Why is homosexuality praised?
Ragtime wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Why is every homosexual treated as a trailblazer to the future, a leader, a pioneer even, merely for sticking..........his...............
I'd like an explanation of what this means, please._________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.
He wanted to stay sticking his sausage up another man's bum-bum.
Last edited by Tequila on 08 Dec 2011, 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Oh yes, I knew that. I just wanted to see if this intellectually bankrupt excuse for a question would be shot down by the vacuous mess posing it or someone with more courage.
As it turns out, it was the latter. Pretty much as expected.
_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.
Ragtime wrote:
Apple_in_my_Eye wrote:
It sounds like the girl was trying to be supportive and went a little overboard. I think that people (ok, some people) see that being gay has some hardships associated with it and want to be sympathetic and supportive. I think you're taking the girl's comment too literally.
I don't think that's it. Only certain bravery is praised, the politically correct kind. I take "gay pride" to mean exactly what it says. "White pride" is wrong, "gay pride" is right. Explain that.
I'd say that's because not all groups are 'behind the 8-ball,' so to speak. IOW, there's no "wealthy person's pride day" because they don't face any particular discrimination or hardships from being a member of that group. There's no need for it.
(And that's not to say that there are no white people who have problems/oppression that is significant -- it's just not because they're white (i.e. maybe they're poor/working class).)
Tequila wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Repressing yourself is ugly thing and there is no logical reason to do that to yourself in this day and age.
Depends where you live.
I suppose that's true, I should of prefaced that by saying in the civilized world. There is a very logical reason to repress yourself in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Alabama...
Jacoby wrote:
...the praising of openness... Repressing yourself is ugly thing and there is no logical reason to do that to yourself in this day and age.
What if you're a Christian? What if you want to put a "Merry Christmas" sign up, and a Nativity scene on private property but in public view? What if you want to pray in school? What if you think abortion is murder, and you want to talk women out of it in order to save lives?
Should you repress yourself then?
_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.
Ragtime wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
...the praising of openness... Repressing yourself is ugly thing and there is no logical reason to do that to yourself in this day and age.
What if you're a Christian? What if you want to put a "Merry Christmas" sign up, and a Nativity scene on private property but in public view? What if you want to pray in school? What if you think abortion is murder, and you want to talk women out of it in order to save lives?
Should you repress yourself then?
You can put whatever you want on private property as long as it meets community standards for inoffensiveness and does not violate any law (e.g. some states may restrict hate speech).
If you want to assault people on the street in order to talk them out of abortion you might have some legal trouble in your future.
Ragtime wrote:
What if you're a Christian? What if you want to put a "Merry Christmas" sign up, and a Nativity scene on private property but in public view?
On private property with the owner's permission? Have at it.
Quote:
What if you want to pray in school?
As long as you're not asking for special privileges, such as having prayer time set aside during the school day, what the devil do I care?
Quote:
What if you think abortion is murder, and you want to talk women out of it in order to save lives?
You're as free to argue that as others are to argue the opposite.
Quote:
Should you repress yourself then?
Meh. Repression is underrated.
dmm1010 wrote:
I think you've confused acceptance with admiration.
No, I really haven't. They are constantly praised in society for being gay.
dmm1010 wrote:
What good does it do to be "anti-gay"? Homosexuality is of biological origin. You're not going to turn homosexuals straight regardless of how much you rail about all the evils of "teh gay."
1. I do believe some people are born with the building blocks of what may eventually turn into sexual tendencies toward the same gender
2. I also believe some people are born badly disfigured, mentally ret*d, sociopathic to the point of being murderous, or with medical conditions rendering them in chronic, lifelong pain.
3. Therefore, being born a certain way isn't necessarily a good thing -- unless you're saying it's good that people are disfigured, mentally ret*d, sociopathic, or with medical conditions which are characterized by chronic, lifelong pain. So, being born a certain way is not necessarily an endorsement of validity for that condition.
4. Gays have converted to Christianity and, sometimes slowly and sometimes quickly, been able to completely leave their gay feelings behind. An all-poweful God can do this in a person, and I know of people He has changed in this way, and they are grateful. It's an inconvenient truth to the homosexual lobby, but gays CAN turn straight. (Or else these people have quite literally accomplished the impossible.)
