Homosexuality: Right or Wrong?

[Enamoured]

I've been placed into an interesting quandary by this: I have a friend who it turns out is a fundamentalist Christian, and aside from the idiocy of believing that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, he also militantly opposes the rights of homosexuals.

 

Just to make a brief point, Christian fundamentalism is not necessary biblical literalism.

 

Having friendships with people who hold different views than yourself is always a good thing; if we just surround ourselves with likeminded individuals it often dulls the impetous to think critically about our own beliefs.

[obfuscator]

Well, that's a good part my fault: if he says anything about astronomy, I will mention Bruno and/or Galileo, at which point our discussion becomes a debate about organized religion and biblical errors and contradictions. But that isn't really the issue: the problem is that he vehemently opposes the idea that homosexuals have the same rights that we "people" do. I also do know that he opposes distribution of condoms in Africa: combine that with the enforcement of patents on AIDS drugs, and you have genocide.

 

Simply put, I would not tolerate someone saying "Jews are not people, they should not be able to serve, marry, congregate, pronounce their faith, etc." Why should I make an exception for people's sexual orientation?

Opposing the distribution of condoms makes you an accessory to genocide?

 

Well then so does supporting abortion.

[das1330]

Well, that's a good part my fault: if he says anything about astronomy, I will mention Bruno and/or Galileo, at which point our discussion becomes a debate about organized religion and biblical errors and contradictions. But that isn't really the issue: the problem is that he vehemently opposes the idea that homosexuals have the same rights that we "people" do. I also do know that he opposes distribution of condoms in Africa: combine that with the enforcement of patents on AIDS drugs, and you have genocide.

 

 

AIDS is a natural disease - how are any anti-AIDS activities in Africa genocide? It's not like people are intentionally infected with the disease by aid workers.

[Skeptical]

Well, that's a good part my fault: if he says anything about astronomy, I will mention Bruno and/or Galileo, at which point our discussion becomes a debate about organized religion and biblical errors and contradictions. But that isn't really the issue: the problem is that he vehemently opposes the idea that homosexuals have the same rights that we "people" do. I also do know that he opposes distribution of condoms in Africa: combine that with the enforcement of patents on AIDS drugs, and you have genocide.

 

Simply put, I would not tolerate someone saying "Jews are not people, they should not be able to serve, marry, congregate, pronounce their faith, etc." Why should I make an exception for people's sexual orientation?

Opposing the distribution of condoms makes you an accessory to genocide?

 

Well then so does supporting abortion.

 

An entire race of people is being systematically eliminated. Whether it is by economic terms, racism, or a disease perpetuated by man, it is genocide.

 

Canada violated patents on anthrax drugs, and then supported a measure to prevent Africa from violating the patents on AIDS treatments. There has never been a single anthrax attack in Canada; millions are dying of AIDS in Africa. The Catholic church, along with many of the Armageddon Brigade oppose the distribution of condoms, a lifesaving measure denied not as the result of a logical, moral concern, but general idiocy on the part of the Western world.

[Alg]

Distributing condoms is only a part of it. Education is far more important, and I have yet to see anyone advocate that. Teach how to use condoms, how AIDS spreads, and how to limit the damage it causes.

 

Plus, societal factors. Women have to be seen as more than baby factories, and that comes as a result of a more industrialized society and an all around better medical system, meaning access and education.

 

The blame game may be fun for a bit, but while you guys are playing it nothing gets solved and the real issues get buried. And it's something neither liberals nor conservatives has been able to move past.

[Skeptical]

I never suggested that those crimes against humanity were committed by a single political party.

 

Education is a long process: as much as we might like the idea, a bunch of money won't instantly provide us with a southern hemisphere as well educated as their northern brethren. Condoms, meanwhile, are cheap, effective, and can be distributed amazingly easily. Education for women will follow their ability to restrict the number of children they have.

[Saru Inc]

Distributing condoms is only a part of it. Education is far more important, and I have yet to see anyone advocate that. Teach how to use condoms, how AIDS spreads, and how to limit the damage it causes.

 

Plus, societal factors. Women have to be seen as more than baby factories, and that comes as a result of a more industrialized society and an all around better medical system, meaning access and education.

