Born a Homo? Part II.

[007]

I don't think homophobe is anywhere near as hateful as queer, fag, etc., but I'm reasonable, so I'll reword it.

"Queer, fag, dick licker, etc.," are slang names for a kind of person. Although slang, they are "accurate". "Homophobia" is a clinical name for a person that has "an irrational fear of" homosexuals. THAT is NOT "accurate". Queer supporters have just like dug a word out of a book and applied it like it pertains in order to demonize the opposer's opinion or beliefs.

I feel as though I can speak for all those here that oppose homosexuality, including myself of course, and there's not a one of us here that are "afraid" of queers. What we "oppose" is their disgusting and immoral lifestyle "choice", and that doesn't include the "fear" of anything.

 

[OCA]

so therefore the conclusion must be it's a choice.

Exactly

 

[OCA]

"Queer, fag, dick licker, etc.," are slang names for a kind of person. Although slang, they are "accurate". "Homophobia" is a clinical name for a person that has "an irrational fear of" homosexuals. THAT is NOT "accurate". Queer supporters have just like dug a word out of a book and applied it like it pertains in order to demonize the opposer's opinion or beliefs.

I feel as though I can speak for all those here that oppose homosexuality, including myself of course, and there's not a one of us here that are "afraid" of queers. What we "oppose" is their disgusting and immoral lifestyle "choice", and that doesn't include the "fear" of anything.

This is exactly right. You see you never hear any of these people trying to say what a wonderful and natural thing it is to choose homosexuality, just a bunch of b.s. about animals etc. etc. etc..

Here is the question: can someone prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is a natural and normal act of life? If you think that homosexuals should be allowed to married are you going to also be consistent with the denial of rights argument and allow adults to marry minors, for people to have multiple spouses and are we going to allow beastiality? All are abhorrent behaviors based on common sense like homosexuality. Moral absolutes scare the shit out of you people for some reason or another, what are you hiding?

 

[MissileMan]

This is exactly right. You see you never hear any of these people trying to say what a wonderful and natural thing it is to choose homosexuality, just a bunch of b.s. about animals etc. etc. etc..

Here is the question: can someone prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is a natural and normal act of life? If you think that homosexuals should be allowed to married are you going to also be consistent with the denial of rights argument and allow adults to marry minors, for people to have multiple spouses and are we going to allow beastiality? All are abhorrent behaviors based on common sense like homosexuality. Moral absolutes scare the shit out of you people for some reason or another, what are you hiding?

I notice you blew right past my arguments and changed the subject! And who appointed you "keeper of moral absolutes"? But since you call it a moral absolute and not a legal one, I assume that you are basing your position on the fact the bible says god is against homosexuality. Well BFD! An ancient collection of myths and stories makes claim that it's a sin. You don't have the right to impose your morals on anyone but yourself and your children(until they become adults). Just as you are not obligated to follow the rules of other religions, noone else is obligated to follow or even believe in yours.

As far as your minors and animals argument, neither relationship would be between two consenting adults and therefore, again your point is non-sequitur.

And when you can prove with absolute certainty that homosexuality is a choice not physiological condition, come on back and link your proof. Until then, just because you say it's so, doesn't make it so.

 

[MissileMan]

Exactly

And stop quoting me out of context!

 

[OCA]

I notice you blew right past my arguments and changed the subject! And who appointed you "keeper of moral absolutes"? But since you call it a moral absolute and not a legal one, I assume that you are basing your position on the fact the bible says god is against homosexuality. Well BFD! An ancient collection of myths and stories makes claim that it's a sin. You don't have the right to impose your morals on anyone but yourself and your children(until they become adults). Just as you are not obligated to follow the rules of other religions, noone else is obligated to follow or even believe in yours.

As far as your minors and animals argument, neither relationship would be between two consenting adults and therefore, again your point is non-sequitur.

And when you can prove with absolute certainty that homosexuality is a choice not physiological condition, come on back and link your proof. Until then, just because you say it's so, doesn't make it so.

I don't say its so, nature says its so, biology says its so, every known sense and urge a human is born with says its so. I love the religion argument, you people just cannot accept that somebody bases there position on common sense and critical, intelligent thinking. It always has to be religion with you LMFAO!

You've provided no sound arguments and really its not your fault, there just aren't any on your side.

And just for a little understanding and to see where you are coming from, Missle do you suck cock and take it in the ass also? :teeth:

 

[OCA]

And stop quoting me out of context!

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

 

[MissileMan]

Missle do you suck cock and take it in the ass :

Nope, I am not a homosexual. And there's a waaaaaaa! for you!

 

[OCA]

Nope, I am not a homosexual. And there's a waaaaaaa! for you!

Nice one there Sparky! That shit don't bother me, don't let it bother you.

 

[MissileMan]

I don't say its so, nature says its so, biology says its so, every known sense and urge a human is born with says its so. I love the religion argument, you people just cannot accept that somebody bases there position on common sense and critical, intelligent thinking. It always has to be religion with you LMFAO!

You've provided no sound arguments and really its not your fault, there just aren't any on your side.

And just for a little understanding and to see where you are coming from, Missle do you suck cock and take it in the ass also? :teeth:

You skipped the question again! Who appointed you keeper of the moral absolute? And you must be one hell of a psychic! You KNOW every sense and urge that EVERY human is born with. Look out for the light cockroach! :teeth:

 

[OCA]

You skipped the question again! Who appointed you keeper of the moral absolute? And you must be one hell of a psychic! You KNOW every sense and urge that EVERY human is born with. Look out for the light cockroach! :teeth:

Nobody appointed me dipshit, I unlike you seem to posess common sense which tells me thou shalt not fuck buddy in the ass.

