Gays and Homophobia

[Lieju]

I'm fairly certain the laws against homosexuality were put in place simply because gay couples cannot conceive, and if they do not produce children they are limiting the growth of their society (and their life expectancies were typically well under 50 years). Thus, being gay is bad "because God said so".

Also at least when it comes to the New Testament times, it was also aimed at the Creeks, with their homosexual practises, as that was a rival nation/religion.

 

[Zechnophobe]

I have no problem with gays and lesbians. Its funny how people pick on homosexuals, but no one makes fun or necropheliacs, pedophiles, zoopheliacs, guro freaks, lolicon fans, scatolphelia, beastiality, and rapists.

...how is that funny?

People have nothing but scorn and disgust for the things you listed. I don't pick on people like that, I'd fucking kill them.

Now this is a much meatier topic. For the sake of argument, why would you 'fucking kill' a zoopheliac? It may not be something you want to do, but I don't exactly think it obviously a crime punishable by death. Same is true for most of the other things you listed.

 

[Mad World]

You forgot The Village People

In the navy, yes you can sail the seven seas...

Hmm?

What of Jesus' teachings that you follow condemn Homosexuality? Do you base your opinion solely on your religion?

Rom 1:26-27 states, "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."

Jude 1:7 states, "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."

My religion is why I am against homosexual acts, yes. Man was meant to be with woman. Simple as that. To go further, ONE man and ONE woman. I am against polygamy, too.

 

[tetron]

In a way I would say I'm against gays/lesbians, because they should be bi(Why limit yourselves ?)

So by your logic EVERYONE should be bisexual, and that's just not going to happen, because sexuality isn't a choice. That's something that everyone (homophobes in particular) needs drilled into their skull.

No not by my logic, by my words everyone should be bisexual. It's less a matter of logic and more a matter of...making things more fun for me.(I consider an attractive straight guy, or lesbian girl, to be a waste.) Although I suppose instead of bisexual I should say pansexual, because really why should gender matter when it comes to making love ?

 

[MrGalactus]

Live and let live. gays should be able to get married and adopt children without closed minded people trying to push laws on them.

 

[Agayek]

Now this is a much meatier topic. For the sake of argument, why would you 'fucking kill' a zoopheliac? It may not be something you want to do, but I don't exactly think it obviously a crime punishable by death. Same is true for most of the other things you listed.

To be fair, pedophilia (including most of the lolicon stuff), rape, guro, and debatably necrophilia all almost certainly qualify for the death penality. Pedophilia because it's gross abuse of children, rape because it's, well, rape, and guro because at the end of the day one or both parties are going to be missing some probably vital body parts. Necrophilia is pretty much the most extreme way to disrespect the dead, and while I'm not sure that qualifies for execution, it's pretty damn disturbing and I'd definitely punch someone I caught doing it.

Bestiality is just gross. Not really worthy of death, but definitely disturbing on a number of levels.

 

[Harlemura]

I'm straight.
I don't mind if someone's gay, I just don't really want them getting the kissy-kissy on right in front of me.
This goes for any couple really, but I'd admit that I'd probably feel more awkward if both participants had the same fun parts.
But still, they're people. Don't take their rights because a minority of people feel a bit awkward around 'em. It's like taking someone's rights because... er... I dunno, they like cod slightly more than haddock. Or something.

 

[Andrew Bohan]

You forgot The Village People

In the navy, yes you can sail the seven seas...

Hmm?

What of Jesus' teachings that you follow condemn Homosexuality? Do you base your opinion solely on your religion?

Rom 1:26-27 states, "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."

Jude 1:7 states, "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."

It was a joke. Does it actually explicitly state in these teachings which acts they performed? I mean, shameful acts with other men's a pretty broad term. Also with romans wasn't it written like an epilogue? Like the letters written after the times of jesus? Don't get me wrong, you're entitled to take it as you wish but you know, it doesn't really state what these acts are. It could be threesomes with animals, corpses, scat, y'know it's a pretty broad spectrum.

