Sexuality

[imgoneimdead]

Dan, as much as we disagree with them, we have to respect their opinions. It's ignorant not to.

No in fact I don't! by what you are saying I'd also have to respect racism! NO NO AND NO! I will never respect ANYONE that is against public freedom and choice! Should i also respect Nazis just "BECAUSE" as well? "Hey! Lets punch some Jews! and some fagots as well! ahaha" I am supposed to respect that?! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! you logic Is INSULTING!

Okay I made a mistake there, I mean if they somehow have a good reason to. Some people, like homophobics, can NOT control there hate. No matter what there is in the world, someone will hate it. What I meant by all this is that even if somebody hates it, trying to argue with it will most likely not be worth it.

[Your Computer]

?

You said this discussion has become ridiculous because of the so-called "hate" found herein. If you look at the posts, most of that hate is coming from you. This topic was supposed to be about the position one takes on the subject, not the position you take on other people's positions. Yet, you're not the only one who decided to avoid simply stating their position and not commenting on others' positions. A lot of those who "support" homosexuality used nothing but rhetoric rather than simply stating their position and letting things be. Note that rhetoric proves nothing, and concerning a lot of the posts that used rhetoric shows a gaffe (or more) towards the user of rhetoric.

It is not surprising to yet again realise that those who think that homosexuality is okay automatically believe that those who think homosexuality is not okay are those who are against "equal rights," though not one of us who believe homosexuality is wrong said anything about denying human rights. These are the kind of fallacies (specifically hasty generalisation) that people like you commit when you put aside reason and logic and dive headlong into emotion, insults and rhetoric. If you, and others, do not see the fallacies within your statements, then one should refrain from posting until something intelligent can be said.

Know that "right" and "wrong" is an illusion without an absolute authority, for there is no way you can ever argue that any position is the "right" or "wrong" position versus another without an absolute authority. It is ironic, though expected, that those who support equal rights would turn immediately around and state, "You are wrong and stupid for taking such a position." Either people are equal or they are not; you cannot have a middle man (especially if you ever seek to be seen as consistent and logical).

Know that rhetoric and truth are separate. If you ever choose to use this standard, you would end up stating a lot more intelligent (logical) statements, or at least in some way refrain from rhetoric. Following this standard you would clearly see what is rhetoric and what isn't. "They are stupid," "They are homophobic," et cetera, are rhetoric statements, for no evidence has been given to show that they are (though i don't expect you to be able to provide such evidence). (And it is predicted that you would think otherwise on the case of evidence.) I have seen all these rhetoric statements before, and have debated against them in the past though i realise there is no need to speak against them, for they speak against themselves. But, surely, there has to be a point where something is said before such things are allowed to run rampant.

If nothing i have said at least causes you or anyone else to reconsider the things you or anyone else has said, then i may as well give up on society and let their own ways ruin them. For over and over again i am shown that people learn only the hard way.

[Bridge]

?

You said this discussion has become ridiculous because of the so-called "hate" found herein. If you look at the posts, most of that hate is coming from you. This topic was supposed to be about the position one takes on the subject, not the position you take on other people's positions. Yet, you're not the only one who decided to avoid simply stating their position and not commenting on others' positions. A lot of those who "support" homosexuality used nothing but rhetoric rather than simply stating their position and letting things be. Note that rhetoric proves nothing, and concerning a lot of the posts that used rhetoric shows a gaffe (or more) towards the user of rhetoric.

It is not surprising to yet again realise that those who think that homosexuality is okay automatically believe that those who think homosexuality is not okay are those who are against "equal rights," though not one of us who believe homosexuality is wrong said anything about denying human rights. These are the kind of fallacies (specifically hasty generalisation) that people like you commit when you put aside reason and logic and dive headlong into emotion, insults and rhetoric. If you, and others, do not see the fallacies within your statements, then one should refrain from posting until something intelligent can be said.

Know that "right" and "wrong" is an illusion without an absolute authority, for there is no way you can ever argue that any position is the "right" or "wrong" position versus another without an absolute authority. It is ironic, though expected, that those who support equal rights would turn immediately around and state, "You are wrong and stupid for taking such a position." Either people are equal or they are not; you cannot have a middle man (especially if you ever seek to be seen as consistent and logical).

Know that rhetoric and truth are separate. If you ever choose to use this standard, you would end up stating a lot more intelligent (logical) statements, or at least in some way refrain from rhetoric. Following this standard you would clearly see what is rhetoric and what isn't. "They are stupid," "They are homophobic," et cetera, are rhetoric statements, for no evidence has been given to show that they are (though i don't expect you to be able to provide such evidence). (And it is predicted that you would think otherwise on the case of evidence.) I have seen all these rhetoric statements before, and have debated against them in the past though i realise there is no need to speak against them, for they speak against themselves. But, surely, there has to be a point where something is said before such things are allowed to run rampant.

If nothing i have said at least causes you or anyone else to reconsider the things you or anyone else has said, then i may as well give up on society and let their own ways ruin them. For over and over again i am shown that people learn only the hard way.

As I said: who the hell cares? The semantics of it are completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is this debate is: is homosexuality wrong? The answer is always it is not.In this day and age anyone intelligent should see that deriving someone of the right to behave in a certain way is wrong. We are talking about two otherwise incomparable human beings (one gay and one straight; ignoring all variables). There is no fundamental difference apart from opposing mindsets. You can be all neutral with your "there is no absolute truth" but it's completely pointless. And with that I'm gone.

[Your Computer]

As I said: who the hell cares? The semantics of it are completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is this debate is: is homosexuality wrong? The answer is always it is not.In this day and age anyone intelligent should see that deriving someone of the right to behave in a certain way is wrong. We are talking about two otherwise incomparable human beings (one gay and one straight; ignoring all variables). There is no fundamental difference apart from opposing mindsets. You can be all neutral with your "there is no absolute truth" but it's completely pointless. And with that I'm gone.

