Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/sessions.php on line 254
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/sessions.php on line 255
Anime-Source.Com: Forums
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 499
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 501
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 502 Anime-Source.com :: View topic - Homosexuality: Your Opinion
Joined: May 30, 2007 Posts: 12 Location: a dark corner of the world, hiding under my desk
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:52 am Post subject:
Hmmm....this is an interesting topic. Honestly, it doesn't bother me. I have gay, lesbian, and bi friends. They don't sit there and go "hey you should become a lesbian/bi too!". It's not like that. It's all about how you feel about another person, whether man/man, woman/woman, or man/woman/man, woman/man/woman - whatever...they're still people. Who cares what they do behind closed doors, it's there business, not ours.
I've had lesbians say they like me, yet it didn't creep me out. Because they know that I am not like that, but they're okay to admire if they want.
Anyway, that's my take on things. Just had to throw my 2 cents in. I"m all for gay rights! Woo Hoo!
Joined: Mar 17, 2007 Posts: 115 Location: Home and Any were
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:38 am Post subject:
In my openion of that home sexuality isn't normal cause it can't interupt with me nor Disturb with it on that in my life.
People who are in evolve on that such Kind of questions are Natural list. _________________ [IMG:400:150:c434d4fd77]http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a85/saber_j/vandreadcopy.jpg[/img:c434d4fd77]
Man i really hate those gay sissies and lesbians but i cant question them bout why are they like that, but to accept them as what they really are, cuz some are really rejected and hated, so why accept them instead. _________________
First of all not all kinds of love are right nor like we can know to whom we will be in love with, but we can control our feeling.
So when you say there is nothing wrong with being gay or lesbian is like your accepting love between siblings or the love between animal and human.
Different creature is a big deal?! Even animal do that. blood is a big deal?!
If the gays and lesbians giving excuse that this is love and love can fall for anyone then the same goes to love between siblings and animal with human. Poor them they fall in love with their pet so what should they do? Separate? And the same maybe happened to those siblings lover who changed the care and family love into that kind of love. Is that a sin? Then what should they do? Be against the love? If majority see it sin or wrong then not all what the majority think or judge is right.
If your going to say that they have mental diseases then gay and lesbians have mental diseases also. If your going to say that they are doing this just to satisfy their desires then the same goes with the gay and lesbians. And if you think that there is no love exist like that one (which it is 100% true) then there isn’t any love between boy x boy or girl x girl. Maybe they like each other but not love.
I don’t see any different in them and all are the same so if your going to support one then support all those kinds of relationships and say as long as they don’t hurt me why would I go against them. If that do really happened then WOW what a freedom. _________________
Not all what you think is right is supposed to be right.
Joined: Jun 16, 2007 Posts: 68 Location: Somewhere
Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:28 pm Post subject:
I would be glad to have some homosexual friends. I mean I'm not homosexual, but to me, it's good to have variegated friends in your lifetime. I used to say, "Gays need to die" but i got to know one and i realized that they are humans just like us. They have a brain, a heart, eyes, and all the other common stuff that make us alive. Although I'm not homosexual, me and some friends pretend to be gay cause it is pretty fun to see how people react. They give us that idiotic look as if they're constipated(s/c?). But I do have limit on friends like that. When they start to actually attempt to hit on me, that crosses the line. Aside from that, I'm carefree around them. _________________ Satan reasons like man, but God thinks of eternity.
I'm against them because it isn't right. We were not created to love a person of the same sex. As friends, that's great but as someone you want to sleep with is just wrong. Just like all those people who have their sex changed, we have no right to do that. God is our creator not mankind.
Joined: Jan 02, 2007 Posts: 683 Location: Czech Republic
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:36 am Post subject:
I don't support homosexuality, but I respect that they can't change their feelings. When he likes guys more, then well, he do it, but does he need the support of public? Homosexuality isn't an illness that can be cured, but it isn't normal. Still it is a mistake in biology, still it is an error of mentality.
In my country homosexuality is legal and it isn't too long since we have registered partnership (same sex union). Now homosexuals can close an union that makes his/her partner able to inherit a property, or is giving right to him/her to know about health status of the partner. But this union isn't giving them right to adopt children for example. And I think that it is OK that they don't have this opportunity, although homosexuals in ourr country are trying to change even this.
Child need two parents, mother and father. Each of them have unique role in the care about the child and in the forming of his personality. Child that never had father or mother is missing one part of teaching and it is sign on him/her. If you have two mothers, still you don't have father. When you have two fathers, still you don't have mother. Somebody would oppose that it would be much better for the child to live at least in this STRANGE family rather than in children-house (don't know how it is in english). I think that rather than give to homosexuals opportunity to adopt children the system of adoption should be improved (in my country it is difficult and long). There are many NORMAL families that are waiting for children.
I think that homosexuals shouldn't show their sexual orientation on public. Although they may say that on it isn't anything bad or that it is normal, homosexuality really isn't normal. Always it will be abnormality and never it will be good.
They always have the right to marry if the partner is of opposite genre. Never they were discriminized in this. They can marry as any other can. Nobody never said to man that he can't marry because he is a gay. He have the right to find a girl he would love and marry her. He has the right. Nobody ever said he hasn't because he is a gay. And that because he is a gay he won't find a girl he would love? Then it is only his problem.
Discrimination it would be if we would say that he hasn't a right to marry a girl because he is a gay. All homosexuals have same rights as any other. So where is the discrimination? And that they don't want use this rights then it is really their own problem.
Discriminization is if you don't have rights which others have. If we say that homosexuals are discriminized because they can't marry same sex gendre, we must say that all people are discriminized because nobody can marry same gendre partner. I don't feel discriminized because I can't marry a boy. Here isn't discriminization a word on a right place.
In my oppinion large sympathies to same gendre are Ok, but if it is growing into homosexuality then it is bad. Homosexuals don't need special rights or special support. _________________
First of all not all kinds of love are right nor like we can know to whom we will be in love with, but we can control our feeling.
