Why Homosexuality Should be Banned

[funguy2121]

I found this video and thought I'd share. Pretty old now, but I've only seen it today.

What do you think?

I thought it was great. The (sarcastic) points were pretty funny and actually hold up nicely as counterpoints to a lot of anti-homosexuality arguments. The editing was a tad annoying, but whatever.

OP, this thread has been done and done. This exact thread, with the same video. Why not use the seachbar, and then add to that thread instead? Or maybe another "What's up with the ponies?" thread?

 

[Vault Girl]

The condescending attitude doesn't help your cause. Your suggesting, as you did to Snowy Rainbow that the only reason people do what we do is because of emotions. I've seen Equilibrium and since your saying it's evidence of emotions going out of control then your solution to the problem is we either stop feeling all together or just put humanity out of its misery right now. that's a very black and white and nihilistic point don't you think? I'm not saying your view is wrong, your just not giving a logical base for it.

That's a quite big misunderstanding. My view on this is the following:
"As long as people have free minds, there will always be people who think differently* than others. That's the price we pay for freedom and I'm willingly paying it."
*I use the word different here instead of evil,wrong,..., because it's objective.
The same goes for emotions, but that's OT.

While that was getting off topic, Just by saying Homosexuality may be, in terms of a natural law philosophy, be technically unnatural. But there is nothing to suggest that it's wrong. getting in to semantics just makes the debate lose most of its meaning

Look through my posts and tell me where I said it's "wrong". You won't find any for two reasons:
1st. I've never said something like this, because I...
2nd. ...don't share this opinion. Mine is what you've just said. It's "technically unnatural", nothing more BUT nothing less aswell. I, personally, don't care and I won't offend a gay until he offends me.

One last note:

[...]But there is nothing to suggest that it's wrong.[...]

That statement of yours is not true. You can't say what's "wrong" and what's "right", as this falls under personal opinion.

I applied an ethical theory to suggest it was technically unnatural, not engaging with word play. Your proposing an investigation akin to Meta-ethical discussion, in terms of an emotive proposition. I'll concede that my saying it was wrong was an meta ethical slip and apologize for it. However The fact that you were arguing semantics and not for ethical reasoning does not provide a constructive argument.

In Terms of Thomas Aquinas Natural Law, the act of homosexuality is only unnatural because it does not produce children, while fully suggesting that feelings are not unnatural.

And "I won't offend a gay" might be considered offensive, since your being objective.

 

[RedxDecember]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZZsy-ivVKU&feature=fvst

Funny as hell.

 

[Vault Girl]

And "I won't offend a gay" might be considered offensive, since your being objective.

Sorry for that. Let me correct it.
"I won't offend or harm a person with a different sexual orientation, as long as that person respects mine."
That should be fine.
Anyway, I think we two went quite a bit offtopic here.

Maybe just a tad.

 

[Alssadar]

Arrived with a sigh, expecting a troll.
Read some comments before watching video, made me interested.
Watched video, laughed.
Sarcasm is the best form of mockery.

Captcha: Gaturr Career
Is that what Alligators have?

 

[Simeon Ivanov]

I hope he's being sarcastic

 

[VanTesla]

Evolution is fine and dandy until the current batch decide they're the best. Then, anything different is considered "wrong".

Magneto was right!

 

[chuckman1]

I love this it's hillarious

 

[Nerfherder17]

I found this video and thought I'd share. Pretty old now, but I've only seen it today.

What do you think?

I thought it was great. The (sarcastic) points were pretty funny and actually hold up nicely as counterpoints to a lot of anti-homosexuality arguments. The editing was a tad annoying, but whatever.

I hope you're not serious, the video seems more of a sarcastic joke. Or the guy's a total idiot. Anyway its not a disease, and its not a choice, its just a personality trait (trait not defect!) that occur in anyone. So banning it would be like banning relationships between black or white people.

And the last thing this planet needs is more children. I'm not saying don't have kids if you want them, but this world is overpopulated, and sodomy might just be the thing that saves this race.

If you are a true patriot, and want to do something heroic for your country, suck a dick!

You should probably go back to school because you clearly haven't learned what verbal irony is, or how to identify it.

If someone makes a point, and then presents an argument for it that makes an opposite point, and does so repeated, chances are you are watching satire.

