Homosexuality: Right or Wrong?

[Alg]

One of the very few threads where I agree with people I disagree with. "Guys = ***, Girls = Yay"

As much as I want to disagree with this on account of double standards in general being disgusting, I actually agree on this. It might help that I'm a card-carrying yuri fanboy though.

 

Just make it so that even guys can do that with no recourse, and everyone is happy, or I hope?

That's the way. The people that like guy on guy and those that prefer girl on girl can both be happy :razz:

[Saru Inc]

Religious convictions are impossible to disprove; ergo, we take the battle to other fields, where logic is actually necessary for victory.

 

Ummm. That's just plain wrong. Religious convictions are impossible to prove? Alrighty then son.

 

 

One of the very few threads where I agree with people I disagree with. "Guys = ***, Girls = Yay"

As much as I want to disagree with this on account of double standards in general being disgusting, I actually agree on this. It might help that I'm a card-carrying yuri fanboy though.

 

Just make it so that even guys can do that with no recourse, and everyone is happy, or I hope?

That's the way. The people that like guy on guy and those that prefer girl on girl can both be happy :razz:

 

 

im so [bleep]ing confused.

[Dupin]

Religious convictions are impossible to disprove; ergo, we take the battle to other fields, where logic is actually necessary for victory.

 

Ummm. That's just plain wrong. Religious convictions are impossible to prove? Alrighty then son.

 

 

One of the very few threads where I agree with people I disagree with. "Guys = ***, Girls = Yay"

As much as I want to disagree with this on account of double standards in general being disgusting, I actually agree on this. It might help that I'm a card-carrying yuri fanboy though.

 

Just make it so that even guys can do that with no recourse, and everyone is happy, or I hope?

That's the way. The people that like guy on guy and those that prefer girl on girl can both be happy :razz:

im so [bleep]ing confused.

Prove it then?

 

And they're saying "hurr hurr homos are fine as long as their womens cause that's hawt and also men are ok because I don't want to make ppl mad".

[Saru Inc]

Religious convictions are impossible to disprove; ergo, we take the battle to other fields, where logic is actually necessary for victory.

 

Ummm. That's just plain wrong. Religious convictions are impossible to prove? Alrighty then son.

 

 

One of the very few threads where I agree with people I disagree with. "Guys = ***, Girls = Yay"

As much as I want to disagree with this on account of double standards in general being disgusting, I actually agree on this. It might help that I'm a card-carrying yuri fanboy though.

 

Just make it so that even guys can do that with no recourse, and everyone is happy, or I hope?

That's the way. The people that like guy on guy and those that prefer girl on girl can both be happy :razz:

im so [bleep]ing confused.

Prove it then?

 

wat. can't be bothered. Quit distracting me from my paper :{}

 

And they're saying "hurr hurr homos are fine as long as their womens cause that's hawt and also men are ok because I don't want to make ppl mad".

 

 

oh. heteros are fine with me as long as they are guys.

[obfuscator]

I haven't seen anything to make me believe homosexuality is wrong so far. I also find it very shocking when people throw pedophiles in the same lot as homosexuals. These are completly different behaviors.

 

I also pity people who need "religious" guidance especially considering how a lot of wars happened because of religious beliefs.

No one's trying to say the behaviors are the same. The classification for the behaviors are identical: a sexual attraction. Any sexual attraction is in this category, homo, hetero, pedo, or otherwise.

 

Perhaps, but it does have a negative connotation to it, and pedofiles are widely accepted as disgusting people so to put homosexuals in the same category does have a negative connotation to it as well.

Yes, and if you'll read my post I'm putting heterosexuals in that same group as well.

 

My point is that as much as the left likes to say "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" and "people's sexual preferences aren't our business" it's frankly untrue. We have all kinds of restrictions on what's seen as an "appropriate sexual attraction".

[Da_Latios]

Chocolate is clearly superior to vanilla.

Am I doing this right?

 

Meh, might as well voice my opinion seeing as I'm here.