If semantics are irrelevant, why do you make statements that necessitate semantics?

[Danny Boy]

As I said: who the hell cares? The semantics of it are completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is this debate is: is homosexuality wrong? The answer is always it is not.In this day and age anyone intelligent should see that deriving someone of the right to behave in a certain way is wrong. We are talking about two otherwise incomparable human beings (one gay and one straight; ignoring all variables). There is no fundamental difference apart from opposing mindsets. You can be all neutral with your "there is no absolute truth" but it's completely pointless. And with that I'm gone.

If semantics are irrelevant, why do you make statements that necessitate semantics?

It doesn't matter how it is said! sure there is no "good" nor "evils" in our reality! sure it is part of the moral given by our parents/government/culture/society/religion sure the way i said it is rough/dictatorial! but the truth is that ANYTHING and ANYONE that is Racist, Homophobic("ish") are in a way or in another AGAINST the power of people having free will! sure they can say they don't like it! but they should NOT be against it! its against Humanity! as i said before sure there no good nor evil in reality, but sure as hell Nazis think they are right about their ideals. does it mean we should respect that?! NO!

But just because some people are gay they should not marry in several countries?! that they should be seen as second class creatures in human skin? doesn't this sound like the old fashion racists that are still around us? In matters of Human rights i don't care if good or evil exists or not or that "there is no right answer"! thats only bureaucratic bull shit that has only stagnated the human mind for centuries! "oh the global warming isn't happening therefore no precautions about shall not be done" just because some people disagree whit something it doesn't mean they should even be taken seriously! in some subjects like the racism and "gay" rights the opposer are generally (therefore not all of course) IGNORANTS! either just pure ignorants or old farts that are too influenced in the old ways of thinking! sure there should be space for debates for every subject there is! but in matters of human rights THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY THING TO BE DISCUSSED ABOUT! Gays deserve the same rights as EVERY ONE ELSE WHEATER BLACK, WHITE, TALL OR SMALL! END OF DISCUSSION! If the Nazis or the Religious "dudes" or the Homophobic teenagers bastards don't like it the hell for them! Nothing but i mean NOTHING should ever mess up whit the human rights! now weather you don't like it or not and say that i am closing in into my own oppinion discarding the others i don't care! for the best of humanity the sooner we think of Gays like this the better!

Ps: sorry if some parts don't really make some sense. its kinda hard for me to write down so much text in English

[imgoneimdead]

Some people have a phobia they have no control over...

[Danny Boy]

Some people have a phobia they have no control over...

There exist rehabs for phobias for a reason. people that have phobias should not hold or screw whit the future and rights of people, no matter their religion(unless its a violent and sanguinary one), culture of race!

[moreendanning]

Ok I'm gonna try and slip my little opinions in here, right in the middle of all the flame wars and b1tch fights on this discussion, and here they are:

Heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality and asexuality are NOT choices. They're like talents or birth marks or your eye colour: you're born with them, you can't pray them away, you can't force yourself to be something you're clearly not. That's the way we are.

I'm bisexual. I was born bisexual. I will always be bisexual, whether I'm ok with it or not, whether my parents are ok with it or not, whether the church is ok with it or not. Not out of choice, but out of design. It's how I am. It will not change.

Also the issue of gay marriage shouldn't exist at all. It's not about gay rights or straight rights, it's about HUMAN RIGHTS. Every human, male or female, straight or gay, should have the HUMAN RIGHT to be attracted to any human, male or female, straight or gay, they want. If two humans, male or female, straight or gay, want to love each other, get married, have a family, whatever, there should be nothing stopping them. Not law. Not religion. Not oppression. Not hatred. Nothing.

So there.

[eliasfrost]

Ok I'm gonna try and slip my little opinions in here, right in the middle of all the flame wars and b1tch fights on this discussion, and here they are:

Heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality and asexuality are NOT choices. They're like talents or birth marks or your eye colour: you're born with them, you can't pray them away, you can't force yourself to be something you're clearly not. That's the way we are.

I'm bisexual. I was born bisexual. I will always be bisexual, whether I'm ok with it or not, whether my parents are ok with it or not, whether the church is ok with it or not. Not out of choice, but out of design. It's how I am. It will not change.

Also the issue of gay marriage shouldn't exist at all. It's not about gay rights or straight rights, it's about HUMAN RIGHTS. Every human, male or female, straight or gay, should have the HUMAN RIGHT to be attracted to any human, male or female, straight or gay, they want. If two humans, male or female, straight or gay, want to love each other, get married, have a family, whatever, there should be nothing stopping them. Not law. Not religion. Not oppression. Not hatred. Nothing.

So there.

Thank you so much for writing this, a lot of people miss out on the actual important bits, like human rights and that your sexuality isn't a choice. I approve this message.

[Juby]

There is a such thing as natural talent, but I'm not sure I would describe it in sexuality. It sounds awkward when you apply that word into sex. Being whatever sexuality you are is indeed a choice; saying it is not would be suggesting somebody will chop your head off and put it in somebody's salad if you aren't. Some people just get turned on with the same gender naturally, but being a sexuality is a decision. In the end, you are the one deciding who you want to passionately love.

Now I want to go off-topic and discuss talent. Natural talent best relates to sports; a talent is a special natural ability and a capacity for achievement or success. Many think of being talented as just the big-shot ultimate player, but really talent does not equal a good player at all. A talent suggests an aptitude in a certain area. "Talented" people can perfect their skills and learn new things a lot easier than the average Joe, but that still does not mean that they are good. This may sound weird, but you can be talented in sex as well as anything.