Gays and Homophobia

[UncertaintyPrinciple]

I never said they couldn't live in peace. I just think its wrong. Does it matter what I think? No. I've been told that a million times here. If they want to live on some island in the Bahamas away from everyone, go ahead, I'm not stopping them. Only when it comes to marriage i will protest. I will continue to believe homosexuality is wrong for as long as i live. If people hate me for it, fine. Criticize me for what i believe, go ahead. I will continue to protest what i believe in.

I care what you think, I'm not attacking you for your beliefs. I want to understand them.

What exactly do you find wrong with a same-sex realtionship; their inability to reproduce, intercourse or the violation of the Church's teachings? And why don't you want homosexuals to be part of society?

I never said they cant be part of society. My main problem with it is how it goes against the natural order. they cant reproduce that's fact. It goes against Church teachings.

My apologise you reference to them going to live on an island gave me the wrong impression. Firstly, how do you define natural order? And why did you select the teachings of the Church over the teachings of Christ to follow?

By Church i also mean Bible. Because it is humanly impossible to fully love. Impossible to fully forgive. Jesus is my teacher, but their are many things we can't do that he could. I try to live my live according to The Bible. But in these days, you'll get persecuted for it.

Christ taught humanity to love another and be tolerent, he tried to bring peace between those with differences and then he asked his followers to do as he did. Why do you choose to listen to the teachings to those that aren't Christ on the subject of homosexuality? Also how do you define the natural order?

 

[captainwolfos]

I'm completely gay. Yay me. I'm for gay rights, mostly to reiterate what most other people have said - we're people too.

However, I hate FAAAAABULOUS gays. There's this gay dude in my class in college. And he plays the 'you're such a homophobe' card whenever someone so much as looks at him funny. He's the biggest ***** in the entire class, and there's only two guys in a class of thirty. It really pisses me off. Most people seem to forget I'm even gay 'cause I don't all out broadcast it.

 

[conflictofinterests]

I think the term you're looking for is "separate but equal" and these here United States done did tried that with them thar nigras. The courts ended up deciding that was stupid and racist (much like the previous sentence itself).

In any case, marriages aren't the same as civil unions, mainly because one state doesn't have to respect the civil union of another, and there are various issues dealing mainly with tax benefits and whatnot.

The only reason I've heard that I respect for maintaining a difference of rights of gay and straight couples is the amount of lawsuits and revoked tax privileges against churches who want not to marry gay couples because the union is against their belief system. (This is not to say I'm not for gay marriage, this is just to say stupid people and stupid religions still exist, and last I checked, freedom of religion was still pretty important to us, no matter how stupid said religion may be)

I apologise if this sound rude, I truly am, but I'm not looking to question the societal impact or past events that are similar. I'm trying to dissect each individual's opinion on the issue to better understand both sides. It's why I always ask question as a response to people's posts

Naw, naw, it's fine. But these things are what influence my views on the subject, it's why I supplied them ;3

Well now you have my interest. So you use past historical events to effect your opinion in order to stop past mistakes being repeated and to have the best solution found fastest?

Ayup. I try to avoid mistakes others have made for me. People are at least useful as cautionary tales, if nothings else.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

I never said they couldn't live in peace. I just think its wrong. Does it matter what I think? No. I've been told that a million times here. If they want to live on some island in the Bahamas away from everyone, go ahead, I'm not stopping them. Only when it comes to marriage i will protest. I will continue to believe homosexuality is wrong for as long as i live. If people hate me for it, fine. Criticize me for what i believe, go ahead. I will continue to protest what i believe in.

I care what you think, I'm not attacking you for your beliefs. I want to understand them.

What exactly do you find wrong with a same-sex realtionship; their inability to reproduce, intercourse or the violation of the Church's teachings? And why don't you want homosexuals to be part of society?

I never said they cant be part of society. My main problem with it is how it goes against the natural order. they cant reproduce that's fact. It goes against Church teachings.

My apologise you reference to them going to live on an island gave me the wrong impression. Firstly, how do you define natural order? And why did you select the teachings of the Church over the teachings of Christ to follow?

By Church i also mean Bible. Because it is humanly impossible to fully love. Impossible to fully forgive. Jesus is my teacher, but their are many things we can't do that he could. I try to live my live according to The Bible. But in these days, you'll get persecuted for it.

Because there is a LOT of stupid shit in there, and if you're going to listen to one bit, you pretty much have to listen to all of it (otherwise that means you don't believe it's the word of God, which is infallible, and yakkedy yak yak yak). How many adulteresses have you stoned to death lately?

how many people have you criticized for believing in something lately?

 

[UncertaintyPrinciple]

Why not have different rights with slightly different benefits where no one is more disadvantaged then anyone else?