Nobody's being gay AT you, so there's no need to get all worked up about homosexuals. They don't affect your life, so let's all just live and let live.

[Assume Nothing]

Chocolate is clearly superior to vanilla.

Am I doing this right?

 

Meh, might as well voice my opinion seeing as I'm here.

Nobody's being gay AT you, so there's no need to get all worked up about homosexuals. They don't affect your life, so let's all just live and let live.

 

Suppose you're in a locker room with a few guys, and some gay men are supposedly 'attracted' to you. Would you take it as a compliment, or not? Why, or why not?

[Alg]

And they're saying "hurr hurr homos are fine as long as their womens cause that's hawt and also men are ok because I don't want to make ppl mad".

oh. heteros are fine with me as long as they are guys.

If it gets people to support gay rights, it's pragmatism :razz:

[meol]

^What's up with the scare quotes and the "supposedly"? :-|

 

{quotes here}

 

Yes, and if you'll read my post I'm putting heterosexuals in that same group as well.

 

My point is that as much as the left likes to say "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" and "people's sexual preferences aren't our business" it's frankly untrue. We have all kinds of restrictions on what's seen as an "appropriate sexual attraction".

What the left usually argues -and I dislike using such terms- is that the government (or other people) should, by default, have no say about the private affairs of people. "By default" being crucial, since that stops as soon as there is an appropriate reason to meddle -like with rape.

[Blyaunte]

I haven't seen anything to make me believe homosexuality is wrong so far. I also find it very shocking when people throw pedophiles in the same lot as homosexuals. These are completly different behaviors.

 

I also pity people who need "religious" guidance especially considering how a lot of wars happened because of religious beliefs.

No one's trying to say the behaviors are the same. The classification for the behaviors are identical: a sexual attraction. Any sexual attraction is in this category, homo, hetero, pedo, or otherwise.

 

Perhaps, but it does have a negative connotation to it, and pedofiles are widely accepted as disgusting people so to put homosexuals in the same category does have a negative connotation to it as well.

Yes, and if you'll read my post I'm putting heterosexuals in that same group as well.

 

My point is that as much as the left likes to say "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" and "people's sexual preferences aren't our business" it's frankly untrue. We have all kinds of restrictions on what's seen as an "appropriate sexual attraction".

 

So - back on topic - what is your opinion then? Is homosexuality right or wrong? "Appropriate or inappropriate"? And why? :mellow:

[Assume Nothing]

I haven't seen anything to make me believe homosexuality is wrong so far. I also find it very shocking when people throw pedophiles in the same lot as homosexuals. These are completly different behaviors.

 

I also pity people who need "religious" guidance especially considering how a lot of wars happened because of religious beliefs.

No one's trying to say the behaviors are the same. The classification for the behaviors are identical: a sexual attraction. Any sexual attraction is in this category, homo, hetero, pedo, or otherwise.

 

Perhaps, but it does have a negative connotation to it, and pedofiles are widely accepted as disgusting people so to put homosexuals in the same category does have a negative connotation to it as well.

Yes, and if you'll read my post I'm putting heterosexuals in that same group as well.

 

My point is that as much as the left likes to say "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" and "people's sexual preferences aren't our business" it's frankly untrue. We have all kinds of restrictions on what's seen as an "appropriate sexual attraction".

 

So - back on topic - what is your opinion then? Is homosexuality right or wrong? "Appropriate or inappropriate"? And why? :mellow:

 

I've said it before. Guys = ***, Girls = Yay. Humans are twisted, apparently.

 

In total seriousness; There is no labelling it appropriate, or inappropriate, really. Would you label heterosexuality?

[Skeptical]

People rarely bother labeling the cultural norm.

[Blyaunte]

I haven't seen anything to make me believe homosexuality is wrong so far. I also find it very shocking when people throw pedophiles in the same lot as homosexuals. These are completly different behaviors.

 

I also pity people who need "religious" guidance especially considering how a lot of wars happened because of religious beliefs.

