What do gays really want?

[Miss MeanWeed]

Glad ya liked it.


It applies. Discrimination against homosexuals is exactly the same as discrimination against other minorities.
WTF does that have to do with you engendering support for your opinion by the sad and tired tactic of accusing someone of racism. You are using the racism that black people have been subject to as a weapon. Your use of their suffering as an emotive tool is insulting to black people.



I was obviously talking about their homosexuality, not your (hypothetical) son. If you read my post that first worked you up, you will clearly see it was a response to a hypothetical poser that focused on how you would feel about your son camping...Try to stick with us(..Us? You are so righteous you can speak unsolicited on others behalf? Or is this where you imply everyone agrees with you and only wankers disagree with you)... Another persons sexual orientation is none of your business. Well hey, I agree with you here! The effects the presence of people so oriented has on my children is entirely my business. If you disagree with me, feel free to explain why it's any of your business. If you disagree, feel free to explain why you think it is. Well hey again, perhaps you could freely explain just what the hell it is you are on about. You're asking me to reply to loaded questions based entirely on your own cluelessness. See, what it is you are doing, is misunderstanding what I am saying, and then reacting to your own mistakes, going off the boil, and packing a tantrum when I deny your attempts to pigeonhole me and fit me into your neat little idealised stereotype so you may feel comfortable and justified with your forthcoming vitriol. If you can actually contain yourself enough to make an actual response or query, and cease the infantile negative portrayals you might be comprehensible. If you don't like my opinion why don't you just say " I don't agree with your opinion.", instead of going for the attack. That's what grown ups do. You can't learn anything if you've already decided you know it all.


What is abnormal is you would garner such feelings as "disgust, horror, humor, confusion, or curiosity" about homosexual people. No, again you confuse your opinion with worldwide reality. Millions of people react with disgust and even *shock horror* disdain at homosexuals. Just think religion, it'll help. Apparently you're really confused as to who these people are... Apparently you just can't make a valid statement without first implying a negative. Jeeeeesus...it's getting annoying now. Are you even aware you do it? If so please feel free to explain...

Disgust would imply homosexual behavior disgusts you. So, in your confusion, when I say PEOPLE react as such, your addled peanut makes the leap in faith and logic that that means I am disgusted by such. You really have no idea that you can't make an argument without first attempting to discredit your adversaries, do you? To make it a bit clearer for you, where did I say it disgusts me? This I'd imagine being, again men specifically of course, showing any kind of affection for each other in public. Be it holding hands, kissing, or even something as innocent as pushing each other on a swing, you'd probably consider it disgusting...Have you finished telling porkies yet? It's still the same accuse and attack method even if you add probably into the sentence. Please stop it! It's reeeaaallly boring! Learn a new or original argumentative technique! (if you think that's normal, seek professional help immediately)

Horror would suggest their behavior terrifies you, like you might struggle with homosexual nightmares or something. AAAAAAAaaarrrgghhhhhh Again, I'd advise you to seek some help as that's not normal behavior.

How bout humor? This indicates immediately that you gain a certain amount of pleasure out of the opposition homosexuals face daily. Another clear indication of abnormal behavior. Seek help. OMG MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOOOOOOOP!!!

Confusion? Understandable. This would also explain the motive behind a lot of your previous statements. Oh the irony...

Curiosity? Also understandable. You should educate yourself on the entire issue and construct a logical conclusion considering equal human rights, discrimination, and tolerance. You would supremely benefit from that. The irony again! You are a very very intolerant person. All you do is attack. You are so worked up, you don't even know how wrong you are. All your responses have been to your own misinterpretations! You are arguing with yourself! Your whole bit-by-bit breakdown and retort is based entirely on your own misperception. Read it again and this time don't fly off the handle prematurely because you got angry at what you think people are thinking.


I can't really comment on that because I'm not in that position. I do know a few homosexual men personally who exhibit this characteristic but guess what? Ok, what? Plenty of them don't. Nooooooo, really?It could be a chemical imbalance in early development that gives them more dominant feminine traits, but they happen to be born male. Oh, so chemical imbalances altered their speech so they talk camp. That doesn't happen here on Earth, but I did hear it happens on planet Idiotic Justification. Plenty of research backs this up. Exactly the same thing with lesbians who exhibit dominant male traits, or how Rick would put it the Bull Dykes! While it is obvious that some gay men have an excess of female hormones in their systems, and that this can and does lead to effeminate traits, it is also obvious that the 6'4" narrow-hipped muscular man with the hairy chest, broad shoulders, and huge adam's apple prancing about with a feather boa doesn't readily suffer from this. Yes, for sure a chemical imbalance makes him pansy to-and-fro while every other chemical in his body tries to turn him into a caveman.



