I had no idea (caution gay thread)

[Erik88]

The homophobia in this thread is extremely obvious.

[Smith]

The homophobia in this thread is extremely obvious.

Good try. Not as obviuos as the religiphobeia/christiphobia. This gets old. I have gay friends and know plenty of folks from that persuasion. I have no fear of them, but again - good try.

[Mike.357]

by the way there a number who seek counseling and help who are not comfortable with who they are.

so is alcoholism drug abuse obesity and a number other genetic disorders. ask anyone in prison.

if I was being equated with criminals and drug abusers I might not feel comfortable with who I am either.

[daddyo]

The homophobia in this thread is extremely obvious.

Yep, if you can't debate the topic, throw out the "homophobe" charge.

This is exactly what the Obamabots do when they play the race card. Congratulations.

[Smith]

if I was being equated with criminals and drug abusers I might not feel comfortable with who I am either.

.... and we've back to blaming Christians. More christiphobia.

Just messing with you Mike.

[Mike.357]

its all good, but I never mentioned Christ.

[Il Duce]

The amount of care over what two people, who have nothing to do with you, do in their own life astounds me.

[daddyo]

The amount of care over what two people, who have nothing to do with you, do in their own life astounds me.

I personally couldn't care less about what two people do as long as they aren't hurting anyone. They have to answer for what they do and don't do, not me.

But when you start trying to normalize aberrant behavior, and demonize people who don't think that aberrant behavior is normal, then I do care about that.

[Jonnin]

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Judge-orders-sex-change-for-Mass-murder-convict-3838432.php

Apparently, it is a serious medical disorder. Even I draw the line at spending tax dollars for this sort of thing... though once obamacare gets rolling, we will probably see a lot of this sort of thing....

I still say the govt needs to get out of this issue entirely. I think the back & forth here shows that nothing else is going to work for enough of the population to be possible.

[Guest HvyMtl]

Smith my comment was not directed at you, but since you believed it to be so, and you think the state would force the church into violating their beliefs by forcing them to marry gays, then you missed the point. That would be a violation of the separation I want protected.

Marriage is the legal union between two. Traditional marriage is the legal union between a man and a woman. Give them the ability to have the first, as it is a legal (government) action.

"Genetic?" Good question. "Defect?" Um. Defect sounds like labling someone second class, due to something they cannot control. An example would be skin color (a genetic condition) and opens up a large can of worms.

Besides, it has not been proven to be genetic, and not choice. Which then begs the freedom of choice. Liberty and pursuit of happiness would come into play with the choice situation.

Besides, how does the homosexuals negative impact you, personally, if they are allowed to marry? You are not gay, so, you still have marriage. You would still have traditional marriage. Your rights would not be limited by their expansion of rights. If you think so, how?

Edited September 4, 2012 by HvyMtl

[Caster]

This country was founded under a premise of "You are free to do what ever you like until what you are doing infringes upon the freedoms of someone else."

Provided they are not doing it on a park bench in public, how does two queers wanting to be together affect anyone else?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

X-Men

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oh Shoot]

Or entire system is built on Christian morality and all legislation is morality....

Christians like to claim that, but it's fallacious.

All cultures, regardless of their predominant religion, have had prohibitions against murder, theft, assault, etc. All have acknowledged personal property rights of various degrees, marriage sanctions, etc. Much more commonality between cultures than dissimilarity.

These concepts developed long before there was widespread religion of any flavor. They were present in the first cuneiform records we have of civilization in Sumer and it's safe to suppose they were present much earlier, and were in place as soon as people banded together in groups larger than nuclear families for protection. Why? Because it's the logical best way, actually the only way, for people to cohere in groups -- anarchy does not foment civilization.

The American experiment is quite unique but its basic laws regarding individual behavior are not. Christianity espouses much the same virtues as all major world religions, and most of these were in place before there were "world religions" at all.

If we had laws against the Seven Deadly Sins, you'd have a case.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

This country was founded under a premise of "You are free to do what ever you like until what you are doing infringes upon the freedoms of someone else."

Provided they are not doing it on a park bench in public, how does two queers wanting to be together affect anyone else?

Who said they couldn't be together?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caster]

If we had laws against the Seven Deadly Sins, you'd have a case.

- OS

If we had THOSE laws, we'd have a bigger problem with amerika's collective fat aßß.

[Caster]

Who said they couldn't be together?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I meant legally bound by marriage.

Sorry.

Edited September 4, 2012 by Caster

[kieefer]

Has Ron Paul been mentioned yet???

I heard he goes both ways, or did when he was about 50 yrs younger, .....and only with whites.

Let's not leave out the ole Dr. now.

[daddyo]

Has Ron Paul been mentioned yet???

I heard he goes both ways, or did when he was about 50 yrs younger, .....and only with whites.

Let's not leave out the ole Dr. now.

Funny, I heard the same thing about Mutt.

[G27]

I am not bent out of shape, lol. If 10% of the population is gay I don't consider it an abnormality, but rather a variance. That is a lot of people.

~10% of the population is left-handed - who would have thought that was a genetic disorder?

[Smith]

HvyMtl - I didn't think it was directed at me. Just answer your question and pointing out the agreement.

[kieefer]

~10% of the population is left-handed - who would have thought that was a genetic disorder?

Ought to be worth a handicap spot and maybe some benefits.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

~10% of the population is left-handed - who would have thought that was a genetic disorder?

How do you even know that? Did you

do a rabbit drive on leftys? There's

almost no way of knowing how many

of either type, except that I know I'm

left handed.

You can throw out figures all day long

and it's still meaningless.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Garufa]

There's almost no way of knowing how many

of either type, except that I know I'm

left handed.

Have you not gone to get cured yet?

[strickj]

Not sure why the "it's a choice" or "disorder" argument always comes up. What does that matter? It still does not change the fact that these laws are unconstitutional. It still does not change the fact that a few are forcing their religion upon others.

And even so, does a disorder mean these people do not have rights? I have OCD.... does that mean I do not have rights?

And for what it's worth, I went to school with two gays and am still acquainted with them today after all these years.

I find it hard to believe that a grade school age child could make the "choice" to be gay.

The homophobia in this thread is extremely obvious.

I've said it before I'll say it again.

I find it extremely gay for a grown man to tell another grown man how to play with his pecker;

[Il Duce]

This country was founded under a premise of "You are free to do what ever you like until what you are doing infringes upon the freedoms of someone else."

Provided they are not doing it on a park bench in public, how does two queers wanting to be together affect anyone else?

Really dude?