Death to gays.

**Flick Montana** · April 7th, 2014, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by Mayflow

I just said I am not willing to judge them on sexual preferences (as long as they are not forcing and harming others, of course)

Yes, but you ARE judging people based on their tolerance toward homosexuals. If I said I thought homosexuality was a sin and homosexuals should be locked away, you would judge me as "evil" for my viewpoint.

There is nothing wrong with making judgments on people based upon the information you have about them. You can make judgments that are too rash or general to be useful, but you still make them. The important thing is the way you act upon those judgments or how you follow them up.

To me, people who DON'T voice their concern over the treatment of homosexuals are actively assisting in the struggle to stop equal rights being granted to a large part of the population. It's as simple as adding a "gay rights" check box to your voting criteria when selecting a candidate. It's as simple as writing to your governor telling them you want equal rights legislation passed (mine said, "No thanks"). It doesn't have to mean you do anything evil to someone else. It just means you take a stand for what is just.

**KALSTER** · April 7th, 2014, 07:40 AM

I will freely admit that I am very uncomfortable around gay men. It is probably because I have not been exposed to it much, though I do not have the same problem with lesbians. Not too sure why that is.

BUT, this is absolutely not a reflection on my attitude towards the LGBT community. While I think we should be concerned with people's private lives if there is something morally reprehensible there, LGBT does not form part of it.

I think that there is probably a spectrum of the influence of nature and nurture, and that the lines are somewhat blurred between the different labels people use to define themselves, but I fully believe that it is not a "condition" and just another natural way of being. I also fully believe that the love and companionship between LGBT people are on equal footing with those of heterosexuals.

Therefore any kind of restriction imposed on the LGBT community not imposed on heterosexuals has no moral or any other legitimate reasoning behind it and those who campaign for those restrictions have no leg to stand on.

Even if I might be uncomfortable being around gay men, I will just have to learn to become more used to it. Hopefully, as the LGBT struggle develops, other people will also get used to the idea and learn to live and let live.

People are too easily swayed by emotions that have no reasoning behind it.

**Flick Montana** · April 7th, 2014, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by KALSTER

I will freely admit that I am very uncomfortable around gay men. It is probably because I have not been exposed to it much, though I do not have the same problem with lesbians. Not too sure why that is.

Even as a big fan of Doctor Who, I've often struggled watching Torchwood as I'm not big on watching men kiss, but it's probably because of the way I've grown up. That having been said, I think I watched the Natalie Portman/Mila Kunis scene in Black Swan an unhealthy number of times...

Funny, that.

**Cogito Ergo Sum** · April 7th, 2014, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by KALSTER

I will freely admit that I am very uncomfortable around gay men. It is probably because I have not been exposed to it much, though I do not have the same problem with lesbians. Not too sure why that is.

Even as a big fan of Doctor Who, I've often struggled watching Torchwood as I'm not big on watching men kiss, but it's probably because of the way I've grown up. That having been said, I think I watched the Natalie Portman/Mila Kunis scene in Black Swan an unhealthy number of times...

Funny, that.

Regardless of that particular scene, it was very good movie. It has certainly earned its numerous awards.

**KALSTER** · April 7th, 2014, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by KALSTER

I will freely admit that I am very uncomfortable around gay men. It is probably because I have not been exposed to it much, though I do not have the same problem with lesbians. Not too sure why that is.

Even as a big fan of Doctor Who, I've often struggled watching Torchwood as I'm not big on watching men kiss, but it's probably because of the way I've grown up. That having been said, I think I watched the Natalie Portman/Mila Kunis scene in Black Swan an unhealthy number of times...

Funny, that.

Exactly!

**Flick Montana** · April 7th, 2014, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by KALSTER

I will freely admit that I am very uncomfortable around gay men. It is probably because I have not been exposed to it much, though I do not have the same problem with lesbians. Not too sure why that is.

Even as a big fan of Doctor Who, I've often struggled watching Torchwood as I'm not big on watching men kiss, but it's probably because of the way I've grown up. That having been said, I think I watched the Natalie Portman/Mila Kunis scene in Black Swan an unhealthy number of times...

Funny, that.

Regardless of that particular scene, it was very good movie. It has certainly earned its numerous awards.

So I've heard. I pretty much just remember that scene and something which demonstrated why you should NEVER pull a hangnail.

**KALSTER** · April 7th, 2014, 01:13 PM

The problem with this automatic aversion is that I experience it even when I know intellectually that I shouldn't, but I have it anyway.

