[Illidan]

Homosexuality: Defined as a person who is attracted to the same gender.

In the past homosexuals have indeed been outlawed by society, as well as prosecuted for their actions containing homosexuality, which resulted in many people hiding their true natural feelings. Nowadays homosexuality has been accepted as a way of life, more than it was in the olden days. But there are still others out there today who still stand against homosexuality, and continue to fight strongly for that certain belief.

My question is, as you would have already probably guessed, what is your opinion about homosexuality as being part of our society? Are you for or against it?

[Ravenblade]

Illidan - you get my vote for most brave topic starter

homosexuality, from what ive been told by friend i have who are ***, of both sexes, and they say they just "are". They didnt choose to be or anything.

However - one also told me that there isnt as such a general definition. You attracted to what you're attracted to. If the general mold is people of the same sex then fine, but there are most likely exceptions.

Overall i dont have a problem with it.

[Kikuichimonji]

This is a very good issue to discuss

I haven't seen any homosexuals (that or they are hiding the fact). I don't agree about homosexuality but heck if people are, let them be

[ForteGX]

Exactly. Who are we to decide the kind of person one should be attracted to? It's their life, so leave 'em to it. I think it's a bit...odd, but it really doesn't bother me. People should have the right to choose who they're attracted to.

[TheDogWho]

Ravenblade, on Jan 28 2005, 05:38 PM, said:

Illidan - you get my vote for most brave topic starter

Yup. Very brave.
I don't have a problem with *** people. I see homophobia in the same light as racism.

[Illidan]

Here's my views relating to the religious concerns for homosexuality:

I don't see the reason in punishing someone because of who they are. Homosexuality is indeed something that cannot be helped, and people who do indeed have an attraction to the same gender which also cannot be helped. I've never heard of anyone who can control what or who they are attracted to. So if "God" wants to punish homosexuals, then God isn't really a fair "God". Since he is indeed the explanation of why we are here, and who we are, then why would God create someone who cannot help but be attracted to the same gender, and yet punish them for it later? It seems a bit dodgey if you ask me.

Brave? ... Alright?

[Ravenblade]

by the same token though - even the Bible says that Homosexuality is not a sin in itself. Acting on it is. And even then, its no worse than having sex outside of marraige. If you follow Illidans line of thought though - if God made homosexuality possible, then it cant really be evil can it? Nothing God makes can be seen as evil. The only way it can be seen as evil, is if its a choice.

[Kikuichimonji]

okay. I'm not against homosexuals or anything, but that point can be proven wrong

God allowed us to be able to make guns, to be killers, to be perverts..etc and we all see that as wrong and definitely punishable

However, I think we should abide the whole "right to free speech" and not discriminate ***s and lesbians because like TDW said, it's as bad as
racism, sexism and religious discrimination.

[Ravenblade]

Kikuichimonji, on Jan 28 2005, 05:55 PM, said:

okay. I'm not against homosexuals or anything, but that point can be proven wrong

God allowed us to be able to make guns, to be killers, to be perverts..etc and we all see that as wrong and definitely punishable

However, I think we should abide the whole "right to free speech" and not discriminate ***s and lesbians because like TDW said, it's as bad as
racism, sexism and religious discrimination.

kik - the important point there is the fact you said God "allowed" us.

It's still like i said though - If homosexuallity can not be "chosen" unlike the making of guns and such, then it is a God send. Otherwise, if it can be chosen then it must be wrong.

[Kikuichimonji]

yes but what I was trying to point out is that some people did not choose to be killers, like people did not choose to be homosexuals.

[Illidan]

Yes I realise that but, if someone is truly a homosexual, do we expect them to never have a relationship, never to touch another person? If that IS the case then why is it that they're forced to be alone, or be with someone who they do not truly love, and are forced to do so because of fear of sin? Why are they being singled out when as they say "straight, people of the right sexuality" get to live their life as normal, and yet these homosexuals are expected to live a lie? How is it disrespecting "God" if they were made like this, by his own hands? I don't understand.

[Kikuichimonji]

I never said being homosexual is wrong, I was just disproving your earlier point. :lol:

I too think it's wrong how certain activists force homosexuals to hide it.

[Illidan]

Sorry I was replying to Raven. Should have quoted

Now here's my response to your comment:

Kikuichimonji, on Jan 29 2005, 05:01 AM, said:

yes but what I was trying to point out is that some people did not choose to be killers, like people did not choose to be homosexuals.

Ofcourse they did! Killing is not a feeling, it's an action, an action that affects and hurts other people because of their hate which they choose to have. Homosexuality does not hurt anybody. Everyone has a choice to kill, it's in their intentions to. Homosexuality is however not.

[Ravenblade]

ok new line of thought - only God can judge this, cos only he knows whats what.

Therefore, it is wrong to have anything against homosexuality, cos we have absolutely no right to judge it. I'm fully aware none of the people here are judging^^

They are given far too hard a time in society...

[Illidan]

Ravenblade, on Jan 29 2005, 05:10 AM, said:

ok new line of thought - only God can judge this, cos only he knows whats what.

Therefore, it is wrong to have anything against homosexuality, cos we have absolutely no right to judge it. I'm fully aware none of the people here are judging^^

They are given far too hard a time in society...

Yes, that's why I disagree with most religious views on homosexuality. Because I too think they don't have any right to judge them.