Awesome, but that's not what I asked, and I'm not interested in playing skirt the question, so I'll ask it again; Did you choose to be straight? Did you ever make a conscious decision one day - "I'm straight, I like females (or males if you're actually a female, but for some reason I have a weird feeling this is a sock account Rick made up to back up his original one because nobody else ever does...)? If you didn't, then why would you assume homosexual people did? Awesome, but if you re-read my reply with your brain turned on, you'll see the bit where I answer your rhetorical question..it's the bit where I say " No decision needed".

Here's one of your main misunderstandings. YOU ASSUME that because I state that homosexuality is environmentally triggered, you somehow relate that to mean I am saying homosexuals consciously decide their sexuality. You make a leap in logic which conforms to your tendency to pigeonhole people.



I'd say it's both, genetic and environmental influences. Well hey, another item agreed! The broader question is (which there's actually already an entire thread about, linked here - https://www.rollitup.org/spirituality-sexuality-philosophy/308136-different-angle-homosexual-debate.html )why should it matter?



You're sitting there the entire time saying that a kid could somehow become influenced to become homosexual if he witnessed homosexual behavior (to phrase it a little more eloquently than you so disrespectfully did before...) going on around him. Unfortunately for you, things aren't that black and white. Monkey see monkey do, my friend. Teenagers are impressionable. If they see gay as exciting, or attention grabbing, or popular, or whatever, they will undeniably be influenced by their experience. Whether they adopt, accept, embrace, ignore or deny this influence is entirely beyond anyone's control. Show anyone where I said it will make the kid become homosexual, this is another of your bonehead interpretations. Please, read it again, without only looking for things to attack. It's a weak and tired argument, overplayed, overused, and waaaaay overdone.You are pinpointing one example out of a possible million and attempting to discredit it and bring the whole house of cards down. Stop being ignorant, you attack like a christian defends, insults first followed by bias. I gave you a scenario in which your own little theory you presented was put to the test, and you came back with "IT FAILED" - thanks for proving my point. LOL what you did was confuse yourself even further and highlight your selective born-again type bufoonery. Have you realised by now your mistakes?



http://www.conservativevalues.com/


"hack his hiney hymen"
"your son's ass-cherry"
" randy camper syndrome and start butt-blasting each other behind the bushes"
"because he sure as hell knows as well as you and I that if they were alone they'd be going for gold"
" He can decide later on in life if rimming a hairy biker's choccie starfish is what he wants to do for fun"
"Homosexuality is not normal"

Oh, you see in your rage and eager piousness you have taken it upon yourself to be the sole interpretive salesman. Yet again you react to your own anger. All you have poorly done is quote several humorous snippets of mine and assigned them all manner of crazy, biased, nieve stereotypicaland salacious translations. In your effort to dig dirt you ended up knee deep in shit right up your own arse. YOU may have implied thoughts about raving sex addicts having unprotected sex with many different partners, but how you see things and how things are in reality can actually be different! No it's true! I swear! I know it's a shock but not everyone sees things from your perspective! Gasp!






...nope, I was honestly just wondering why you're concerned with what homosexual people do with themselves... That seems a bit odd to me... Don't be coy little chicken, say what ya mean. Oh wait, you were trying to be clever.....grroooaaannnn...