 

The blame game may be fun for a bit, but while you guys are playing it nothing gets solved and the real issues get buried. And it's something neither liberals nor conservatives has been able to move past.

 

 

Ok. I'm just saying. If you don't know how to use condom, I'm not sure how you survived long enough to be able to use one.

 

I am still confused how this is on the topic of homos. Aids are not homos.

[Dupin]

Distributing condoms is only a part of it. Education is far more important, and I have yet to see anyone advocate that. Teach how to use condoms, how AIDS spreads, and how to limit the damage it causes.

 

Plus, societal factors. Women have to be seen as more than baby factories, and that comes as a result of a more industrialized society and an all around better medical system, meaning access and education.

 

The blame game may be fun for a bit, but while you guys are playing it nothing gets solved and the real issues get buried. And it's something neither liberals nor conservatives has been able to move past.

 

 

Ok. I'm just saying. If you don't know how to use condom, I'm not sure how you survived long enough to be able to use one.

 

I am still confused how this is on the topic of homos. Aids are not homos.

AIDS is God's way of punishing homos. The topic relates directly.*

 

Condoms are not exactly necessary for life. They're talking about Africa, where kids grow up working to survive. If you have to choose between a condom and a hamburger, and it's the only food you'll get that day, what will you choose? Nobody in his right mind would actually ship condoms to the poorer parts of any country (the parts with the largest AIDS problem) and expect to make a profit. That is why charity organizations, especially religious ones, are so important here.

 

[spoiler=*Dear Moderators] Please don't be mad.

 

[Powman3]

I've been skimming over the past few pages, and I have one thought on my mind.

 

What makes ANYONE think we're a country of majority? Uh, no. That's why we have the electoral college when it comes to presidential elections.

 

Proposition 8 (now this post is definitely related to homosexuality in a way) was itself unconstitutional. It doesn't matter if all the homophobes voted for it, it's going to be repealed when it passes through the Supreme Court in the next couple of months. A lot of Republicans are mad because they think justices change laws out of ideological reasons; it has nothing to do with that. It is about upholding the Constitution, about equal rights for all citizens of the U.S. (14th Amendment).

 

I don't see the problem with homosexuality and for homosexuals to have equal rights as other Americans do, no matter if they're gay, straight, or bisexual. It's not a choice; you can't choose who your attracted to. It doesn't play out that way.

 

I can't wait for the day that equality prevails in this country. It started with race, then gender, now orientation. It will end the same way as those all did: with the majority not getting what they want (and ending up getting use to it).

[Dupin]

I've been skimming over the past few pages, and I have one thought on my mind.

 

What makes ANYONE think we're a country of majority? Uh, no. That's why we have the electoral college when it comes to presidential elections.

 

Proposition 8 (now this post is definitely related to homosexuality in a way) was itself unconstitutional. It doesn't matter if all the homophobes voted for it, it's going to be repealed when it passes through the Supreme Court in the next couple of months. A lot of Republicans are mad because they think justices change laws out of ideological reasons; it has nothing to do with that. It is about upholding the Constitution, about equal rights for all citizens of the U.S. (14th Amendment).

 

I don't see the problem with homosexuality and for homosexuals to have equal rights as other Americans do, no matter if they're gay, straight, or bisexual. It's not a choice; you can't choose who your attracted to. It doesn't play out that way.

 

I can't wait for the day that equality prevails in this country. It started with race, then gender, now orientation. It will end the same way as those all did: with the majority not getting what they want (and ending up getting use to it).

:thumbup: :thumbup:

I completely agree.

[Saru Inc]

I've been skimming over the past few pages, and I have one thought on my mind.

 

What makes ANYONE think we're a country of majority? Uh, no. That's why we have the electoral college when it comes to presidential elections.

 

Proposition 8 (now this post is definitely related to homosexuality in a way) was itself unconstitutional. It doesn't matter if all the homophobes voted for it, it's going to be repealed when it passes through the Supreme Court in the next couple of months. A lot of Republicans are mad because they think justices change laws out of ideological reasons; it has nothing to do with that. It is about upholding the Constitution, about equal rights for all citizens of the U.S. (14th Amendment).