So when you say there is nothing wrong with being gay or lesbian is like your accepting love between siblings or the love between animal and human.
Firstly, I think its really unfair to compared homosexuality to incest.
Incest is wrong because it actually does increase chances of having defunct children due to the whole gene pool thing. Bestiality is wrong because the animal is unable to fend for itself. Humans can, unless in cases of incest/pedophilia.
trueline wrote:
Different creature is a big deal?! Even animal do that. blood is a big deal?!
If the gays and lesbians giving excuse that this is love and love can fall for anyone then the same goes to love between siblings and animal with human. Poor them they fall in love with their pet so what should they do? Separate? And the same maybe happened to those siblings lover who changed the care and family love into that kind of love. Is that a sin?
Also incest and bestiality isn’t usually based on love. Its based on fetishism, please learn about both before you compare homosexuality against it. (Not to mention both are illegal across the world)
trueline wrote:
And if you think that there is no love exist like that one (which it is 100% true) then there isn’t any love between boy x boy or girl x girl. Maybe they like each other but not love.
I don’t think you have the right to say its not love when you are not in the person’s shoes, or you have not experienced in the situation. Can you define love? I can’t.
Homosexuals are not rallying for you to be a part of them, they only want to be accepted as human beings as they are. Sexual preference should not define what rights you have. Just because they don’t follow the norm does not make them subhuman or “mentally ill.�
hungo200 wrote:
I'm against them because it isn't right. We were not created to love a person of the same sex. As friends, that's great but as someone you want to sleep with is just wrong. Just like all those people who have their sex changed, we have no right to do that. God is our creator not mankind.
Once again I think it’s because of your religious upbringing that does help form your opinion. I have nothing against that. But once again, me being a pro-choice type, God gave them their body, I think ultimately he’d want them to be happy?
I think having a sex change is a better option than being unhappy with yourself your whole life. People are superficial like that.
KaRei wrote:
Still it is a mistake in biology, still it is an error of mentality.
As of yet I believe they don’t have a solid argument on this yet.
KaRei wrote:
Child need two parents, mother and father. Each of them have unique role in the care about the child and in the forming of his personality. Child that never had father or mother is missing one part of teaching and it is sign on him/her. If you have two mothers, still you don't have father. When you have two fathers, still you don't have mother. Somebody would oppose that it would be much better for the child to live at least in this STRANGE family rather than in children-house (don't know how it is in english). I think that rather than give to homosexuals opportunity to adopt children the system of adoption should be improved (in my country it is difficult and long). There are many NORMAL families that are waiting for children.
I come from a single parent family. Personally I don’t think that just because I don’t have a father I’m raised any different. I know a lot of people that also come from single parent families and I don’t think any of us are lacking any aspect of life. We all appreciate the fact our parent is working to try and fill the role of “both� parents so personally I think a child being raised by 2 mothers or 2 fathers would have any effects on the child’s mentality. Gender I believe doesn’t really determine how you raise a child. Just as how heterosexual couples can raise children that become delinquents.
KaRei wrote:
I think that homosexuals shouldn't show their sexual orientation on public. Although they may say that on it isn't anything bad or that it is normal, homosexuality really isn't normal. Always it will be abnormality and never it will be good.
I think also, how they chose to act in public is their choice. You can say the same with heterosexual couples, public displays of affection aren’t all that appropriate with anyone. Just because it isn’t the accepted norm doesn’t make it “wrong.�
KaRei wrote:
They always have the right to marry if the partner is of opposite genre. Never they were discriminized in this. They can marry as any other can. Nobody never said to man that he can't marry because he is a gay. He have the right to find a girl he would love and marry her. He has the right. Nobody ever said he hasn't because he is a gay. And that because he is a gay he won't find a girl he would love? Then it is only his problem.
Discrimination it would be if we would say that he hasn't a right to marry a girl because he is a gay. All homosexuals have same rights as any other. So where is the discrimination? And that they don't want use this rights then it is really their own problem.
Discriminization is if you don't have rights which others have. If we say that homosexuals are discriminized because they can't marry same sex gendre, we must say that all people are discriminized because nobody can marry same gendre partner. I don't feel discriminized because I can't marry a boy. Here isn't discriminization a word on a right place.
In my oppinion large sympathies to same gendre are Ok, but if it is growing into homosexuality then it is bad. Homosexuals don't need special rights or special support.
For the most part, I don’t think you get why people are fighting for their rights. You don’t feel discriminated because you can’t marry a boy? Maybe that’s because you don’t want to. They’re not feeling discriminated against because they can’t marry a girl, they can, but they don’t love the girl. They want to marry their own gender and that’s because they love them. Do you get it?
It is discrimination because they CAN’T do something just because of who they love. Okay?
I believe homosexuals do need help/rights/support because just because they’re not like the rest of the population they’re getting beat up, hated on, and sometimes killed. _________________ "The basis of optimism is sheer terror."
(,,#ﾟДﾟ):∴;'･,;`:ｺﾞﾙｧ!!
Firstly, I think its really unfair to compared homosexuality to incest.
Incest is wrong because it actually does increase chances of having defunct children due to the whole gene pool thing. Bestiality is wrong because the animal is unable to fend for itself. Humans can, unless in cases of incest/pedophilia.
Boyxboy caused aids and though I studied this for four years but who cares. Does love mean have sex? Cant there be love without sex? I don’t know about you but for me there are love without it and still people forbid the love itself between them not because of the diseases it cause but of the blood, they don’t want them to stay together as couple no matter what. Also sisterxsister is consider as they're commenting sin, right? And you know why? It’s the boold only, there isn’t any diseases.
Quote:
Also incest and bestiality isn’t usually based on love. Its based on fetishism, please learn about both before you compare homosexuality against it. (Not to mention both are illegal across the world)
Let me repeat the same thing you as said to me with a little change, I don’t think you have the right to say it isn’t based on love when you are not in the person’s shoes, or you have not experienced in the situation. Can you define love? I can’t.
