Poll: Homosexuality
- Thread starter Sarpedon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I am gay so no I don't have any problem with it, I am NOT one of those stereotypes who gropes people & says "everyone's a little gay" and I hate those people, usually...
Oh also FUN FACT I have never heard a good argument for being against gay people, and if anyone has one please tell me, because i'd like to know if they actually exist.
Oh also FUN FACT I have never heard a good argument for being against gay people, and if anyone has one please tell me, because i'd like to know if they actually exist.
I said I support but It's more apathy leaning towards support. I don't go round patting the back of gay people for being gay, I just dislike people who Discriminate.
If any of that makes sense.
If any of that makes sense.
YEAH...WE HAVE PEOPLE TO JUDGE ON THERE SKIN COLOR....... IM so kidding here with that I just wanted to add it.webby said:
Honestly I see no problem with gay people, hell one of my better friends are gay and well.....I love the guy. and he is SUPER GAY...like....My little sister saw him for .3 seconds and asked me..."He's gay right?" ...So i lied and told her no just so that she would get mad that a straight guy looks like that...BUT ANYHOW. If they want to be gay, let them. My rule is Do whatever you want. Just not in my butt.
The one-sided argument almost makes me want to act like my priest on this just to even the sides, but I won't. Speaking of which, people against homosexuality often use the Bible as their sword, free speech as their armor, and the few gay rape cases as their shield. I find problems with each of those arguments. The point of this small essay is not to offend, but to persuade. Take it as you will, but with a bit of rationality.
I realize many people on the internet are atheists, so disregard this paragraph and go on to the next one. At the risk of ticking someone off, I'd have to say that the Bible argument is flawed. I realize that this theory may already be beaten to death, but I don't care. Paraphrasing, it says that all men and women are flawed. God used men to interpret the Bible onto paper, so my theory is that one naysayer whose job it was at the time decided to throw his/her personal opinions into the book. The only words not paraphrased are the Ten Commandments, which say nothing about homosexuality short of controlling your lust, regardless of sex or gender. It doesn't even say anything about women at all, nothing about lesbianism, although that was probably chauvinistic neglect. Besides, we've interpreted the Bible wrong before, around the 1600's, and what do you history buffs guess happened then? Is that a desirable future, to have fellow man locked up in prison or physically abused while they perform back-breaking labor? Again? That's nothing that the right backwards legislation couldn't accomplish.
Free speech is probably the least flawed, in my sight. I observe that you can say anything you want in public or private(except "Kill the President")in this country. That's true. But somebody shouldn't just be allowed to spew hate into the air, over the press, onto television and radio. That's probably why we have mods and program planners who act at their discretion, but nevertheless. It's my personal opinion that it should be in some constraints, but that's my personal opinion and therefore lacking in any substantial logic.
There is the argument that I've heard surprisingly often in certain places, even today, that homosexuals are crazy for the action that makes us call them "homosexuals", and have no restraint. I find while that is bound to be true in some gay individuals, that they will stop at nothing to find and violate people, that is also true with heterosexuals. It's what I prefer to call the "Atticus Finch Defense" for you literates out there, and it is no less true for race as it is in sexual preference.
They can't even control their own biological sexual preferences, yet some would punish them for being different. It's no different from kicking a black man because he offered to shake your hand or ask you for the time. You wouldn't do that, I hope. I'm going to be as impartial as I possibly can after that, by saying that homosexuals might be slightly more guilty than someone born with more melanin, because it is a somewhat controllable aspect of the personality, if not by much. If anyone in the currently 494 of the indifferent and against isn't still convinced, I'd love to hear your reasons why you would prefer to punish the majority of these upstanding, tax-paying citizens who are only different from you in their preference.
EDIT: I just realized this, but I would like to reiterate so there is no question that I am a devout Southern Baptist, as hard as that may be to believe.
I realize many people on the internet are atheists, so disregard this paragraph and go on to the next one. At the risk of ticking someone off, I'd have to say that the Bible argument is flawed. I realize that this theory may already be beaten to death, but I don't care. Paraphrasing, it says that all men and women are flawed. God used men to interpret the Bible onto paper, so my theory is that one naysayer whose job it was at the time decided to throw his/her personal opinions into the book. The only words not paraphrased are the Ten Commandments, which say nothing about homosexuality short of controlling your lust, regardless of sex or gender. It doesn't even say anything about women at all, nothing about lesbianism, although that was probably chauvinistic neglect. Besides, we've interpreted the Bible wrong before, around the 1600's, and what do you history buffs guess happened then? Is that a desirable future, to have fellow man locked up in prison or physically abused while they perform back-breaking labor? Again? That's nothing that the right backwards legislation couldn't accomplish.
Free speech is probably the least flawed, in my sight. I observe that you can say anything you want in public or private(except "Kill the President")in this country. That's true. But somebody shouldn't just be allowed to spew hate into the air, over the press, onto television and radio. That's probably why we have mods and program planners who act at their discretion, but nevertheless. It's my personal opinion that it should be in some constraints, but that's my personal opinion and therefore lacking in any substantial logic.
There is the argument that I've heard surprisingly often in certain places, even today, that homosexuals are crazy for the action that makes us call them "homosexuals", and have no restraint. I find while that is bound to be true in some gay individuals, that they will stop at nothing to find and violate people, that is also true with heterosexuals. It's what I prefer to call the "Atticus Finch Defense" for you literates out there, and it is no less true for race as it is in sexual preference.