[Kikuichimonji]

erg, geez, what I meant was that some people can't help it...doesn't matter, it has nothing to do with the topic itself so lets end it there. :lol:

The whole issue makes you think, are we still living in the past? You know, still not so open-minded...

[Ravenblade]

i agree kiku, we live defined by the old religion based rules. You know in China, homosexuality was considered insanity until about 2 years ago. And they arent a backwards country are they? In the UK, there isnt a huge problem with it although we're still not allowing marraige. I think it gets a hard time in america too from what i've heard.

[Illidan]

Kikuichimonji, on Jan 29 2005, 05:17 AM, said:

erg, geez, what I meant was that some people can't help it...doesn't matter, it has nothing to do with the topic itself so lets end it there. :lol:

The whole issue makes you think, are we still living in the past? You know, still not so open-minded...

Yeeh I got your point. Sorry Kiku. :D I thought you meant you don't agree with it because it's similar to killing, when it's a completely different concept.

Wow Raven that's really retarded refering to the Chinese issue ofcourse. XD

[Echo_djinn]

Wow, I was thinking about putting up this topic but I thought better of it. I think if you are *** or lesbian is a sin. It's wrong in my eyes and I don't accept it. Though people do what they want to and I can't change that. I try not to make fun of them or belittle them and I respect them but I still think it's wrong and I couldn't see myself being friends with someone who is ***. This is my opinion if I have offended anyone I am sorry.

[Ravenblade]

Echo, are you taking that form the Bible? If so...does that not mean that only the act of being *** is a sin. And that the state or feeling itself is not? I've mentioned my thoughts and im not gonna dive on you or anything cos who knows what the answer is but...im pretty sure not being friends with one isnt a good reaction o.o

I mean - thats a sin too. Judging and shunning. I dont know if you would ever actually do that though...

[TobiasMar]

Anti-homosexuality is illegal now in America (I think it is at least) because George Dubya Bush is butting religion in law. :lol: Anyway...

I say that Homosexuality is alright, but it is unusual... O_o

[Echo_djinn]

Ravenblade, on Jan 28 2005, 03:47 PM, said:

Echo, are you taking that form the Bible? If so...does that not mean that only the act of being *** is a sin. And that the state or feeling itself is not? I've mentioned my thoughts and im not gonna dive on you or anything cos who knows what the answer is but...im pretty sure not being friends with one isnt a good reaction o.o

I mean - thats a sin too. Judging and shunning. I dont know if you would ever actually do that though...

I said that I would still respect them and treat them like any other person but I just couldn't see myself having a *** person as my friend. I am judging them? Yes, in the bible it states the homosexuality is a sin and that maybe back-up what I said earlier but it is also my opinion as well. I also think having *** thoughts or feeling it is wrong. I don't believe that anyone can be born ***.

[Ravenblade]

but then that means you think they chose to be. I have never ever heard a person tll me that they CHOSE to be ***, and i know quite a few. I know one girl, a lesbian turned heterosexual, who was devastated when she fell in love with a guy cos it meant she had been wrong previously. It took her ages to deal with it and she still hasnt fully recovered. I dont think that if she had "chosen" to be *** that she would have put herself through that. However i appreciate that what you're saying is your opinion and so its just as valid as anyone else's of course^^

[Mewt]

Personally I have no problem with homosexuality. Heck, I say if you feel you're ***, why deny it? Go for it!

It may be because I'm not particularly religious, or maybe because in my little corner of society it is acceptable (and I know some jolly nice *** people - one of my best-friends is bi-sexual). I don't know. Neither am I *** myself, but I do think that it's fine. As long as people are happy.

[Ivan is my name]

*** used to mean happy!! XD!!!! I have no problem with it
Edit: Although I am not *** myself

[Echo_djinn]

Ravenblade, on Jan 28 2005, 04:03 PM, said:

but then that means you think they chose to be. I have never ever heard a person tll me that they CHOSE to be ***, and i know quite a few. I know one girl, a lesbian turned heterosexual, who was devastated when she fell in love with a guy cos it meant she had been wrong previously. It took her ages to deal with it and she still hasnt fully recovered. I dont think that if she had "chosen" to be *** that she would have put herself through that. However i appreciate that what you're saying is your opinion and so its just as valid as anyone else's of course^^

Yes, that what I am saying RB. They chose to be ***. No one can be born ***. It's my opinion man nothing is going to change it. I have seen many people who have chosen to be *** or had *** feeling for someone but it was only for a short time and they got over it. The feelings that they have for the same sex is something they chose to feel or have been influenced to feel that way. We could argue about this and shoot up examples but it wont get us anywhere. Anyways I am glad you respect my opinion and that all I really wanted.

[Ravenblade]

agreed ^^

you know - i heard that scientists were suspiscious about there being a "*** chromosome" in DNA which decided this for people but im pretty sure that isnt true cos it sounds kinda ridiculous. I dunno though, its possible i guess but then...your sexuality being defined by a chromosome??..hmm

[Mewt]

Ravenblade, on Jan 28 2005, 09:58 PM, said:

agreed ^^

you know - i heard that scientists were suspiscious about there being a "*** chromosome" in DNA which decided this for people but im pretty sure that isnt true cos it sounds kinda ridiculous. I dunno though, its possible i guess but then...your sexuality being defined by a chromosome??..hmm

Well, we can't choose our (original) gender and Chromosomes do that for us. Why not homosexuality? It seems plausible.