BTW don't cockroaches like to live in dirty,filthy and dark areas such as the asshole of a queer?

Its funny how people who support the social downfall of America like to try and turn the tables the only way they know how to which is to try and demean the opponent, its sad but laughable at the same time. Keep trying twinkle toes, your just the latest in a long line of people who've come up against me on this subject and had their ass handed to them.I look forward to your next mad scramble for a straw.

 

[DKSuddeth]

with 2% of the nation being homosexual/lesbian I seriously doubt it stands a chance of being the social downfall of this country. If anything is going to be the social downfall it will be using any means necessary to force/persuade people to believe in a specific set of morality.

 

[wade]

But their genes will make them crave it, much the way a virgin homosexual finds himself attracted to another male. Hey he too can abstain for sex ! Keep in mind sexual interaction IS a choice. There are people who go their entire lives without it.

You can't bend fact to try and make your point !

This is not true. No person who has not tasted alcholol, in fact who has not tasted quite a bit of alcohol, will crave it.

You are the one who is bending facts to try to make your point.

Show us any evidence whatsoever that anyone is born with a craving for alcohol, except perhaps FAS babies (where mom was a very heavy drinker right up to the childs birth) and these kids are so messed up that they cannot be seriously counted.

Wade.

 

[wade]

Babies born to alcoholic mothers....

Even FAS don't crave alcohol unless given it at some point - they do suffer withdrawls at birth, but do not crave it until they taste it at a later point in life. Never having tasted alcohol they will never look at a bottle of beer and a coke and crave the beer over the coke.

And FAS babies are so messed up in so many ways they are not a valid reference anyway.

Wade.

 

[wade]

Talk about a weak argument; still why should I pay now ??? The amount of school taxes paid per year, would more than pay for my child on a year to year basis.

You greatly underestimate the cost of providing a quality education to a kid. Figure something in the area of $1000/month minimum, and that is very minimum ($50/day).

Here we go with socialism again !

When it comes to education, yes our society has decided to be somewhat socialist. I'm not arguing for it in this case - that is how it is!

Another argument is that you got your education (or at least could have) from taxes paid by others and now it is your turn to pay in.

You're preachin to the quire on this one Eric - I have no kids, will never have any, and I too have to pay for other peoples kids educations.

Wade.

 

[wade]

"Queer, fag, dick licker, etc.," are slang names for a kind of person. Although slang, they are "accurate". "Homophobia" is a clinical name for a person that has "an irrational fear of" homosexuals. THAT is NOT "accurate". Queer supporters have just like dug a word out of a book and applied it like it pertains in order to demonize the opposer's opinion or beliefs.

I feel as though I can speak for all those here that oppose homosexuality, including myself of course, and there's not a one of us here that are "afraid" of queers. What we "oppose" is their disgusting and immoral lifestyle "choice", and that doesn't include the "fear" of anything.

I disagree. You are afraid of gay's because either you have gay tendancies yourself or are afraid someone in your family will. Otherwise you would not care what other people do.

 

[dmp]

You are Christophobic wade - you are afraid of Christ, or that someone in your family will know Him.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Then, in 1991, Simon LeVay set out to find if the sexual dimorphism in INAH2 and 3 could be correlated with sexual orientation. He hypothesized that the size of this region in the brain in homosexual males would be similar in size to that in heterosexual females, and that it would be larger in heterosexual males and lesbians. He dealt mainly with the INAH 3, as it is more significantly different between males and females. He found that male homosexuals had INAH 3's that were comparable in size to heterosexual females. He didn't study lesbians. With results stating that this region of the brain is different in homosexual and heterosexual men, and the knowledge that the size of this same region in rats is determined in utero and directly following birth, the evidence seems to support the theory that homosexuals are "born that way."

http://www.goshen.edu/bio/Biol410/SrSempapers01/christiana.html

 

[dmp]

Then, in 1991, Simon LeVay set out to find if the sexual dimorphism in INAH2 and 3 could be correlated with sexual orientation. He hypothesized that the size of this region in the brain in homosexual males would be similar in size to that in heterosexual females, and that it would be larger in heterosexual males and lesbians. He dealt mainly with the INAH 3, as it is more significantly different between males and females. He found that male homosexuals had INAH 3's that were comparable in size to heterosexual females. He didn't study lesbians. With results stating that this region of the brain is different in homosexual and heterosexual men, and the knowledge that the size of this same region in rats is determined in utero and directly following birth, the evidence seems to support the theory that homosexuals are "born that way."

http://www.goshen.edu/bio/Biol410/SrSempapers01/christiana.html

I bet this study has been refuted and debunked for being 'non-scientific' 10 times on this board.

 

[wade]

This is exactly right. You see you never hear any of these people trying to say what a wonderful and natural thing it is to choose homosexuality, just a bunch of b.s. about animals etc. etc. etc..

Here is the question: can someone prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is a natural and normal act of life? If you think that homosexuals should be allowed to married are you going to also be consistent with the denial of rights argument and allow adults to marry minors, for people to have multiple spouses and are we going to allow beastiality? All are abhorrent behaviors based on common sense like homosexuality. Moral absolutes scare the shit out of you people for some reason or another, what are you hiding?

Why does someone have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that something is in fact the case before people can be given their rights to freedom and equal treatment under the law? Very un-american. You should have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that gayness is not congenital before we even consider denying people any rights and freedoms - and even then I'd oppose it - people have a right to live as they choose.

As for adults marrying minors - come on be serious. Children cannot consent therefore it is rape and that is illegal period. The law is there to protect the child and our society has deemed children are not mature enough to engage in sexual activity with anyone - but with adults it is rape.

Beastiality - hmmm - if its animal cruelty it should not be allowed - other than that, if some sicko wants to fuck his sheep...

Wade.