Satire is used in many ways, and in this particular instance, is used to undermine the points raised by the anti-homosexual agenda in America. He makes one of the anti-homosexual points, then presents reasoning that displays contempt for that point, mocking the anti-homosexual agenda.

By coming in and starting to go 'This guy is an idiot!' about what he's saying, and then going on a pro-homosexual rant just shows that you didn't not actually hear what he was saying. You should not speak up to criticize things you do not understand.

Thought I quite clearly displayed both possibilities myself, and I have heard Americans saying equally stupid shit and being serious about it (I've heard other nationalities do it as well so no pro american rants please!). However I stand by the points I made regardless of their contexts, they were related to the subject and (to me) were important to make, especially the part about blowing people for the sakes of better future (which applies to both genders. You could also try licking a **** once in a while instead of all this mindless breeding).

The only part that made me doubt its seriousness was the very end. Had I paid more attention I might have picked up on other elements of the humor.

 

[Active Schizophrenic]

I thought this was kind of funny I am against homosexuality and christian but really dont care if they get married or have parades and stuff because im not involved and am REALLY tired of some other Christians religious zealotry *cough* westboro *cough* and please agnostic,athiest escapist community note WE ARE NOT ALL LIKE THE PEOPLE MENTIONED EARLIER!

 

[emeraldrafael]

Reminded me of the vid on Tosh.o Where the guy was like, there are only two places to go on spring braek.

... But meh, its alright, I suppose.

 

[Johanthemonster666]

I dont't hold anything againts gay people - what they do in their bedrooms is their problem.The video is good and the guy expreses some valid and som invalid reasons.

But I think we should ban gay pride parades.I can't imagine how you can gain support to your cause by dressing in abnoxiously coloured dress pretending to be a woman.Plus the word parade go buy a dictionary and find the meaning of that word.
I simply can't imagine that some people with any sence of moral would go around parading with their sexuality.

And again I will say that what gay people do in bed is their problem -I just don't like how some faggots try to shoff their ass in my face

It's a matter of opinion in this case; you dislike a small, vocal aspect of the community (those who are flamboyant and the more outlandish transgender people) but there is nothing wrong with them voicing that aspect of themselves. Just as you would be free to arrange a parade where you wear whatever you like and the such.

Different strokes for different folks and all that jazz.

Not to start a flame war, but this "those people are just flamboyant and ridiculous... the rest of us gays and lesbians aren't like that" type mentality needs to stop. Gay/Bi men and women need to stop reinforcing homophobic norms by casting out people like them for having a lisp, being androgynous or just fall outside gender/sex "norms" is no better than people bashing on gay and lesbian people for who they are. LGBTQ people are just as diverse as heterosexual ones...so as hard as it might be for some people not to stereotype (for psychological convenience) a massive chunk of the human race, it's better to live and let live unless it's somehow ACTUALLY harming you or others mentally or physically.

I know you weren't saying that being flamboyant is a bad thing and I agree everyone has a right to have fun, celebrate, and cut loose with a community of like-minded people in a controlled setting.

All these people that whine about gay pride parades.... why do you care? It's the only event of its kind and is held once a damn year in every major U.S city/community.

I have to put up with heterosexuality being shoved down my throat in every single bar, nightclub, mardi gras, movie, billboard, and internet media site that I come across...so I'm sure your (person complaining) frail (arbitrary) "puritanesque" sensibilities can tolerate one harmless parade just like they do with topless women during street parties and other sexualized opposite-sex displays in our daily lives.

P.S- Saying you're okay with Lesbians and gays but treating transgender, intergender,butch women or effeminate men, and bisexual people like crap doesn't qualify as acceptance in my book. I had to get let go of my ignorance about all that, I don't see why mentally capable people couldn't do the same in a world with much bigger problems.

 

[FC Groningen]

snip

I'm failing to see your point here. Bad thing have happened and do happen to people. Yes. And? Because one group had it rough no other group who is also being beaten and murdered can wish to fight for their rights?

The world doesn't work that way.

My original point was clearly defined: Homosexuals have every right to fight for their rights, but it's not the same as racial discrimination.

Of course it is. One is the treatment of an individual or a people based upon their race. The other is the treatment of an individual or people based upon their sexuality.

