thoughts. That is the distinction.
I have no issues with a guy who has homosexual thoughts, but that is not what causes the problems. The poor mental and physical outcomes come from acting on homosexual thoughts, not just thinking them.
[/quote]
Exactly, you cant always control your mind, but you can control your actions. There have been many times i just wanted to reach out and strangle someones throat for stupidity or cutting me off on the road. Doesnt mean i have to act on impulses that are illegal or immoral.
I think you need to be a little more reasonable in your ideas. There is nothing wrong with a gay wanting to change, regardless of social pressure. Many, many, many adults do things because of social pressure; the newest car, the best looking house on the block, etc… Everyone does things to support their view of society. We are all social beings and that cannot be changed.
[/quote]
Doing something due to social pressure is neither good nor bad in itself. People shower due to social pressure, this is good. Some people wear clothes that are in style at a particular time due to social pressure, this is innocuous enough. However, this does not make legitimate all change based on social pressure, especially when that social pressure is based on bigotry and fear.
Much like an interracial couple breaking up because of social pressure, or a woman giving up on her career goals because of social pressures to be a stay at home mother, or a young person joining a gang due to social pressure, or anyone else giving in to such pressures.
Yes, we are all social beings, but that does not make everything about any one particular society right, and society can change.
I disagree. There are good things done because of social pressures, and bad things. This is a bad thing.
It offers more options to openly discriminate against and hate other people for no good reason other than “they’re different and I can’t handle that”.
Thats wrong.
And many straights would prefer if it was a choice so they could gay bash with impunity.
What issue, exactly? Because there are a few being discussed here; gay marriage/ if being gay is a choice/ if being gay is wrong.
If being gay is a choice, it depends on your definition. The attraction is not a choice, the actions a person takes are choices. So a gay man does not choose to want to have sex with men, but he can choose to have sex with men or not.
IMO, its a moot point because theres no reason gays just cant be gay; what causes me to speak up on the issue is that so many people only want to “prove” that its a choice so they can use it as rationalization for their bigotry against gays (nevermind that being gay could, reasonably, be both a choice and not wrong).
So, on a legal level, I’d rather it be viewed as intrinsic and innate, as to not open those gates I described earlier.