Because keeping several extremely similar sets of rights is a lot more hassle then just having one set for all? Because there is NO benefit to not just merging them all?

Please you must understand, my questions contain none of my beliefs. They are merely there to invoke a response and better understand the opinions and beliefs of others. Also, I'm unsure as to what the question you have asked me is, I mean no offense but I can only see to declaritive statements ended with question marks.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

I never said they couldn't live in peace. I just think its wrong. Does it matter what I think? No. I've been told that a million times here. If they want to live on some island in the Bahamas away from everyone, go ahead, I'm not stopping them. Only when it comes to marriage i will protest. I will continue to believe homosexuality is wrong for as long as i live. If people hate me for it, fine. Criticize me for what i believe, go ahead. I will continue to protest what i believe in.

I care what you think, I'm not attacking you for your beliefs. I want to understand them.

What exactly do you find wrong with a same-sex realtionship; their inability to reproduce, intercourse or the violation of the Church's teachings? And why don't you want homosexuals to be part of society?

I never said they cant be part of society. My main problem with it is how it goes against the natural order. they cant reproduce that's fact. It goes against Church teachings.

My apologise you reference to them going to live on an island gave me the wrong impression. Firstly, how do you define natural order? And why did you select the teachings of the Church over the teachings of Christ to follow?

By Church i also mean Bible. Because it is humanly impossible to fully love. Impossible to fully forgive. Jesus is my teacher, but their are many things we can't do that he could. I try to live my live according to The Bible. But in these days, you'll get persecuted for it.

Christ taught humanity to love another and be tolerent, he tried to bring peace between those with differences and then he asked his followers to do as he did. Why do you choose to listen to the teachings to those that aren't Christ on the subject of homosexuality? Also how do you define the natural order?

I do have tolerance if i didn't i'd probably be criticizing every homosexual i met.

 

[UncertaintyPrinciple]

Ayup. I try to avoid mistakes others have made for me. People are at least useful as cautionary tales, if nothings else.

Do you believe that if humanity was not to heed the words of the past, we demonstrate that we have not developed at all as a race and are held in the dark ages by our prejudices?

 

[UncertaintyPrinciple]

I never said they couldn't live in peace. I just think its wrong. Does it matter what I think? No. I've been told that a million times here. If they want to live on some island in the Bahamas away from everyone, go ahead, I'm not stopping them. Only when it comes to marriage i will protest. I will continue to believe homosexuality is wrong for as long as i live. If people hate me for it, fine. Criticize me for what i believe, go ahead. I will continue to protest what i believe in.

I care what you think, I'm not attacking you for your beliefs. I want to understand them.

What exactly do you find wrong with a same-sex realtionship; their inability to reproduce, intercourse or the violation of the Church's teachings? And why don't you want homosexuals to be part of society?

I never said they cant be part of society. My main problem with it is how it goes against the natural order. they cant reproduce that's fact. It goes against Church teachings.

My apologise you reference to them going to live on an island gave me the wrong impression. Firstly, how do you define natural order? And why did you select the teachings of the Church over the teachings of Christ to follow?

By Church i also mean Bible. Because it is humanly impossible to fully love. Impossible to fully forgive. Jesus is my teacher, but their are many things we can't do that he could. I try to live my live according to The Bible. But in these days, you'll get persecuted for it.

Christ taught humanity to love another and be tolerent, he tried to bring peace between those with differences and then he asked his followers to do as he did. Why do you choose to listen to the teachings to those that aren't Christ on the subject of homosexuality? Also how do you define the natural order?

I do have tolerance if i didn't i'd probably be criticizing every homosexual i met.

But to be tolerent is to not stand in someones way and instead let them go on with objection or impedment. Why do you believe that people should limit the right of homosexuals?

 

[BlumiereBleck]

I never said they couldn't live in peace. I just think its wrong. Does it matter what I think? No. I've been told that a million times here. If they want to live on some island in the Bahamas away from everyone, go ahead, I'm not stopping them. Only when it comes to marriage i will protest. I will continue to believe homosexuality is wrong for as long as i live. If people hate me for it, fine. Criticize me for what i believe, go ahead. I will continue to protest what i believe in.

I care what you think, I'm not attacking you for your beliefs. I want to understand them.

What exactly do you find wrong with a same-sex realtionship; their inability to reproduce, intercourse or the violation of the Church's teachings? And why don't you want homosexuals to be part of society?

I never said they cant be part of society. My main problem with it is how it goes against the natural order. they cant reproduce that's fact. It goes against Church teachings.

My apologise you reference to them going to live on an island gave me the wrong impression. Firstly, how do you define natural order? And why did you select the teachings of the Church over the teachings of Christ to follow?