Your baffling. But I'm not going to argue with you. Frankly, I'm thankful you don't understand what I'm talking about. no one should.

As a sociology student, I'm going to try anyway.

First of all, I wholeheartily support the equal rights for every human being, regardless of gender, race, income, intelligence, sexual preference, age and beliefs. That's coming straight from the first line of our constitution and I personally think every civilised country should make it part of their constitution.

On the race issue: (sorry for going off topic)

Mimsoftthedawg, I think that the majority of the people that post here can actually understand the picture you described earlier about the discrimination of the Native American People. Despite the fact that majority of us, including me, never experienced it firsthandedly, we can vision it because of global media that are available to us. There are other people/social groups that live in similar or worse conditions over the globe. There are for example, the untouchables that live in Japan, Korea and China, (all with different names and societies), tribes in Africa that are basically enslaved and children that are forced to work as soldiers or prostitutes. Just some examples; Except for the child soldiers and prostitutes, none of these issues and plights are very well known in the Western world.

To the objective eye, there are many similarities (and also differences) and therefore its easy and typical human behaviour to compare your social group to others. I'm certainly not saying "that it's not so bad"; quite the contrary. As I said, I support equal rights for every human being, but that includes no special treatment as an excuse for social groups.

If we think about it, a lot of social groups that have been hit hard over the course of history and feel discriminated against, feel the need to voice themselves. No matter whether it's the Jews, Negroid population, Hispanics or Native Americans. All these groups feel special/unique, which also makes them a strong, but seperate group. Because there are so many social groups that feel left out, they feel like they have to adapt their behaviour to stand out, because each social group still wants (and will fight for) its own place in the bigger group, which is (global?) society.

In other words, with all due respect Mimsoftdawg, like you said, you don't want to be understood, because you feel that is what makes you or your group special and stand out. You don't want to be compared with other social groups, because despite a lot of similarities, you want to be acknowledged as part of your peer group. Unfortunately, this form of antagonal and sometimes provoking behaviour isn't unique in its own way.

Again, i sympathise with your plight, but do not close your eyes for the misery others have in the world. After all, the world is still a ****** place to live in for the vast majority of the population. Also, finding (peaceful) measures to improve your life standard will be more productive than reminiscending over the past. I believe that you also used events in your story that happened way before you were born. Eventually, a social group will have to abandon its "victim role" in its way to equality.

Hope that was helpful. A Dutch sociology student.

 

[the_lisk]

Homosexuals are people just like hetrosexuals, a complete non-issue

 

[quhouv vhqwiufv qwiu]

It shocks me how many of the commenters on that video don't understand satire. Though I'm aware many of them are just 'trolling'. Coincidently this video does a lot to highlight how stupid trolls actually look.

 

[Woodsey]

That just made me laugh
I have an interesting theory on the subject matter though...
Are more people becoming Homosexual or is Homosexuality just becoming easier to admit to?
And if more people are Homosexual then is that natures way of population control?
Don't take me for a Hater of Homosexuals, i believe in equality for everyone.

Its just easier for people to admit. Its not like this is the only time its been so open, its gone through periods of acceptance before (particularly with the ancient Greeks and Romans I believe).

As for population control, I've read that biologists dislike the theory, as it would likely require conscious action (i.e. a god).

 

[jpoon]

Hah, good vid.

 

[LaughingAtlas]

"Gay marriage people will encourage more people to be gay, the same way hanging around tall people makes you tall."
Brilliant. Stephen Colbert would be proud, I think.

 

[cobra_ky]

Homosexuality is quite common in the natural world in many other species, why should humanity be any different?

Because we're talking about gay rights here, so animals have nothing to do in this discussion. That's like saying: It's unnatural for the human being to fly. And then someone comes up with: "But, birds...".

in what sense, then, can you say that homosexuality is unnatural? you seem to be appealing to a purely subjective standard of human nature.

 

[Raskolnikov34]

Ugh, this video is obnoxious...

I'm anti-homosexual (don't flame me), and I hate the way he basically makes up supposed arguments of anti-homosexual people.

And yes for the record, birth control is unnatural and no, I don't oppose gay marriage because I feel my religion should have its views dominate the entire country, just because my views and my religion's coincides (he makes the assumption that all religious people blindly accept their religions ideas, ie: Bigotry).