Forums → WEPR → [necro] Is homosexuality right or wrong?
| 1146 | 385291 |
I think homosexuality is totally wrong and unnatural, what do you think?
- 1,146 Replies
2.)Being called homophobic is one of the biggest strawmans argument their is. The latin root for homo is "the same" and phobia is "fear of". Therefor "fear of the same" doesn't make sense in the English language in the context that is being referred to. So not only is the word not used correctly if you were trying to convey the correct Latin it would be with the use of futuo or "sex" which would be roughly "homofutophobic."
I am pretty sure that the word would be homophiliaphobic (Futo? Where did that coem from.) but I don't see how this is relevant.
I have yet to hear a compelling argument as well on what rights are LGBT denied.
Marriage? It was illegal for them to even have sex in most states until 2003...
@Johndoesme
Okay, so it seems like you have a hard time understanding why some gay people call you homophobic (I will address your problems with this word choice later).
Well, let me take a few choice words out of you post, and lets see if we can shine some light on this issue:
I personally don't like the idea of homosexuality just because I find it pretty disgusting.
that is just factual.
I challenge hard core supportors to watch a full man on man porn and see if they don't squeem a bit
intelligent debate
Here's the thing. Telling someone their sex life is disgusting, and that this is a fact, has no place in an "intelligent debate". Now, maybe that doesn't merit name calling. But, then you go on to cite sources, in a way. But, unfortunately, you source happens to be porn. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that porn probably shouldn't be used as evidence in anything that doesn't directly concern porn.
Okay, so here's some perspective: Imagine you ARE a gay person, having a conversation with someone like yourself. This person tells you that videos of guy on guy action make him squeamish, as if internet porn is somehow indicative of the sex lives of actual humans. He goes on to tell you that he isn't sure of exactly what LGBT groups are trying to accomplish, but that he also feels like they are way too pushy. Like, he isn't sure what they are pushing for, but he is certain they are pushing way too hard. He end by assuring that he can't possibly be homophobic, because first of all that word doesn't make any sense, and second of all he has met multiple gay people before.
What do you do? Do you explain to him what its like to be afraid to tell people who you love, because they find your love disgusting? Do you explain what it is like to be unable to marry who you love? To so much as kiss your partner in a public place?
How can you explain these things to a person like yourself?
Just spend a few minutes thinking about all the actions you take for granted, that a LGBT person would put considerable thought into committing. If you don't think that there are still a LOT of homophobic people out there, well, I don't know what to say.
Oh right. That word. Yeah, it makes no sense in context. But, look at this: how do you pronounce zoology? We say Zoo all low gee, right? Where does that "all" come from? Shouldn't it just be pronounced zoo low gee? The thing is, English is stupid. SO stupid, we pretty much just say things until people understand what we are saying. People understand what we mean when we say homophobic. Think of it as slang.
actually, i read somewhere that homophobic means fear OR hatred OR discomfort of gays. and how many people will tell you "i have no problem with them as long as the stay away from me/dont hit on me/dont touch me/dont bother me"?
people wont admit it but that uncomfortable feeling they get is a result of a phobia. just like other phobias. you think hemophobic are actually scared of blood because it can hurt them? no, it makes them feel bad just like cockroaches make 90% of the world feel bad.
and if your going to argue about words meaning id say we should first take care of the word "gay" and its real meaning dont you think? people take it as so obvious but i know id feel a little bad if someone disliked the taste of a bavarage and said: "this soda is so jew".
im not saying those people who throw the "bigot" (even though i DO think they are the main opponents of LGBT) and "homophobic" word arent childish but when someone clearly shows he isnt going to accept something because its different then his point of view is just asking to be called a "bigot". same thing about a guy who shows a sign of "its disgusting". i have to say ive never even seen someone who used those words in a way i wouldnt use them.
Do you know, i had the biggest post i think i've ever typed to reply here, and then my computer died. I cannot be bothered to retype.
Basically John whats his face stated his opinion as factual. Your OPINION is not FACT.
You also asked about what rights LGBT citizens are denied. You must remember that LGVT issues are not confined to America.
