Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Is homosexuality right or wrong?

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:24pm

Freakenstein

Freakenstein

9,253 posts

Moderator

the gay parents inculcate their kids to be gay, what if their offspring doesn't do the same?


Do they? You never showed me they do. Remember that being homosexual is not a choice, nor can it be influenced no matter how hard someone tries to keep a person from being homosexual.
 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:26pm

FishPreferred

FishPreferred

1,558 posts

Pretty self explanatory, it's the typical case of spare the rod, spoil the child, if you let your child watch Adventure Time or some other fruity show like that instead of letting him/her watch let's say Dragon Ball Z there will be more chances of him/her being gay considering how kids look up to the protag of the series, it's obvious that it's up to the parents if your kid turns into a homo.


So you think it's okay to promote sexual relations with other species (sayan, or whatever it's called in this example)? It makes just as much sense, when you think about it.

Homosexuality injures the fabric of society, especially children.


No, actually, it doesn't. See; I can make baseless claims, too.

A societal acceptance of same sex relationships gives vulnerable children the impression that same sex relationships are good, moral and healthy.


And a societal rejection of it gives vulnerable children the impression that same sex relationships are bad, immoral, and unhealthy.

Not only does the Bible condemn such behavior...


Doesn't the Bible also condemn contraception? Who uses that, anyway? Was it gay people? I can't remember...

... but medical professionals have affirmed that these kinds of sexual relationships are unhealthy.


No, actually, they haven't. Baseless claim #2 successfully countered.

A society that accepts immoral relationships cause children to stumble into immorality.


Hey. I think I found the kernel of truth!

Homosexuality is anti procreation.


No, actually, it isn't. #3.

Logically speaking, if everyoneâs sexuality was expressed heterosexually, then humanity will survive and perpetuate our own kind for generations to come. But simply put, if everyoneâs sexuality was expressed homosexually, we would go extinct. Therefore homosexuality is counter productive to the survival of the human race.


That's a nifty bit of pseudo-reasoning. Let me try:
If everyone's diet was 0% pure sugar, then people would live off of meat and starch and we wouldn't have any obesity. But simply put, If everyone's diet was 100% pure sugar, then everyone would be dying from diabetic ketoacidosis. Therefore, sugar is counter productive to the survival of the human race. Neat!

Homosexuals have a higher incidence of infidelity.


No, actually, they don't. #4, for those of you counting at home.

Defining a Homosexual relationship as loving and monogamous ignores the reality of same sex relationships. Many say that the premise on which we should accept same sex unions is that some of them are âloving, monogamous relationships.â Same sex unions may be loving and monogamous from a worldly viewpoint, but if they had âreal godly loveâ they would not subject each other to unnatural sexual activity that leads each other into sin. When we lead others into sin, we are no longer walking in love.


Sorry, I had to reread this a few times. From the context, I could have sworn this part was about Heterosexuality.

In regards to homosexual monogamy, homosexuals remain faithful to one partner about 25% of the time. This is a much lower fidelity rate, than their heterosexual counterparts, which is 80%. It is not unusual for homosexuals to have hundreds of sexual partners in a life time.


According to recent reports, 76% of those statistics are entirely fabricated.

Homosexuality does not offer the stability of a traditional family.


No, actually, it does. I don't even need to believe this; it's still an equally sound argument (#5).

Children need the stability of a traditional family. Children need a real male Father and a female Mother for proper and healthy development. Naturally speaking, there is the necessity of each of the male and female contributions to a childâs life.


No, actually, they don't, and there isn't. #6 , #7, and #8.

(It has already been proven that boys without fathers end up in jail and practice destructive behaviors a great deal more than those who have fathers.)


And how many of these fathers were also homosexual? If the father is homosexual and in jail, do they cancel each other out? Are you suggesting that the link between domestic violence and crime is actually through crime prevention? What are you trying to say here?

The vast majority of the public knows instinctively that it would be better if both parents are present in a childâs life.


No, actually, it doesn't. Hence the progression of this discussion past the very first post. #9.

Once concealed research shows that a child who is brought up in a homosexual home may be more likely to engage in homosexuality.


Researchers only conceal their work when they make grievous error, if even then.

But is it loving to expose children to the predominantly damaging lifestyle of homosexuality?


Is it loving to expose them to the dangers of the outside world, like high-density sidewalk traffic, choking hazards, and errant softballs? That's what I want to know.

If homosexuality can be learned, what does that say about the argument that people are born that way?


It can't, which is why it doesn't say anything.

tl;dr: 2 homosexual parents don't offer the stabilty of a traditional family, homosexuality can stop procreation, homosexual relations are less healthy.


A summary of baselessness, bias, and bald-faced lies. I can see that you're trying to make a reasonable argument, but what you've come up with is only fit for ridicule.
 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:29pm

Fiends

Fiends

114 posts

I won't bother to read what you said, because in the end i know being homosexual is bad and one day everyone will find out.

 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:30pm

Fiends

Fiends

114 posts

Homosexuality is a mental disorder. It is true the afflicted individual cannot in some instances help what he is born with but to elevate the behavior to accepted status means it is worthy of emulation. Why is that a problem? Because it promotes promiscuity and relationships built around egocentric greed rather than those built around the family - the fundamental building block of civilization - and what is good for society and for most of its members.