[Echo_djinn]

Mewt, on Jan 28 2005, 05:09 PM, said:

Well, we can't choose our (original) gender and Chromosomes do that for us. Why not homosexuality? It seems plausible.

It does but what about those people who all of a sudden start liking the same sex in a sexual way. Are you saying that this chromosome affects people differently at different times of there lives?(If there is such a thing)

[Mewt]

Echo_djinn, on Jan 28 2005, 10:14 PM, said:

It does but what about those people who all of a sudden start liking the same sex in a sexual way. Are you saying that this chromosome affects people differently at different times of there lives?(If there is such a thing)

That's an excellent point. My answer to that is ... I don't have a clue. I'm no scientist, and I'm not researching this kind of thing.

[Luna]

Note: I didn't read anything but the first post <<;

As some of you know, I went to France in October as part of an exchange. My first host was a girl and she was bisexual. Her friends were all ***, lesbian or bi. My friend's host was also bi.. and her mom was a lesbian. How do I know? They told us.

I didn't have a problem with it... I mean, they're people @_@; I don't see anything wrong with them.

<<; As for the people that "hate" them or are against them, SOME of them (Note: I said SOME PEOPLE, I am NOTsaying that everyone in this planet is this way), they just "hate" them because they're scared >.o; Just because they're different...

[TobiasMar]

Yeah, I also noticed that Sheba.

[Elliott]

My view on homosexuality is pretty simple.

I think it is disgusting, wrong, vulgar, vile, and anyone who is homosexual should be outlawed from civilised society.

Sorry if that offended anyone, but this topic is asking for opinions no?

[Ravenblade]

what are your reasons for thinking that agatio? Is it based on religion or something?

[Elliott]

Semi Religion based, but also because I'm the straightest person you will ever meet, and I don't understand how homo's can think differently. It sickens me to the core.

[Ravenblade]

i understand that, but i guess its a little sad that you feel that way. At the same time though it may wll be the correct way to feel. I have been tempted to think that cos of faith but i try and keep as broad as possible. In truth i am not as passionate about this issue as some people. One of my close friends turned out to be *** and confessed at the age of 17, i thought long and hard but couldnt think why i should abandon him, even if the Bible said it was wrong. But then i DO understand where you're coming from to an extent

[Nick Presta]

Just to tell you, this is a debate style topic and will be watched very closely to make sure it remains on topic and doesn't get out of hand.

And just a little note:

In nature, every single mammal reverts to homosexuality at some point. EVERY single one.

[gsninja]

I don't really care about homosexuality. People are homosexuals, people are not. It just doesn't matter to me.

[Elliott]

Quote

In nature, every single mammal reverts to homosexuality at some point. EVERY single one

How do you figure that?

Quote

*** used to mean happy!! XD!!!! I have no problem with it
Edit: Although I am not *** myself

But you're a chronic spammer thats for damn sure.

[gsninja]

nick1presta, on Jan 28 2005, 10:11 PM, said:

And just a little note:

In nature, every single mammal reverts to homosexuality at some point. EVERY single one.

I'm wondering too, where did you find that information?

[My Best Wishes]

I think it is wrong, some people turn to the same sex becuase they have been hurt by the oppisete sex. they scare me, but i think that is becuase i don't know any. but they do talk funny.

To shorten this i aprove of everything Agaito has said so far.

my views ARE affectted by my belief though.

[ForteGX]

watch, on Jan 29 2005, 04:28 AM, said:

but they do talk funny.

Talk funny? Are you joking? That's just a dumb-a$$ed stereotype. I don't think it's possible for one's accent to change just because they're ***.

[Ravenblade]

thats true - i dont know any *** people who talk like the "concieved way of *** talking", and i know 3 or 4.

I'm also curious about N1P's point though o.o

[Kikuichimonji]

What forte and raven said, those sorts of ***s are known as "queenie" ***s and are often what you think of ***s immediately due to the media stereotyping of them. The show "Will and Grace" comes to mind...

[Ravenblade]

thats true - perhaps a ot of these negative feelings come from TV and other forces...such as the acursed media. But then again im also pretty sure from what people have been saying that they have considered this and made an informed decision about it. Many people, however, wont have done. They're probably more likely to make life hard for homosexuals too.

[Sol.Warrior]

Jesus guys! This is an internet forum about a GBA game...

[Bekita]

Personally I think it's wrong but it doesn't matter because people will do what they want. I don't *hate* the people who are *** or whatever I just don't agree with it.

[Kite]

I dont care about people being ***. XD
As long as they DONT bother or harm me, Ill still have no problem. ^^;
and wtf is George Dumb Bush doing outlawing homosexuality? He shpuld get impeached if that goes thru or atleast have the congress DECLINE it. << If he dosent want to bother with homos, why did he choose to become president? >>

[Nick Presta]

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20..._gayanimal.html

There is one article that says that "homosexuality among animals is not uncommon and is natural for some"

There is a lot of facts providing information that states homosexuality among animals is normal.

And just to top it off:

http://www.narth.com...animalmyth.html
^And yes, I know this disproves my statement to a point, but they also acknowledge that homosexuality in animals isn't uncommon at all.

