To all you homophobes: Why?

[Kingsman]

Well, I didn't want to talk about it, but since the thread is being so straightforward, it would be discourteous if I didn't answer it.

From a strictly non-religious standpoint, homosexualism, assuming it is a genetic trait/impulse, is a function which causes a backwards reaction in a creature, causing it to feel sexual reactions only towards the same sex and thereby cuts off its ability to reproduce. That it has been accepted instead of frowned upon confuses me in this regard.

 

[mrpenguinismyhomeboy]

Wouldn't you want everyone to be gay if you were "alpha male"? Hence getting all the ladies for yourself?

Clever...very clever...

I personally don;t think there is anything wrong with being gay, and I don't think that should determine your political or social rights. In fact, I don't think that the fact that you are gay or straight should even matter, and I especially think people should keep their sexuality to themselves.

If gay people want to be gay that's fine. There's nothing I can do about it, and it doesn't hurt me. So yeah.

 

[Del-Toro]

I can change the word homosexual for pedophile and have pretty much the same argument. Since I have a problem with pedophiles, I have a problem with homosexuals.

What? That doesn't make sense, what do pedophelia and homo-sexuality have to do with eachother?

I agree. Plus, that comment is out of order-you are comparing homosexuals to pedophiles. That is wrong and sick and you should be ashamed of yourself

Yeah as far as sexual misconduct goes homosexuals (to the best of my knowledge) have a much better track record than pedophiles. By that I mean a gay man is less likely to kidnap, rape, torture ect. an innocent child. Much, much less likely. The line between seduction (age of consent individuals if they know what's good for them, and they generally do) and rape(of five year olds) is so thick and wide that they aren't even worth trying to compare. That is the key difference. It makes ALL the difference. It's the means through which natual urges are satisfied, see?

 

[[V.2]]

*This is long and isn't entirely relevant to the post*

This is something I have been wanting to get off my chest for awhile: The Bible should not be taken literally

The main reason people think being gay is bad is because they claim the Bible says Jesus said so
The thought that usually comes to mind is "Do you worship God or the Bible?"

Also, people fail to realize that the Bible was not written by God, it was written by men... it was written by men who lived in a culture that accepted oppressing women just because they were women. Bottom line: I don't think God or Jesus would condemn their own people.

Others try to justify this by saying something along the lines of the definition of marriage is the joining of a man and a woman. This I find to be the most BS excuse ever. Definitions change, they have always changed, as time goes on, definitions change and get added on to. Examples: Piss- then it meant urine, now it can mean angry
Gay- then it meant happy, now it can mean homosexual, etc. etc.

 

[bkdlsf89990]

No, he says that he condemns it because he things it's disgusting. The idea of homosexual sex disgusts me as well, the idea of a penis in my ass....o dear gód no....but do I condemn other people for liking that? No ofcourse not, why should I, why is my disgust more important then their preference? I don't like something, they do, fine. I don't condemn you because you find raw shrimp disgusting, why would I do that? Same with homosexual sex, why would I condemn someone because I don't like it?

Well really it's his argument, I'll let him defend himself. Because right now I think I agree with you.

 

[Doug]

What disgusts you so much about homosexuality, or gay marriage or even gay rights?

Femininity.

Men must be dominant. Submissive behavior is unsightly and unnatural. Sexual acts performed on women, such as licking, fingering, and breast-fondling are manly things that big strong men do, so lesbians are in the clear. Fellatio is something that weak people do to the strong, and the other way around for anal sex.

That's all.

Edit: That's the actual root cause I see in American Culture, anyway. I think equal rights for gays is something that should be a non-issue; already in place and accepted.

Why must just men be dominant? A woman have just as much right to be dominant. Okay, we're not talking rights here, but still, the only reason that it's believed that men are more dominant than women, is cause the idiots of the pasts thought; "Hey, were bigger and stronger than women, so we should be dominating, while they do the dishes.", and this lead to oppression. Just cause we can be dominating, why should we? Can't women be dominating, and can't men be feminine? And besides, we left being natural a long time ago.

Right, just like women have a right to vote but we've only just recently allowed it.

Just because something is morally correct by our standards doesn't mean it's what's happening or is currently held as objective truth.

In short, women to attempt to be dominant and powerful will be seen with a general disgust by the populace as nagging, overbearing she-devils with an axe to grind against men. Why else would they upset the natural order of things?

