You're making a false argument with you're analogies. Being homosexual is not a racial trait, it is a personal choice.

liberator wrote:You're making a false argument with you're analogies. Being homosexual is not a racial trait, it is a personal choice.

Don't get me started on the genetic links to homosexuality. Your side ALWAYS lose that argument.

The arguement still stands though even if it is a personal choice. You're still lumping yourself in with the nazis and other close minded idiots even then. So what if a guy chooses to sleep with other guys? Why does that give you the right to beat him up or say that his lifestyle is so offensive to you that he doesn't have the right to display any sign of it in public?

The fact is that your taking offense is not reasonable. You can wave the bible all you like but I don't see you taking the same offense at someone wearing a cloth of two different materials. I don't hear you saying that you would beat up a woman who asked you to screw her. Hell I don't see you taking the same level of offense at someone insulting their parents even though that breaks one of the commandments which are supposedly more important.

There are lots of offenses in the bible that demand the same punishments as being homosexual but I don't hear you getting all offended about any of them. You've picked something almost at random from the bible and decided to take offense at that. Even considering your faith that's still not reasonable.

What makes the Nazis scumbags was not that they were persecuting the jews over something they had no control over. People would still think them monsters if instead they'd decided to gas anyone who cut their hair short or wore the colour green.What makes them monsters is that they arbitrarily decided that something unreasonable was a reason to gas people. Personal choice or not the fact that you've randomly chosen being gay as something to get offended about is what lumps you in with the nazis.

there has been very few studies where it actually concludes that homosexuality is genetic i thought

liberator wrote:You're making a false argument with you're analogies. Being homosexual is not a racial trait, it is a personal choice.

That's an unproven assumption, and there is evidence to the contrary.

As kara pointed out, religion is a personal choice. Does that make persecution of the Jews in WW2 (and prior to that, throughout history) acceptable, because it's a choice they made to believe? Or indeed, persecution of anyone.... i.e. you can persecute, hate, discriminate against anyone for any choice they make, on the basis that they made a choice in it?

So would i be right to hate you, deny you equal rights because you made a choice to, for example, be a christian?

I'm not denying you the ability to have an opinion much as I may disagree. But to use that opinion as a basis to justify discrimination and hounding of a large subset of society, is just plain wrong.

Homosexuality is not a choice. However, wether the person acknowledges it and persues the lifestyle, or tries their best to live as a straight person is. Why, seriously, would one choose a lifestyle that cause them to be ostracized, threatened, and possibly even murdered? And don't say massochism, I'm talking about sane individuals.

karajorma wrote:What makes the Nazis scumbags was not that they were persecuting the jews over something they had no control over. People would still think them monsters if instead they'd decided to gas anyone who cut their hair short or wore the colour green.What makes them monsters is that they arbitrarily decided that something unreasonable was a reason to gas people. Personal choice or not the fact that you've randomly chosen being gay as something to get offended about is what lumps you in with the nazis.

But, cutting your hair short or wearing the color green is not recognized by a significant portion of the population as a negative behavior. Bear in mind, I don't actually know any gay people, I don't care too. This is America and they have the right to be as lachivous as they want, but I won't stop pointing out that it is wrong and that they should change their ways.

Also, something of note, a woman would never ask me to screw her. As I've already said, I am one of the most unattractive people you will ever meet. I empty rooms faster than tear gas.

liberator wrote:But, cutting your hair short or wearing the color green is not recognized by a significant portion of the population as a negative behavior.

So? My whole point was that being gay is something that is arbirarily viewed as negative behaviour. There's no more sense to it than there is for hating someone for wearing a certain colour. Oh and don't think I picked those examples at random. There has been a recent situation where shaving hair was seen by a significant portion of the population as a negative behavior. Didn't you think it nonsense when the Taliban started thowing people in jail for shaving their beards off? How's that different from your argument?
As for wearing green I think there are some B5 fans who'll get the reference now.

liberator wrote:Bear in mind, I don't actually know any gay people, I don't care too. This is America and they have the right to be as lachivous as they want, but I won't stop pointing out that it is wrong and that they should change their ways.

But why pick on gay people and not unmarried mothers or people who disrespect their parents or any of the other multitude of sins that your whole book says are wrong? Why have you singled out gay people?

liberator wrote:Also, something of note, a woman would never ask me to screw her. As I've already said, I am one of the most unattractive people you will ever meet. I empty rooms faster than tear gas.

So? That fact doesn't invalidate my argument. If a woman who was blind (and given the crap you've spouted here most likely deaf too) asked you to screw her would you respond with the same violence you claimed you'd use on a gay man who tried it? If not why not?

liberator wrote:
But, cutting your hair short or wearing the color green is not recognized by a significant portion of the population as a negative behavior. Bear in mind, I don't actually know any gay people, I don't care too. This is America and they have the right to be as lachivous as they want, but I won't stop pointing out that it is wrong and that they should change their ways.
.

It is in Scotland, actually. Wear green - or blue - in the wrong pubs and the wrong areas of town and you're practically a dead man.

You should change your ways - because you are wrong.

Ah, but I can quantify it as a negative behavior. STDs occur at a much higher rate in the homosexual population.

Are you part of the homosexual population? No. Therefore; does it concern you how others live their lives? NO.

liberator wrote:Ah, but I can quantify it as a negative behavior. STDs occur at a much higher rate in the homosexual population.

So? Why would you give a flying f**k about that? What if they are all catching sexually transmitted diseases? Why would you care? Is the person who earlier wanted to punch people just for being gay around him suddenly concerned for their health? I think not.

Secondly it's a load of crap. The AIDS infection rate in the hetrosexual community has far outstripped that in the homosexual one. *points at Africa*
You going to blame that one on gay people?

Lastly it's the christian right's attempts to block anything other than abstinence only sexual education that causes the higher STD rates anyway.

Besides if you're going to use that as an argument Hetrosexual sex is obviously negative behaviour. The unwanted pregnacy rate in the gay community is 0%. The abortion rate in the gay community is 0%. Looks like it's us hetro's who are engaging in the more negative behaviour cause ours gets passed on to the next generation.

Sure you can say that not all hetro's are that irresponsible when it comes to sex but guess what? There are plenty of gay people who use protection. You can't paint all gay people with the STD brush any more than you can paint all hetro's with the abortion one.

They also have zero extra-marital children, making them the most bible-abiding side of society in that respect

You see, everything can be made to mean anything if you look at it from a certain perspective

Carpe Diem and leave other people to carpe their own diems

Flipside wrote:They also have zero extra-marital children, making them the most bible-abiding side of society in that respect

Not quite. There are some gay couples who do have extra-marital children. The difference is that they usually want to be married but it's the christians stopping them

My grandfather was a minister at a local church for 34 years. I've been raised on stories from the bible since I was born. However, I have many gay friends. I don't believe that everything in the bible needs to be taken as seriously as it is. I believe that the bible should be a guide to how to live life. It shouldn't be that if you don't follow what is said exactly that you are going to be sent to hell. Pretty much all of us are going to hell if the bible is taken that literally.

The bible was written by man. Even converted a few times. It is inherantly biased...