Marriage or not, why do people oppose g@ys anyway?

FACT: Gays are plotting to take over the world and redecorate it with sthparklesth and fabulousth powder-blue Priusthesth just as soon as they get this whole "social acceptance" thing out of the way. IT'S A FRONT! A FRONT, I SAY!

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="warriordoc"]

"Mmhmm and I also know that a man and a woman fit together in a certain kind of way that doesn't require justification."

That would be a good arguement if we were still reliant on reproducing to continue our species. We are in no dire need of reproducing right now

magicalclick

"We could always just produce children without any sexual contact. Its happening even now. Nothing too strange here."

Yea, I agree with you, I don't think its abnormal whatsoever. I was mostly just trying to counter his argument, but my counter argument didn't really show my beliefs haha.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="warriordoc"]

"Mmhmm and I also know that a man and a woman fit together in a certain kind of way that doesn't require justification."

That would be a good arguement if we were still reliant on reproducing to continue our species. We are in no dire need of reproducing right now

magicalclick

FACT: Gays are plotting to take over the world and redecorate it with sthparklesth and fabulousth powder-blue Priusthesth just as soon as they get this whole "social acceptance" thing out of the way. IT'S A FRONT! A FRONT, I SAY!

Theokhoth

I was just done unpacking the sthparkling decoration.... =/

FACT: Gays are plotting to take over the world and redecorate it with sthparklesth and fabulousth powder-blue Priusthesth just as soon as they get this whole "social acceptance" thing out of the way. IT'S A FRONT! A FRONT, I SAY!

Theokhoth

Dude, shut up! You're going to blow our cover! :evil:

"We could always just produce children without any sexual contact. Its happening even now. Nothing too strange here."

Yea, I agree with you, I don't think its abnormal whatsoever. I was mostly just trying to counter his argument, but my counter argument didn't really show my beliefs haha.

warriordoc

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

FACT: Gays are plotting to take over the world and redecorate it with sthparklesth and fabulousth powder-blue Priusthesth just as soon as they get this whole "social acceptance" thing out of the way. IT'S A FRONT! A FRONT, I SAY!

Dark_Knight6

Dude, shut up! You're going to blow our cover! :evil:

Pfft. You're bisexual; we haven't decided what to do with you people yet. :x

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

FACT: Gays are plotting to take over the world and redecorate it with sthparklesth and fabulousth powder-blue Priusthesth just as soon as they get this whole "social acceptance" thing out of the way. IT'S A FRONT! A FRONT, I SAY!

magicalclick

Pfft. You're bisexual; we haven't decided what to do with you people yet. :x

Theokhoth

I am? :o News to me.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]But if our numbers dropped, it would become abnormal again? I don't think you'd want to accept that so I see no point there.Dark_Knight6

You do realise that homosexuals aren't sterile, right? If it came down to the survival of the human species, I'd have sex with a woman.

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]But if our numbers dropped, it would become abnormal again? I don't think you'd want to accept that so I see no point there.SolidSnake35

You do realise that homosexuals aren't sterile, right? If it came down to the survival of the human species, I'd have sex with a woman.

You see? You DO learn something new every day! :D

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]But if our numbers dropped, it would become abnormal again? I don't think you'd want to accept that so I see no point there.SolidSnake35

You do realise that homosexuals aren't sterile, right? If it came down to the survival of the human species, I'd have sex with a woman.

Since you pretty much admitted that your dissaproval is based purely on subjectivity and all...

Don't worry, Bi is the next big thing. :)magicalclick

But am not fifteen...or a girl. :o

Then I think its ok to conclude that homosexuality after all doesnt need justification like you implied, right?

Since you pretty much admitted that your dissaproval is based purely on subjectivity and all...

Teenaged

And now that that's over and done with, we can gossip about hot men. Woo! :D

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]Then I think its ok to conclude that homosexuality after all doesnt need justification like you implied, right? Since you pretty much admitted that your dissaproval is based purely on subjectivity and all...SolidSnake35

Maybe thats just me......

As for the feeling, I really dont want to tell you that I find it unexpectable to doubt about the "quality" of feelings in homosexuality, since you are outside of it, but the very fact that you are out of it, means that you would have to be one to know if the feeling is equivalent to a heterosexual's.

