Ah, I see. I think we can agree, though, that various societies have different rules, and that the bounds of a society is pretty typically defined geographically. Gay rights aside, communities of people in a certain area have always made rules to live by that apply to that area. Whether or not homosexuality is accepted would be one.
Sorry. I won’t use confusing things like “Yeah, if you say so” anymore. What I should have said was “The idea that I think gays are criminals is so wrong and so irrelevant that there’s no good reason for you to have brought it up. Therefore, I will dismiss it and hope you said something more rational further down the post”. Sorry for leading you astray.
First, I never said or implied that I hate gays. Second, I never said or implied that I wanted to ban anybody from any community. That, of course, would be why I haven't given a good reason for it. Third, I overestimated you when I figured you would realize "Yeah, if you say so" wasn't an endorsement of gays being criminals so much as me saying "You seem determined to characterize me a certain way regardless of the truth, so I'll let it go".
OK, and what’s the purpose of the comparison? Did the fingers just type away for no particular reason? To what conclusion was I supposed to be lead when you talked about my similarities with Nazis?
OK…it’s getting obvious that you say all this same stuff to anybody who disagrees with you about homosexuality, because you clearly haven’t been reading what I’ve said in the least. If you had been paying attention, you’d realize that my view has nothing to do with hate, nothing to with religion, nothing to do with any of the above. My point is simply that when a person enters a community, they are obliged to abide by that communities customs of acceptable public behavior. What the heck does that have to do with hating or banning anybody?
Well, you thought wrong. We’re not discussing what I like or dislike at all. Or, at least, I’m not.
Well, certainly. But then, I'm not the one who feels an obligation to force someone to either change there mind or be silent. I'm not the one who repeatedly makes analogies between the views of the people I'm talking to, and the views of what most would consider the most evil human being in recent history. How open to my opinion are you?
Yes, they always have rules… like immigration. In Saudi Arabia few years ago, no one was allowed in without and invitation. Doesn’t mean it’s right. I think all countries and communities that possess a peace of the world and claim their land, is wrong. As I said, we don’t own lands, we use it… we borrow it from nature, from the world… from God, if you want to see it that way. So it’s everything that lives should be able to move around the face of the earth as they pleased. But that’s in a large scale… still, there are rules in the free countries that allow free coming and going. You can’t own a street, it belongs to the government, which means it belongs to everyone in the country. So, even if your community dislikes gays, they can’t ban gays from it, because the land is free to anyone who wants to walk on it. You, then, have you privacy in your home,… if you don’t like them, you are free not to let them in.
If you want to ban someone’s freedom to come and go, if you (and you community) want to ban someone from your society is because the person doesn’t fit the ‘rules’ of your society. That’s what we do with criminal.
You didn’t said YOU wanted to ban them, but you suggested:
‘In the same way, gays have an obligation to keep that element of their lives private and out of the public eye if they live in a community that finds them disgusting, offensive, or whatever.’… ’ Communities that accept homosexuality can be allowed to continue to do so, and communities that reject homosexuality can be allowed to do that too’… ‘society that wants to reject homosexuality is perfectly entitled to do so’
Maybe you are using the wrong word there… cos rejection means to throw away, cast away.
True. You just think they are wrong.
You shouldn’t overestimate people.
Line of thought… prejudice against what is different from you, non acceptance of other ‘cultures’
Of course I say the same thing… if a person has prejudice against gays I does disappoint me, so I would say the same, why would i say differently if that’s what i feel?
We are talking about gays in a community that rejects them. You think they have the right to reject them, I think they haven’t go this right. I think that the community who rejects gays is because they have religious morals which implies that gays are wrong and they should hide it a pretend they are not to please the society. If you allow a society grow up thinking gays are wrong and they are disgusting and should hide themselves from other, they will soon bring homophobia to their houses and soon hatred and crimes against gays. To believe that this can’t happen in ignore history and all the things we see today, even in societies that have gays from long time. Like in britain.
Not allowing gays to say or just be gay in public is censorship and violation of their right to free expression. They are harming no one kissing other males on the street, as its not a harm to a heterosexual to kiss on the streets.