Hows that? I don’t have the right while you do?
Quote:
Homosexuals are not rallying for you to be a part of them, they only want to be accepted as human beings as they are. Sexual preference should not define what rights you have. Just because they don’t follow the norm does not make them subhuman or “mentally ill.�
They are human like us but why don’t you just imagine that all people are gays and lesbians then it’s the end of the world. No children will born and human being is the one who stopped this life. IF that happened you will know who is to blame, but since its not all of them then its ok they're doing right and good because its in the name of (as you call it) love. Is it wrong if all people are like that and right if few people are like that? _________________
Not all what you think is right is supposed to be right.
First off, if you're against homosexuality because of religious reasons, you're likely going to miss the point of this post. I tackle things from the side of reason, and religious faith and dogma ignore reason. I also believe that "right" and "wrong" aren't absolute, they are dictated by society and circumstance. If you believe that morals are absolute, universal and set in stone, and that homosexuality is "wrong" then you're also likely to miss it; and discussing such things isn't the point here. Just take a bit of an open minded approach.
KaRei wrote:
I think that homosexuals shouldn't show their sexual orientation on public. Although they may say that on it isn't anything bad or that it is normal, homosexuality really isn't normal. Always it will be abnormality and never it will be good.
Isn't THAT discrimination? What's wrong with seeing two guys hold hands in a park? That a child will see it and become gay? Sorry, I don't think it works that way. People should be allowed to express their orientation in public because it is their right to love whoever they want to love or live their lives whichever way they want to live them. It is a parent's task to show the world to a child and help him understand it. that doesn't mean that a parent should encourage a child to be gay. Parents should encourage children to be honest with themselves. If the child grows up to be gay, well, who cares? It's not because he saw a guy kiss another once, but because he just is that way, period. And here we o again with the value judgment. Why isn't it "good". could you please define "good" for me? You know what else isn't normal? Twins. It isn't like every other family has twins, so they are bad? maybe we should kill one and let the other live? Define "good", please.
KaRei wrote:
They always have the right to marry if the partner is of opposite genre. Never they were discriminized in this. They can marry as any other can. Nobody never said to man that he can't marry because he is a gay. He have the right to find a girl he would love and marry her. He has the right. Nobody ever said he hasn't because he is a gay. And that because he is a gay he won't find a girl he would love? Then it is only his problem.
Discrimination it would be if we would say that he hasn't a right to marry a girl because he is a gay.
It's interesting to see how you've completely missed the point. They can marry a girl, sure, but they can't marry whoever they want. THAT is discrimination. a gay person could eventually marry someone from te opposite sex because of love and all... but just how gay would that person be then? Try "not gay at all". At least, not anymore.
KaRei wrote:
A All homosexuals have same rights as any other. So where is the discrimination? And that they don't want use this rights then it is really their own problem.
Discriminization is if you don't have rights which others have. If we say that homosexuals are discriminized because they can't marry same sex gendre, we must say that all people are discriminized because nobody can marry same gendre partner. I don't feel discriminized because I can't marry a boy. Here isn't discriminization a word on a right place.
The words are "discrimination" and "discriminated". Check the dictionary.
Anyway, It is nice to see that they have he right of union where you live, but they still don;t have the right to marry the person they want to. They don't have the right to adopt or raise children. You also say that they shouldn't have the right to express their orientation in public. If that isn't discrimination, I don't know what is.
KaRei wrote:
In my oppinion large sympathies to same gendre are Ok, but if it is growing into homosexuality then it is bad.
Again, why?
KaRei wrote:
Homosexuals don't need special rights or special support.
Well, what about the normal rights that everyone else has? About marriage and family? About freedom of speech? About life? About freedom from fear? Those are the normal ones, and in many places homosexuals don't have them. I also agree that they don't need any extra or special ones. But what about these normal ones?
(From this point all quotes are of trueline unless otherwise specified).
trueline wrote:
Boyxboy caused aids
Questionable at best. The fact that homosexuality was first discovered among homoseuals doesn't mean it originated there. I don't have the story completely straight, but the people looking for the disease initially where looking for it in homosexuals, so it is highly possible that there were sick heterosexuals at the time who weren't found out for the simple reason that the investigators weren't looking there.
Quote:
Does love mean have sex? Cant there be love without sex?
There can, but that's not what we're talking about. Homosexuality entails sexual attraction.
Quote:
I don’t know about you but for me there are love without it and still people forbid the love itself between them not because of the diseases it cause but of the blood, they don’t want them to stay together as couple no matter what. Also sisterxsister is consider as they're commenting sin, right? And you know why? It’s the boold only, there isn’t any diseases.
I'm sorry... what? So, if I say, "I love my brother, but I don't want to bang him" I'm still some sort of sicko according to you?
Quote:
Quote:
Also incest and bestiality isn’t usually based on love. Its based on fetishism, please learn about both before you compare homosexuality against it. (Not to mention both are illegal across the world)
Let me repeat the same thing you as said to me with a little change, I don’t think you have the right to say it isn’t based on love when you are not in the person’s shoes, or you have not experienced in the situation. Can you define love? I can’t.
I'm not gonna define love here, but use the word as a concept through which people define a set o feelings of both sexual and personal attraction to another person. Not only does a person in love find the other sexually attractive, but also a pleasant and preferred companion for non-sexual activities including, but not limited to, spending time together, getting married and/or raising a family. Although these feelings are personally understandable for the person (he/she can question wether or not he/she is in love with someone), because they are a feelings rationality has a relatively small role in the matter (Example: I'd rationally like to marry a hardworking, loyal, hot 90-60-90 woman, about my height, with long hair and good education who's nice to have a conversation with, but I'm not actually in love with any at the moment and I don't know if I'll actually fall in love with such a person). Emotional maturity and personal experience play a major role in this understanding as well. This is the kind of love I'm talking about, not the kind of "I love (to eat) chocolate" or "I love (appreciate very much) my mother". I do not feel sexual attraction nor have the urge to spend time with either.