They can't even control their own biological sexual preferences, yet some would punish them for being different. It's no different from kicking a black man because he offered to shake your hand or ask you for the time. You wouldn't do that, I hope. I'm going to be as impartial as I possibly can after that, by saying that homosexuals might be slightly more guilty than someone born with more melanin, because it is a somewhat controllable aspect of the personality, if not by much. If anyone in the currently 494 of the indifferent and against isn't still convinced, I'd love to hear your reasons why you would prefer to punish the majority of these upstanding, tax-paying citizens who are only different from you in their preference.
EDIT: I just realized this, but I would like to reiterate so there is no question that I am a devout Southern Baptist, as hard as that may be to believe.
Ok let me put it another way, Are there any reasons why gay people should not have the same rights as straight people? eg Marriage, Adoption, The ability to give blood.TU4AR said:It depends what you mean by "against gay people".Thundero13 said:Oh also FUN FACT I have never heard a good argument for being against gay people, and if anyone has one please tell me, because i'd like to know if they actually exist.
If you're meaning arguments pertaining to "they shouldn't exist", then no.
If you're meaning arguments concerning more specific and complex areas of the social change being brought about by the general movement, and/or the attitude of said collective, then yes, I personally take issue with some of the areas addressed.
But if you're talking about the former then no, there isn't.
Tolerance makes it sound like they're a pest and I just deal with it very well, It's more along the lines of sexuality not even being a factor. I simply don't care about who you romp, be it straight, gay, or bi.bahumat42 said:
Do I or do I not support homosexuality? Like it's a team or something? That is truly strange phrasing.
Like many others, I'm indifferent. I am not homosexual myself, but I know many people who are, including two cousins of mine that are around my age, one of who recently "came out."
I don't care, I don't understand why anyone else would/does and it's really not any of my business.
I believe that people who think that homosexuality is a choice are ignorant and have little to no concept of the complexities of life.
I don't understand why anyone would care either. First of all, why is someone's sexual life another person's business? And, if it doesn't directly negatively affect one, why is it an issue?
Like many others, I'm indifferent. I am not homosexual myself, but I know many people who are, including two cousins of mine that are around my age, one of who recently "came out."
I don't care, I don't understand why anyone else would/does and it's really not any of my business.
I believe that people who think that homosexuality is a choice are ignorant and have little to no concept of the complexities of life.
I don't understand why anyone would care either. First of all, why is someone's sexual life another person's business? And, if it doesn't directly negatively affect one, why is it an issue?
i personally support homosexuality. i am not personally homosexual, nor do i know anyone who i *know* is gay (im only 15, haven't been around THAT much), but i do not find anything wrong with it. yeah so its not how we were designed to reproduce, but does it really matter that much? survival by maintaining population is hardly a concern nowadays considering how large it has gotten, and who am i to judge whether or not someone's sexual preferences are right or wrong? To each his own i say, for it is how i would prefer to be treated, and all we really have to do in this life is be happy, so i say let 'em enjoy each other.
(just as long as they don't hit on me after i made it clear im not interested. that would bug me, but that goes for women as well)
(just as long as they don't hit on me after i made it clear im not interested. that would bug me, but that goes for women as well)
Can I "support" homosexuality because guys hitting on me makes me feel better about my appearance?
Because I can do that.
Also, a person's worth and rights should not be decided by what sexual characteristics make his/her heart flutter and crotch organ fire up.
Because I can do that.
Also, a person's worth and rights should not be decided by what sexual characteristics make his/her heart flutter and crotch organ fire up.
I'm in full support of gay rights. We live in a wonderfully diverse world. No one deserves to be punished for who they are or how they feel (unless of course, it harms others...like serial killing...) I'm not gay myself, but I think everyone deserves to be happy. If anyone genuinely believes homosexuality is a choice, I'd like to hold their heads under the waters of knowledge until that last air bubble goes bloop. Why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay? It means to be ostracized, rejected by certain people, and all around just makes you very different from everyone else. You don't choose to be straight, do you?
I think humanity has more important things to worry about than other people's sexual orientation. And I see no point in judging people by something like that when there are much more valid criteria. (For example, basic social skills and consideration for others spring to mind.)
Well I'm fine with it personally.
People often say it's "not natural". I had 2 pets once, a female rabbit and a male guinea pig. The female rabbit often tried to hump the shit out of the male guinea pig, mounting it and thrusting. That makes no sense but I'd have to argue that by its very nature it is natural despite it being between different species and weird reversed genders. Anybody who thinks only humans can be gay is just retarded.
People often say it's "not natural". I had 2 pets once, a female rabbit and a male guinea pig. The female rabbit often tried to hump the shit out of the male guinea pig, mounting it and thrusting. That makes no sense but I'd have to argue that by its very nature it is natural despite it being between different species and weird reversed genders. Anybody who thinks only humans can be gay is just retarded.
This is incorrect.DannibalG36 said:
You can express a negative opinion so long as you do so without insulting or disrespecting people.
For example [footnote] These are just examples for the sake of clarification. I don't personally share these opinions are all[/footnote]:
Good way to express a negative opinion:
I think homosexuality is wrong because my religion says [whatever] / because I don't think it's right [whatever reason here]
Wrong ways to express a negative opinion on this topic:
Homosexuals are wrong because they're not real people! / because they have no rights!
FUCKING FAGS ARE FREAKS!
In essence, if you're explaining why you express a negative opinion and not being derogatory or insulting, you're fine, even if people don't agree with your opinion.
I've known several people who've had rabbits that were prone to getting crushes on cats. While it was usually a male rabbit and a female cat, it wasn't always.Daveman said:
