What do you think of same gender relationships?

[Marona]

To me,I sorta think it is okay and sorta think it's not.It is pretty weird for that relationship to exist...but to respect it is sorta weird too..what do you think?

[TheDragonKnight]

Umm dont you mean same gender relationships? thats the controvsial topic up right now in politics. Opposite gener relationships are pretty much acepted as the norm currently.

or am i missing somethign entirely here?

hmm this brings to mind a suggestion i think anyone starting off a topic in this section should be farily though in explaning the topic, as well as of course stating their own opinion on it. ive noticed that the first few pots of topics can be taken up with clarifiyng the subject under discussion as opposed to the actual discussion.

<edit opps im blind didnt se the poll>

ok sorry my fault, the poll makes it clear that you were refering to the same sex relationship issue.

hmm well like most malse my age i find gays to be a turn off and teh idea of lesbianism extreamly erotic (prehaps a a double standard that i find one less appealing then th other i dont know, sure me im human and have hormones :P)

abut the issue in genearl though, i take a fairly laid back stance. you gay fine, im not so as long as you can respect that i dont have a problem.

the issuse of gay marrage is a littel harder as thats been complicated by our own laws. as a relgious insstitution (namely the many varieties of chriastian) a marrage is cleary out of the question (however its amusing to note taht teh bible specifly denounces gay men but not gay women) as under taht religious doctrine it is forbidden. <to avoide flames id like to add that this isnt nessicarialy my opinion simply waht i know on the subject>

as a legal processes its simply a matter of standing infront of a judge.justice witha couple of witnesses and a few formalities, then you get a peice of paper that says you can file taxes jointly now, if you lack a pre-nup one party may be entitled to screw the other over at a later date, sorry thats another discussion. legaly marrige is not a problem, as far as i know teh law was not worded to specifcly exclude same sex marriges.

on to my opinion(oh look im referenceing a differnt topic again, ive got to stop that :D) i think either way it should be the choice of the two individuals involved and noone elses. as ive expressed in other topics im a firsm beleiver in personal choice, however if your making your own decesions you also need presonal accountability.

[bjp4444]

yeah, as long as your are not infringing upon my rights or putting my life or others' in harm's way, I have no problem with you doing whatever you want in your life. use what you want to use, love who you want to love, eat what yoiu want to eat. i may think you're a fool for only eating banana splits all day, but I'm certainly not going to tell you not to. Because what would then stop you from telling me what to do?

-bjp

[Marona]

oops...sorry...heh editted!^^;

[Blade Tanaka]

I find this a serious problem, and I disagree with it tottaly. Not to be dicrimatory but as a concern for my own rights and freedoms and to where this is leading. First off Govorment and Legilation was set off to protect the religeous rights of all others but son afterwards (or much later) the discrimatory act was placed stating that you can't discrimanate against these types of people just because they are gay or whatever. Now they have used this to get want they want and restric the rights of religions the law was origaonaly placed to protect. Soon you will not be allowed to look into the eyes of a gay person without making a lawsuit out of it jsut because of looking at them discrimatory. I am concerned about my own family growing up to think it is okay to do anything you want just because the law is there to back you up. Also I fear where this will lead us. If people think it is okay to be gay then pretty soon people will think it si okay to do other things that seem stupid like Obeastigality... Yes I mean that there will be peopl in about 10 years or so thinking it is okay to marry thier pets ar ohter animals because they "love each other". You may think "this will never happen the law will protect us against that" But look at where we were 10 years ago... Same situation exept over Gay right people were saying "it'll never happen" but here we are. And also an apology to those who are gay but don't wave it around. But also not to say that I am allowing you to be gay if you don't rub it in other peoples faces I am still against it and afraid that if we continue to act like it's no big deal it may become one and threaten our rights to live as one who isn't gay ^o^

[silverDistortioN]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ - #38, Blade.

the thing is, that probably won't happen.

if i were to oppose homosexuality, i would probably do it on the grounds that it's nasty. but the thing is, so is heterosexuality.

[Kilu]

I personally have no issues with gay men or women. It's their choice. As for their marriage, I don't have any objections to that either.

However, I'm againts gay couples adopting a child. Firstly, lack of mother/father figure might mess the childs view on the world. Secondly, because masses are idiots. Even if the kid is okay with two daddies, it might not be okay for everyone else involved with the kid, and resulting in behaviour that might damage the kid, mentally or even physically. Think about school, and when teacher asks "what does your mommy do for living?"... "I don't have a mommy, two daddies". It's possible that the teacher can't handle it, and even worse, the other kids will probably end up teasing the lone kid with two daddies.