Now, this "love" requires both parties to share similar feelings. I'm gonna assume animals actually have some sort of feelings here (people might question that, but let's just play along), but I seriously doubt they are quite what we'd refer to as this "definition" of love. Animals can't understand conversation appreciation, generosity, etc, at least not in the way humans do. Therefore it is impossible for an animal to fall in love with a person, just like it is impossible for a doll or some other fetish to do so. In fact, people might derive sexual pleasure from such activities, but love? I doubt it in the overwhelming majority of cases. In the case of common upbringing, such as in the case of siblings, there are certain feelings of empathy but here is where emotional maturity and experience come in. One might harbor a special set of feelings for a sibling, but experience and maturity will most likely indicate to a person that their feelings are not "love" as above, but a different kind of non-sexual empathy commonly referred to as love. And there isn't incest without sex, just like there isn't murder without someone turning up dead.
Now, such is not for homosexuality. It is perfectly possible for people of the same gender to feel attraction, both sexual and otherwise, for someone of the same sex. Now, it is because these people are capable of reason and understanding their feelings and attraction that I think homosexuality is perfectly acceptable. I really doubt all of these conditions apply to the majority of cases of incest and bestiality, where there might be only sexual gratification or a case of confusion (someone thinks he's in love with a sibling until actually falling in love with someone else). I'm not gonna deny the very real possibility that someone might actually be in love with a sibling or animal even withing the conditions mentioned above, but that will be the case of a minority within the pre-existing minorities of "incestuous" people.
Quote:
Hows that? I don’t have the right while you do?
Now, law is not meant to bring justice (if you think so, you'd better get off that cloud); it is meant to bring social order while striving to stick as close to possible to "justice"; and law dictates and defines what are people's rights.
Now, you're drawing parallels so I'll do the same. Ever heard of Kleptomania? It's a condition where people feel psychologically compelled to steal things; something irrational that sometimes can be reversed, and sometimes it cannot. Now, it is a fact that there are kleptomaniacs in the world; but they still don't have the right to steal. Kleptomaniacs know and understand that what they are doing is a crime, but yet still do it. Why is it that a kleptomaniac might be ordered to serve some sort of sentence if caught stealing? Because it is against the law to steal. And why is it against the law to steal? Because it negatively affects other people and disrupts the social order. Because if stealing were legal people would live in uncertainty about his/her possessions and and welfare. Simply put society cannot afford to legalize theft just because of a minority of kleptomaniacs.
Now, What about homosexuals? How does being homosexual disrupt social order? I'm gonna go off on a limb and, based on your last post, assume that the response will be "because that means that men will have sex with men and women with women all over the place, eventually leading to the disruption of the family and, because same sex couples obviously cannot reproduce, maybe even to the destruction of the human race or society as we currently know it".
No.
First off the fact that homosexuals exist and (let's suppose) are allowed to marry, ultimately has no effect in my life and it most likely will not affect most heterosexuals. Just because homosexuality is not discriminated against or persecuted doesn't mean that heterosexuals will turn homosexual. I'd sure as hell wouldn't become gay if someone told me "it's ok to be gay". I already think that way and I am still not gay! This probably applies to a lot of people. If you're afraid that some (because this definitely won't happen to all, maybe not even to many) young people might experiment with homosexuality and stick to being gay later on, I'd have to wonder how heterosexual that person was in the first place. Besides, just like many people don't marry their first boyfriend or girlfriend, for many it will merely be a phase. As for their permanent orientation or choice of partner, they will probably end up with some other person, and because of the non-trivial issue of basic biological attraction, they will probably end up choosing a mate of the opposite sex in the end to marry and raise a family.
Second of all, I don't have any statistics here, but I'm fairly sure that the number of folks seriously and honestly in love with their family members is going to be minuscule compared to the number of homosexuals. Hell, I bet even the number of "mistaken" incestuous people is smaller. Sucks for them, but I see no reason to accommodate such a group within the law, if they aren't accommodated already. Besides, in these cases sometimes there might be other interests at play such as inheritance and property divisions, which could be manipulated by having immediate family members marry each other. An "OK incest" law leaves itself open for exploitation. Sure, there are already laws open to unscrupulous exploitation all over the place, but the fewer we've got the better. I doubt that the same would happen with, say, a homosexual marriage law, which would have the same pros and cons as your typical heterosexual marriage law. In the case of bestiality, marriage requires understanding and consent by BOTH parties. Animals are incapable of either.
Sure I'd hate to be harassed by a homosexual, but not because it is by a homosexual; it would be because I'm being harassed; just as I'd be annoyed at being harassed by a woman to whom I'm not attracted. And unattractive women still have the right to marry. Why wouldn't a homosexual?
By the way, I DIDN'T shoot myself in the foot by loosely comparing Kleptomania (arguably a metal condition or disorder) to homosexuality (which isn't a mental condition or disorder). Simply because, just like kleptomania can be "cured" (in which case someone isn't actually kleptomaniac), homosexuality isn't necessarily as black and white as people make it out to be. Someone might be attracted to the same sex and suddenly fall in love with someone of the opposite. For all practical purposes that person wouldn't be homosexual anymore (key word: "anymore"; anyone can identify him/herself as homosexual, and it is their damn right to do so and live as they please, even if they eventually stop for whatever reason). Besides, unlike "not stealing", "falling in love" is not something that can be taught or coerced into a person's head. Just like being homosexual, it just happens; but there is no medical treatment or rational control from the person's mind.
Spanky wrote:
Homosexuals are not rallying for you to be a part of them, they only want to be accepted as human beings as they are. Sexual preference should not define what rights you have. Just because they don’t follow the norm does not make them subhuman or “mentally ill.�
Yup.
Quote:
They are human like us but why don’t you just imagine that all people are gays and lesbians then it’s the end of the world.