...nope, again, just curious, you seem to be against the freedom of choice (or for a certain group of citizens anyway...). Nonono, naughty naughty, it's still a tired and sad undermining technique even if you say 'you seem'...JESUS H CHRIST GROW THE FUCK UP AND FIGHT LIKE A MAN NOT A SNIDE DEVIOUS BITCHING LITTLE SOP

No, I'm implying that you're unamerican, not unpatriotic. Oh I didn't know there was a difference when you're flinging shit The freedom of choice is fundamental to our American society.Why do you say that? Is it a lead up to implying that I am against freedom of choice? You don't like it, you have the freedom to pack your shit and move to Pakistan, where it's still OK to hate the homosexuals. Well whaddya know, it was!!!Our society would benefit without'cha. I would be better off if you hadn't crawled out of the abortion bucket.
So you're disregarding the, literally, millions of homosexual people who are born into happy homes and lead perfectly normal healthy childhoods? No simpleton, that's what YOU are IMPLYING. You make another momentously heinous leap in logic and ASSUME, once again. You are a nasty. nasty person who only sees things to rail against. You read with a forked brain and seem only to listen to yourself. Are you using the argument that every homosexual person has some kind of troubled past or traumatic experience? No, that's YOU expressing your own inner thoughts.

Thank God YOU'RE here to tell ME what's best for MYSELF! But I'm not wrong though, eh?

You don't get to dictate other peoples actions, not in a free society, not in America. Move to a place that better suits your interests, Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, all fantastic options for a person like you who feels those sorts of things are OK... That's horribly pathetic. You get pwned completely, reply with gibberish, and your last cowardly evangelist-like act is to link me to the Axis of Evil?

...and worst of all the erroneous pomposity of a thoroughly misguided zealot.

Couldn't make this shit up...

No, you couldn't.

 

[CrackerJax]

Careful FDD.... you almost let a opinion slip out.

 

[fdd2blk]

Careful FDD.... you almost let a opinion slip out.

 

[CrackerJax]

Gimme gimmie gimmie ... Hahah!@!

 

[fdd2blk]

with how much i beg, ... i should be gay.

 

[RickWhite]

I think MissMeanWeed did a yeoman's job of dissecting Padawan's "argument" and demonstrating that it is nothing more that one foul after another. It should also be noted that these same tactics are used in just about all the Left wing posts I see here.

Particularly common is the technique of misunderstanding, or intentionally mis-characterizing the other person's argument and then responding to this mis-characterization with a tirade. Of course the mis-characterizations are always much weaker and easier to defeat that the actual ideas proposed by the other person. Of course it is always easy to win an argument when you get to re-define the other person's position to suit you. It's kind of like a batter doing his own pitching.

And the constant personal attacks are unyielding and go quite well with the mis-characterizations. Every line takes the form of "so what you are saying is, you agree with Hitler - you are a Nazi." Yep, sheer brilliance.

If we take nothing else to heart, we should come away with the realization that MissMeanGrean and I dare say myself are obviously much better at producing sound arguments and avoiding the use of fallacious logic. I think that speaks to ones wisdom and over all intelligence. Just maybe, the rational individual ought to hold our opinions in higher regard for these reasons alone. If we are clearly superior in this regard, maybe there is reason to have confidance in our judgement more so than in the judgement of one who consistantly demonstrates an inability to reason on a similar level.

 

[RickWhite]

I do include it in my thinking process. Being a "fag" believe me, I have read, re-read, researched, been counciled, talked to other people, wrote essays, discussed with my doctor, talked to ministers, etc. So my thoughts on the matter are pretty well informed.

And I am not making the poor "victim" arguement here. Have I experienced discrimination? Yeah, serveral times. But I do not really feal like a "victim". I think it is important that a person's mind and heart is in the right place.

But I would encourage everyone to read about the "younger son" reason for being gay. Please keep an open mind while reading it. That is only fair.

Upnorth, although it was not my major, I have studied quite a bit of psychology. I am familiar with birth order and other birth cohort studies, twin studies, etc.

As someone formally trained in science and scientific research, I usually like to go to the source of the study so that I may review the methods and the data. What happens most of the time, is that any time a study is conducted that demonstrates any causal relationship, it is picked up by second hand media outlets and cited as evidence. The truth is, much of the time, correlations reported as "evidence" are either within the margin of error of the study or slightly above. In other words, the studies are far from conclusive.

Another thing that happens a lot in social sciences is that the methods used give a lot of room for erroneous results. I am often amazed at how sloppy many studies are with regard to their methodology. But often, the reality of dealing with complex human behavior makes this unavoidable. After all, one can not keep a child in a cage from birth to study the effects of isolation.

On top of this, the social sciences are heavily burdened by politics and researchers are heavily pressured to show the "right" results as opposed to the correct ones.