 

[Zechnophobe]

Now this is a much meatier topic. For the sake of argument, why would you 'fucking kill' a zoopheliac? It may not be something you want to do, but I don't exactly think it obviously a crime punishable by death. Same is true for most of the other things you listed.

To be fair, pedophilia (including most of the lolicon stuff), rape, guro, and debatably necrophilia all almost certainly qualify for the death penality. Pedophilia because it's gross abuse of children, rape because it's, well, rape, and guro because at the end of the day one or both parties are going to be missing some probably vital body parts. Necrophilia is pretty much the most extreme way to disrespect the dead, and while I'm not sure that qualifies for execution, it's pretty damn disturbing and I'd definitely punch someone I caught doing it.

Bestiality is just gross. Not really worthy of death, but definitely disturbing on a number of levels.

I guess the point I am making though is that they are pretty much just sexual preferences along a different access. Is someone who, for example, fantasizes about Rape or Guro just as guilty as someone who rapes, or dismembers a loved one? Even BDSM has its practicers, and that can involve some amount of CONSENSUAL VIOLENCE which while weird to me, seems rather fair and in bounds. As gamers, we very much know the difference between pretending, or imagining doing something, and actually doing it, don't we?

 

[Agayek]

Rom 1:26-27 states, "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."

Jude 1:7 states, "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."

My religion is why I am against homosexual acts, yes. Man was meant to be with woman. Simple as that. To go further, ONE man and ONE woman. I am against polygamy, too.

I'm not going to get into an argument over this, feel free to dismiss it entirely as you almost surely will, but I can't stop myself from pointing out one thing:

You are letting a book written at least 2,000 years ago make your decisions for you. Whether or not that's a bad thing remains to be seen, but I can say that it's an abandonment of free will (you know, that thing YHWH granted humanity to raise us above beasts). If you're against gays, that's your right and all the more power to you. Just make that choice yourself.

 

[Zechnophobe]

Now this is a much meatier topic. For the sake of argument, why would you 'fucking kill' a zoopheliac? It may not be something you want to do, but I don't exactly think it obviously a crime punishable by death. Same is true for most of the other things you listed.

It is, isn't it? I didn't mean all of them, more just the pedophile, rapist and possibly the necrophile.

I don't really give a shit about crime. If one of my friends was raped, I'd probably kill the bastard. Depends on a lot, details make everything, but I think I have the capacity.

But you're right, that topic would be much more interesting. Loli/guro/scats don't bother me, as there aren't usually real people involved, and if there are, it's voluntary. Beastiality/zoophelia is just plain wrong.

Yeah, they are... rather icky to talk about too much I admit. But if you could arrange for the zoophelia to not be harmful to the animal, I'm not sure I would classify it as inherently evil or anything.

I disagree with your vigilante opinion on Rape, but I at the very least completely understand the emotions that would motivate you to that opinion. Also, it hasn't happened to anyone I know... I might have a sudden change of heart if one of my loved ones was violated in that manner.

 

[Agayek]

I guess the point I am making though is that they are pretty much just sexual preferences along a different access. Is someone who, for example, fantasizes about Rape or Guro just as guilty as someone who rapes, or dismembers a loved one? Even BDSM has its practicers, and that can involve some amount of CONSENSUAL VIOLENCE which while weird to me, seems rather fair and in bounds. As gamers, we very much know the difference between pretending, or imagining doing something, and actually doing it, don't we?

Someone who fantasizes about it isn't guilty of anything. I never meant to imply that people with fantasies of those fetishes deserved death. All I was saying is that the act (for the sake of clarity, I'm assuming non-consenting partners, any act between consenting adults that doesn't harm anyone else is perfectly acceptable) implied by them warrants an execution.