[Bekita]

I agree with the president on a lot of things but yes I think you could say outlawing homosexuality is unconsitutional so it can be overturned by the Supreme Court

[Cosmos]

Hey, everybody!
The last time I logged onto this website was a *long* time ago, but looking over this topic, there are definately some things that I need to say.
First of all, I am a homosexual, and I can tell you with 100% assurance that I felt that way before I knew what it was, and it wasn't a choice. I have not been hurt in any relationship that I have had with a female, in fact, I generally get on beter with females than males. My voice is not funny at all, and I am not that feminine of a character, I participate in sports, I dislike clothes shopping (for all of you who want to enforce that stereotype), and I like bloody, violent, video games. As for the homophobes in this forum, I hope that you are proud of yourselves, as you are exactly the type of closed minded, sterotyping human, that makes people like me feel like crap and want to kill ourselves. I want absolutely nothing to do with you, and I honestly despise you with all there is to me. I know that I am not going to change your opinion, but I can tell you right now that you do not have to worry about having any *** or bi friends. Thats enough for now, but hey, if anybody has some *good* questions, I am ready to answer them. ^_^

[TheDogWho]

That's really opened up the topic now quite a lot.
I think no-one should give him awkward questions or call him names.

[Cosmos]

As if I'm not used to it... <_<

[Mewt]

Well done for being so honest and open, Cosmos, it has restored my faith in freedom of speech and free-will - be what you are, not what others think you should be. <_<

However, you don't necessarily have to be so damning about 'homophobes', especially since a lot of it here is down to their faith, which is fair enough. Otherwise an argument might start and it'll go on and on ... you know. Yet I am saying this as an outsider of both particular stances I suppose, and I am not aware of all your personal feelings on this subject.

[Cosmos]

I know that is not great on my part to strongly dislike a certain type of person, but honestly, when you are leading a more difficult life becuase of a difference which you can't help, and people think that they have the authority to tell you that you chose to be the way you are, is really annoying, and hurtful. I really just can't get along with homophobes, seeing as they certainly cannot get along with me.

[Blink]

The only thing I have to say about this topic is that being homosexualist is like being sexist. When you're born, you don't choose to be m/f, just like you don't choose to be homosexual or not. I have a homosexual cousin, and he's openly ***. Really though, nothing is different about him except that, he's really buff and he is always happy. I hope you people aren't against this kind of thing because, well, its like getting mad at someone for being born into a bad family. It's not their fault, and they can't do anything about it, though most try to hide and deny it.

[Cosmos]

Homosexualist is not a word, just so that you know. Being homosexist is the way a society (which doesn't exist) would be like where everybody assumes people are ***. Heterosexist is where people assume people are straight (like everywhere on Earth). Homophobic is being against *** people.

[Papercut]

Cosmos, on Jan 29 2005, 08:53 PM, said:

Homosexualist is not a word, just so that you know.  Being homosexist is the way a society (which doesn't exist) would be like where everybody assumes people are ***.  Heterosexist is where people assume people are straight (like everywhere on Earth).  Homophobic is being against *** people.

That doesn't sound right. A phobia is a persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of something. Homo meaning (in this case) homosexual. So what we have here in the word is fear, not hate of *** people. Leave it to pop culture to kill another word.

And if someone were Heterosexist or Homosexist it doesn't have anything to do with assuming people are one way or another. It means they discriminate against them for either being straight or being ***. -_-

[Cosmos]

Please do not tell me what I do and don't know about being ***.

1. homophobia -- (prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality)

Trust me, while I agree that the words meanings are not what they imply, I know what I am talking about, okay? (I am not mad, it has just been a hard week. Parents found out Monday)

[Ravenblade]

i just consulted with a friend (yes, he's ***) and he said that the definition os to be afraid of something, but that this leads to hatred and prejuduce and so on. Homophobia is associated with those things but doesnt literally mean them.

Anyways, i guess its good that we have someone who is actually *** as part of this debate as it clears a few things, like the issue of choice, up. Anyone who posts anti-***s views though are just as entitled to their opinions as anyone else i guess. I mean, im a Christian and although i dont agree with this particular strand of my faith, i can appreciate where some people are coming from.

[Andross]

The following is a rough speculation, based off of the fact that during the times of cultural boom in Greece, many men engaged in activities that others may find uncomfortable.

Umm, I'd like to note something, and that is many people back in, oh say, Biblical times CHOSE to be homosexual, and this was only between males. See, back then, there was no such thing as contraceptive. So in order to have sex without having a baby, many men decided to engage in sexual activities with other men. They weren't ACTUALLY homosexual. They weren't attracted to males. But in order to have sex without responsibility, they did such a thing. This was common in many of the early pagan religions (there's reason to believe that those famous Greek scholars were engaged in such activities).

Now, obviously, people back then who were not pagan, or may have been Jewish, would have found this appalling. Not only is the person engaging in sexual activities out of lust, not a loving relationship, but they are doing it in order to avoid any responsibility. They don't want to deal with consequences. This is plain cowardly in their eyes, and it really is, because it's not as if many of these people really ARE homosexual. They're merely engaging in sexual activities with the same sex.

So, considering this, it can be logically speculated that it was written into the Bible that men having sex with men was forbidden specifically because of such a situation. Natural homosexuality would have been in a very small number back then, due to the world's population of humans. The genetic mutation that causes 'mixed signals' would not be present amoung many people. And in the end, the people who wrote the commandment most likely wouldn't think that such an occurance would ever be seen naturally in our world. They wrote it to point out that the men having sex with each other should stop being cowardly asses and only engage in sexual activities when they are ready to take on responsibilities.

What I think then is that the true meaning is just a further law on adultery: Don't have sex in ways to avoid responsibility. And it happens every day. One of my mom's friend's daughter got pregnant, even though she used birth control pills for a month before 'engaging.' Get my point? It isn't condemning homosexuals necessarily, because it was written 3000 years ago when people did this out of choice, not instinct.