Add all this up and what one finds is that most studies of this nature are unreliable and are certainly nowhere close to that of other hard science.

Another thing you should know is that learning and understanding is not about finding evidence to support what you already know or wish is true. And it is wrong to fall into the trap of believing in the false dichotomy of being pro-gay vs homophobic.

I understand that you would like people to believe that homosexuality is a product of nature because you believe this will make people accept it as good. What you need to understand is that people who do not believe it is a product of nature do not necessarily believe Gays are bad people, just that like many other people, things happened to them that caused a given personality characteristic and that portraying this characteristic as ideal for society might not be a good thing.

Most of us probably do things that we would not want held up as an example for all to follow, and that is how life should be. For anyone to have an overwhelming need to push for social acceptance of things they ought to be keeping to themselves is in my opinion a form of depravity in and of itself.

In fact, I would argue that we have an epidemic of people not knowing what conduct should remain behind closed doors. There is a lack on the part of far too many, of basic understanding of proper social decorum. I believe society is made decidedly worse by this.

 

[Stoney McFried]

I would absolutely love to read some of the papers you've authored. Were any of them published in any scientific journals or magazines? Perhaps you could point me to some?

No, you are wrong. First, I have told you that I have a degree in biology and I have produced dozens of scientific reports.

I don't understand why you seem to think that a pair of responsible gay adults would have any less self control in front of children than a pair of responsible straight adults. I'm sure they could restrain themselves from spreading their DNA about the campsite.
Also, being gay doesn't equal being a pedophile, so I'm sure that your son's granola would remain unstirred-unless you were dealing with pedophiles.I've said this before, and I'll say it again-pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. It, like rape,is an act of violence,manipulation, and control against a helpless person. They are getting off on doing harm.

I answer NO.

The whole field trip alone with two gays is too risky to allow. If you trusted the homosexuals alone in the woods with your son, and believed that they wouldn't be trying to hack his hiney hymen then perhaps you could feel safe about your son's ass-cherry remaining intact.

However, if the two homosexuals were a pairing, then they might get randy camper syndrome and start butt-blasting each other behind the bushes within earshot of your vulnerable child, or he may discover them 'wrestling' with each other in their sleeping bag. Or they may restrain themselves to mere petting or knowing looks and familiarity. Either way, the homos are demonstrating, in a personal environment and intimate setting, alone with your 13 year old impressionable child, that their gayness is ok.

Which it isn't.

Not in this situation. Maybe on TV, or witnessing them in public places, that is ok, people stare at odd things all the time...but alone in the woods with your 13 year old child? Your child is a walking erection looking for any reason to explode. You do not want him coming home and wacking off to imaginings about what the two homosexuals would have gotten up to if he weren't there with them, because he sure as hell knows as well as you and I that if they were alone they'd be going for gold. The whole situation is akin to acclimatisation, or preparation for acceptance, and an invite to hormonal curiosity. It's not worth the risk. By allowing your child to go off into the woods with two homos and all sleep in the same tent, you would be practically endorsing any inquisitiveness your son and his boner might have. He can decide later on in life if rimming a hairy biker's choccie starfish is what he wants to do for fun, he doesn't need any input at his age from people that already do.

If you want grandkids, alone in the woods in a tent with two homos for the weekend is not the way to do it.

Homosexuality is not normal. It is everywhere, everyday, but it is not normal. It is a reactionary behaviour to broken mental linkings damaged/influenced in people during formative years.

Homos may defend against this and imply that they are fine, normal citizens, but their rebuttal is entirely retrospective and a basic denial that anything is faulty with them. This defense lacks the insight to identify the collective or individual experiences which shaped their personality outcomes. Homos are the first to say their shit don't stink.

SO basically, you're saying it's Rob's fault his son is gay. You talk about this subject a lot, so you must fancy yourself an expert on nature vs. nurture. How many children have you personally raised?

That isn't what I said at all.

What I'm saying is that you are understandably unaware of why your son is gay. Perhaps you son exhibited certain traits that you equated with being gay and you treated his as such, thus creating a self fulfilling prophesy. There is no way to know what the cause was. I'm sure to you it seems he was born that way - that doesn't make it so.