Now, I'm not saying that all kinds of teasing doesn't happen already, but I am saying that allowing gay couples to adopt will most likely increase the posibility of teasing.

[silverDistortioN]

over here, i'm in favor of leaving the decision up to states (on both counts). if a society is not willing to accept it, then maybe it would be wisest for individuals to move rather than try to change society.

[Blade Tanaka]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ - #38, Blade.

the thing is, that probably won't happen.

if i were to oppose homosexuality, i would probably do it on the grounds that it's nasty. but the thing is, so is heterosexuality.
Thast's just what I'm talking about they said that about legalizing gay maradgies and look where we are nowhttp://www.rpgamers.info/images/smilies/wink.gif... ^o^

[TheDragonKnight]

not sure the lack of one parent figuer holds all that much water with me. i mean there are already ungoldly large amounts of familiys without one. (usualy missing the father) i am my self a child of a single mother, and i dont think that lacking a father has impeaded my growth any.

[silverDistortioN]

Thast's just what I'm talking about they said that about legalizing gay maradgies and look where we are nowhttp://www.rpgamers.info/images/smilies/wink.gif... ^o^did you not take a look at that link i posted? how about this one: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fallacy

...and who is "they"?

[TheDragonKnight]

...and who is "they"?
ahh silver you should know better to ask that "they" will always remain unnammed and mysterious


as you would know if youd read the article he linked too (great site by the way though a little old,they reference a kiwi fruit computer!) he was pointing out teh flaw in your logic, you did not present a valid argument in that last post, for taht to work you need some kind of proof to suppourt your claim that legalizeing gay marriage will be followed by it being legal to marry an animal. such an asumption is clearly flawed. the same train of logic would allow me to conclude that since the state and church were officaly and legaly seperated that its only a matter of time before it becomes illegal for anyone working for the government to have a religon.

such an assumption is clearly flawed and more importantly without any suppourting evidance (are there senators pushing for a "marry your pet" bill? have we seen ANYONE complaning about how their rights are being infringed, or how they are being discriminated against becasue they cant marry a sheep?) i have seen gay pride parades but ive yet to see thousands of people jam the downtown area of a major city becasue they cant marry a pet.

id guess silver was trying to be polite by only giving you the link and not making an issue however im not that nice :P since you seem to have missed the point entirely i have explained it im more detail.

in short your argument is without substance, and holds no water, the risk of someone wanting to ammry a sheep is hardly something that should weigh on weather or not humans can marry.

As far is the what the bible says about gay's its not as clear as what most think. Remeber you are reading an english translation. if your translation is relitavly pure your likely geting it from hebrew or old greek, but its a little bit ofa shocker ot realize that something like the bible was interperted for you before you got to read it isnt it? the translator may or may not have prefect understandings of both languages, and in the cases where his judgment is called for you get the translators opinion on how it should translate. Here's a final fun fact to think on before you start quoting a bible at someone. A bible that DOES NOT condemn homosexuality sells less than one that does (and oh yes they can be translated in more than a few ways, espicaly that paticular section) now with that in mind, what do YOU think the publishers are going to supourt? an accurate book, or a book that sells well?

[bjp4444]

i wish i had time (perhpas i will later on tonight), but i believe there have been studies that have shown no negative impacts on kids in the situation you described, kilu. yes there might be teasing, but i think kids are going to find whatever they can to get one someone. kids are merciless.

<joke>

and for my joke of the day, since homosexuals can (actually, cannot in most us states) marry, i want to ride down the slippery slope and marry my ps2. legally, i want it to have my health insurance benefits. that's it. i'm not worried about the church.

<end joke>

and technically, at least in the states, if a majority of people wanted to marry their pet, than it would happen. it is a land of majority. but that's an issue i don't think we'l ever have to deal with. i'm sure there have always been and will alwayas be eccentrics pushing a majority of items that will never become law. i think the issue with homosexual marriage, at least for me, is that they pay taxes in for items that are afforded to married couples. so either, let them get married and share in what i hear is hell, OR, don't let them, but elimate theri tax burden. your choice.

-bjp (happy this is his 100th post)

[Blade Tanaka]

Silver: I understand what you mean by me saying "they" but "they" would be us ten years ago. This argument had been going on about leagalizing it when the gorvorment re-assured us that it would never happen but it has.

TheDragonKinght: Yes I am aware of what you mean by the Bible being translted and things varying. As well when the were moved around and continually translated a lot of it was hcked out cut down simplified etc, So really no one can tell what it had to say about gay marrages unless we were to find an origonal manuscript, wich is highly unlikely. ^o^

[TheDragonKnight]

well your still missing the point here so ill be blunt and paste the relivant peice form the website.


Description of Slippery Slope
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:


Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because there is no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another without an argument for such a claim. This is especially clear in cases in which there is a significant number of steps or gradations between one event and another.

Examples of Slippery Slope

"We have to stop the tuition increase! The next thing you know, they'll be charging $40,000 a semester!"

"The US shouldn't get involved militarily in other countries. Once the government sends in a few troops, it will then send in thousands to die."

"You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk all over you."

"We've got to stop them from banning pornography. Once they start banning one form of literature, they will never stop. Next thing you know, they will be burning all the books!"


YOU MUST PROVE A LINKING FACTOR BETWEEN GAY MARRIGE BEING LEGAL AND THE LEGALIZATION OF MARRIGE TO AN ANIMAL!

without a linking factor your just spouting nonsense, if your going to make ridiclous clams at least try to give some suppourting facts, regardless of how flimsy they are.

your assumption that next will be animals is akin to saying because smoking in your car is leagl next you'll be allowed to smoke crack in your car. obviously incorrect, but it follows the same logic. i was hoping to avoid being outright rude here but quite frankly you amaze me with your inability to understand one simple fact; you must present a valid justification for your argument.

im not sure about the others but i reaally dont care who "they" are i think silver was simply tring to point out that your are attempting to lend weight to your argument by citing an ambigious body of people, becasue of course if "they" agree with you you must be right.

while your opinion is valid, and indeed even respected, you must produce FACTS to sustain a valid argument. i like math so ill go with opinion+facts+reasoning=conclusion

your mising facts and reasoning here all youve got is an opinion, and since we've called upon you defend your opinionyou need to produce some, facts and reasoning that is

[Lord Draud]

well ehre is my two cents, homosexual behavior is found in the wild all the time and we are seeing more of it because we are geting better at studing animals in there natural habitat, note that at this time i have not read waht every one else has said and so i might say some thing that have been said already, i personaly think gay marrige is no diffrent then any other kind of marrige ( mind you i think its all a big sham ) and thus in a socity like ours that is more refind it should not be treaded diffrently, it will not link to anything othe then people geting married.

[TheDragonKnight]

ill use the obvious responce to that.

So your saying we should only hold ourselves to the smae standards as animals? obviously as civilized men we must have higher stndards of conduct then something that flings its own shit around.

(note this is not my position i presonly think its rather flimsy but i beleive ive heard it used before)

[Yojimbo]

i 100% disagree with homosexuality for the very FACT that it is not supposed to happen. it defies nature, if we were supposed to have sex with the same gender then there should only be one gender on the face of the Earth.

i find it totally outrageous and disgusting, i mean how can you be attracted to another boy/girl, and placing you parts in every precipice possible.

homosexuality is wrong, ok, it is wrong.

[Lord Draud]

i think the fact that we are not flinging are feces around prove we are above animals but in the end homosexuality is part of nature, almost every mammal on the planet has been documented in engaging in it, the FACT is is we as humans didn't want our animals doing it so we breed them a certen way, i mean farm make money off of animals if your animals are not breeding your not making money but in the wild its more wide spead then most like to think, and while yes it may seem disgusting ( and yes thats a feeling i share with you yojimbo ) its what they do its if you think about it any kind of sexual contact is disgusting in some way.There is something to be said for holding our self up to the same standers as animals, its very rare that and two of the same (mammal) speices will kill each other, they don't over populate a area ( well most don't i am not talking about ant or locust) and they don't try and wipe out another speices whole sale.

[TheDragonKnight]

weer not the only animals to over popualte (ants arent one of them druad sorry) rabbits area prime case, lemmings are as well (though they correct that)

as for wiping out other species wholeslae, ever looked into the relation between african and european honeybees?

the differences your trying to illustrate arent as clear cut as you might think.

as for the flinging shit comment, i wasent being literal tehr and didnt expect it t obe taken so so i guess i should clarify. We have evolved to a point where we can pss on opinoin and information rapidly and easily with the rest of our species, we can reason, this brings us above the rest of the animals on our planet.

the only problem is we as a specias seem all to willing to STOP using our reason and react instead out of instinct, fear and prejudice or intolerance.

yes we were obviously made biologicaly to mate with the opposite gender, tahts unarguable, however if your looking at sex as simply entertainment, someting to enjoy, i dont think who you enjoy it with is much of an issue, male or female.

What two consenting adults do in hteir homes is nobodys buisness but their own.

i think gay marrige will be legal, its only a mattter of time, ive seen the streests of toronto filled with people during gay pride parades, ive yet to see the streets clogged by a procession of people denouncing it.

WE live in a country of majority, you may not like it but tahst the way it is, it seems thers more gay people out there than there are people who would denounce gays, so all were waiting on now is political process.

[Lord Draud]

...i assume when you are talknia bout lemming you mean that horrible disny film they made about them? lemming DO NOT jump off cliffs disney sent out a guy to make a nature film on the fuzzy guys and what did he find? nothing nothing what so ever they didn't do anything, so he gatherd a bunch up and stampeded them off a cliff and said hey look they comite mass suicide! the bee's are not waging a war they are breeding them out there is a diffrence and rabbits only over populte in areas that do not have preditors used to them, as for most of the rest i agree with you TDK

[Yojimbo]

thought the shit throwing statment was soooooo funny, good one draudhttp://www.rpgamers.info/images/smilies/biggrin.gif.

have you guys ever seen them Chimpanzee's in the wild that are gangsters. saw it on a documentary, another chimp stepped into the wrong territory and the gangsters ripped it to peices (looks like we havnt changed from the typical monkey after all)

also about these stupid gay parades i think they should be illegal. what is the point of dancing around the street dressed like women and freaks, its not normal, who are they trying to impress and what message are they potraying??? that gay is normal, no i dont think so, they do it to wind up the normal public.

and lastly, the killer, WHY do gays have to speak like absolute retards. there was a gay in my form at school and he is from Manchester and he should be using his Manchester accent (like his brother does) but instead he puts a gay accent on like all of them weirdos do, is it any wonder that everyone drove him out of school.

oh and you say that rabbits are over populating well i dont think so, i dont even think there is over 200'000 rabbits in the UK. i tell you what are annoyingly over populating though, those damn fox hunters, i just wish it was them hunters at the opposite side of 200 dogs and a load of shotguns. i cant stand the British royal family either, they think they are so good thast they get other people to wipe their ass

[silverDistortioN]

i think the "gay accent" is a genetic speech impediment linked to the "gay gene."

but that's just pure speculation on my part.

[Blade Tanaka]

i 100% disagree with homosexuality for the very FACT that it is not supposed to happen. it defies nature, if we were supposed to have sex with the same gender then there should only be one gender on the face of the Earth.

i find it totally outrageous and disgusting, i mean how can you be attracted to another boy/girl, and placing you parts in every precipice possible.

homosexuality is wrong, ok, it is wrong.
As I may have already mentioed I agree too. If we really were that way we would be one sex or like some kind of frog I heared about we could change our sex. Or we germinate like flowers and spores and really wierd stuff like that...
^o^

[silverDistortioN]

does this mean you guys oppose contraception as well?

[Yojimbo]

no i do not oppose contreception to a certain extent, just homosexuality. For some reason though daft teenage girls (and boys) decide it is right not to use any form of contreception and when they get pregnant its "well i only didnt use it once" thats all it takes you idiots.

contreception is a good way to stop passing on STD's, and therefore i agree with it, but if it had only one purpose to stop people getting pregnant then i disagree with it, im sure that people know when to ejaculate and so they wouldnt need a condom etc.

as for the gay accents, i dont believe it is generic, it cant be. if it was generic then it has to be passed down by the parents, and the parents couldnt have been gay or there would have been no offspring, the parents could have possibly been bisexuals though, and im pretty sure also that a gay allele is recesive to a not gay allele.

[bjp4444]

i'm not trying to nitpick, but wouldn't the only forms of contraception that would possibly stop std's (abstinence is the only 100% effective way isn't it?) be condoms and a "dental dam"? I don't believe that the pill or other items are for that purpose...they are for preventign pregnancy...so are you for some and not the other? i'm just looking for further clarification because i'm curious. if you alreaqdy clarified this and i missed it, then i apologize.

thank you
-bjp

[TheDragonKnight]

Am i the only one who thinks silver was being scarcastic?