5. God gifts us all at birth with the ability to make choices. For the socialpath, the choice to work toward finding peace. For the mentally ret*d, God gives some level of choice -- even if this choice is, in severely handicapped cases, only made on a spiritual, and not mental, level -- to love God and be the best person he or she can be, regardless of certain deficits in normal abilities. For the chronically-in-pain, the choice to seek spiritual peace and be a powerful example of endurance and conquest over a mountain of difficulty through God's miraculous strength. And for the person born with
dmm1010 wrote:
I think you've confused acceptance with admiration.
No, I really haven't. They are constantly praised in society for being gay.
dmm1010 wrote:
What good does it do to be "anti-gay"? Homosexuality is of biological origin. You're not going to turn homosexuals straight regardless of how much you rail about all the evils of "teh gay."
1. I do believe some people are born with the building blocks of what may eventually turn into sexual tendencies toward the same gender
2. I also believe some people are born badly disfigured, mentally ret*d, sociopathic to the point of being murderous, or with medical conditions rendering them in chronic, lifelong pain.
3. Therefore, being born a certain way isn't necessarily a good thing -- unless you're saying it's good that people are disfigured, mentally ret*d, sociopathic, or with medical conditions which are characterized by chronic, lifelong pain. So, being born a certain way is not necessarily an endorsement of validity for that condition.
4. Gays have converted to Christianity and, sometimes slowly and sometimes quickly, been able to completely leave their gay feelings behind. An all-poweful God can do this in a person, and I know of people He has changed in this way, and they are grateful. It's an inconvenient truth to the homosexual lobby, but gays CAN turn straight. (Or else these people have quite literally accomplished the impossible.)
5. God gifts us all at birth with the ability to make choices. For the socialpath, the choice to work toward finding peace. For the mentally ret*d, God gives some level of choice -- even if this choice is, in severely handicapped cases, only made on a spiritual, and not mental, level -- to love God and be the best person he or she can be, regardless of certain deficits in normal abilities. For the chronically-in-pain, the choice to seek spiritual peace and be a powerful example of endurance and conquest over a mountain of difficulty through God's miraculous strength.
And for the person born with the building blocks of what may eventually turn into sexual preference for one's own gender, God gives the choice, as with all human, of working toward pleasing him and avoiding sin, even in areas where it is very difficult to do so. And He strengthens us as we work toward that. Like most straight people, I was born with what would later develop into the desire to sleep with many, many people. That, however, was not necessarily "who I was" -- because God spiritually transformed me, as the Bible says He does Christians, into me into a chaste person. If a man naturally wants to cheat sexually, is that right? By the logic of the politically-correct take on gays, it must be.
_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.
Cornflake wrote:
Oh yes, I knew that. I just wanted to see if this intellectually bankrupt excuse for a question would be shot down by the vacuous mess posing it or someone with more courage.
As it turns out, it was the latter. Pretty much as expected.
As it turns out, it was the latter. Pretty much as expected.
Allow me to ask a question in return. May I ask who made you a moderator? I've never known moderators on WP to consider it their business to go around calling members "vacuous mess"es because their opinions differ. Maybe you are simply not aware that there is still a worldwide debate on homosexuality; the matter hasn't been closed in its favor.
_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.
Apple_in_my_Eye wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Apple_in_my_Eye wrote:
It sounds like the girl was trying to be supportive and went a little overboard. I think that people (ok, some people) see that being gay has some hardships associated with it and want to be sympathetic and supportive. I think you're taking the girl's comment too literally.
I don't think that's it. Only certain bravery is praised, the politically correct kind. I take "gay pride" to mean exactly what it says. "White pride" is wrong, "gay pride" is right. Explain that.
I'd say that's because not all groups are 'behind the 8-ball,' so to speak. IOW, there's no "wealthy person's pride day" because they don't face any particular discrimination or hardships from being a member of that group. There's no need for it.
(And that's not to say that there are no white people who have problems/oppression that is significant -- it's just not because they're white (i.e. maybe they're poor/working class).)
Alright then, how about this? Any group going around touting "black pride" would be considered racist, and rightly so. How, then, is "gay pride" not discriminatory against straights?
_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.
blauSamstag wrote:
@Ragtime, it's ok if you are gay. WP will accept you, and if you go into politics as a career, it's practically a requirement for republicans these days.
Worse yet, in their eyes -- I'm CHRISTIAN. WP strains hard to accept that.
_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.