There's a difference between dominant and pyschocotic/nagging/etc.

Same as there is a difference between dominant 'powerful' guys and jerks/jocks/arseholes.

I do think you're partly right though.

Women generally lean towards submissive.
Men generally lean towards dominant.

HOWEVER, there are people of both sexes on the other side, and people who like both roles.

Its like saying "Right handers are the natural order of things!" - another the term "natural order" makes me wince as it implies a pattern of control and rules that grossly oversimplify things and don't fully accept that the rules we see are emergent, not inheritant to the system.

You do understand that I'm merely presenting the truth I find, yeah?

Just because it's true doesn't mean I agree with it.

Anywho, you're just going further proving my point by talking about manly women and womanly men. They exist, but they're jeered and taunted as unnatural, and that's the way it will stay for some time in America.

Gays, stay in the closet. For your own good. At least until you're truly independent.

Ahhh, well, you didn't append 'in America'. To be honest, over here its abit of a non-issue to the bulk of people - their are still a group of religious prudes, but in reality those groups lack any real ability to affect government as they are only a small voting group. That and we're really jaded on average with the church, and apparently are 'the most kinky people in Europe', or so I've been told, so we're pretty open these days to alot of stuff, we just get embarrassed talking about sex stuff, heh. Oh, 20+ years ago, very different story, but these days we've gotten off our high horses.

 

[Ignignoct]

I can change the word homosexual for pedophile and have pretty much the same argument. Since I have a problem with pedophiles, I have a problem with homosexuals.

Pedophiles are sick perverts who prey onto poor innocent children who aren't old enough to know about sex.

I don't think you have any idea what a pedophile is.

Anyway, as a christen I'm against homosexuality, but not homosexuals themselves. I know full well it's beyond their control, (as most informed christens do) and I personally don't think less of them for it. The christen position is actually that homosexuals should practice calibacy. And I don't think less of those who don't, I just go "oh well" and hope they decide to come around.

You're an excellent example of the majority of the voting Americans.

Yeah, they know they're people, but they've got a disorder, and need to snap out of it. The homosexuals, of course, not the christians. You shouldn't validate their disease with rights and protections.

Within the context of Christianity, he's absolutely correct, and actually more merciful than is necessary.

 

[Fronken]

Alot of people have called me a homophobe, though im really not, true, i find the thought of men having sex disgusting, but it doesnt affect me, as long as they dont try and chat me up, im fine with there being homosexuals out there.

And as for rights, they should get the same rights as everyone else, i mean they are human after all...dont see why they shouldnt have the right to live like the rest of us.

And its actually true what you say, alot of the worlds bigotry comes from the bible, and i just find that stupid, i mean sure if you believe in god, good for you, but dont judge people by what some old book says, i had one of my mates come out of the closet a couple of years back, true i was chocked, but i mean who wouldnt be?, but i accepted him just as he was and he's still my mate.

Oh and when it comes to gay people, this may be very sexist but i find 2 men together disgusting, while 2 women together is probably the most beautiful thing in the world.

 

[MarsProbe]

I'm pretty sure you won't find any here.

If by "here" you mean within the confines of your post then you may well be write (saying that as I don't actually know your views on the matter). But if you mean within The Escapist then that's most likely incorrect as it is extremely unlikely that every Esacapist user here thinks the same way. Something this thread has kindly demonstrated.

 

[Sindaine]

]*This is long and isn't entirely relevant to the post*

This is something I have been wanting to get off my chest for awhile: The Bible should not be taken literally

The main reason people think being gay is bad is because they claim the Bible says Jesus said so
The thought that usually comes to mind is "Do you worship God or the Bible?"

Also, people fail to realize that the Bible was not written by God, it was written by men... it was written by men who lived in a culture that accepted oppressing women just because they were women. Bottom line: I don't think God or Jesus would condemn their own people.

Others try to justify this by saying something along the lines of the definition of marriage is the joining of a man and a woman. This I find to be the most BS excuse ever. Definitions change, they have always changed, as time goes on, definitions change and get added on to. Examples: Piss- then it meant urine, now it can mean angry
Gay- then it meant happy, now it can mean homosexual, etc. etc.

What, you mean I CAN'T brain my enemies' infants with rocks?!? Or sell my daughter into slavery? That sucks man!