[silverDistortioN]

actually, i was hoping someone would explain the reasoning why homosexuality should be considered unnatural while contraception should not.

but as for the genetic thing... there are PLENTY of traits that only manifest themselves when a pair of RECESSIVE genes are passed on. such as BLUE EYES; both parents can have brown eyes yet have a child that has blue eyes. besides, there's the whole socially acceptability thing that counfounds things a bit.

anyway, just to be clear, i just think it's *possible* for homosexuality to be genetic. i don't mean to imply i think that's why all homosexuals are homosexuals.

[Lord Draud]

lol i have to agree with you yojimbo there is a line between being pround and just showing off and they gay pride parades piss me off its ok to be gay but please don't wave it infront of my face and go LOOK At Me I AM GaY!!!!! as for contraseption(sp) i think its a good idea realy, if you don't want to have a kid but still want to have sex i think that its ok realy i mean in the end its safer then having fun via drinking and or drugs, not to mention it also prevents over population....mind you i am pro choice because in the end those that want to have an abortion will do it anyway and if they are doing it with a coat hanger in a back ally way rather then in a hospital then the chance of death is increased. fnny fact the roman cathlic churchs resons for banning it was mostly due to we can out breed all other religeons

[Blade Tanaka]

Am i the only one who thinks silver was being scarcastic?
No I do nat think siver was "scarcastic"... I'm sorry I couldnt resist it was too funnyhttp://www.rpgamers.info/images/smilies/biggrin.gif... ^o^

[TheDragonKnight]

thank you for poking fun at my spelling/typing skills, or lack thereof, i have been trying to improve so kindly lay off, i used to be much worse.

Hmm alright ill take up silver on two points, first assming any part of homosexuality is genetic id say its akin to alcholism, you may be more likely then the next guy to go, but its not predetermined, its still up to you and your choices.

and by the strictest interpertation, bing gay is MORE natural then contraception, i dint need any devices chemicals or pills to be gay but i need soemthing to stop pregnancy.

[Blade Tanaka]

No I do nat think siver was "scarcastic"... I'm sorry I couldnt resist it was too funnyhttp://www.rpgamers.info/images/smilies/biggrin.gif... ^o^
Don't worry about it... I suck at it too but the word scarcastic hit me in a diffrent way then the usual misshaps.

However I find it intresting that homosexuallity was once considered a disease. Now it seems anyone against it or who fears it, a homophobic, has a disease and is shunned... I wonder why? ^o^

[IceBurner]

In response to Kilu's concerns, there have all ready been scientific studies concluding that there is no psychological harm done to a child by having same gender parents.

In fact, the only psychological harm seems to come from other people who can't handle this.

Supportive corrorboration:
http://www.lethimstay.com/wrong_socscience_studies.html
http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/articles/glb/orientat.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_pare2.htm
http://www.apa.org/psyclaw/delongbrief.html

[Firefly]

What I find wrong is when people argue that homosexuality is wrong simply because they don't like it.

Hey, 80% of dumbasses don't like asparagus, so let's make it illegal!

[Kilu]

In fact, the only psychological harm seems to come from other people who can't handle this.
Which was my second point in the the post I made.

[Geosgaeno]

i just think it is totally wrong and unatural, nothing more to add.

[Grey Fox]

It aint normal. Its not in nature, Race will die out if we are all idiots. Is logic. End of debate.

ahhh here we are the liberal boat is afloat.

Well no harm done to the child hahaha what rubbish. What about bullying? Bottom line, its not the bottom you should be interested in.

[Lord Draud]

sigh, IT IS fOUND IN NATURE! every mammal speices on the planet does it ( wel not the whole thing but a small percentage jsut like humans that are mammaliln animals) for the most part we just ignore it or teach then its wrong ( the animals ad humans bolth) but in the end the race will not die out grey because there is more then enough hetro people if for what ever reson the homo population getbigger then half of the total population i think then we should do something but till then your just being ignorent and i think you should do more research on it ( and not just from redneck rightwinged bigots are us book stores)

[Geosgaeno]

well when animals do it in the wild, its definately because they cannot think proper, they do not know whether it is male or female they are trying to get up. humans is a different scenario because we have piece of mind and that makes it totally unatural, why do it how can you be attracted to a fella its disgusing, too many bleeding bottoms on this Earth. did you know the guy from a band called "soft cell" collapsed on stage because he had a stomach full of seamen, that is wrong and absolutely unatural.