 

[Katatawnic]

If we take nothing else to heart, we should come away with the realization that MissMeanGrean and I dare say myself are obviously much better at producing sound arguments and avoiding the use of fallacious logic. I think that speaks to ones wisdom and over all intelligence. Just maybe, the rational individual ought to hold our opinions in higher regard for these reasons alone. If we are clearly superior in this regard, maybe there is reason to have confidance in our judgement more so than in the judgement of one who consistantly demonstrates an inability to reason on a similar level.

Your arm is in danger of breaking, Rick.

I would absolutely love to read some of the papers you've authored. Were any of them published in any scientific journals or magazines? Perhaps you could point me to some?


I don't understand why you seem to think that a pair of responsible gay adults would have any less self control in front of children than a pair of responsible straight adults. I'm sure they could restrain themselves from spreading their DNA about the campsite.
Also, being gay doesn't equal being a pedophile, so I'm sure that your son's granola would remain unstirred-unless you were dealing with pedophiles.I've said this before, and I'll say it again-pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. It, like rape,is an act of violence,manipulation, and control against a helpless person. They are getting off on doing harm.


SO basically, you're saying it's Rob's fault his son is gay. You talk about this subject a lot, so you must fancy yourself an expert on nature vs. nurture. How many children have you personally raised?

Careful, Stoney... you're not being "rational" enough for the grown ups in this thread.

 

[Stoney McFried]

I know. Apparently, I'm a moron because I disagree with Rick. Maybe I can get a dummy check?

Careful, Stoney... you're not being "rational" enough for the grown ups in this thread.

 

[CrackerJax]

I would be FAR FAR FAR more concerned if two straight men wanted to adopt a baby.

Didn't they make a cute movie about that?

 

[Keenly]

I know. Apparently, I'm a moron because I disagree with Rick. Maybe I can get a dummy check?

thats how its always been stony, if you disagree with him your wrong


even if agreeing with him means discrimination and bigotry he is all for it

 

[Keenly]

I would be FAR FAR FAR more concerned if two straight men wanted to adopt a baby.

Didn't they make a cute movie about that?

i just feel if 2 dudes or chicks want to go through all the work it takes to raise a child who the fuck is anyone else to tell them they cant


shit i bet the disagreeing persons children are more fucked up than theirs would be

 

[CrackerJax]

I think gay pppl who want to adopt children don't do it because of an equality issue. They do it because they feel they have something worth passing on to another generation. No, not their sexuality.... their knowledge and life experiences.

I also don't think TONS of gay couples want children, and the ones who do are probably better off financially than most straight parents.

Of course to the most basic and obvious point.... there are so many orphans out there. Children who need parents.

This helps the children.

Isn't that what it's all about?

 

[Keenly]

its human nature, engraved into our very minds and hearts to carry on our families and leave a piece of us behind when we go


its the survival instinct


and before anyone pulls the ridiculous argument of adopting a child does not leave a piece of you behind


i am adopted, but i am 100% my mothers and my fathers son, no matter what anyone says

 

[CrackerJax]

Is that you son?

 

[Stoney McFried]

I think it was 3 men.... and something about the mom not being sure which one was the dad.... tres risque!

I would be FAR FAR FAR more concerned if two straight men wanted to adopt a baby.

Didn't they make a cute movie about that?

Well,my heart is broken. No, wait...it was just gas.

thats how its always been stony, if you disagree with him your wrong


even if agreeing with him means discrimination and bigotry he is all for it

 

[fdd2blk]

SO basically, you're saying it's Rob's fault his son is gay. You talk about this subject a lot, so you must fancy yourself an expert on nature vs. nurture. How many children have you personally raised?

i don't think he is saying that. i think he is saying "what if it were?". you all can't see past the personal side of the argument to actually address the point. i thought most of you were better than this. instead of actually facing the fact that this is one possibility, you just make personal attacks instead. i don't understand why.

open your minds a little. just for fun if anything. no one is holding you to any of this. well, ....

never mind.

 

[CrackerJax]

I'm writing it all down.

 

[fdd2blk]

it IS a possibility. 2 gay men COULD do something to a child in the woods. if i look deep enough i may even find something (google is amazing). BUT, it seems those who love the gays can't even admit a gay has EVER done anything wrong.

this is the shit that kills me.

denial wins NO argument. i don't even really have an opinion, other than the gay side can't even address reality.