No one's trying to say the behaviors are the same. The classification for the behaviors are identical: a sexual attraction. Any sexual attraction is in this category, homo, hetero, pedo, or otherwise.

 

Perhaps, but it does have a negative connotation to it, and pedofiles are widely accepted as disgusting people so to put homosexuals in the same category does have a negative connotation to it as well.

Yes, and if you'll read my post I'm putting heterosexuals in that same group as well.

 

My point is that as much as the left likes to say "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" and "people's sexual preferences aren't our business" it's frankly untrue. We have all kinds of restrictions on what's seen as an "appropriate sexual attraction".

 

So - back on topic - what is your opinion then? Is homosexuality right or wrong? "Appropriate or inappropriate"? And why? :mellow:

 

I've said it before. Guys = ***, Girls = Yay. Humans are twisted, apparently.

 

In total seriousness; There is no labelling it appropriate, or inappropriate, really. Would you label heterosexuality?

 

I wouldn't label anything, personally -- I am merely trying to find out who's on what side of the debate and why.

[Dupin]

I haven't seen anything to make me believe homosexuality is wrong so far. I also find it very shocking when people throw pedophiles in the same lot as homosexuals. These are completly different behaviors.

 

I also pity people who need "religious" guidance especially considering how a lot of wars happened because of religious beliefs.

No one's trying to say the behaviors are the same. The classification for the behaviors are identical: a sexual attraction. Any sexual attraction is in this category, homo, hetero, pedo, or otherwise.

 

Perhaps, but it does have a negative connotation to it, and pedofiles are widely accepted as disgusting people so to put homosexuals in the same category does have a negative connotation to it as well.

Yes, and if you'll read my post I'm putting heterosexuals in that same group as well.

 

My point is that as much as the left likes to say "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" and "people's sexual preferences aren't our business" it's frankly untrue. We have all kinds of restrictions on what's seen as an "appropriate sexual attraction".

 

So - back on topic - what is your opinion then? Is homosexuality right or wrong? "Appropriate or inappropriate"? And why? :mellow:

 

I've said it before. Guys = ***, Girls = Yay. Humans are twisted, apparently.

 

In total seriousness; There is no labelling it appropriate, or inappropriate, really. Would you label heterosexuality?

 

I wouldn't label anything, personally -- I am merely trying to find out who's on what side of the debate and why.

We're all on the right (left) side, because we alienate everyone who disagrees. Y Guy is just trollin' cause he has a green name.

 

As far as the whole, "Oh noes, a gay guy might see me in a locker room", get over it. If you don't feel comfortable being judged, go change in a stall. And it's not like these people have no self restraint, nor is it true that a straight man can't make comments about your body.

[Blyaunte]

I haven't seen anything to make me believe homosexuality is wrong so far. I also find it very shocking when people throw pedophiles in the same lot as homosexuals. These are completly different behaviors.

 

I also pity people who need "religious" guidance especially considering how a lot of wars happened because of religious beliefs.

No one's trying to say the behaviors are the same. The classification for the behaviors are identical: a sexual attraction. Any sexual attraction is in this category, homo, hetero, pedo, or otherwise.

 

Perhaps, but it does have a negative connotation to it, and pedofiles are widely accepted as disgusting people so to put homosexuals in the same category does have a negative connotation to it as well.

Yes, and if you'll read my post I'm putting heterosexuals in that same group as well.

 

My point is that as much as the left likes to say "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" and "people's sexual preferences aren't our business" it's frankly untrue. We have all kinds of restrictions on what's seen as an "appropriate sexual attraction".

 

So - back on topic - what is your opinion then? Is homosexuality right or wrong? "Appropriate or inappropriate"? And why? :mellow:

 

I've said it before. Guys = ***, Girls = Yay. Humans are twisted, apparently.

 

In total seriousness; There is no labelling it appropriate, or inappropriate, really. Would you label heterosexuality?

 

I wouldn't label anything, personally -- I am merely trying to find out who's on what side of the debate and why.

We're all on the right (left) side, because we alienate everyone who disagrees. Y Guy is just trollin' cause he has a green name.