By Church i also mean Bible. Because it is humanly impossible to fully love. Impossible to fully forgive. Jesus is my teacher, but their are many things we can't do that he could. I try to live my live according to The Bible. But in these days, you'll get persecuted for it.

Christ taught humanity to love another and be tolerent, he tried to bring peace between those with differences and then he asked his followers to do as he did. Why do you choose to listen to the teachings to those that aren't Christ on the subject of homosexuality? Also how do you define the natural order?

I do have tolerance if i didn't i'd probably be criticizing every homosexual i met.

But to be tolerent is to not stand in someones way and instead let them go on with objection or impedment. Why do you believe that people should limit the right of homosexuals?

It's against the natural order! and why are you trying to change my beliefs?

 

[conflictofinterests]

Ayup. I try to avoid mistakes others have made for me. People are at least useful as cautionary tales, if nothings else.

Do you believe that if humanity was not to heed the words of the past, we demonstrate that we have not developed at all as a race and are held in the dark ages by our prejudices?

Naw, we are still human after all. There are bound to be a sizable portion of us that can't imagine anything that's happening now having happened before. The people paying attention to past mistakes may not try things that were mistakes in the past, but apply differently to a new situation and actually be solutions in the present. Basically, it takes all kinds.

 

[UncertaintyPrinciple]

It's against the natural order! and why are you trying to change my beliefs?

I am not trying to change your beliefs, merely understand them. I'm qeustioning them so I can understand the fundemental basis for them.

Back to this Natural order issue, how do you define the Natural order? What is your criteria?

 

[Danzaivar]

I never said they couldn't live in peace. I just think its wrong. Does it matter what I think? No. I've been told that a million times here. If they want to live on some island in the Bahamas away from everyone, go ahead, I'm not stopping them. Only when it comes to marriage i will protest. I will continue to believe homosexuality is wrong for as long as i live. If people hate me for it, fine. Criticize me for what i believe, go ahead. I will continue to protest what i believe in.

I care what you think, I'm not attacking you for your beliefs. I want to understand them.

What exactly do you find wrong with a same-sex realtionship; their inability to reproduce, intercourse or the violation of the Church's teachings? And why don't you want homosexuals to be part of society?

I never said they cant be part of society. My main problem with it is how it goes against the natural order. they cant reproduce that's fact. It goes against Church teachings.

My apologise you reference to them going to live on an island gave me the wrong impression. Firstly, how do you define natural order? And why did you select the teachings of the Church over the teachings of Christ to follow?

By Church i also mean Bible. Because it is humanly impossible to fully love. Impossible to fully forgive. Jesus is my teacher, but their are many things we can't do that he could. I try to live my live according to The Bible. But in these days, you'll get persecuted for it.

Christ taught humanity to love another and be tolerent, he tried to bring peace between those with differences and then he asked his followers to do as he did. Why do you choose to listen to the teachings to those that aren't Christ on the subject of homosexuality? Also how do you define the natural order?

I do have tolerance if i didn't i'd probably be criticizing every homosexual i met.

But to be tolerent is to not stand in someones way and instead let them go on with objection or impedment. Why do you believe that people should limit the right of homosexuals?

It's against the natural order! and why are you trying to change my beliefs?

You're in America, arguing with someone in Australia with essentially no time lag. I'm chipping in from the opposite side of the World too.

We're past the point where 'the natural order' applies. By quite a bit.

 

[Swarley]

It's against the natural order!

He said on the internet.

 

[UncertaintyPrinciple]

Ayup. I try to avoid mistakes others have made for me. People are at least useful as cautionary tales, if nothings else.

Do you believe that if humanity was not to heed the words of the past, we demonstrate that we have not developed at all as a race and are held in the dark ages by our prejudices?

Naw, we are still human after all. There are bound to be a sizable portion of us that can't imagine anything that's happening now having happened before. The people paying attention to past mistakes may not try things that were mistakes in the past, but apply differently to a new situation and actually be solutions in the present. Basically, it takes all kinds.

So you believe we must consider the past to aviod obvious repeats of the past but not focus so much not it that we aviod the reapplication of old ideas to new circumstances?

 

[conflictofinterests]

I never said they couldn't live in peace. I just think its wrong. Does it matter what I think? No. I've been told that a million times here. If they want to live on some island in the Bahamas away from everyone, go ahead, I'm not stopping them. Only when it comes to marriage i will protest. I will continue to believe homosexuality is wrong for as long as i live. If people hate me for it, fine. Criticize me for what i believe, go ahead. I will continue to protest what i believe in.

I care what you think, I'm not attacking you for your beliefs. I want to understand them.

What exactly do you find wrong with a same-sex realtionship; their inability to reproduce, intercourse or the violation of the Church's teachings? And why don't you want homosexuals to be part of society?