I am against your point of view that a community should have the right to reject them. The hatred and banning come as a consequence of this right.
True. This is a very important subject to me, and I mislead the discussion when I said that. But I made my point above of what we are discussing.
I do feel the need to change peopels mind about gay prejudice and rights. I don’t think it is a bad thing to feel this need, as it’s not a bad thing to change our minds either.
Again… I said line of thought. I never compared you, as a person, to Hitler or the Nazis, I compared the line of thought. Prejudice leads to hatred, and (as I said before) you might not be the person who will committee anything against gays, but someone who will agree with your that a community has the right to reject gays, will committee a crime against them if they think that ‘that gay couple over there is kissing in public and they are not supposed to. Which is what happen with the Nazis. Not all German was against Jews, but the ones who were against them were free to treat them badly after they were told they were allowed to.
You aren’t bringing to me any new opinion or point of view. I heard all this ‘right to reject gays’ before, so I have an opinion about that already.
Is not right to censor a people because of their sexuality, is not right to reject them or ban they freedom of expression, as it would be right censor or reject other cultures and people from other origins if they aren’t casing you any harm.
The argument that you feel OFFENDED is not good enough, the problem there is within the person, not with gays or whoever they are repressing.
Now, I apologize for saying you hate gays, you didn’t say that, however it doesn’t dismiss the rest of my arguments. And as I said, I am not against you, I am against what you said in this subject. The same things I said to you, the same comparison with your line of thought and the Nazi line of thought, I say to parents and my brother and to anyone who think gays are not allowed to the same things as heterosexuals.
No actually, I don't. I say a community can place limitations on public behavior, in the defense of their tastes and beliefs. Related to gays, a community can state 'We don't want people to engage in same-sex public displays of affection, or wear clothes bearing slogans with pro-homosexuality messages', and newcomers to that community are obligated to abide by those rules. It's the exact same reason why I wouldn't go to a country where cows are worshipped, and walk down the street eating a steak sandwich. Do I think eating beef is morally wrong? Not at all.
I would say it depends on the size of the community. Can I throw a party in my apartment where only white, male, 30 year olds are allowed to show up? Sure I can. I would think I could even have a large club or small business that held to limitations like that. However, if my 'community' was large enough that those restrictions were making it hard for some people to be employed or have housing, then I would say the limitations violate fair-treatment obligations to blacks, women, etc.
It goes without saying that I also think a group can legitimately formed that excludes men, whites, the middle-aged, and so on.
Good question.
For the sake of this discussion, I would say a community is any group of people that when considered together, have controlling interest over the place/organization in question. Therefore, the community of my apartment would be me and my roomate, the community of my town would be everybody living and paying taxes there, the community of a club would be everybody paying dues (or whatever else is required for legitimate membership) and so on.
Also, communities can influence larger communities, and their actions must be judged in the context of the larger community they affect. In other words, the community of my apartment doesn’t have sole rights to decide how loud I can play my music at 3 a.m., as this has serious impact on the larger community of “People who live in the same building”. A community of people living in an apartment building across town need not be involved, though (unless I get a lot more money to invest in a sound system, that is).
Certainly. However, unless you establish an objective mandate of ethics, any attempt you make to force Saudi arabia to open it's borders is no more right than any attempt they make to keep them closed. With that kind of subjectivity, the only relevant question is "Who gets to make the decision", and the only answer can be "Each particular community".
I would agree with this, but I think this raises the question of “What’s so special about a home, and how precisley is it defined?” I can keep purple people out of my home, sure. Can I keep them off my yard? Can a series of families living next to each other decide to keep purple people off their street? I don’t see any definite distinction.
Perhaps I was. I think between by the time you get to this point in this post, you’ll understand what I was really trying to say.
I do think homosexuality is morally wrong, yes. But that’s based on religious beliefs that not everybody shares. I don’t think there’s any particular obligation to stop people from performing homosexual acts in private.
Because the same old thing won’t nessicarily apply to every argument for a position. For example, my argument is totally independant of the question “Is homosexuality ethical?”, and has very little to do with predjudice, so 90% of what you’ve said so far in the conversation hasn’t been as relevant as it could have been.