Ah, but as I said before, not all people are gay or lesbian, so your point proves.... nothing. In fact you seem to have missed what spankit just said. the fact that someone is homosexual doesn't make everyone homosexual. It is perfectly legal for people to tumble down cliffs to their deaths. So, why don't we see people going like lemmings to jump off cliffs? Because the fact that something isn't outlawed or generally considered "wrong" doesn't necessarily make it right or make it the thing that people ought to do. If suddenly the majority of people wanted to jump off cliffs it is likely that jumping off cliffs would be outlawed, but it isn't. It is in most people's instinct to live on and not jump off cliffs, just like it is in most people's instinct to be attracted to the opposite sex. Sure there are exceptions, but thay do not threaten the rule.
Quote:
IF that happened you will know who is to blame, but since its not all of them then its ok they're doing right and good because its in the name of (as you call it) love.
Well, yes. If you've read all that I've written before, you'd understand.
Quote:
Is it wrong if all people are like that and right if few people are like that?
To put it bluntly, yes, but you're still putting an "if" there. If mankind were born to be homosexual or to jump off cliffs we wouldn't have evolved and reached our current stage; natural selection would have killed us off long ago. "If, if, if"; but that is not so. It is because homosexuality is not a threat that it is pointless for it to be discriminated against.
What I'm saying is that, when it comes to homosexuality, "good", "bad", "right", 'wrong", are beside the point. My personal opinion on homosexuality (if you can call it that) is "so what?". I don't see a reason why homosexuals shouldn't marry each other, why they shouldn't raise children, or why they don't deserve equal treatment. They don't need "special" treatment either, such is discriminatory anyway. They deserve to be treated as human beings with feelings and rationality, who are free to live thir lives as they want to without having to fear from persecution.
Ideally everyone should be able to live like that but some can't because they break down order. In the case of violence, on the other hand, is illegal because ANYONE can be violent and go on a killing spree (wasn't the unabomber a highly educated college professor?). It is a threat to existence and order. Therefore, outlawed. Same with robbery. Same with rape. Anyone has wanted to kill someone, or to steal something. We don't do it because it is illegal; because it is morally objectionable, both of which stem from the fact that it is chaotic; because we'd rather not have something stolen from us or because we don't want to be killed. But the same doesn't apply to homosexuality. I liked girls before I even knew homosexuality existed, or that guys could like guys. I still liked girls after I found out. For the looks of it, I always will like girls regardless of how objectionable homosexuality is. And I'm pretty sure that the same is the case for others as well. homosexuality doesn't threaten our existence, doesn't threaten our order. Not discriminating it will bring happiness to others, would help stop lies and double-lives that destroy families and only hurt people. Why should we be against it? _________________
Joined: Jun 21, 2006 Posts: 5630 Location: Inside food!
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:51 am Post subject:
I just want to know what's the different between if I was againest them because of religious reasons or because of anything else. Both religious and unreligious are againest them for the same reasons and same opinion. I'm a religious and I think its wrong not because of my religion. I have my own opinion. This is my opinion my own.
Let me say something. If what others do doesnt hurt you, you let them do whatever they want? If its going to hurt them, then its ok?
If a child saw their people around him steal he will do (imitate) and if he saw them kissing,hugging..etc he will do the same and you know that, right? Children imitate what they see and sometimes they feel it's what he needs to do bcause others do it. I hope you get what I mean.
If you let people live the way they want then its not freedom. Its chaos. They will do everything they want wether its good or bad. Just imagine a world where everyone is doing what he/she wants. How does it look like?
Good is something that doesnt hurt you nor hurt others. That's the define of the word "Good" for me.
Stealing was a bad thing..a very very bad thing but now it became nothing. Rape was a bad thing...very very bad but now it isnt. Killing children was a bad bad thing but now it isnt. Everything changes not because the people but because of the changable law. They dont have one law for this crime or that crime.
I want to ask you something leo. If a woman whom have many guys beside her and she dont have any mental illness nor have a bad experience with men nor she hates them, do you think if she loved a girl means she's normal? I never heard that a girl get attract to another girl because she loves her. I never heard of a guy who doesnt get attract to a girl nor he likes any. If there are then they are upnormal or have mental illness or have bad luck with men/girls or dont like men/girls due to some past problems happened to someone precious to him/her or to one of his/her relatives or family or they want to get people's attraction. Other then that I never heard of a love (I mean love that end up marrying) between a girlxgirl or boyxboy. Ask me.
leo wrote:
And there isn't incest without sex, just like there isn't murder without someone turning up dead.
Means there isn't love without sex, just like there isn't murder without someone turning up dead. If not then why only incest cant be without sex?
spanky wrote:
(Not to mention both are illegal across the world)
Did you ask yourself why was it illegal across the world?
Who said its illegal from the first place? and why?
Their eyes were closed and now our eyes are open or a new love has been discovered?
Sorry but if you dont care about others you dont have the right to say this is wrong and this right. Please if you experienced it then talk if not shut your mouth. _________________ "Blogger"
Did you ask yourself why was it illegal across the world?
Who said its illegal from the first place? and why?
Incest and Bestiality are a form of abuse. Incest can lead to defected babies and some adults abuse their children or young relatives sexually. Beastiality is a form of animal abuse in a sense that an animal is being forced to non-consensual sex.
And incest are legal in some States in US, Japan and some other parts of the world, but its only legal to marry someone like your cousin or a distant relative.
Quote:
Boyxboy caused aids
I believe anal sex has a more higher chance of catching aids then vaginal sex. BUT this is the same risk for both males AND females and anyone who practices anal sex.
Quote:
No children will born and human being is the one who stopped this life.
Gosh, you sound like the Americans (and me) and their anti-communism. Because they are allowed to be homosexual does not mean they go running around and spreading their influence. And when people admit they are gay its not like they suddenly got persuaded to be one. They're just coming out of hiding.
Edit:
Quote:
Sorry but if you dont care about others you dont have the right to say this is wrong and this right. Please if you experienced it then talk if not shut your mouth.
As Leo said, people have the rights to speak their minds but only if they know or understand the situation and that they have a backing to their argument. If letting only the experienced people speak then the world will be quiet and no understanding of one another will never happen and we'll all be left confused and in the dark.