Again, it's a speculation, but I have a strong belief that it holds some truth in it. Just wanted to share my thoughts.

[Bekita]

Quote

It isn't condemning homosexuals necessarily, because it was written 3000 years ago when people did this out of choice, not instinct

I just was wondering if people have changed since then? I mean if they chose back then wouldn't they choose now?

I can't imagine we're that different than people back then except that they might have been smarter since they made all the discoveries, but still I think the basic ability to choose was still there.

I do think you have a point though about not taking responsibility. That might be true for some.

[Andross]

Bekita, on Jan 30 2005, 03:38 AM, said:

I just was wondering if people have changed since then? I mean if they chose back then wouldn't they choose now?

I can't imagine we're that different than people back then except that they might have been smarter since they made all the discoveries, but still I think the basic ability to choose was still there.

I do think you have a point though about not taking responsibility. That might be true for some.

Pagan religions were absorbed into Christianity, and barely any pagans are around today. Because of this, most Pagan rituals were either twisted into something different to fit Christian criteria but still please Pagans (Christmas) or were outright forbidden with brutal force through the invoking of fear (sexual encounters with same sexes).

When such cultural beliefs are erased, they are not taught, and thus people don't grow up wanting to have sex with men to avoid making babies. What's the point of that when you can do it with a woman and still have a chance of avoiding pregnancy afterwards? Beliefs don't transcend generations if the belief isn't perpetuated. So when homosexual encounters are forbidden and this is taught across generations, the choice to have sex with a guy to avoid responsibility becomes not only wrong, but pointless in today's world.

The main thing is people aren't going to choose to do it today because it's serves no point. The only reason males had sex with males was to avoid responsibilities. Now males can have sex with the more prized female and still avoid responsibility. It's more satisfying and efficient in the end.

Damnit, I sound like Dr. Ruth :agitated:

[Bekita]

Andross, on Jan 29 2005, 09:44 PM, said:

The main thing is people aren't going to choose to do it today because it's serves no point. The only reason males had sex with males was to avoid responsibilities. Now males can have sex with the more prized female and still avoid responsibility. It's more satisfying and efficient in the end.

Yeah I would think that it's a preference to be with a female but still I don't think you can call it an "instinct" as you called it earlier to be homosexual. It just doesn't fit with the natural order of things. Not trying to be crude but things dont work as easily that way. Therefore it occurs to me that there might be something wrong with it.

[Andross]

When I say instinct, I mean it's an instinct for people who have the 'mixed signals' that exist within their genetic structure and hormones. It's an instinct in a way for actual homosexuals. Is that right Cosmos?

[Bekita]

Then why do such a minority have this "mixed signal" thingy?

[Andross]

Because it's an occurance which only occurs under rare circumstances. It is not inheritable as far as studies go to show, and thus, by mere chance, the body's sexual hormones involved in the sex drive react to stimuli which is usually a stimuli that would not cause a reaction in a person who is not homosexual.

[Bekita]

I don't believe in chance like that....genetics are pretty predictable

[Cosmos]

Thank you so much Andross! Those were some great examples, and just to clear up a few things that Bekita is asking, it is not suer why some people feel for people of the same sex as they should people of the opposite sex, but it is suspected that it is genetic, just like most differences that are not choice. (Genetics are NOT predictable in the way that you mean Bekita, Downs Syndrome and many other disabilities are caused by early mutations in the gametes.) I am one hundred percent suer that I did not choose to be the way I am, honestly, I would LOVE to be straight. That would make life so much easier. As for the question about if people chose then, why don't they chose now? The people that "chose to be ***" back then were not really ***, they were just looking for a way to have safe sex as contraceptives hadn't been invented yet. (This seems to be getting a little racy, seeing as there could be a nine year old using this board.)

[Sea of Time]

I saw an ad for this movie that comes out soon. (not major motion picture, film festival perhaps) and it was about this 12 year old kid, figuring out that he was different from the other boys. If you're into this debate and stuff like that, this movie is for you. I'm sorry, but I don't have a name but if I can find one, I'll be sure to give it to you.

[Cosmos]

I don't know, I honestly am not much for watching emotional, ***, films, even though I am *** myself. I like action, horror, and comedy. Could that film have been "Billy Elliot"?

[Sea of Time]

No, this movie hasn't come out yet. It's more educational for most people then it is entertaining.

[Cosmos]

Educating people about ***s... As if that will ever work.
There are laws in some countries (and I'm not talking the backward ones) that disallow teaching ofaccepting GLBT people, as they think that it will make the kids ***. And the movies have to have a tricky, misleading, title to get the people that it is aiming to change to want to watch it, you know? I mean, a the average Republican isn't going to want to watch a movie about why to vote Democratic, or vice versa. It's nice to have movies on the matter to educate people, but they never seem to be able to get far. The audience that they appeal to is never the audience that needs to watch it.

[Illidan]

I've honestly never heard of a person who can choose their sexuality, so all you others who have said it is a choice, are not necessarily right.