Serious answer: Primarily religion. Religion is entirely about excluding somebody. They go, 'So-and-so's purported sexual practices freak me out, ergo we should exclude them this time around since we can't exclude women or black people anymore.'

 

[Ignignoct]

What disgusts you so much about homosexuality, or gay marriage or even gay rights?

Femininity.

Men must be dominant. Submissive behavior is unsightly and unnatural. Sexual acts performed on women, such as licking, fingering, and breast-fondling are manly things that big strong men do, so lesbians are in the clear. Fellatio is something that weak people do to the strong, and the other way around for anal sex.

That's all.

Edit: That's the actual root cause I see in American Culture, anyway. I think equal rights for gays is something that should be a non-issue; already in place and accepted.

Why must just men be dominant? A woman have just as much right to be dominant. Okay, we're not talking rights here, but still, the only reason that it's believed that men are more dominant than women, is cause the idiots of the pasts thought; "Hey, were bigger and stronger than women, so we should be dominating, while they do the dishes.", and this lead to oppression. Just cause we can be dominating, why should we? Can't women be dominating, and can't men be feminine? And besides, we left being natural a long time ago.

Right, just like women have a right to vote but we've only just recently allowed it.

Just because something is morally correct by our standards doesn't mean it's what's happening or is currently held as objective truth.

In short, women to attempt to be dominant and powerful will be seen with a general disgust by the populace as nagging, overbearing she-devils with an axe to grind against men. Why else would they upset the natural order of things?

There's a difference between dominant and pyschocotic/nagging/etc.

Same as there is a difference between dominant 'powerful' guys and jerks/jocks/arseholes.

I do think you're partly right though.

Women generally lean towards submissive.
Men generally lean towards dominant.

HOWEVER, there are people of both sexes on the other side, and people who like both roles.

Its like saying "Right handers are the natural order of things!" - another the term "natural order" makes me wince as it implies a pattern of control and rules that grossly oversimplify things and don't fully accept that the rules we see are emergent, not inheritant to the system.

You do understand that I'm merely presenting the truth I find, yeah?

Just because it's true doesn't mean I agree with it.

Anywho, you're just going further proving my point by talking about manly women and womanly men. They exist, but they're jeered and taunted as unnatural, and that's the way it will stay for some time in America.

Gays, stay in the closet. For your own good. At least until you're truly independent.

Ahhh, well, you didn't append 'in America'. To be honest, over here its abit of a non-issue to the bulk of people - their are still a group of religious prudes, but in reality those groups lack any real ability to affect government as they are only a small voting group. That and we're really jaded on average with the church, and apparently are 'the most kinky people in Europe', or so I've been told, so we're pretty open these days to alot of stuff, we just get embarrassed talking about sex stuff, heh. Oh, 20+ years ago, very different story, but these days we've gotten off our high horses.

Forgive me for having to reiterate this to you...

America is by default who and what we're talking about, unless we specifically preface the post with one of the lesser countries/nations names.

Yes, that was trolling, because I'd rather screw with you than bother with your nitpicking.

*bark-bark, growl-growl*

 

[Cowabungaa]

the whole 'homosexuality is unnatural' argument. You say homosexuality is unnatural? How about fellatio? Masturbation? Viruses? Genetic defects? Alien cows? Why are you only complaining about this and not about all those other things society has deemed to be unnatural at some point? Either become a 'naturalist'or stop raining hell down on people just because they want to be different.

Reminds me of an awesome Russel Howard show at Live at the Apollo.
Watch from 3:56, there is where the gay part starts:

Spoiler: Don't read this if you want to hear the clue from Russell Howard himself, he really does it more funny.

Flight Attendant: Stop kissing, it's not natural! Gay guy: You're flying *kisses some more* I'm going to put you in prison! What with men? Think it through. Brilliant stuff.

 

[Doug]

Wouldn't you want everyone to be gay if you were "alpha male"? Hence getting all the ladies for yourself?

Clever...very clever...

Wait a second... This explains that 'Gay Bomb' project!

(For those of you who don't know about this, it was a project to create a chemical bomb that would, put simply, make soldiers want to fuck each other - after all, what army would knowing face that? Especially the fundamentalist ones!)

Anywho, military value my buttocks; it was so military personnel could score more!