it needs to all stop NOW

[bjp4444]

did you know the guy from a band called "soft cell" collapsed on stage because he had a stomach full of seamen, that is wrong and absolutely unatural.
i'd say it's unatural, since the same urban legend has also been attributed to Rod Stewart, Elton John, David Bowie, Mick Jagger, Andy Warhol, Jeff Beck, Jon Bon Jovi, the drummer for Bon Jovi, the lead singer for New Kids on the Block, the Bay City Rollers, Alanis Morrissette, Li'l Kim, Foxy Brown, Britney Spears, and Fiona Apple.

you'd think if this was true, a simple google search would being up a news article of this. it would be news, yet "marc almond (his name) semen" only brings up alot of urban legend and/or myth-busting pages to say otherwise.

i don't really care if you think homosexuality is wrong or not, but you should at least research before you make a statement like this. it's up there in the rules of conduct for this section.

not trying to argue, just trying to clarify
-bjp

[Firefly]

It's funny that no one who's complaining has mentioned gay WOMEN. It's just a bunch of guys complaining about other guys as if they're going to come in the night to buttrape them. I have to wonder if they've ever been able to form an objective thought in their lives.

Also, I've seen many cases where the guys complaining about gays actually enjoy lesbian porn. :roll:

[IceBurner]

Kilu, I'm not sure if you mean to imply this, but if the harm comes from other people, then the problem lies with other people and not homosexual parenting.

When the Nazi party spread racial intolerance and then harmed people based upon the same discriminations, did that make being a minority wrong? I think not. Does anyone here believe being Jewish, Spanish, or Black is fundamentally wrong or harmful? I'd hope not.

Perhaps then it was that society's intolerance that was wrong, yes? Well, this is the same situation. There's nothing fundamentally harmful about homosexual parenting. If people are prejudiced and act upon those prejudices, harming others, then they are the problem. Capice?

Grey Fox, your attitude is at the very root of the problem you believe to invalidate homosexual parenting. Do you understand this? Let me spell it out, just to make sure: YOU ARE CURRENTLY PART OF THE PROBLEM. Way to go for circular reasoning.

[Grey Fox]

some of the people on this site need to get a reality check.

I repeat, if all of us did it race would die out. It is either a sick choice, a genetic defect or a mental disease.

You choose.

and no matter ow much you wishy washy liberals want it to be completely accepted and made normal. You will fail.

[baron]

Just to get into this discussion I need to touch on many points

1) Grey fox, Everyone has an opinion, it's the form that you express it in. some of my friends (male and female) are homosexual and you know what the funny thing is? only about 10% of them flaunt it. I'll give you a couple of examples of just people I know. a) A female friend of mine works at a gay club as a host, dress's like a male at work (Ring master clothing) but when she's not at work you wouldn't know she was a lesbian unless you asked. b) a male friend of mine has gone through the "flamer" stage and aside from having his boyfriend in tow sometimes, he's normal.

2) The "gay accent" is a learned trait that many pick up in social settings, it is also used in the "flamer" stage most often due to the fact that again it is a social trait that is learned.

3) I personally know 3 gay couples that are parents, and know 2 teens that grew up in gay households and both are normal, one is hetrosexual and the other is Bi-Sexual.

4) Homosexuality has been documented throughout history, Earliest I can remember off the top of my head is the roman empire. Many historical people were gay and so has the biogotry towards them been there.

I have used the term "flamer" in my post and I will explain what I mean by it. A "flamer" is a person who flaunts thier homosexuality to the point that it is almost thier entire identity. I personally don't like people that do that but I have learned to be paitent, many gay people go through that as a phase, while never truly leaving that behind they grow to be a whole person.

In closing I will admit that I am friends with many homosexual people, hell I've even crushed on some of the female ones, I have learned to accept who they are and I realized at a young age that people are more then just gay, thier siblings, thier son's / daughters, they are cashiers, wait staff, cooks, just about every job there is around. Look beyond the sexual prefrences to the person.

[Grey Fox]

I don't give 2 rotton shits how many you know. I am TELLING YOU that it is not normal, it is wrong, it is 1 of the 3 options above.

[baron]

As I said, that is your opinion, you are represented by how you express it.