[Angelic_Raine]

Okay here goes a long and boring post... In regards to this topic I just wanted to voice my opinion. For one, I was raised Christian but I'm not sure that I believe in God per say, but that their is a higher power. That being said I shall quote my Christian Ethics teacher whom changed a lot of homophobics opinions on the subject. God made everyone equal and so they should be treated equal, like it has been said, one cannot choose whom they fall in love with and according to God, sex out of marriage is wrong. However, it is unfair to not allow ***s or lesbiens to marry one another if they love eachother. For them, and I know this because I have many friends who have choosen such a path and are very religious individuals, it is not that homosexuality is wrong but that because the church will not marry them they are forced to consumate their love out of wedlock. I for one believe the church is misinterperting the bible and even if they do not wish to marry them should come up with another name or ceremony so that in the eyes of God these couples are one. Who every said the bible could not be changed? It was changed at one period of time why has it remained untouched for so long? However I won't delve into that. Anyway, one should not be judged on race, sex or their sexual prefrence. However, and I hate to bring this up but I'm hoping that one of you may be able to put this thought to rest. My father is slightly homophobic and brought this up to me and I still haven't been able to answer him. Would you say that one cannot choose to have sex with an animal or a corpse and that it is simply their sexual prefrence? If so then how can you be against that when you aren't against homosexuality? I don't believe that it is the same thing but he does have a bit of a point. *Edit* Also after reading Andross' post I just wanted to say one thing. Could it be possible that the people doing these tests were looking for a reason people are homosexual and by looking I mean searching so hard that they just HAD to find a reason because they didn't want to accept that it is just the way some people are and there is nothing biologicaly wrong or different from homosexuals and straights? If so then why would, instead of accepting it which would be the only logical thing to do because things will not change, they be using such "brilliant" minds to figure out why people are *** instead of using it towards finding a cure for various illnesses? I'm not trying to argue with your point I just find it slightly amusing the things people choose to research when there are so many more important things to figure out. In my opinion I do not agree with these scientific results simply for the fact that they cannot be proven to me. There is nothing physically, mentally, emotionally, or spiritually different from homosexuals and those that are straight it is simply a sexual prefrence. Also, my opinion won't change so don't try to make it change it will only result in wasted breath.

[Elliott]

I don't want to get into the animal/corpse thing, I'd rather keep my lunch in my stomach. Also, can someone merge this topic with the sexuality topic? As they are basically the same thing now.

[Illidan]

That topic was created after this one right? To be honest I didn't see the point of making a topic like that when there's basically already a topic like it created before.

[Elliott]

I think Cosmos saw a homo topic and though he'd ask everyone what their preference was. A little silly, but what do you expect?

[Illidan]

We could have easily stated it here. It wouldn't have been off topic really. =/

[Elliott]

Eh, the mods will deal with it in due time, so there's no worries.

[Ravenblade]

um...back on topic and responding to Angelic Reines point..um you said a lot so bear with me (not trying to change your opinion).

The Bible says in it that anyone who adds to it is damned so that'd be why the Churches are reluctant to change anything im guessing.

um..also, i stated in the other topic, its not homosexuality as such that the Christian faith disagrees with, although thats the common misconception, its the "having sex without producing children" bit. Again i know this will be no comfort to *** Christians, but in truth, its not disliked by the Church any more than having sex outside of marraige and such. (i think!! - dont hold me to that, i was told this). I would also like to stress that this is probably just the Catholic Church...i've looked into many others and they appear to be the same though...

And i agree, we should love them as equals, and this links in with what i said earlier, about this not being our place to judge anyways. We can argue over interpretations of the Bible, or moral codes, but if we make any judgement on the issue of condemning people, then we have committed a great wrong. If homosexuality is not a choice (my personal belief from what friends have said) then God must have made it possible for them to be that way. In that instance, it cannot be evil, since the only evil that enters into the world is through choice.

*waits for onslaught*

[Echo_djinn]

Ravenblade, on Jan 31 2005, 10:56 AM, said:

um...back on topic and responding to Angelic Reines point..um you said a lot so bear with me (not trying to change your opinion).

The Bible says in it that anyone who adds to it is damned so that'd be why the Churches are reluctant to change anything im guessing.

um..also, i stated in the other topic, its not homosexuality as such that the Christian faith disagrees with, although thats the common misonception, its the "having sex without producing children" bit. Again i know this will be no comfort to *** Christians, but in truth, its not disliked by the Church any more than having sex outside of marraige and such. (i think!! - dont hold me to that, i was told this). I would also like to stress that this is probably just the Catholic Church...i've looked into many others and they appear to be the same though...

And i agree, we should love them as equals, and this links in with what i said earlier, about this not being our place to judge anyways. We can argue over interpretations of the Bible, or moral codes, but if we make any judgement on the issue of condemning people, then we have committed a great wrong. If homosexuality is not a choice (my personal belief from what friends have said) then God must have made it possible for them to be that way. In that instance, it cannot be evil, since the only evil that enters into the world is through choice.

*waits for onslaught*

*Pours on with onslaught of questions*
You say some christian churchs allow *** people to associate with them. Ok that maybe true but they don't try to change them in from there habits? They don't try to make them see that being *** is wrong if they want to be a christian? If they don't then I find it hard to believe if they are true christian churchs that allow homosexual people to associate with them and not try to help them remove that sexual feeling they have for the same sex. Anyways I may have misunderstood you so correct me if I am wrong.

[Ravenblade]

um...my point was that the "reason" christian churches have a problem with *** people is their impossibility to produce children, meaning that any sex is recreational. Thats the bit that is deemed "wrong" and so its the same for people who have sex outside of marraige. (and explains why Catholicism doesnt do the contraceptive thing). I'm sure there are a lot of Christians, and Churches who misunderstood that, which is why many people now thing its Christianity versus *** people. In truth, it's more Christianity versus casual sex. That's the interpretation i've always understood anyways...