From what I have seen, I would be proud to call Paleoichneum my friend and there are no obstacles to discussion here or on Facebook, but I know, and I am ashamed of it, that there would be a problem in real life whenever he and his partner were simply being themselves around me. That part pisses me off, a lot.

But what it gives me is some inside understanding into the mindsets of those who let their emotions control their thoughts to a much higher degree. It is again part of that early indoctrination that is very difficult to escape from. During those first 8 or 10 years of life is when our core personalities are formed and if you are immersed in a particular set of morals and norms and form those emotional ties to certain concepts and stimula, it can be a very tough thing indeed to break those associations.

And I think the same phenomenon is largely behind the majority (if not all) the kinds of backwards thinking that people are guilty of and it is especially strong when people are more inclined to let their emotions influence their thinking.

I think that a huge step towards a more tolerant and inclusive community is that we try our best to understand as many ways of thinking as we can muster, from the most loving to the most anti-social. That means that those who are marginalized and/or oppressed would gain a lot from understanding more behind the mindsets of those doing the marginalizing and oppression.

For me it means that I do get angry at anti-atheists for example, but at the same time I have an understanding about where those sentimentalities are coming from and in addition, also have a sympathy for them due to being able to empathise to a degree.

People have to learn that we humans don't normally want to be bad people as judged by those who are more "enlightened", they just turn out that way due to circumstances largely out of their control. I realise this is a controversial stance, but I believe it is essential if humanity is to really advance.

**Flick Montana** · April 7th, 2014, 01:21 PM

As G.I. Joe used to tell me when I was a kid:

If you can recognize that your feelings are judgmental, you're not a bad person. You're decidedly normal. I feel uncomfortable when I see two men being intimately affectionate toward one another, but I know it's just because I grew up with the stereotypical ideal of what a man should be (hint; kissing other dudes ain't part of it). My parents were extremely liberal, but I was still hammered with notions of appropriate manliness from other sources and it shaped the way I grew up.

Now, my big hope is that kids growing up today will be subjected to open homosexual behavior and find it just as normal as seeing a man with a woman. I look forward to the day a high school kid has to deal with, "What are you, gay?" and can respond with, "Yeah. So?".

**scoobydoo1** · April 7th, 2014, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by KALSTER

But what it gives me is some inside understanding into the mindsets of those who let their emotions control their thoughts to a much higher degree.

It is again part of that early indoctrination that is very difficult to escape from. During those first 8 or 10 years of life is when our core personalities are formed and if you are immersed in a particular set of morals and norms and form those emotional ties to certain concepts and stimula, it can be a very tough thing indeed to break those associations.

And I think the same phenomenon is largely behind the majority (if not all) the kinds of backwards thinking that people are guilty of and it is especially strong when people are more inclined to let their emotions influence their thinking.

This is one of the reasons why I'm interested in psychology in general; observing people who allow their emotions to color and override much of what would have been their higher thought processes. It is also one of the reasons why I prefer reading and watching member's behaviour in the forums than to participate in the conversation at times.

**Cogito Ergo Sum** · April 7th, 2014, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

This is one of the reasons why I'm interested in psychology in general; observing people who allow their emotions to color and override much of what would have been their higher thought processes. It is also one of the reasons why I prefer reading and watching member's behaviour in the forums than to participate in the conversation at times.

I have this image of you in my head, setting at your desk with a clipboard in your hand to take notes, whilst you are trying to diagnose some members on the Science Forum. One cannot blame you, though; there are members that do not reside anymore in the realm of sanity.

**scoobydoo1** · April 7th, 2014, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum

I have this image of you in my head, setting at your desk with a clipboard in your hand to take notes, whilst you are trying to diagnose some members on the Science Forum. One cannot blame you, though; there are members that do not reside anymore in the realm of sanity.

Well, there are no clipboards, but I do take mental notes to aid in identifying some of the more basic emotions. The tricky part is when attempting to catch our own as they are evoked from the various stimuli and identifying what causes them, and for me it is when practicing to deconstruction almost to the point where I sometimes feel like the human species are the animals in my field study. It is a dangerous and precarious position to be in if I forget to juxtapose our negative qualities with our positive ones.

**astromark** · April 7th, 2014, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Originally Posted by KALSTER

But what it gives me is some inside understanding into the mindsets of those who let their emotions control their thoughts to a much higher degree.