 

[Trivun]

The thing I'm interested in mainly here, is what the gay members of the Escapist think about this topic. I'm straight yet have absolutely no problem with homosexuality, and if my best friend or my brother turned out to be gay then that would be perfectly fine by me. If a homosexual guy came onto me I'd let them down gently, feel flattered and say to them politely that I'm not gay, but thanks for the attention. And so on. As it happens I'm also pro-gay marriage (why should someone be stopped from actual marriage just because they aren't marrying the "right" gendered person?). However, I know that there are several homosexual members of the Escapist, who I know (I won't name them for obvious reasons) and there are some people I've seen make homophobic comments (again, I won't name them for obvious reasons). What do they all think of this subject?

EDIT: I am Christian, but I still agree with gays and gay marriage. Most of the Bible is horrifically out of date anyway, and the whole Sodom thing? The city should never have been destroyed, just because the people there were mostly gay, was no excuse to kill them all. Even if it was only a story (I'm more of a science-Christian in that I believe in God and Jesus but I think most of the Old Testament was stories much like Aesop's Fables, but based on true events. Like God created the world in seven stages, which came together as the Big Bang and the overall creation of different planets and stars and different lifeforms over time, but not Adam and Eve. And so on...).

 

[Doug]

What disgusts you so much about homosexuality, or gay marriage or even gay rights?

Femininity.

Men must be dominant. Submissive behavior is unsightly and unnatural. Sexual acts performed on women, such as licking, fingering, and breast-fondling are manly things that big strong men do, so lesbians are in the clear. Fellatio is something that weak people do to the strong, and the other way around for anal sex.

That's all.

Edit: That's the actual root cause I see in American Culture, anyway. I think equal rights for gays is something that should be a non-issue; already in place and accepted.

Why must just men be dominant? A woman have just as much right to be dominant. Okay, we're not talking rights here, but still, the only reason that it's believed that men are more dominant than women, is cause the idiots of the pasts thought; "Hey, were bigger and stronger than women, so we should be dominating, while they do the dishes.", and this lead to oppression. Just cause we can be dominating, why should we? Can't women be dominating, and can't men be feminine? And besides, we left being natural a long time ago.

Right, just like women have a right to vote but we've only just recently allowed it.

Just because something is morally correct by our standards doesn't mean it's what's happening or is currently held as objective truth.

In short, women to attempt to be dominant and powerful will be seen with a general disgust by the populace as nagging, overbearing she-devils with an axe to grind against men. Why else would they upset the natural order of things?

There's a difference between dominant and pyschocotic/nagging/etc.

Same as there is a difference between dominant 'powerful' guys and jerks/jocks/arseholes.

I do think you're partly right though.

Women generally lean towards submissive.
Men generally lean towards dominant.

HOWEVER, there are people of both sexes on the other side, and people who like both roles.

Its like saying "Right handers are the natural order of things!" - another the term "natural order" makes me wince as it implies a pattern of control and rules that grossly oversimplify things and don't fully accept that the rules we see are emergent, not inheritant to the system.

You do understand that I'm merely presenting the truth I find, yeah?

Just because it's true doesn't mean I agree with it.

Anywho, you're just going further proving my point by talking about manly women and womanly men. They exist, but they're jeered and taunted as unnatural, and that's the way it will stay for some time in America.

Gays, stay in the closet. For your own good. At least until you're truly independent.

Ahhh, well, you didn't append 'in America'. To be honest, over here its abit of a non-issue to the bulk of people - their are still a group of religious prudes, but in reality those groups lack any real ability to affect government as they are only a small voting group. That and we're really jaded on average with the church, and apparently are 'the most kinky people in Europe', or so I've been told, so we're pretty open these days to alot of stuff, we just get embarrassed talking about sex stuff, heh. Oh, 20+ years ago, very different story, but these days we've gotten off our high horses.

Forgive me for having to reiterate this to you...

America is by default who and what we're talking about, unless we specifically preface the post with one of the lesser countries/nations names.

Yes, that was trolling, because I'd rather screw with you than bother with your nitpicking.

*bark-bark, growl-growl*

Awww, now I just what to put you in one of those hamster cages as a pet. Then unleash you on unsuspecting threads, hahahaha, Muhahahahahaha, MUHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...*ahem* but I won't.

 

[Ignignoct]

Alot of people have called me a homophobe, though im really not, true, i find the thought of men having sex disgusting, but it doesnt affect me, as long as they dont try and chat me up, im fine with there being homosexuals out there.