[Echo_djinn]

Ravenblade, on Jan 31 2005, 11:15 AM, said:

um...my point was that the "reason" christian churches have a problem with *** people is their impossibility to produce children, meaning that any sex is recreational. Thats the bit that is deemed "wrong" and so its the same for people who have sex outside of marraige. (and explains why Catholicism doesnt do the contraceptive thing). I'm sure there are a lot of Christians, and Churches who misunderstood that, which is why many people now thing its Christianity versus *** people. In truth, it's more Christianity versus casual sex. That's the interpretation i've always understood anyways...

I don't think thats the reason at all. First there was man and woman not man and man or woman and woman. The problem is it's not what god intended for mankind. Well, thats my reason why I think homosexuality is wrong. Some may think what you are saying is the reason why those churchs oppose *** people but I don't.

[Mewt]

I can't really comment on the religion thing ... I don't know enough about it to be honest e.g. I've never read the Bible.

However, I will say that being *** is not just about lust and sex, the same as heterosexuality. The last load of posts in this topic have discussed sex as the main reason for people to be ***. I do not believe this to be the case.

For example, I certainly am not 'attracted' to men for sexual reasons. It just feels right for me to like men. I think that's what 'sexuality' is about for the most part, it is who you want to go out with/be in love with/ share your life with. That person may be the same gender as you. That is one of the reasons why I think it is perfectly acceptable for people to be ***. You cannot choose who you fall in love with.

[Ravenblade]

Echo - fair enough my friend^^ that was just the interpretation i developed.

Mewt - i didnt realy mean lust, it's perfectly true that *** people fall in love with each other, but even when that happens in heterosexual relationships, its deemed as wrong to have sex outside of marraige. And being married without the possibility of having children is not something the Churches are keen on. (Except with medical conditions as to why, as the Church believes its a choice too - i think)

Anyways, away from religion, yes your point is true - people cannot choose who they are attracted to. That being said, well...yeah its true. Personally, if i fell in love with one of my guy friends, i would surpress it as i would lose too much that i hold dear to me in such an act. But i understand that other people feel that there is no problem for them to do so, in which case then it is of course acceptable.

[Echo_djinn]

I wonder if to much association with your guy friends leads to *** thoughts. Maybe if you spend more time with guys then you do with girls you may start to get attached to them. Or maybe it works the other way around. Who knows.

[el_Sethro]

I have absolutely nothing against homosexuals. I am not completely sure if they are born that way or if it is learned over time, and there isn't really any way to tell, but the reality is that they feel more natural and happier with other of their own gender, and they most certainly can't help that (and even if they could, who's to say that that choice is wrong?). As stated before, you have no right to force someone to spend their life with someone they don't truly love just because you don't approve of their choice.

also, homo/bisexuality IS natural; there was actually a show on Discovery Channel about *** animals. they showed a few couples of bisexual female chimps who would er... engage in intercourse regularly. this is apparently regular practice for many animals, though they do breed with members of the opposite sex, as well.

finally, they're NOT HURTING ANYONE!!! Other people's relationships aren't any of your business; as long as they're both happy, their relationship doesn't affect you at all. yes, I agree that it is gross to see people making out in public, but that goes for everyone, and many homosexuals are considerate and save it for when they're in a more private environnement.

[Cosmos]

About the animal/corpse thing, there has not been a single person (that I know of) that has felt that way, and if there ever id, that's when we'll deal with it. About the dual topics, I do not think that there has been much spam or major repetition of ideas, and if it bothers you that there are two topics, then let the mods take it. I just wanted to make an anonymous poll, and yes, maybe it should have been in the spam forum, okay?

It seems that the only thing that people think about when homosexuality is mentioned is sex. That is not all there is to it, people! (Yes, there are a few people who have mentioned other subjects.) When you had your first "crush" in third, or fourth grade, where you thinking about how you want to shag the girl you have a crush on? Or the person you like right now, if you are in high school, or middle school, is sex the only thing on your mind? Is the pretty face all that you care for? I hope not, and I am not that way either.

For anybody who still thinks that it is a choice, then could you please explain how people would then commit suicide because of their sexuality? I have wished for multiple years that I was straight almost every waking moment, and you know what? It never worked.

And just as a question to those strongly opposed to *** marriage: Why is this a political issue, instead of a religious one? Why does it have to banned as a law, instead of part of the church? Is buying a permit so that you can see your partner in the emergency room, or share benefits asking too much?

[Blink]

Echo_djinn, on Jan 31 2005, 08:57 AM, said:

I wonder if to much association with your guy friends leads to *** thoughts. Maybe if you spend more time with guys then you do with girls you may start to get attached to them. Or maybe it works the other way around. Who knows.

anything but that! I go to an all guys school and so I get turned on by more girls then I used to, just because I don't see them that often.

Also, you said that Christians are against that, but like I said in the other topic, thats Prodestant christians, not catholics. Catholics have a much more "lets include everyone" view, and because of that, its a bit more lax of a church, but it works a lot more towards the idea of equality.

Just because homosexuality is incorrect naturally, that doesn't mean someone chooses or should be treated badly because of it. It's the same as if you had a child who was a vegetable. They aren't going to have any real children, and the gene won't be passed on, but that doesn't mean you should hate that person and disclude them because of it.