And don't tell people to shut up. Suppressing the little voice is what fascist regimes would do. _________________
Last edited by Angel_Armz on Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Jan 02, 2007 Posts: 683 Location: Czech Republic
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:53 pm Post subject:
leoxjm wrote:
First off, if you're against homosexuality because of religious reasons, you're likely going to miss the point of this post. I tackle things from the side of reason, and religious faith and dogma ignore reason. I also believe that "right" and "wrong" aren't absolute, they are dictated by society and circumstance. If you believe that morals are absolute, universal and set in stone, and that homosexuality is "wrong" then you're also likely to miss it; and discussing such things isn't the point here. Just take a bit of an open minded approach.
Take an open minded approach and you'll accept anything. Respect and tolerance is one thing, but it mustn't grow into phlegm.
The stand "let them do what they want" led most the times to catastrophe.
When during 60s, 70s was a freedom of sex and drugs it didn't end very good. Or you think that it was a success?
leoxjm wrote:
Isn't THAT discrimination? What's wrong with seeing two guys hold hands in a park?
It isn't discrimination because in this I don't distinguish between heterosexuals and homosexuals. I only said it wrong that it sounded one-way. I'm that strict in both cases. Hold hands is Ok, but I had in mind closer acts than this. Then it is something personal and it shouldn't appear on a public. At least because there could be people that would mind it. And it doesn't make sence if it's with same or opposite sex gendre. Still on public you mustn't disturb with your actions others.
Quote:
Why isn't it "good". could you please define "good" for me? Define "good", please.
Good and bad is something what everybody is taught by parents, school, religion and traditions.
This teaching is forming in everybody a feeling of good and bad things and a sence to distinguishing them. Distinguishing of good and bad is then task of that internal feeling. So you then feel something as bad and something as good.
And I feel homosexuality as bad.
Anyway, although I feel it like this, I respect, tolerate and accept that somebody can feel "love" to same gendre. But here it stops and I'm against same sex marriage and to some point even against the union.
Quote:
It's interesting to see how you've completely missed the point. They can marry a girl, sure, but they can't marry whoever they want. THAT is discrimination.
It's you who missed the point.
Nor hetero can marry whoever he want, only somebody of opposite sex.
The word discrimination comes from the Latin discriminare, which means to "distinguish between".
Law doesn't distinguish between heterosexuals and homosexuals and it says EVERYBODY can marry only opposite sex partner. To call the case as a discrimination the part of "distinguish between" is missing in whole case.
Do you have it already?
Quote:
The words are "discrimination" and "discriminated". Check the dictionary.
I realized it late.
Quote:
Anyway, It is nice to see that they have he right of union where you live, but they still don;t have the right to marry the person they want to. They don't have the right to adopt or raise children.
And it should remain like that. Purpose of marriage is raise family. Purpose of family is raise children. But imagine how it would look like when child would be adopted by homosexuals. How poor the child would be. Can you imagine that other children, when they would realize that the child is from such family, would be pointing on that child? That it would be a target of jokes, mockery and vexation? That child would have a horrible childhood. I'm not exagerating now. Children are targets of their classmates because of much smaller things than this. Even glasses are enough to became a taget. And what about when the child would have that much different parents from others? If because of nothing else, than at least because of this homosexuals shouldn't have a possibility to adopt children.
Quote:
Well, what about the normal rights that everyone else has? About marriage and family? About freedom of speech? About life? About freedom from fear? Those are the normal ones, and in many places homosexuals don't have them. I also agree that they don't need any extra or special ones. But what about these normal ones?
Now you say that they don't need special or extra rights, so why you was all the time speaking that they should have an EXTRA right to marry same sex partner?
On one side homosexuals say that they are as any other people. On the second side the rights that any other people have aren't enought for them. If they are as any other people why they want rights that no other people needs? _________________
Last edited by KaRei on Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
I just want to know what's the different between if I was againest them because of religious reasons or because of anything else.
That's because religion refers to the very basis of the way you look at life and the world; and nothing that I or anyone else say about it is going to change your opinion. Sometimes it is kind of fun to fight for lost causes, but in that case it is just a waste of time. And there is nothing wrong with opposing homosexuality due to religious reasons. It may not be as rational as I'd like, but it is part of a larger whole that holds some people's world together; and just this issue isn't enough to be opposed to that whole. I don't think it is wrong or evil to disapprove of something like gay marriage because of religious reasons. Now if you were saing "let's kill all the homosexuals" that would be something else, but you're not.
Quote:
Both religious and unreligious are againest them for the same reasons and same opinion.
Not necessarily.
Quote:
I have my own opinion. This is my opinion my own.
Yes, just like I have mine.
Quote:
Let me say something. If what others do doesnt hurt you, you let them do whatever they want? If its going to hurt them, then its ok?
No, but I still don't see how being gay hurts someone.
Quote:
If a child saw their people around him steal he will do (imitate) and if he saw them kissing,hugging..etc he will do the same and you know that, right? Children imitate what they see and sometimes they feel it's what he needs to do because others do it. I hope you get what I mean.
I do, but that is where parenting comes in. It's just like watching TV. responsible parents know what their kids watch and help them deal with it and understand them. People may be killing each other on TV; it is a parent's work to say "you shouldn't do that" or "that happens because..." In the unlikely (but possible) case that the child is born gay, he may grow up without the many insecurities that lots of gay people have about coping with themselves in a hostile or intolerant world. And in the more likely case that the kid isn't gay, he'll learn to respect other people's feelings. Either way everyone wins. And don;t tell me that childre do and imitate everything they see because I don't think so. They may be curious about it, but some things are just not of any interest. I grew up watching people eat hard-boiled eggs and I HATE hard-boiled eggs. Always did. There are some things that looking at doesn't change, and I blieve this is one of them.
Quote:
If you let people live the way they want then its not freedom. Its chaos. They will do everything they want wether its good or bad. Just imagine a world where everyone is doing what he/she wants. How does it look like?