To me, it seems that thinking that the feeling "mustnt be quite right" comes purely from the image of abnormality homosexuality bears for thousands of years.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"] No, as you said, everyone has flaws. I just don't like how those flaws are being treated as something mainstream instead of as, well, flaws.fidosim

OK, so if called being Christian a flaw am I in the right?

Well, first off homosexuality does have something to do with biology, it might be more accurate to say that the minds of people who repress their homosexuality do not match their biology. Second, I think it's a perfect comparison. What premise are you arguing on? The premise that you BELIEVE something is unnatural, wrong, not right, however you want to put it. They BELIEVE that what they're doing is not wrong, that they should have that choice. In fact, why should something that people have so little control over as sexuality be called a flaw whereas something that people have ultimate control over such as their own beliefs be accepted? At any rate, there's nothing that I can see that seperates the two arguments, just as you can come up with strawman arguments as to why homosexuality is wrong I can come up with strawman arguments as to why Christianity is wrong. Doesn't make either of us right, the point isn't being right, the point is not being concerned with other people's definitions of morality and the things they do with their peronal lives.

BTW, the whole natural argument isn't new or unique to the homosexual debate, supporters of slavery argued on the natural inferiority of black men based on junk science long before homosexuality ever became an issue. That's the thing with these issues, acceptance doesn't work if you make exceptions in the cases where you take personal exception, that goes against the very definition of the phrase.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]Then I think its ok to conclude that homosexuality after all doesnt need justification like you implied, right? Since you pretty much admitted that your dissaproval is based purely on subjectivity and all...Teenaged

Maybe thats just me......

As for the feeling, I really dont want to tell you that I find it irrational to doubt about the "quality" of feelings in homosexuality, since you are outside of it, but the very fact that you are out of it, means that you would have to be one to know if the feeling is equivalent to a heterosexual's.

To me, it seems that thinking that the feeling "mustnt be quite right" comes purely from the image of abnormality homosexuality bears for thousands of years.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"] I never said it did need justifying... only that heterosexuality needs no justification. I didn't mean to imply there that homosexuality does, unlike heterosexuality, need justifying. Indeed, if it were a choice, it would need justifying but, as it is not a choice, no justification is required; that is, other than to say, "hey, that's just how I feel". But at this point I would hold that the feeling there isn't quite as it should be. Of course, it doesn't matter; we should tolerate it but I think that people should be more tolerable of those who still want to regard it as different as well.SolidSnake35

Maybe thats just me......

As for the feeling, I really dont want to tell you that I find it irrational to doubt about the "quality" of feelings in homosexuality, since you are outside of it, but the very fact that you are out of it, means that you would have to be one to know if the feeling is equivalent to a heterosexual's.

To me, it seems that thinking that the feeling "mustnt be quite right" comes purely from the image of abnormality homosexuality bears for thousands of years.

How is it directed differently?

How is it directed differently?Teenaged

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]How is it directed differently?SolidSnake35

If you mean that instead of the opposite it is directed to the same sex, then how does that say anything about the "type" of the feeling or its abnormality.

There was no question towards you that would require such an answer. Anyway...Teenaged

Because most people are bigots that have it in their head that homosexuals actually choose to be homosexuals. Yeah, because that makes ****ing sense. :roll:

Dark_Knight6

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]How is it directed differently?Teenaged

If you mean that instead of the opposite it is directed to the same sex, then how does that say anything about the "type" of the feeling or its abnormality.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]There was no question towards you that would require such an answer. Anyway...SolidSnake35

Actually that someone was me, but I wasnt trying to misconstrue your argument. I was just pushing your argument to a logical "consequence" that it has. Its just a way to "push" someone to either clarify or make sure they dispute the very implications of their post.