[Cosmos]

Look, I think that you should be happy that we are not contributing to the already over-inflated population of the world, I mean, could more people really help in any way?

The one thing I fail to understand, is how people are so stuborn about the fact that people choose to be ***! The whole "babies are not born ***" is so stupid, as if you define straight as being sexually attracted to the opposite sex, then the baby is not born straight either! I did not want to like somebody of the same sex, but I did, and I have never liked somebody of the opposite sex in that way, and you have no idea how much I would pay to be able to. Do you really think that I want to be a part of a heavily disliked minority?

[Illidan]

Yes, reasons for hatred towards homosexuals are society is definitely overrated and overestimated. Indeed anybody who isn't a homosexual cannot get into the mind of any one of them, thus don't know how they think or feel. Nobody can tell you or anybody else how they think and feel, but yourself. So these things they are assuming are indeed estimates, ones that no one can prove or prove wrong unless they are indeed experiencing homosexuality for themselves. Until then I think it's better for everyone to keep their mouth shut. It may be wrong for yourself but that doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong for everyone else. Unless it's affecting you you should seriously mind your own bussiness and not step in.

That's my opinion.

[Elliott]

Quote

Is the pretty face all that you care for? I hope not, and I am not that way either.

That's because you like boys :P .

[Illidan]

Alot of girls go out with guys because of looks too you know? :P

[Angelic_Raine]

1. I want to make it clear that I wasn't necessarily talking about sex in my posts.
2. Homosexuality is not a choice nor are you born that way. To prove Cosmos post earlier. Can a child choose their sexuality? No they grow into it but they certainly don't choose it.
3. The reason there are more straights than homosexuals is because a>tieing into number 2, the majority of the people living today are not *** and therefore because of influential people in our life, whom aren't ***, children are either directly or indirectly taught that it is not the right way of life. Indirectly, for example in the way that their parents are a straight couple and that influence rubs off on the children. That it is more natural to be with someone of the opposite sex for example. b> many people do not want to come out with their sexuality for fear of people that may persecute them for it.

Those of you that are *** or bisexual, I say be proud of it, you are different and that makes you brave in this aspect! Braver than those who choose to hate homosexuals simply because they are homosexual, those people are just too AFRAID to change their stereotypical image.

[Angelic_Raine]

Agatio, on Jan 31 2005, 11:27 PM, said:

That's because you like boys :P .

Sorry double post but I just saw this. Guys can be pretty too in a different sort of way! Tee Hee!

[Elliott]

God why the hell is there still 2 topics? They are identical!
Yah but guys shouldn't find guys attractive, it's wrong.

[Illidan]

Oh wait Angelic_Raine is a male? Whoops, sorry. ^__^;;

[Elliott]

Wtf are you talking about? In her profile it states she is a female, and there is a photo of her and her husband!

[Illidan]

Oh ok I got confused. o.o... Sorry.

[My Best Wishes]

Cosmos, on Feb 1 2005, 01:54 PM, said:

Look, I think that you should be happy that we are not contributing to the already over-inflated population of the world, I mean, could more people really help in any way?

The one thing I fail to understand, is how people are so stuborn about the fact that people choose to be ***!  The whole "babies are not born ***" is so stupid, as if you define straight as being sexually attracted to the opposite sex, then the baby is not born straight either!  I did not want to like somebody of the same sex, but I did, and I have never liked somebody of the opposite sex in that way, and you have no idea how much I would pay to be able to.  Do you really think that I want to be a part of a heavily disliked minority?

Are you serious, your not attracted to girls at all......... oh....

alright i'm at a loss for words ummm

night

[Illidan]

That's what being "***" is all about.

[Cosmos]

Did Watch not know that I was ***?

Or did he just not know the definition?

Anyway, could a moderator PLEASE move this topic to the spam forum, so that people cannot still get mad at me for making a "duplicate"?

EDIT: Oops! Thought I was in the "Sexuality" poll! Made a mistake! All the more reason to move it to spam! (Not this topic, but the other one!)

[Andross]

Couple of corrections:
(Oh God, this'll be a great joke someday XD)
Our sexual drive cannot work if there is no initiation. Cells have to work in order to create "feelings", and what helps them are hormones. There are hormones that work in a masculine orientation, and others for feminine. Estrogen and testosterone being those hormones. In some homosexuals, the body produces too much of the wrong stuff (as all people have some of each, and for males/females, more than the other).

That would be my logical conclusion. Though these hormones also affect voice (why some homosexuals have deeper/higher pitched voices), so I'm not sure if there is another determination.

But it is a weird switch up with the DNA. I'm not sure if it is a mutation per-say, because it happens too often, but when puberty kicks in, the wrong stuff is generated. So sexuality isn't really a choice. Pre-determined hormones that are made for specific gender codes are what make us sexually active. Sometimes, the DNA just copies the wrong data.

[Cosmos]

While I do agree that hormones do have their effect, research has proven that not all ***s have high levels of estrogen, or low levels of testosterone. The really feminine ones tend to, but most, like me, have normal hormone levels. I think that different mutations cause different "sorts" of homosexuality, some which just affect attraction, some which affect hormones as well. I can't ell you the answer, as it is still unknown, but I do not believe that hormones are the only cause, as taking hormones has not ever been a solution to homosexuality.

[Andross]

Ah, I didn't make myself too clear. Yeah, I think there is some other determination, and just that those may be part of the factor.