In the same way pedophilia is a mental disorder. The afflicted individual cannot help his attraction to children no matter if told it is inappropriate. This does not mean we do not castigate him and protect our children from him. A certain breed of psychopaths like the taste of blood naturally. We do not allow them to roam free and kill people for sport so we lock them up for our own protection. That is life. People come in all sorts of varities and perversions but we steer them in a certain direction promoted by the greater culture and over time they begin to resemble our ideals.


I could go on all night but if i have to rest.

 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:32pm

Fiends

Fiends

114 posts

We do chose our behavior. We are responsible for our behavior. That is a major issue, even beyond the issue of whether having the preferences are a matter of choice, DNA, abuse, or whatever.

People give this little midget-brained knee-jerk responses that homosexuality is okay. They haven't given it real thought, and they haven't thought about it objectively at all. To do that, there are many questions to answer, not just the tangential question of "civil rights." To give you an idea, you have to start with the following questions at the very basis:

What is "sex"? What is it's purpose, what's it for, how does it work, why does it even exist?

What is "love? Is love sex? Is love part of sex, or is sex part of love? Does love need sex? Can two people love one another with sex? Can two people have sex together without love? What is first, or prior, or more important? Which should lead the way in relationships? Which should be the master, and which should be subservient - between sex and love?

What is "Nature" and is the most natural way necessarily the best way in all things?

What is "choice"? How do you know when you have a choice and when you don't?

Historically, what is the course of societies which have restricted or outlawed homosexual behavior (not preferences or feelings, but behavior), and what is the course of societies which have allowed homosexual behavior to be freely practiced? Who fails to learn from history is doomed to repeat it. Who fails to learn from Nature is doomed to disease, suffering, and extinction.

"Civil rights" - buzz words are nonsense words. If you want to say something specific about the rights of homosexuals, you should do so, not hide behind the vague fog of "civil rights" or "human rights." Which so-called rights are we talking about? Different nations recognize slightly different lists of rights. One nation limits a right one way, a second nation limits a right another way. So that brings up a second question - whatever civil rights for homosexuals we are talking about, we also need to know what definition or application of "rights" we are attempting to apply - and why that set rather than another? Civil rights for a particular category of people is not a kindergarten affair; it will be complicated by culture, law, tradition, and societal mores.

 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:36pm

Freakenstein

Freakenstein

9,253 posts

Moderator

Homosexuality is a mental disorder. It is true the afflicted individual cannot in some instances help what he is born with but to elevate the behavior to accepted status means it is worthy of emulation. Why is that a problem? Because it promotes promiscuity and relationships built around egocentric greed rather than those built around the family - the fundamental building block of civilization - and what is good for society and for most of its members.


You have never once yet proven these revelatory points with objective, peer-reviewed articles. How can we of the WEPR forum distinguish what has been recorded as evidence from emotional fear-mongering?

Yet we have provided data to the contrary. We have provided articles that showed homosexuality being contributory to society in the past. Why should we believe you if you haven't delivered a single bit of unbiased testimony?

In the same way pedophilia is a mental disorder. The afflicted individual cannot help his attraction to children no matter if told it is inappropriate


"In the same way heterosexuality is a mental disorder. The afflicted individual cannot help his attraction to the opposite sex no matter if told it is inappropriate".

Read that to me and tell me if you understand why this is ridiculous to compare pedophilia to homosexuality.
 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:36pm

FishPreferred

FishPreferred

1,558 posts

I won't bother to read what you said, because in the end i know being homosexual is bad and one day everyone will find out.


Actually, I know that you aren't willing to read it, because you are literally homophobic and must avoid seeing my rational analysis to protect yourself from what you fear most. And that makes 10.
 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:37pm

Freakenstein

Freakenstein

9,253 posts

Moderator

Ohhhh, I know what's going on.

Fiends is copy-pasting from Stormfront.

No wonder he has trouble coming to terms with rational thinking.

 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:41pm

NoNameC68

NoNameC68

5,296 posts

Knight

Fiend's first article merely states that children raised by homosexual parents are more likely to become homosexual themselves. But it's not a conclusive study.

The second link I couldn't get to open properly.

The third link only looks at children raised by both a mother and a father or only one parent - it says nothing about same sex couples from what I could tell.

Link four. I only skimmed this one, but from what I could tell, the author is a total moron. I might go back and go into more detail as to why he's such an idiot, but it's clear that the "proofs" he has that homosexuality is wrong is based off the per-concieved notion that homosexuality is wrong. Basically, he's arguing "homosexuality is immoral because it is immoral". This is overly simplified, I know, but the logic he employs is circular.

Link five is not based off of an actual, peer reviewed, study.

Link six might be the best argument you've provided. But it's still flawed. One, it doesn't speak of morality. Two, it's only a single study and an explanation as to why gay men are prone is still unknown. And most importantly, three, there have only been 283 documented cases in 5 years. Without looking at the study, this number could be a lot, or it could be incredibly low, depending on the sample size. Is it 283 cases in all of America? If so, then those numbers are incredibly small!

Lastly, the final link took me to the homepage.

 

Posted Feb 1, '14 at 9:49pm

nichodemus

nichodemus

13,242 posts

Knight

per-concieved notion


Pre-conceived.

Fixed that for you.
 
Reply to Is homosexuality right or wrong?

You must be logged in to post a reply!