If I can teach that homosexuality is wrong and/or disgusting, and have that impact the next generation in the way you describe, why can I not also teach that crimes against gays (or anyone else) are wrong and/or disgusting, and have that stick just as well?
I think rights are a farce, so I don’t really have anything more to say about this.
I also, don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to change people’s minds. The problem is, when some people try to change minds, they’re accused of being intolerant or ‘forcing their views on people’ or whatever, and when other people try to change minds, they’re sainted for it.
And, as I said, ‘I’m not the one who repeatedly makes analogies between the views of the people I’m talking to, and the views of what most would consider the most evil human being in recent history.’ While I’m certainly glad that you didn’t say I was an evil person, I think comparing my views to Hitler’s doesn’t say anything meaningful about them. It feels like you’re trying to give a reason to dismiss my views without due consideration.
That doesn’t make my view wrong. Someone could read the words you’ve said in other threads about religion, and go burn down a synagogue full of old ladies because of it. And that doesn’t make your views wrong.
I think we covered a lot of ground with this most recent exchange.
OOps, also needed to address some things that Uccisore said (or rather his whole message)
I accept everything you have said Uccisore. It’s good to finally hear that someone believes in banning public displays of homosexuality.
In order for there to be peace about ANY subject it must be kept behind closed doors. Although I haven’t seen too many diplays of public homosexuality (here in Michigan), the TV more than makes up for it.
With show such as Queer as Folk on HBO making mega bucks off the whole gay “scene” it show that gay people are starting to turn down the same road as blacks and “american” indians.
I say this because black people often complain SO much about being treated wrong, yet they choose not to get out of their environments or do something to change it. They risk their life to sell drugs, instead of risk their lives to stop it.
As for native americans, they should count themselves lucky. When I applied for college near my home here in Michigan, I soon found out right from the college handbook that Native Americans get FREE tuition. That’s not the only thing, they don’t even have to pay other bills either and some times even get free food. I want to know why I have to pay for an education and Native Americans get to be freeloaders! I want to know why gays and lezbos get to whine all day and why everyone is telling me to be quite! SOMEONE ANSWER ME THAT!
To end this message, I’d like to say that no matter what happens I will never believe that children in schools should be taught how to be gay. My statement may sound a bit “over the edge”, but I beleive that right now in a school somewhere, a little girl or boy is being asked over and over if he or she “likes” someone from their same sex. When a preteen or teen is pumped full of this force to be gay, they have to react to it somehow. Mostly the weak-minded go along with what society tells them to do, like when they tell them to be gay. In fact if you search, you will find that most people who are gay are mostly weak-minded individuals with many issues that never got them far in life.
Give me one example of a gay person who made an invention or taught something moral to people or a gay person who tried to make peace with people?
Not to say that gay people were “weak-minded” before they were told they were gay, I beleive everyone is straight until pushed to be gay and that’s all there is to it.
Hi, Mr.Lee. Good to have another point of view on board.
You mean by cashing in on the negative sterotypes about them, while at the same time condemning anybody who believes the sterotypes are true? Absolutely.
I would say that probably happens sometimes- maybe even most of the time. I personally have watched friends of mine 'decide' they were gay well into their late teens, for no reason other than they couldn't get a girlfriend, and they were in an environment were guys were coming on to them regularly.
On the other hand, I do think there are people that are gay because of something going on genetically. There's a whole bunch of psycho-sexual disorders, of which homosexuality was considered one of until about 30 yeras ago, and these are a lot more complex than being 'pushed into it'.
Uccisores argument against public displays of homosexuality is based on obligation towards a community that chooses to not accept it, not that there is actually anything wrong with homosexuals (as far as I understand it). According to this logic, since you agree with it, you shouldn’t be saying anything cause this community right here doesn’t accept the way you articulate yourself. But hey, to each his own.
Lee stated:
Do you realize the consequences of what you say? Do you realize how obtuse the above is? The presumption being that all subjects are to be behind closed doors, cause otherwise we will have no peace. It’s not possible even if all 6 billion people were to concur with your statement.