 

I don't see the problem with homosexuality and for homosexuals to have equal rights as other Americans do, no matter if they're gay, straight, or bisexual. It's not a choice; you can't choose who your attracted to. It doesn't play out that way.

 

I can't wait for the day that equality prevails in this country. It started with race, then gender, now orientation. It will end the same way as those all did: with the majority not getting what they want (and ending up getting use to it).

:thumbup: :thumbup:

I completely agree.

 

I completely DISAGREE.

 

 

ok not really, I agree as well.

 

My mom along with her Republican cluster [bleep]s honestly believe Gays want to get married out of pure spite of heteros. NOT REALLY.

 

 

i just wanna get married because... Actually, I don't wanna get married.

 

However I realized since I'm gay i can say whatever I want on this topic and it can't be off topic. win.

[obfuscator]

I never suggested that those crimes against humanity were committed by a single political party.

 

Education is a long process: as much as we might like the idea, a bunch of money won't instantly provide us with a southern hemisphere as well educated as their northern brethren. Condoms, meanwhile, are cheap, effective, and can be distributed amazingly easily. Education for women will follow their ability to restrict the number of children they have.

This post shows your extremely poor grasp of the situation and societal norms in third world countries.

 

Distributing condoms has limited effect for two reasons.

 

Firstly, because rape is rampant. Condoms won't help here.

 

Secondly, because for many, the driving force for having sex so much is to have kids. These people often feel that their only hope for survival and old age is to have many children, in the hope that one of them will become rich and provide for them. Of course, this doesn't really work, but it limits the effectiveness of condoms.

[Skeptical]

I never suggested that those crimes against humanity were committed by a single political party.

 

Education is a long process: as much as we might like the idea, a bunch of money won't instantly provide us with a southern hemisphere as well educated as their northern brethren. Condoms, meanwhile, are cheap, effective, and can be distributed amazingly easily. Education for women will follow their ability to restrict the number of children they have.

This post shows your extremely poor grasp of the situation and societal norms in third world countries.

 

Distributing condoms has limited effect for two reasons.

 

Firstly, because rape is rampant. Condoms won't help here.

 

Secondly, because for many, the driving force for having sex so much is to have kids. These people often feel that their only hope for survival and old age is to have many children, in the hope that one of them will become rich and provide for them. Of course, this doesn't really work, but it limits the effectiveness of condoms.

 

Even if the number of rapes was several times those reported, it would still be insignificant in terms of population. (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita). And there is an issue with your logic: a rapist does not want AIDS any more than a consensual participant in intercourse.

 

And yet, people can't seek education if they feel the only course of action is to have more children. Distribution of condoms will also require family planning, and the installment of an educational system.

[obfuscator]

Or you could take the money you're spending on distributing condoms and put it directly into an educational system which guarantees improvement and doesn't sidestep the real issue.

[Enamoured]

AIDS is God's way of punishing homos. The topic relates directly.*

 

I don't even...

 

It's obviously this 'God's' way of punishing poor and non white individuals, too.

[Alg]

AIDS is God's way of punishing homos. The topic relates directly.*

 

I don't even...

 

It's obviously this 'God's' way of punishing poor and non white individuals, too.

Fun fact: Sarcasm doesn't translate well over the internet.

[Enamoured]

Was that opining I'd missed sarcasm, or he would?

 

Clarify :3

[Alg]

His post was sarcastic. Well, that part was. The rest, probably serious.

[Enamoured]

Ah. Hilarious -_^

 

Italics would've been helpful.

[Dupin]

Ah. Hilarious -_^

 

Italics would've been helpful.

You must be new. Welcome to tip.it, where any non-liberal posts are either sarcastic or trolling, and therefore should be ignored completely.

 

It always makes me laugh when I visit the first page of this thread and see posters who actually believed that, though.

[Saru Inc]

I never suggested that those crimes against humanity were committed by a single political party.

 

Education is a long process: as much as we might like the idea, a bunch of money won't instantly provide us with a southern hemisphere as well educated as their northern brethren. Condoms, meanwhile, are cheap, effective, and can be distributed amazingly easily. Education for women will follow their ability to restrict the number of children they have.