It is again part of that early indoctrination that is very difficult to escape from. During those first 8 or 10 years of life is when our core personalities are formed and if you are immersed in a particular set of morals and norms and form those emotional ties to certain concepts and stimula, it can be a very tough thing indeed to break those associations.

And I think the same phenomenon is largely behind the majority (if not all) the kinds of backwards thinking that people are guilty of and it is especially strong when people are more inclined to let their emotions influence their thinking.

This is one of the reasons why I'm interested in psychology in general; observing people who allow their emotions to color and override much of what would have been their higher thought processes. It is also one of the reasons why I prefer reading and watching member's behaviour in the forums than to participate in the conversation at times.

~ Then the issue becomes one of. You like to observe and not contribute so often.. Then there will be little to observe if we all adopted the ' Better to remain silent and thought a fool, than to open ones mouth and confirm such. We can be complex yet transparent. Well reasoned and judgmental.. My view is not superior to yours. I can live with this.

**babe** · April 8th, 2014, 12:17 AM

Originally Posted by Mayflow

Originally Posted by babe

Originally Posted by Mayflow

I see evil in a lot of times when people sit in judgment of others. I therefore think, I do not wish to do that.

Therefore if others are of a different sexual desire than I have experienced, I do not judge them.

Clearer now?

That is clearer.

HOWEVER.......then why did you refer to homosexual sex as being evil?

I said I think it would be evil for me to judge others for it.

My error and my apology.

**Tranquille** · April 10th, 2014, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by Stargate

I do not understand you, are you talking about man to woman body contact production? or any kind of production? Do you agree with what I am saying about the penis better equipt than a needle to inject sperm into the ovaries?

Are you suggesting your penis is able to travel up the vagina, through the cervix and uterus, up the fallopian tube and inject your sperm directly into the ovary?

**Stargate** · April 10th, 2014, 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by Tranquille

Originally Posted by Stargate

I do not understand you, are you talking about man to woman body contact production? or any kind of production? Do you agree with what I am saying about the penis better equipt than a needle to inject sperm into the ovaries?

Are you suggesting your penis is able to travel up the vagina, through the cervix and uterus, up the fallopian tube and inject your sperm directly into the ovary?

No, that was a mistake, I already cleared up the question.

**grmpysmrf** · April 11th, 2014, 12:36 AM

Originally Posted by Tranquille

Originally Posted by Stargate

I do not understand you, are you talking about man to woman body contact production? or any kind of production? Do you agree with what I am saying about the penis better equipt than a needle to inject sperm into the ovaries?

Are you suggesting your penis is able to travel up the vagina, through the cervix and uterus, up the fallopian tube and inject your sperm directly into the ovary?

Mine does. yeah, that's right, it does.

**Daecon** · April 11th, 2014, 03:45 AM

Originally Posted by grmpysmrf

Originally Posted by Tranquille

Originally Posted by Stargate

I do not understand you, are you talking about man to woman body contact production? or any kind of production? Do you agree with what I am saying about the penis better equipt than a needle to inject sperm into the ovaries?

Are you suggesting your penis is able to travel up the vagina, through the cervix and uterus, up the fallopian tube and inject your sperm directly into the ovary?

Mine does. yeah, that's right, it does.

So THAT'S why you're so popular with the ladies!

**grmpysmrf** · April 11th, 2014, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by Daecon

Originally Posted by grmpysmrf

Originally Posted by Tranquille

Originally Posted by Stargate

I do not understand you, are you talking about man to woman body contact production? or any kind of production? Do you agree with what I am saying about the penis better equipt than a needle to inject sperm into the ovaries?

Are you suggesting your penis is able to travel up the vagina, through the cervix and uterus, up the fallopian tube and inject your sperm directly into the ovary?

Mine does. yeah, that's right, it does.

So THAT'S why you're so popular with the ladies!

**Flick Montana** · April 11th, 2014, 02:31 PM

We all know how much the ladies dig a guy with hardware that looks like a foot long nematode.

**Cogito Ergo Sum** · April 11th, 2014, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

We all know how much the ladies dig a guy with hardware that looks like a foot long nematode.

**astromark** · April 11th, 2014, 07:42 PM

~ Why is he so popular ? Is it that he can lick his eyebrows.. ? Hmm.. Time to move away from this...