Lee stated:
What the hell you complaining for? You shouldn’t communicate such information and views cause you are informing others of your opinion and that means you are opening the doors to your views, but we have to keep things behind closed doors in order to have peace. Or is your sole purpose to come here, be puerile and cause plight in the lives of others?
Lee stated:
You know it’s people like you that elate themselves by going through life complaining and demeaning everything but themselves. You would sooner look to your neighbours backyard and complain that they have a mess before you would look to your own backyard to see if it was a mess. Metaphorically speaking ofcourse. So here’s my version of your above statement “As for Mr. Lee, he should count himself lucky. When I first came on the board and found Mr. Lee shooting his mouth off I found out that anyone can go around shooting their mouth off without consideration for anyone. I want to know why I have to put up with Mr. Lee because his views are confounded, he is rude, pretentious, and is puerile in his views of homosexuality, amongst other things. I want to know why Mr. Lee gets to demean others and tell them that they have to hide what they are and I get him telling me rude and demeaning things!”
Mr. Lee stated:
People aren’t taught how to be gay! Even if all of us wanted to teach others to be gay, how would we do it? We aren’t even taught how to be straight in school. We are taught the body parts, but teachers don’t go around saying “now boys and girls make sure you keep inserting those penis’ into the verginas”. No one would agree to children being taught how to be gay in school. Wow Mr. Lee you have actually figured something out for yourself, congrats. Now how about getting back to the topic, which is “why shouldn’t homosexuals be allowed to act as a hetersexual couple in public?” By which I mean, the majority don’t take issue with seeing a young heterosexual couple kissing on a park bench. So why shouldn’t homosexuals be extended the same courtesy?
Mr. Lee stated:
Out of all seriousness, Mr. Lee, why do you believe that in a school somewhere a little girl or boy is being asked if they like someone of the same sex? Who are they being asked by? And what does being asked if you like someone of the same sex have to do with schools teaching kids how to be gay?
Mr. Lee stated:
Mr. Lee, are you afraid you might be gay? What makes you think that the weak-minded go along with what society tells them to do? If that is true, and you agreed with Uccisore then you should realize that the majority of people are against homosexuality, so if the weak minded go along with what society tells them to do then everyone should be against homsexuality, like yourself. But that is changing, and that is what scares you. So if the majority of society is against homosexuals, and there is a turn happening, wouldn’t that suggest that people are getting stronger minded? Able to comprehend and accept homsexuality for what it is cause they can see the future implications and know that it doesn’t affect heterosexuals. Ie. If you go back to one of my first posts to you, you will find that I told you of an article that stated how homosexuals have raised kids on their own and their kids grew up to be healthy members of the society, and guess what…they were straight! I have never heard from society, in any way, shape or form that I should be gay. Where did you get that absurdity from? Furthermore, when you say that a teen is pumped full of this force of being gay, what force are you talking about?
Mr. Lee stated:
Mr. Lee, if you had researched homosexuality, your statements wouldn’t be so obtuse and would be much more in-depth. If you want to base your argument on research, then source it and I will source mine. Let me know…
Persons of debated sexual orientation…
Alexander the Great
Solon, Greek statesman
Susan B. Anthony, US feminist and womens’ suffrage activist
Aristotle, Greek philosopher
Socrates, Greek philosopher
Any questions?
Mr. Lee stated:
If that’s all there is to it, then there is no point in talking to you about it, cause it means you are not willing to be rational. Most religious people give me a similar line when they begin to see that I have a strong argument against them “It doesn’t matter what you tell me, I’m still going to believe in God”. Well then how can we blame anyone for doing anything? We should respect all those we might hate, like mass murderers, terrorists, rapists, etc - cause if we tell them they are wrong, they will be justified in saying (according to your logic) “No matter what you tell me, I know I did the right thing”.
What’s your take?
Oh wait, sorry Mr. Lee, people like you almost make me forget my manners. Welcome back
I generally agree with everything you said here, Magius, but I would like to point out that homosexuals use the above ‘reasoning’ the justify their own activity, too. That’s why when I’m talking to Clementine, I’m so quick to point out when she makes an ethical pronouncment.
hommosexuals are those type of people who just think theire so special,and don’t want to be like every one else.So saying they should have equal right is a no no.I think if they want to be gay then thats them.they shouldnt make it our problem.