Ok, that's what we have the law for. As I said, the law is what maintains order. Andif gay people were allowed to marry order still wouldn't be broken down. they are still people, human beings with rights and responsibilities under it. I don't see why liking someone form the same sex is such a big deal.
Quote:
Good is something that doesnt hurt you nor hurt others. That's the define of the word "Good" for me.
And how does homosexuality violate that condition?
Quote:
Stealing was a bad thing..a very very bad thing but now it became nothing. Rape was a bad thing...very very bad but now it isnt. Killing children was a bad bad thing but now it isnt. Everything changes not because the people but because of the changable law. They dont have one law for this crime or that crime.
I didn't know either of those things stopped being bad at any point in time. Must have happened as I slept last time. Murder is bad because it means taking a life and making those who love a person lose someone they like. robbery is bad because it makes you lose something that is rightfully yours, perhaps something that's precious. Rape is bad because it brutalizes and forces someone to do something unwanted to satisfy the one-sided desire of someone else no matter how they are opposed to it. All hurt people, all are wrong in my book (there might be attenuating circumstances for robbery and murder, but that's for some other time). I don;t se how being homosexual can be equated with any of these. If a homosexual rapes someone it isn't bad because it is a homosexual. it is bad because it is RAPE.
Quote:
I want to ask you something leo. If a woman whom have many guys beside her and she dont have any mental illness nor have a bad experience with men nor she hates them, do you think if she loved a girl means she's normal?
Yes.
Quote:
I never heard that a girl get attract to another girl because she loves her.
I have. At least twice. And both are great people. I'd love to date them myself but they don't find me attractive. Pity, but I don't dwell on it.
Quote:
I never heard of a guy who doesnt get attract to a girl nor he likes any.
If you mean "like' as in "is sexually attracted to" then also, I have. Hell, I grew up with these people (friends of my mom's). By the way, being gay doesn;t allienate you from the opposite sex. Just like heteroseuals find some people of the other sex unnatractive, the same happens to homosexuas. They might like women as friends, but that's about it.
Quote:
If there are then they are upnormal or have mental illness or have bad luck with men/girls or dont like men/girls due to some past problems happened to someone precious to him/her or to one of his/her relatives or family or they want to get people's attraction.
Not necessarily. the people I know are fairly "normal"; don't have any traumas or bad luck with the opposite sex. it is a simple matter of preference.
Quote:
Other then that I never heard of a love (I mean love that end up marrying) between a girlxgirl or boyxboy. Ask me.
Ok, then you lack experience.
Quote:
leo wrote:
And there isn't incest without sex, just like there isn't murder without someone turning up dead.
Means there isn't love without sex, just like there isn't murder without someone turning up dead. If not then why only incest cant be without sex?
If a brother rapes his sister, that IS incest. if a brother thinks that he'd like to have sex with his sister his thoughts are incestuous, but there isn't incest because there is no consumation. You can't throw someone in jail because of some thought that person had. I've also thought of killing someone, or of staling something, yet I haven't done it. Am I still a criminal? And like in the above mentioned case of rape: incest does not always have to do with love. there can be love without sex and there can be sex without love.
Quote:
spanky wrote:
(Not to mention both are illegal across the world)
Did you ask yourself why was it illegal across the world?
Who said its illegal from the first place? and why?
Their eyes were closed and now our eyes are open or a new love has been discovered?
Old laws are based on morality; and back then it was thought that homosexuality was amoral. usually such moraliy was of religious nature. Now, times have change, there is separation between church and state etc. Why are some things still not legal? because 1) they threaten order or because, in a sense our laws still dictate what is moral and what is not (statutory rape comes to mind).
Bestiality is illegal because it goes against order. it debases the importance of consent in marriage and relationships. It is different if two consenting homosexuals want to get married or be together under the law. Incest is illegal because, more often than not, it is the result of coercion, trickery, misinformation and exploitation. All are objectionable. If two adult, mature people want to spend their life together in marriage fully aware of their rights and responsibilities that such union entails, I don't see how being of the same gender would affct that. It's their life. I think I made my case against incest and bestiality on my last post so I'm not going to go over it again.
Quote:
Sorry but if you dont care about others you dont have the right to say this is wrong and this right. Please if you experienced it then talk if not shut your mouth.
"Shut your mouth"? Such forceful demand, hehe.
Anyway, it is a pity but I do happen to know what I'm talking about so I'm not shutting my mouth. It is your right to express your opinion as well, so I won't tell you to take a hike because I think (keyword: THINK) you're wrong.
AA: All very valid points.
KaRei wrote:
Take an open minded approach and you'll accept anything. Respect and tolerance is one thing, but it mustn't grow into phlegm
Correct. It is because I'm not *that* open minded that I till find bestiality, incest, murder, robbery, assault, rape, warfare and battery objectionable. As it happens such is not the case with homosexuality. I wouldn't consider myself phlegmatic. In fact I think that those who commit crimes or violate order should be punished according to the rigor of the law, swiftly and effectively. Not everything can be overlooked.
Quote:
The stand "let them do what they want" led most the times to catastrophe.
When during 60s, 70s was a freedom of sex and drugs it didn't end very good. Or you think that it was a success?
Fun fact: I'm against drug use. Of course it was a big failure. I haven't said "let do people do what they want" That's not freedom, as Ultimasome said. But I don't see how changing homosexuality from the "intolerable" side of the spectrum to "legal and acceptable" (note: NOT encouraged or mandatory in any way) will bring about social chaos and disruption.
Quote:
It isn't discrimination because in this I don't distinguish between heterosexuals and homosexuals. I only said it wrong that it sounded one-way. I'm that strict in both cases. Hold hands is Ok, but I had in mind closer acts than this. Then it is something personal and it shouldn't appear on a public. At least because there could be people that would mind it. And it doesn't make sence if it's with same or opposite sex gendre. Still on public you mustn't disturb with your actions others.