**babe** · April 12th, 2014, 12:25 AM

Cause he is DARLING and has a little of a Pinnochio nose *L*

**SowZ37** · April 13th, 2014, 12:11 AM

I thoroughly believe in the power of truth to win out over falsehoods, if only in the long term. It is my belief that a scientific and moral outlook is to allow the open expression of all ideas and viewpoints, though this does not shield those speakers from ridicule. Neither is it immunity against legal action if they choose to act on those beliefs in a harmful way. Anything less than open discourse on all subjects limits the exploration of ideas. Philosophies that dictate hateful ignorance must be extinguished violently have too little faith in the power of truth. Government action is inherently violent. Violence is not an appropriate response to an idea, no matter how vile and hateful it may be. I try and be absolutely consistent in this philosophy, trying especially hard when it comes to hateful ideas that hit close to home and personally offend me. Despite my heritage being German Jewish immigrants and the fate of those who stayed behind I don't know about but fear the worst for, as a for instance, I still oppose anti-Holocaust denial laws in Germany. Further, any view that is outlawed, either outlawed to openly teach or outlawed to believe, gives that view a certain vogue and mystique that leads it credence. That's human nature. Letting ignorance exist in the open allows it to be better understood, debated, and ultimately abolished, (or at least kept to a negligible portion of the populace. Ideas rarely go away completely.)

**astromark** · April 13th, 2014, 03:58 AM

Originally Posted by SowZ37

I thoroughly believe in the power of truth to win out over falsehoods, if only in the long term. It is my belief that a scientific and moral outlook is to allow the open expression of all ideas and viewpoints, though this does not shield those speakers from ridicule. Neither is it immunity against legal action if they choose to act on those beliefs in a harmful way. Anything less than open discourse on all subjects limits the exploration of ideas. Philosophies that dictate hateful ignorance must be extinguished violently have too little faith in the power of truth. Government action is inherently violent. Violence is not an appropriate response to an idea, no matter how vile and hateful it may be. I try and be absolutely consistent in this philosophy, trying especially hard when it comes to hateful ideas that hit close to home and personally offend me. Despite my heritage being German Jewish immigrants and the fate of those who stayed behind I don't know about but fear the worst for, as a for instance, I still oppose anti-Holocaust denial laws in Germany. Further, any view that is outlawed, either outlawed to openly teach or outlawed to believe, gives that view a certain vogue and mystique that leads it credence. That's human nature. Letting ignorance exist in the open allows it to be better understood, debated, and ultimately abolished, (or at least kept to a negligible portion of the populace. Ideas rarely go away completely.)

~ Looking across our globe I see that all Nations and Governments do not act with such venom upon their own.. But it would be great if we could be as you.. Tolerance and compassionate understanding sometimes have to wait a generation or two.. Some of us actually get to choose where we live. The mentality of control is not dormant. Education done thoroughly is all we have..

**rmbettencourt** · April 29th, 2014, 10:02 PM

Oh wow. Anyone notice how very religious and insane people are so alike that you cannot tell the difference?

Human ignorance never truly ceases to amaze me.

**grmpysmrf** · April 29th, 2014, 11:32 PM

Good lord, isn't this Gay thread dead yet?

See what I did there?

**rmbettencourt** · April 30th, 2014, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by grmpysmrf

Good lord, isn't this Gay thread dead yet?

See what I did there?

Oopsies, I brought it back to life.

**carlinsomes** · May 6th, 2014, 01:53 PM

I believe in a free society, gays should nay must have equal rights to straights.

To assert that the "Bible" says it's wrong is false.....tell me where God or Jesus said the Bible is or must be the basis of earthly law/governance...

Jesus himself said "render unto Caesar.."...so yeah, even God himself says not to impose nor give a shit about governance...

**Chucknorium** · May 6th, 2014, 02:00 PM

using the bible to prove any point is ridiculous. the bible is full of contradictions. it is easy to find a supportive or contraire verse using the bible. chapter 3 of the Book of Ecclesiastes pretty much says you can do just about anything you want, if the time is right.

**astromark** · May 6th, 2014, 02:52 PM

Lets not turn this thread of well reasoned thoughts of gay rights and tolerances in our communities into another God bothering tirade.
~ Not all of humanities ills are of biblical considerations. What I do is what I do and I do not require or want for comment or judgments from some fringe viewed group. I do not value that things biblical are moving the understanding forward. Be self aware and responsible for your own views.. How I lay and with who is not your concern if it's not you...

**babe** · May 7th, 2014, 04:10 AM

Thank you astromark!

**Beer w/Straw** · May 20th, 2014, 09:36 AM

Gay exorcisms?

I don't know if it was posted before. When I saw it I thought it could have been a joke.