And about them adopting kids is VERY WRONG,it was theire decision to be homosexual they shouldn’t raise kids or do any thing that “NORMAL HUMANS” do,since they want to be diferent,since they want to allianate themselves from society(HUMANS),then it would be only good if we help them do it…and dispossess them from any “HUMAN” rights they have.
When God created heaven and earth he made Adam and EVE and not adam and Steve,if God wanted a hommosexual world then he would’ve never created the woman.
LOL,but its funny to me because they don’t know what theire missing,woman are just magnificent,God bless the female body
So far as I have seen, there isn’t a single homosexual here on this forum that has said anything about being special or wanting to be special, it is only you and a few other STRAIGHT people that go about speaking about being above others. Furthermore, whether a person is egotistical, like yourself, it has nothing to do with their sexual preference. You are mixing concepts that have nothing to do with each other.
Michael Angelo stated:
Being gay isn’t a choice as far as scholars and scientists have shown. Moreover, Gays don’t go around making anything other peoples problem unless someone has made something their problem. Gays don’t want anything but to be accepted for what they are…homosexual. So that they may go through a park with their significant other and hold hands, or hug, you know the things heterosexuals do with their significant others when they are in love. Yes, they don’t get the chance to do those things, amongst others, cause we heterosexuals are always making things their problems.
Michael Angelo stated:
What’s your definition of NORMAL? What is it exactly that NORMAL human do?
Michael Angelo stated:
Yeah but there never was any Adam and Eve in my opinion. But even if there was, I guess one of the worlds greatest crimes against God is that we make incest illegal. Since, God made Adam and Eve and all other humans were brothers and sisters of Adam and Eve, then incest should be normal.
I have to disagree with both of these on the basis of personal experience.
Back when I first starting being political, the thing pro-homosexual folks said was that they wanted tolerance, and that acceptance wasn’t fair of them to ask for. I seem to remember at that time, most anti-homosexual folks were saying “But as soon as you get tolerance, you’ll start demanding acceptance next”.
As far as I’m concerned homosexuals should be accepted. I wouldn’t trust what politicians have to say about anything, especially not a controversial issue like homosexuality.
I feel the points discussed here are mute simply because they are too complex. Let me simplify my view of life so this discussion can move quicker, easier and more to a simpler point
A man has a Right to live and a Right to Die, he knows in life that he will not be happy because he only has the right to pursue it.
Now I will judge another man simply because it will either suit to keep me alive or lead to my death, both of which i have a right to. my judgement is made using general logic used by all. Input is considered and a responce is made.
I do not have the right to end a life, For i did not create it. Others do not have the right to destroy the life i create. Even if i disagree with the life i could/would want to end, i still do not have the right.
Now If you feel you should End a life that does not belong to you, you are a fool and should have your life ended.
Now you must seperate MAN from GAYMAN. Because GAY is your own judgement. It describes the man but it is not the man. A MAN has all the rights listed he has here. him being juged gay either by himself or society has no effect over his rights.
So to simply even further
A man has rights
These rights are to Die and Live
A gay man is a man thus he has the same rights as any other man gay or not.
A man does not have the right to kill another that does he does not own.
Also I will list for an example Rights you as a man Do NOT Have:
You do not have the right to live Well or Poor only.
You do not have the right to food.
You do not have the right to unearned currency.
You do not have a right to any earthly thing(house, Car, Fridge, Horse, Plow).
You do not have a right to any right that is not given to you by what ever religion or club or organization you are a part of unless that right is given to you, this is because you choose to be part of that organization. They have as the organization to give rights to whom ever, whatever they wish beause it is theirs.
Utilitarianism gives some people the right to ban beliefs and ideas, but not others? If someone doesn’t accept utilitarianism, does it have authority over them anyway? Sorry, I’ve been told I’ve no right to ‘push my morals on others’ way too many times to accept that the pro-gay agenda has an objective moral mandate. They simply argue against any such thing far too often.
[/quote]