1. Marriage - obviously not legal everywhere, and civil partnership is a mere compromise. Why a compromise if we're joined together in union through a civil partnership? We do not get the rights a married couple get. (Benefits etc)
2. Children - Most homosexual couples cannot adopt. If a child comes from a previous relationship, the same sex partner of the mother/father has no rights over that child (including not being able to take said child to the doctor)
3. In the military, obvious discrimination which until recently included not being able to enlist if you were openly gay.
4. Work place - In many places it is legal to fire someone on the basis of their sexual orientation, even though laws state the inability to fire a person based on discrimination.. LGBT aren't included in the basic human right of not getting fired on the basis of discrimination? Yeah, okay. Not to mention gay men cannot be scout leaders - absurd - showing that (not only do people associate a gay male around young boys as tempting; he's gay, not a peado) we are denied certain jobs on the basis of our sexuality.
5. Giving blood - A gay man cannot give blood because they're all infected with HIV/AIDS? Sure, that's not judgemental in the slightest.
6. Media - TV shows have restrictions on showing gay couples. They can show them, a wee cheeky kiss and a hand hold, but god forbid the media show a gay couple having sex in a network tv show. Straight couples are obviously fine to show. Mainly if it's ****, good message they send out you see. Nice and wholesome.
7. Educational discrimination - This one is mainly America, where there are numerous states with no laws against homophobic bullying. Racist bullying? Sure you'll get expelled. Bully an LGBT? No problem. No protection for our children embracing who they are is a lack of human rights.
8. Housing - LGBT are exempt from housing protection acts in many countries. Meaning if a landlord finds out the two guys renting his two bedroom apartment are only using the one bedroom - he can kick them out on the spot, and there's not a darn thing the governments will do.
The list can go on - but there's a gist.
LGBT are not denied rights? And your opinion of this is "factual"?
I'd think again sir.
2. Children - Most homosexual couples cannot adopt. If a child comes from a previous relationship, the same sex partner of the mother/father has no rights over that child (including not being able to take said child to the doctor)
This one becomes more weighted when considering the ability to care for a child who otherwise would not receive such care is one talking point where homosexuality can be a benefit to society as a whole.
7. Educational discrimination - This one is mainly America, where there are numerous states with no laws against homophobic bullying. Racist bullying? Sure you'll get expelled. Bully an LGBT? No problem. No protection for our children embracing who they are is a lack of human rights.
Further more not only is there a lack of protection there have been uses of religious freedom as an excuse to allow such bullying, protecting the bully instead of the victim.
This one becomes more weighted when considering the ability to care for a child who otherwise would not receive such care is one talking point where homosexuality can be a benefit to society as a whole.
Exactly. I mean, you have parents having kids, beating on them, neglecting them - Yet a same sex couple with love, money, resources can't care for a child? MAKES SENSE.
Further more not only is there a lack of protection there have been uses of religious freedom as an excuse to allow such bullying, protecting the bully instead of the victim.
Disgusting. If governments can't separate church from state then what hope do we have at tackling these issues. Ridiculous.
List of lame excuses by supporters of the LGBT communities.
1. Other normal couple beat their children, but we homos don't instead we shower them with our warm love with shiny glitters and rainbows. (Wonderful argument!)
2. What's happening to the LGBT community is similar to the struggles of colored men. Eventually this will be a norm. (I certainly hope it is not.)
3. Fantasizing that same sex marriage is perfect that they would never divorce. (What a bunch bullcrap!)
Anyways I will just wait until same-sex marriage is a norm and I'll just adapt.
List of lame excuses by supporters of the LGBT communities:
1. Other normal couple beat their children, but we homos don't instead we shower them with our warm love with shiny glitters and rainbows. (Wonderful argument!)
2. What's happening to the LGBT community is similar to the struggles of colored men. Eventually this will be a norm. (I certainly hope it is not.)
3. Fantasizing that same sex marriage is perfect that they would never divorce. (What a bunch bullcrap!)
Anyways I will just wait until same-sex marriage is a norm and I'll just adapt.
I think its wrong cuz u can get HIV and ur respect gonna down...