And as for rights, they should get the same rights as everyone else, i mean they are human after all...dont see why they shouldnt have the right to live like the rest of us.

And its actually true what you say, alot of the worlds bigotry comes from the bible, and i just find that stupid, i mean sure if you believe in god, good for you, but dont judge people by what some old book says, i had one of my mates come out of the closet a couple of years back, true i was chocked, but i mean who wouldnt be?, but i accepted him just as he was and he's still my mate.

Oh and when it comes to gay people, this may be very sexist but i find 2 men together disgusting, while 2 women together is probably the most beautiful thing in the world.

Yeah, because boners are disgusting *except yours*, and tits are TITS.

"Judge and Jury, and present to you... EXHIBIT B!"

 

[ExaltedK9]

I am a christian. First I should point out that homophobic means fear of homosexuals, not hatred. And I don't hate them, some of my close friends are gay. I am against gay marriage, I at least think gay couples should be denied the marriage ceremony. And I mentioned this in another thread: Men can't have children, serrogacy does NOT make it possible for them to.
Men and women go together. It's natural, it's intended, and it's instinctive.

 

[Skeleon]

Oh and when it comes to gay people, this may be very sexist but i find 2 men together disgusting, while 2 women together is probably the most beautiful thing in the world.

Well, you, sir, are reading my mind. Unfortunately, lesbian =/= bisexual.
But anyway, as long as we don't oppress gay men because of our personal preferences, they are a non-issue.

 

[Ignignoct]

What disgusts you so much about homosexuality, or gay marriage or even gay rights?

Femininity.

Men must be dominant. Submissive behavior is unsightly and unnatural.

That's all.

Bondage must freak you right the fuck out, ay?

*cracks whip*

Silence, slave. You'll get 10 lashes for talking out of turn, and double that if you start crying!

Harder, damnit, I've been bad. Sorry, absolutely had to post that. Couldn't resist.


ANYHOO, I'm not against gays/lesbians. Want to know why? Well, it's a two-part reason. Firstly, in society today in America, being against gays and lesbians means you are a homophobic asshole, and that it's okay to mock you. The end. That's how people who are against gays/lesbians are portrayed, and while I've never really agreed with people who are against homosexuality, the least we could do if we're going to have a rational discussion is stop slandering. Or something.

Secondly, while it may turn out to be a genetic hiccup that actually causes homosexuality, or whether it's just someone's choice, or alien rays blasted a percentage of the population last year when they were sleeping, it doesn't matter, and neither does the whole 'homosexuality is unnatural' argument. You say homosexuality is unnatural? How about fellatio? Masturbation? Viruses? Genetic defects? Alien cows? Why are you only complaining about this and not about all those other things society has deemed to be unnatural at some point? Either become a 'naturalist' or stop raining hell down on people just because they want to be different.

God, are we going to turn into a nation of people who keep trying to purge specific races or lifestyles off the face of the Earth or something?

Oh, wait.

Other than that, in a nutshell- homosexuality isn't really that unnatural, people who automatically call anti-gay/lesbian whatevers are hypocrites, and I am in favor of people practicing whatever kind of sexual practices they want. Peace out.

Sure, there's actual hard evidence that animals and people have been gay in the past without any "trauma" or "disease" afflicting them, but try telling that to Christian America.

Faith trumps truth every time. Faith replaces it.

Overall, I agree, but it's a matter of convincing the majority of a truth that conflicts with their 'truth'.

 

[Mookie_Magnus]

I am going to quote Ron White on this one...

"Being gay is un-natural"
"Next time you have a thought...don't be stupid."
"It's true though."
"Everyone is slightly gay. It's just to what level are you gay."
"I Ain't gay at all."
"Oh yeah?"
"Yeah."
"Do you like Porn?"
"Yeah, I love porn."
"Do you only watch lesbian porn?"
"No, I'll watch a man and a woman do it."
"Do you want the man to have a small half-flaccid penis?"
"Hell no, I like big hard throbbin' Cocks...Oh."

Result of conversation: PWN'd.

Here's another little tidbit of research:
According to... something...
10% of people are completely heterosexual
10% of people are completely homosexual
The remaining 80% have varying levels of bisexuality.

The bible teaches to hate the sin, not the sinner. But unfortunately, most bible-thumping christians omit the 'sin, not the' part of the sentence.