But like... A movie?

Gay exorcisms are horrifying.

**carlinsomes** · May 20th, 2014, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by astromark

Lets not turn this thread of well reasoned thoughts of gay rights and tolerances in our communities into another God bothering tirade.
~ Not all of humanities ills are of biblical considerations. What I do is what I do and I do not require or want for comment or judgments from some fringe viewed group. I do not value that things biblical are moving the understanding forward. Be self aware and responsible for your own views.. How I lay and with who is not your concern if it's not you...

I've always thought that not allowing gay marriage because of the Bible was stupid. Jesus himself said render unto Caesar, so I don't how it's an issue.

**babe** · May 21st, 2014, 04:02 AM

Originally Posted by carlinsomes

Originally Posted by astromark

Lets not turn this thread of well reasoned thoughts of gay rights and tolerances in our communities into another God bothering tirade.
~ Not all of humanities ills are of biblical considerations. What I do is what I do and I do not require or want for comment or judgments from some fringe viewed group. I do not value that things biblical are moving the understanding forward. Be self aware and responsible for your own views.. How I lay and with who is not your concern if it's not you...

I've always thought that not allowing gay marriage because of the Bible was stupid. Jesus himself said render unto Caesar, so I don't how it's an issue.

What does THAT have to do with gay marriage?

You make ZERO sense!

**adelady** · May 21st, 2014, 06:54 AM

What does THAT have to do with gay marriage?

It's about what is and isn't legal. Rendering unto Caesar isn't just about paying taxes. It's about complying with laws.

The Biblical stories were written in a time when people generally believed that whoever ruled them was placed there by god/s. If they were invaders or occupiers or just plain nasty, then people felt they had to comply with the impositions of that form of government and pray for relief from what looks like god/s' wrath being visited on them by unwelcome or cruel rulers.

But if it's the law, it's the law.

**parag29081973** · May 21st, 2014, 09:47 AM

i think the problem of gays is country specific. Gay relations should be encouraged in third world countries like India and China to control population.

**Daecon** · May 21st, 2014, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by parag29081973

i think the problem of gays is country specific. Gay relations should be encouraged in third world countries like India and China to control population.

Is that like "encouraging" gay people to pursue heterosexual relationships?

People are either gay or they're not. You can't encourage people to become gay to "control the population".

**Flick Montana** · May 21st, 2014, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by parag29081973

i think the problem of gays is country specific. Gay relations should be encouraged in third world countries like India and China to control population.

How about people EVERYWHERE should be entitled to their sexual preference so long as that relationship is between consenting adults?

**billvon** · May 21st, 2014, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by Daecon

People are either gay or they're not.

Given that a lot of people are bisexual I don't think that's a valid statement.

**Paleoichneum** · May 21st, 2014, 03:09 PM

How would "encouragement" even work?

**grmpysmrf** · May 21st, 2014, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by billvon

Originally Posted by Daecon

People are either gay or they're not.

Given that a lot of people are bisexual I don't think that's a valid statement.

They're no doubt not "Bi" because of "encouragement" is the point. It's how they were made, not their coaching.

**grmpysmrf** · May 21st, 2014, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

How would "encouragement" even work?

"F*ck that @ss!! you can do it! NO no put your hips into it!! Or "you call that a fist?"

Over the line?

**Flick Montana** · May 21st, 2014, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

How would "encouragement" even work?

Tax breaks for guys who take their friendship to the next level?

**Beer w/Straw** · May 21st, 2014, 09:29 PM

Tell them they can be movie stars.

**Daecon** · May 22nd, 2014, 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by grmpysmrf

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

How would "encouragement" even work?

"F*ck that @ss!! you can do it! NO no put your hips into it!! Or "you call that a fist?"

Over the line?

"You call that a fist?"

Oh my god I just laughed so hard at that! I'm a bad man...

**babe** · May 22nd, 2014, 03:09 AM

Originally Posted by adelady

What does THAT have to do with gay marriage?

It's about what is and isn't legal. Rendering unto Caesar isn't just about paying taxes. It's about complying with laws.

The Biblical stories were written in a time when people generally believed that whoever ruled them was placed there by god/s. If they were invaders or occupiers or just plain nasty, then people felt they had to comply with the impositions of that form of government and pray for relief from what looks like god/s' wrath being visited on them by unwelcome or cruel rulers.

But if it's the law, it's the law.

The law has been changed. In many many States and countries and gay activities were prevelant even in Ancient Rome!!!