 

[bl4ckh4wk64]

I really couldn't care less about gay people/marriages. But, when they start complaining over a name and social security benefits, then it starts to annoy me. Let me put it in context. I'm from California, yet I voted to for that gay marriage ban. Why? Because they already have something in California that is almost exactly the same as marriage. It's called a civil union, and the only differences between marriage and civil union (besides the names) is that marriage gets you social security benefits and is recognized most, if not all, religions.

But why can't Gays have the exact same as Straight couples, why do you believe there should be any discrepancy?

My strong catholic upbringing tells me it's wrong. But really I don't care. As I said, my biggest complaint is when they complain. I believe in a strictly "Don't ask, Don't Tell" ideology and it works pretty well. Don't even get me started on how that San Francisco judge banning it is fucking up our military...

 

[Zechnophobe]

I guess the point I am making though is that they are pretty much just sexual preferences along a different access. Is someone who, for example, fantasizes about Rape or Guro just as guilty as someone who rapes, or dismembers a loved one? Even BDSM has its practicers, and that can involve some amount of CONSENSUAL VIOLENCE which while weird to me, seems rather fair and in bounds. As gamers, we very much know the difference between pretending, or imagining doing something, and actually doing it, don't we?

Someone who fantasizes about it isn't guilty of anything. I never meant to imply that people with fantasies of those fetishes deserved death. All I was saying is that the act (for the sake of clarity, I'm assuming non-consenting partners, any act between consenting adults that doesn't harm anyone else is perfectly acceptable) implied by them warrants an execution.

I think we are on the same page then. I wasn't really sure if you were assuming consent or not, but I do know people who strongly feel that the idea of being aroused by certain things is wrong. Which always seemed rather a self centered approach to sexuality.

 

[zen5887]

Joe Rogan can say more than I can

 

[Agayek]

Still, time means nothing. People will always look for others to guide them. We're humans, it's what we do. I don't think CHOOSING to follow the Bible is an abandonment of free will any more than choosing to follow the law is. Keep in mind that he's choosing to believe the Bible through his own free will.

First: Society, science and even religion has evolved a hell of a lot over the last couple of millennia. Laws become less and less relevant the more the society meant to employ them changes, which is why every (mostly) successful legal system on the planet has the means to amend and update their laws.

Second: While it's true that it's an act of choice to follow the Bible, using it as your entire reason for anything is a cop-out. If your reason is "God said so", you have clearly exerted absolutely no effort to reach a decision, and have abandoned all logic. Therefore, it is a safe and valid conclusion that you're doing it wrong.

 

[Mad World]

It was a joke. Does it actually explicitly state in these teachings which acts they performed? I mean, shameful acts with other men's a pretty broad term. Also with romans wasn't it written like an epilogue? Like the letters written after the times of jesus? Don't get me wrong, you're entitled to take it as you wish but you know, it doesn't really state what these acts are. It could be threesomes with animals, corpses, scat, y'know it's a pretty broad spectrum.

I figured it was a joke; just was making sure.

Anyway, I really don't think that the possibilities you listed are what the scripture is describing. It said that women felt lust for one another, so, yeah... seems kind of obvious to me.

You really don't think that it meant that? I'm not being rude or anything; I'm merely wondering.

I'm not going to get into an argument over this, feel free to dismiss it entirely as you almost surely will, but I can't stop myself from pointing out one thing:

You are letting a book written at least 2,000 years ago make your decisions for you. Whether or not that's a bad thing remains to be seen, but I can say that it's an abandonment of free will (you know, that thing YHWH granted humanity to raise us above beasts). If you're against gays, that's your right and all the more power to you. Just make that choice yourself.

I'm following a book which is the Word of God. It was written by men, but it was inspired by God, a being who still exists (and always has and will). A being who is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.

You may not believe this, but understand why I consider the Bible to be infinitely more than just "a book written a long time ago."

Yes - we have freewill. And I am exercising mine by choosing to follow God's Word. I am not being forced.