In that case I seem to have misunderstood you; I apologize. If that is so, I have to say that I am of the same opinion. There ought to be limits to the affection that people show each other in public, simply because, homosexual or heterosexual, it is going to make others uncomfortable, as you said. I've thought to myself "get a room" when seeing some people. You're right.
Quote:
Good and bad is something what everybody is taught by parents, school, religion and traditions.
This teaching is forming in everybody a feeling of good and bad things and a sence to distinguishing them. Distinguishing of good and bad is then task of that internal feeling. So you then feel something as bad and something as good.
And I feel homosexuality as bad.
Anyway, although I feel it like this, I respect, tolerate and accept that somebody can feel "love" to same gendre. But here it stops and I'm against same sex marriage and to some point even against the union.
I see, o basically you think homosexualit is bad because you've been taught that way. I guess there is nothing to do about that.
My opinion of good is a bit more like Ultimasome's. See, I think something is good when it makes people happy without bringing harm to themselves or to others. I think it is good to eat some chocolate that I bought because it is tasty. It is bad to eat a ton of chocolate that I bought because it will make me sick and I could have used that money for something else, more healthy. I think it is bad to eat chocolate that I stole from someone because it is stolen, I affected someone else negatively. I think it is bad to kill someone over a piece of chocolate; but I think it is acceptable (NOT good) to kill someone in self defense, because not doing so would have got YOU killed or perhaps seriously injured. I see the world in shades of gray. I may have been taught, to see the world in shades of gray, but ultimately I like to think that I can understand why I think something is darker or something is lighter, and that because of it i can say this case of eating chocolate is good, this other one is bad. I make my own opinions. At least I like to think that I do.
It is because of this kind of outlook that I don't think homosexuality, on the whole, is a bad thing. There can be bad and exploitative homosexual relations, just as there can be exploitative heterosexual relations. See? I don't think one is worse because it is homosexual, both are bad because they are exploitative, and I believe that there ARE perfectly non-abusive relationships of BOTH natures. It is because both can be beneficial for the people involved that I find neither objectionable. I know two adult men who are homosexual, have been living together for years and are happy that way. They haven't hurt anyone, they don't go around making out in the street and they keep their privacy as it is: private. Why should I, you, or anyone be opposed if they, one day, decide to get married under civil law?
Quote:
Nor hetero can marry whoever he want, only somebody of opposite sex.
...
Being hetero MEANS that you are attracted to and would ideally like to marry someone of the opposite sex. Why would you marry someone of your same sex if you'd rather not? Convenience? Heterosexual marriages of convenience aren't illegal either.
Quote:
Law doesn't distinguish between heterosexuals and homosexuals and it says EVERYBODY can marry only opposite sex partner. To call the case as a discrimination the part of "distinguish between" is missing in whole case.
Do you have it already?
I do. Now, owing to the fundamental nature of homosexuality, the law is in PRACTICE discriminatory, it may not have been meant to be that way in tis inception (as it was created where the only conceivable kind of union was between people of opposite genders), but for all practical purposes, it is discriminatory. Now, if the law said "EVERYBODY can marry any other consenting individual who understands and is willing to accept the rights and responsibilities that the union of marriage entails as long as either person isn't already married to someone else", would you be opposed to it?
Quote:
And it should remain like that. Purpose of marriage is raise family. Purpose of family is raise children. But imagine how it would look like when child would be adopted by homosexuals? How poor the child would be? Can you imagine that other children, when they would realize that the child is from such family, would be pointing on that child? That it would be a target of jokes, mockery and vexation? That child would have a horrible childhood. And if because of nothing else, than at least because of this homosexuals shouldn't have a possibility to adopt children.
You see, I know what you mean. But if society were to change its outlook on homosexuality the problem that you mention would disappear. Same happened once (and still happens) with interracial couples, you know? If people though "same sex couple? with a kid? so what?" then it wouldn't matter, would it? I would like to see society move that way. Change is a long process; things don't happen overnight. True, it will be a painful experience for many, but if it leads to a future where a kid will not be bullied because of it, I'd encourage the state and society to move in that direction. I know, I know... "if". but I think that this is an "if" that can be realized.
Quote:
Now you say that they don't need special or extra rights, so why you was all the time speaking that they should have an EXTRA right to marry same sex partner?
Read above. It wouldn't be a special right. No more special than everyone else's.
Quote:
On one side homosexuals say that they are as any other people. On the second side the rights that any other people have aren't enought for them. If they are as any other people why they want rights that no other people needs?
It is because such rights were conceived with a special mindset: people would only like to marry and/or live with someone of the opposite sex. THAT is not so; and in practice the law is discriminatory. If you change the mindset, you change the rights. it's the same as with the issue of race. Before, people thought that marriage between different races was inconceivable; it initially wasn't legal because nobody thought to make it legal. Enter civil rights movements and the law changed. Does that mean that something that was amoral suddenly became moral? I don't think so. Why is it different from this case? Aren't we, in both cases, dealing with human beings capable of understanding their decision and accept it as part of their life? _________________
Joined: Oct 11, 2004 Posts: 15 Location: Staring blankly at a computer screen
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:59 pm Post subject:
Firstly I'd just like to say this is a facinating thread with constructive arguments on both sides of the fence - kudos to all that it hasn't degenerated into a flame war.
Personally I tend to take the zen approach to viewing homosexuality which doesn't actually distinguish a difference between homo or hetro but instead has the precept:
"I resolve not to engage in harmful sexual relations, but to be loving and responsible."
Sexual practices which harm, manipulate, or exploit others is forbidden (e.g. sex with children, with persons who are engaged or married to others, with persons unable to give informed consent, etc.)
I'm not gay myself but I do have gay friends.
Sexual orientation is not something for approval or disapproval in my view . The love (or lack of) is no different between hetro or homosexual when engaging in sexual congress - or thats what I gather when my gay friends talk about their relationships and desires.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All images and comments are property of their respective owners, all the rest � 2002 by Anime-Source.com.
You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php.
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