I never said they cant be part of society. My main problem with it is how it goes against the natural order. they cant reproduce that's fact. It goes against Church teachings.

My apologise you reference to them going to live on an island gave me the wrong impression. Firstly, how do you define natural order? And why did you select the teachings of the Church over the teachings of Christ to follow?

By Church i also mean Bible. Because it is humanly impossible to fully love. Impossible to fully forgive. Jesus is my teacher, but their are many things we can't do that he could. I try to live my live according to The Bible. But in these days, you'll get persecuted for it.

Christ taught humanity to love another and be tolerent, he tried to bring peace between those with differences and then he asked his followers to do as he did. Why do you choose to listen to the teachings to those that aren't Christ on the subject of homosexuality? Also how do you define the natural order?

I do have tolerance if i didn't i'd probably be criticizing every homosexual i met.

But to be tolerent is to not stand in someones way and instead let them go on with objection or impedment. Why do you believe that people should limit the right of homosexuals?

It's against the natural order! and why are you trying to change my beliefs?

Was it that particular post that you thought was trying to change your opinion? Because if the questions and statements are in earnest, as I think they may be, they are aimed more at causing you to examine your beliefs so the two of you can better understand them and all they are built on.

 

[Scde2]

Now, I was wondering in why you believe homosexuals need to have the same rights as straight couples?

Because there is no reason to limit the rights of people in same-sex relationships. There is no need for every last person on the planet to go breed with one another. Come talk to me again when the world is underpopulated. Or are our orphanages not full enough?

A homosexual relationship is a same-sex equivalent, so why can't you rights be equivalent but different?

That sounds like Separate but Equal. That hardly ever is the case.
And if it's different, how the hell can it be equivalent?

One kilogram of feathers weighs the same as one kilogram of bricks, they are different materials of equal net mass. Why not have different rights with slightly different benefits where no one is more disadvantaged then anyone else?

OR, you can give the same rights. <3
It'll leave lesser room for people to complain that other people have more rights.

Why do you believe I was inferring limiting same-sex couples rights and not just giving Homosexual couples some hetrosexual couples don't have and vica-versa?

I not sure what you are asking here. I was using the term same-sex relationships because I didn't feel the need to exclude couples who are in a same-sex relationship and who are bisexual. You asked me why I thought homosexuals should have the same rights as couples in a male to female relationship. What I said still applies.

 

[conflictofinterests]

Ayup. I try to avoid mistakes others have made for me. People are at least useful as cautionary tales, if nothings else.

Do you believe that if humanity was not to heed the words of the past, we demonstrate that we have not developed at all as a race and are held in the dark ages by our prejudices?

Naw, we are still human after all. There are bound to be a sizable portion of us that can't imagine anything that's happening now having happened before. The people paying attention to past mistakes may not try things that were mistakes in the past, but apply differently to a new situation and actually be solutions in the present. Basically, it takes all kinds.

So you believe we must consider the past to aviod obvious repeats of the past but not focus so much not it that we aviod the reapplication of old ideas to new circumstances?

Sounds about right to me.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

It's against the natural order! and why are you trying to change my beliefs?

I am not trying to change your beliefs, merely understand them. I'm qeustioning them so I can understand the fundemental basis for them.

Back to this Natural order issue, how do you define the Natural order? What is your criteria?

Natural order: Man marries woman, woman marries man.

 

[UncertaintyPrinciple]

Now, I was wondering in why you believe homosexuals need to have the same rights as straight couples?

Because there is no reason to limit the rights of people in same-sex relationships. There is no need for every last person on the planet to go breed with one another. Come talk to me again when the world is underpopulated. Or are our orphanages not full enough?

A homosexual relationship is a same-sex equivalent, so why can't you rights be equivalent but different?

That sounds like Separate but Equal. That hardly ever is the case.
And if it's different, how the hell can it be equivalent?

One kilogram of feathers weighs the same as one kilogram of bricks, they are different materials of equal net mass. Why not have different rights with slightly different benefits where no one is more disadvantaged then anyone else?

OR, you can give the same rights. <3
It'll leave lesser room for people to complain that other people have more rights.

Why do you believe I was inferring limiting same-sex couples rights and not just giving Homosexual couples some hetrosexual couples don't have and vica-versa?

I not sure what you are asking here. I was using the term same-sex relationships because I didn't feel the need to exclude couples who are in a same-sex relationship and who are bisexual. You asked me why I thought homosexuals should have the same rights as couples in a male to female relationship. What I said still applies.

So you believe that there should be no difference, both are relationships between to individuals where gender should not matter and that by giving different laws it aknowledge there is a difference when there really isn't any?

 

[thublihnk]

It's against the natural order!

He said on the internet.

+1 internets to you, sir. And a good day, as well.