[jetblue]

I too shall get in the discussion.
Homosexuality is condoned by the olympian gods and even Alexander the Great had a affair with a male. I dont think its genetic. Its choices or fate. We cannot choose who we fall in love with or who falls for us.
But even in homosexuals the genetic natural need to reproduce is there as it is in all humans. Many get pregnant or impregnate a donor. And in the end thats all nature require's of you. Nature does'nt care what else you do.

[Firefly]

I repeat, if all of us did it race would die out. It is either a sick choice, a genetic defect or a mental disease. Wow, that's a whopper of a false dichotomy (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=false+dichotomy&btnG=Google+Search) argument if I ever saw one. (Also, continue flaming like you did in the last post and I won't be surprised to see you banned.)

Also, consider this example. Some scientists might forego the pursuit of a mate, if you will; a sacrifice they make for complete devotion to the pursuit of knowledge, for the sake of humanity. If everyone chose to do this, we would all die off. Obviously, this will never happen.

So, knowing that, who ever said that we would all have to be gay if we accepted homosexuality? As others have pointed out, there have been gays all throughout history (even with animal populations), and in many, many parts of the world. Obviously, their existance presents no threat to the survival of the species.

The world is never that black and white. Sadly, too many people can't get that around their puny heads.

And by the way, I'm not a "liberal." But isn't it so much easier to pin a scapegoat label on people you don't agree with, rather than making any intelligent claims? :)

[IceBurner]

All right everyone.

I'm TELLING YOU that the sky is falling. Does that make it so? Do I have any research to back this claim? Do I have any authority or experience to theorize this claim? I do not. One cannot hope to argue from such a weak position.

No reproduction would doom any species, gendered or not. However, complete homogenality is abnormal. For supporting evidence, look anywhere at all. It is of the absolute lowest probability possible for all of a group of anything, even similar things, to be 100% the same. Based upon this, it is extremely safe to say that Humankind will never be complete hetero or homosexual. In addition, it has always been true that homosexuality in all species that exhibit this trait is in the minority. Since half of any large enough population is fully capable of doubling its numbers through reproduction, this means that the current level of population can be maintained indefinitely even if half of its members fail to reproduce at all. Well, even the lagest minority must, by definition, be less than half. Therefore, homosexuality is insignificant to the survival of any species.

Does anyone know what this means? It means the agument that homosexuality is detrimental to survival is baseless. How about considering some other possibilities? If one never considers but one way, there is no knowing that it is true.

One who presumes much and does not ever question the veracity of these beliefs has no power to argue.

[Grey Fox]

You are a true idiot and I do not care about being banned if I am right. What an absolute idiot you are. Firefly I am in tears lauging at your last post

[Firefly]

You are a true idiot and I do not care about being banned if I am right. What an absolute idiot you are. Firefly I am in tears lauging at your last post
What an absolutely compelling argument. B+!

Also, I am sorry I made you cry. :(

[IceBurner]

and no matter ow much you wishy washy liberals want it to be completely accepted and made normal. You will fail. This sounds as though you feel someone is trying to do something to you. What is it that feels so threatening? Can't you live with people who are different? This difference does not harm anyone, this has been proven. Homosexuals aren't made of antimatter (and for that matter, aren't attracted to heterosexuals either.)

As has been said before, it's not anyones views or opinions, but they way they express them. You can earn a ban if you'd like, but it won't get you the respect that you want.

[Grey Fox]

Not bothered about ban, i am not bothered whether the bum bandits (and the female homosexuals lets not forget) stay at home and do it, but I will not (and nor will the majority) put up with them doing all that unnatural behaviour in public. ALthough it is wrong/unnatural I know tey are human, but all tis normalisation you guys think is great....isn't. I have said my piece on this argument. Grey fox and Daniel have spoken.

If you disagree you are wrong. No opinion.

and I see BJP is now atacking geo. Give it a rest bjp you are just a pest

[IceBurner]

People who flaunt anything in public are generally annoying. Unfortunately, for those bothered by it, gays are finally able to be open and enjoy these freedoms after a fairly long period of oppression. Guess what they are going to do? The typical Human thing to do with any newfound (or re-found) freedom -- flaunt it. You know who are responsible for gay oppression? People who "won't put up with them doing all that unnatural behaviour in public". You reap what you sow. Deal.

[Kilu]

Kilu, I'm not sure if you mean to imply this, but if the harm comes from other people, then the problem lies with other people and not homosexual parenting.
Well actually, I'm not blaming anyone about the problem, mainly stating that the problem exists.