Well, first off homosexuality does have something to do with biology, it might be more accurate to say that the minds of people who repress their homosexuality do not match their biology. Second, I think it's a perfect comparison. What premise are you arguing on? The premise that you BELIEVE something is unnatural, wrong, not right, however you want to put it. They BELIEVE that what they're doing is not wrong, that they should have that choice. In fact, why should something that people have so little control over as sexuality be called a flaw whereas something that people have ultimate control over such as their own beliefs be accepted? At any rate, there's nothing that I can see that seperates the two arguments, just as you can come up with strawman arguments as to why homosexuality is wrong I can come up with strawman arguments as to why Christianity is wrong. Doesn't make either of us right, the point isn't being right, the point is not being concerned with other people's definitions of morality and the things they do with their peronal lives.BTW, the whole natural argument isn't new or unique to the homosexual debate, supporters of slavery argued on the natural inferiority of black men based on junk science long before homosexuality ever became an issue. That's the thing with these issues, acceptance doesn't work if you make exceptions in the cases where you take personal exception, that goes against the very definition of the phrase.theone86

As i've said, the urge to reproduce is one of the most basic and natural instincts. When people don't want sex with the opposite gender, something is wrong. It's not just my belief, it is not junk science. It's the truth.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"] At one sex or the other.SolidSnake35

If you mean that instead of the opposite it is directed to the same sex, then how does that say anything about the "type" of the feeling or its abnormality.

Just because for instance I may not be able to relate to sth, that doesnt mean that that something is somewhat wrong. If I dd think like that then I would just be trying to justify my lack of sympathy or my inability to relate.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]There was no question towards you that would require such an answer. Anyway...Teenaged

Actually that someone was me, but I wasnt trying to misconstrue your argument. I was just pushing your argument to a logical "consequence" that it has. Its just a way to "push" someone to either clarify or make sure they dispute the very implications of their post.

"As i've said, the urge to reproduce is one of the most basic and natural instincts. When people don't want sex with the opposite gender, something is wrong. It's not just my belief, it is not junk science. It's the truth."

loltruth

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"] Someone misconstrued my argument. They accused me of saying that what's normal is always dependent on it being a rational decision. I used heterosexuality to refute that and was then taken to be saying that homosexuality does require justification. I never said that, only that it would IF it were a choice.SolidSnake35

Actually that someone was me, but I wasnt trying to misconstrue your argument. I was just pushing your argument to a logical "consequence" that it has. Its just a way to "push" someone to either clarify or make sure they dispute the very implications of their post.

I still dont get it but I'll choose to blame the fact that its late at night here.

Again a subjective opinion coming from the fact that you cant imagine yourself falling in love with someone of the same sex. Just because for instance I may not be able to relate to sth, that doesnt mean that that something is somewhat wrong. If I dd think like that then I would just be trying to justify my lack of sympathy or my inability to relate.Teenaged

People forget there's supposed to be a seperation of church and state.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]Again a subjective opinion coming from the fact that you cant imagine yourself falling in love with someone of the same sex. Just because for instance I may not be able to relate to sth, that doesnt mean that that something is somewhat wrong. If I dd think like that then I would just be trying to justify my lack of sympathy or my inability to relate.SolidSnake35

Marriage has no set standards...sSubZerOo

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]Marriage has no set standards...fidosim

No it does not.. It has changed consistently, before this time men had many women in quite a few cultures.. And adultry wasn't considered wrong.. STANDARDS were changed on numerous platforms, to argue otherwise is just flat out ridiculous.

lol....MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMEN DUR HUR DEY TOOOOOK URRRRRRR JERBBBS

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]"Clearly normal"..... hm... I will ignore that comment cause I dont think you came in here to debate about what constitutes "normal". I still dont get it but I'll choose to blame the fact that its late at night here.SolidSnake35

Whats the point in saying that heterosexuality "is clearly normal" if not to imply that homosexuality's "normality" is at doubt? Or even to put it in contradiction to homosexuality, implying that homosexuality is flat-out abnormal, but you are polite enough to know say it explicitely?

So you see in fact I am debating for homosexuality being normal; not heterosexuality being abnormal.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]Marriage has no set standards...fidosim

[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]Marriage has no set standards...sSubZerOo

No it does not.. It has changed consistently, before this time men had many women in quite a few cultures.. And adultry wasn't considered wrong.. STANDARDS were changed on numerous platforms, to argue otherwise is just flat out ridiculous.