 

Ah -- I see ... :unsure:

[meol]

^It's just that a lot posters who find homosexuality wrong just come here and throw a one liner without ever backing it up. There are some good exceptions, of course.

 

There's one thing I still wonder about. Do people actually choose to be homophobes?

[obfuscator]

^It's just that a lot posters who find homosexuality wrong just come here and throw a one liner without ever backing it up. There are some good exceptions, of course.

 

There's one thing I still wonder about. Do people actually choose to be homophobes?

Define homophobe.

 

Most people would call me a homophobe, but I'm certainly not afraid of homosexuals. In fact, I have several gay friends with whom I get along quite well.

[Da_Latios]

Chocolate is clearly superior to vanilla.

Am I doing this right?

 

Meh, might as well voice my opinion seeing as I'm here.

Nobody's being gay AT you, so there's no need to get all worked up about homosexuals. They don't affect your life, so let's all just live and let live.

 

Suppose you're in a locker room with a few guys, and some gay men are supposedly 'attracted' to you. Would you take it as a compliment, or not? Why, or why not?

Of course I would take it as a compliment if someone thought I was attractive. If you were a lesbian female and a heterosexual male was attracted to you, I'm sure you would take that as a compliment also.

[Zierro]

^It's just that a lot posters who find homosexuality wrong just come here and throw a one liner without ever backing it up. There are some good exceptions, of course.

 

There's one thing I still wonder about. Do people actually choose to be homophobes?

Define homophobe.

 

Most people would call me a homophobe, but I'm certainly not afraid of homosexuals. In fact, I have several gay friends with whom I get along quite well.

 

Homophobe literally means fear of homosexuals.

 

However its loosely used to describe people who hate people because they are homosexuals.

 

Anytime I see a gay picture on the internet, I'm pretty turned off because it looks nasty. As for the people themselves, they're no worse than any other average member of society. As far as being afraid of them, that's just funny. I'm willing to bet some people would still call me a homophobe though.

[Blyaunte]

^It's just that a lot posters who find homosexuality wrong just come here and throw a one liner without ever backing it up. There are some good exceptions, of course.

 

There's one thing I still wonder about. Do people actually choose to be homophobes?

Define homophobe.

 

Most people would call me a homophobe, but I'm certainly not afraid of homosexuals. In fact, I have several gay friends with whom I get along quite well.

 

 

... and with these "gay" friends of yours -- do you try to "turn them straight"? Do you ask them to "pray the gay away"?

 

Do you think they were "born" gay? Or did they "choose' to be gay?

 

Have you, personally, ever tried to "choose to be gay"?

:unsure:

[Zierro]

Have you, personally, ever tried to "choose to be gay"?

 

I never tried because I'm happy where I'm at and I believe it's not something you can just pick anyhow. Similar to how your taste buds work - I can't just consciously decide to like potato salad one day. The thought of males in a sexual connotation is like potato salad. No thanks. :-#

[Assume Nothing]

So, what do you guys think of bisexuality?

 

Personally, I think it's more 'normal' than homosexuality, because it only means one is more curious about one's sexuality, and not deliberately choosing to avoid women because one like's men.

[Enamoured]

Personally, I feel that most people have at least some bi-sexual urges or tendency which they haven't acknowledged and/or acted on, whether due to societal pressure, fear, whatever. In that sense, a degree of bi-sexuality is the norm, rather than 'pure' homo/hetrosexuality. :wink:

[Zierro]

Personally, I feel that most people have at least some bi-sexual urges or tendency which they haven't acknowledged and/or acted on, whether due to societal pressure, fear, whatever. In that sense, a degree of bi-sexuality is the norm, rather than 'pure' homo/hetrosexuality. :wink:

 

I can agree with that, but what I don't understand is how some people think that everybody is at least part bi.

[Synthox]

I have no problem with homosexuals as long as they don't get in my face about it. They can do whatever they want, whenever as long as it doesn't become known to me.

 

Just my opinions.