This post shows your extremely poor grasp of the situation and societal norms in third world countries.

 

Distributing condoms has limited effect for two reasons.

 

Firstly, because rape is rampant. Condoms won't help here.

 

Secondly, because for many, the driving force for having sex so much is to have kids. These people often feel that their only hope for survival and old age is to have many children, in the hope that one of them will become rich and provide for them. Of course, this doesn't really work, but it limits the effectiveness of condoms.

 

Even if the number of rapes was several times those reported, it would still be insignificant in terms of population. (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita). And there is an issue with your logic: a rapist does not want AIDS any more than a consensual participant in intercourse.

 

And yet, people can't seek education if they feel the only course of action is to have more children. Distribution of condoms will also require family planning, and the installment of an educational system.

 

 

Just....

 

stop. No. I can't, just,

 

system meltdown.

 

You must be new. Welcome to tip.it, where any non-liberal posts are either sarcastic or trolling, and therefore should be ignored completely.

 

It always makes me laugh when I visit the first page of this thread and see posters who actually believed that, though.

 

Or anything said by me ever.

[Dupin]

Just....

 

stop. No. I can't, just,

 

system meltdown.

 

You must be new. Welcome to tip.it, where any non-liberal posts are either sarcastic or trolling, and therefore should be ignored completely.

 

It always makes me laugh when I visit the first page of this thread and see posters who actually believed that, though.

 

Or anything said by me ever.

Do you know why I love complete sentences? It's because they're easy to read and people will understand what you're saying.

 

Your post, on the other hand,

no, just

i dont even

why

my eyes.

[Alg]

Figure contributing at least once gives me an excuse to spam up the second half of my post.

 

Re: Rapes. The thing you overlook is that a rapist can still spread AIDS. Look at all of those as a potential new infectee and that starts to become a problem, and saying that it may be several times higher than reported can only make it MUCH worse.

 

Re: Condoms. Distributing condoms does not lead to family planning. Family planning leads to distribution of condoms. You can't give out condoms and expect people to learn how to use them perfectly. You can send volunteers to educate people and have them give out condoms when they know everyone knows how to use them.

Plus, condoms are only as effective as the society's values. If you're looking at a culture where having many children is either seen as good or necessary to counter a high infant mortality rate, they aren't going to be using them. Sex isn't just a recreation thing like it is here in the West.

Condoms are not some miracle substance. They limit the spread of the disease only if everyone uses them, and they do nothing to actually, you know, treat it. And they limit the rate at which a population can restore itself. Think about it. What happens if a population that is dying very rapidly loses the means to replenish itself? You have a very slow genocide or a quick and efficient one. But either way you have genocide.

 

[spoiler=Spammy bit]

 

Do you know why I love complete sentences? It's because they're easy to read and people will understand what you're saying.

 

Your post, on the other hand,

no, just

i dont even

why

my eyes.

Fragments faster, more effective. Fully show his state of mind. Adds stylistic edge to otherwise dull post. Gets point across.

Compare:

You are dumb

To

So stupid! Can't comprehend! Brain failing! Hurguhurgehurghhhhhh...

 

[Saru Inc]

I approve.

 

Now to do the opposite, and to validate an otherwise spammy post:

 

 

I agree.

 

 

I mean, i do. Not sure what else to say, you make a very good point, one I'd like to see argue. They are in a situation of going from the frying pan into the fire. Use condoms? Less aids. Use condoms? Less children. Do you want the survival of your culture, or allow the death of your culture at the small chance of getting aids. And by the way, most rapists who have aids don't care if their victims get it. Just saying. So the use of condoms only honestly is going to apply to consensual sex, which isn't even that common.

 

 

AND THAT IS STILL OFF TOPIC. NEED MOAR GAY.

[fakeitormakeit2]

You know what I've noticed from the last several pages of this thread? People like to use the word genocide very liberally. Some people also seem to forget that genocide is a deliberate and systematic elimination. So no, the theorized meteor that hit the earth which led to the events that caused the dinosaurs to disappear did not commit genocide, unless the supposed meteor was conscious of what it was doing.