I'll respect anyone who can at least write that sentence so it makes any sense whatsoever. You can also get HIV and other STD's just as easily as a gay man/woman will. Being straight will not magically stop this from happening.
Why do people tend to think all homosexuals have various STD's? If anything, it's the straight people who have more STD's than homosexuals.
@Jefferysinspiration In some countries, such as my motherland, people dislike (hate, despise, whatever suites you best) homosexuals because they stop the family name from spreading. And then, our government puts laws against being openly gay (they won't imprison you or anything, but if you're beaten up on the middle of the street because you are openly gay, the police have the right to actually join in). So, you can't adopt. So, there's no way whatsoever of spreading the family name unless you're straight. It's idiotic
Why do people tend to think all homosexuals have various STD's? If anything, it's the straight people who have more STD's than homosexuals.
Statistically in transmission categories male to male sexual contact ranks #1 in estimated number of AIDS diagnoses according to the CDC survey conducted in 2009. Adolescent males accounted for an estimated 17,005 diagnoses and adult males accounted for 529,908 diagnoses.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#exposure
Of course this doesn't mean that all gay people have STDs, it just puts a male who is gay into a higher risk factor statistically speaking. It would be like saying all Americans are fat.
I think its wrong cuz u can get HIV and ur respect gonna down.
Oh dear me. You make me laugh. The people who contract HIV from dirty needles.. they're all gay? What about people who are brutally *****, gay and lose respect also? Your logic.. it amazes me. Thank you for this insight.
In some countries, such as my motherland, people dislike (hate, despise, whatever suites you best) homosexuals because they stop the family name from spreading. And then, our government puts laws against being openly gay (they won't imprison you or anything, but if you're beaten up on the middle of the street because you are openly gay, the police have the right to actually join in). So, you can't adopt. So, there's no way whatsoever of spreading the family name unless you're straight. It's idiotic
My God, that sounds awful. I'm struggling here in Indonesia. In most island being openly gay will lead you being put in prison for a lengthy sentence or being stoned to death. Although i'm thankfully not on one of those, it's still very much frowned upon, so having to be a closet case for safety isn't something i'm used to or appreciating.
How backwards, about the family name though. Very sad.
Now, I have no opinion to state about homosexuality as a moral quandary.
However, I will look at it form a evolutionary point of view.
An organisms point in life, from evolutions point of view, is to have lots and lots of babies. The more suited you are to your environment, the more babies you have. This is what makes evolution work.
A homosexual? That's a broken organism, one that refuses to have lots and lots of babies, like a healthy minded organism should.
Morally? Homosexuality gets a pass from me. From a scientific point of view? My, what a rampant disease this is.
Now, I have no opinion to state about homosexuality as a moral quandary.
However, I will look at it form a evolutionary point of view.
An organisms point in life, from evolutions point of view, is to have lots and lots of babies. The more suited you are to your environment, the more babies you have. This is what makes evolution work.
A homosexual? That's a broken organism, one that refuses to have lots and lots of babies, like a healthy minded organism should.
Morally? Homosexuality gets a pass from me. From a scientific point of view? My, what a rampant disease this is.
From that point of view, altruism and heroism are negative traits that are a disease on society. After all, from an evolutionary point of view, it makes no since to give away items that would make you more powerful expecting noting in return. As well, heroism would be considered a negative trait under that, after all, risking your life for others gives no evolutionary befit for the person risking their life. Evelution does a good job, but then again, it is not perfect. After all, we have one hole that we both eat and breath with, causing the death of thousands a year...Probably.
Now, I have no opinion to state about homosexuality as a moral quandary.
However, I will look at it form a evolutionary point of view.
An organisms point in life, from evolutions point of view, is to have lots and lots of babies. The more suited you are to your environment, the more babies you have. This is what makes evolution work.
A homosexual? That's a broken organism, one that refuses to have lots and lots of babies, like a healthy minded organism should.
Morally? Homosexuality gets a pass from me. From a scientific point of view? My, what a rampant disease this is.
Made this point before, but curious about your opinion.
Infertile men/women - broken organism?
What about people who CHOOSE to not have children? Broken organism?
Thread is locked!