Homophobia

humanji

stovelid wrote: »

I'm in my 30s and I've unfortunately never come across a couple of any persuasion having sex in public.

If you're talking about PDAs, they're annoying, but in my experience, they're not exclusive to any particular sexual orientation.

The depressing fact here is that, as ever, a lot of people are equating gay couples with overly sexual public displays when the real issue is that they are offended by seeing same-sex couples doing everyday stuff like holding hands or kissing in public.

Actually, re-reading you post made me realise I got you wrong. I thought you were just labelling anyone who didn't want to see homosexual sex or the more indecent PDA's as homophobic, where my point was that not many people want to see any sex of indecent PDA's of any kind. But since I missed your point, it doesn't matter.

jim o doom

Lu Tze wrote: »

Its amazing how the prevailing winds change in AH (not singling you out jim BTW)

Everybody was up in arms yesterday about the pyjama brigade!

yeah yer dead right I suppose - and being honest the pyjama brigade does annoy me - but not so much the fact that they are wearing pyjamas - but the general habits and disposition of the people in the pyjamas!

but there again I am tarring them all with the same brush as they are generally in the same socio economic grouping.. but hell I don't think less of them due to wearing pyjamas for the most part - I just judge (mentally haha) any scumbag actions they might make; being rude to passers by or shop workers etc, or being racist or whatever..
I try to reserve my judgements for the actions of people that harm others for the most part. and i hate morons - im a moronophobe. and that probably means im a closet moron!!

Dragan

Terry wrote: »

Attack the post etc.

Sorry, meant it in the descriptive as opposed to calling the poster himself retarded. I should probably just cease using that term on line.

Lu Tze

jim o doom wrote: »

I try to reserve my judgements for the actions of people that harm others for the most part. and i hate morons - im a moronophobe. and that probably means im a closet moron!!

Thats ok Jim, we have a support group...AH

Sesudra

me-skywalker wrote: »

you knew him????!



i repeat, I NEVER said because i have gay firends that my opinion is either right or ok, I said it because I have experience with gay ppl and its not just to post here and discriminate against gay ppl that I started this thread.

and my gay friends are still my friend because they know while my views on homosexuality are against their own nature and views it does not define me as a person and i dont hate them for that and they dont hate me for that.



there was a point of this but all the kids talk has put me off track............

ok,to reply to your original point which was to talk about homophobia,and your opening remark was that we should never be allowed marry and that the "act" sickens you.as a gay man,those remarks offend me,as did your wheeling out of your gay friends at the end of the original post.

stovelid

humanji wrote: »

Actually, re-reading you post made me realise I got you wrong. I thought you were just labelling anyone who didn't want to see homosexual sex or the more indecent PDA's as homophobic, where my point was that not many people want to see any sex of indecent PDA's of any kind. But since I missed your point, it doesn't matter.

Fair enough.

Nah, I don't like really graphic PDAs either - no matter who it is.

I just meant that some people seem to be sugaring up an obvious distaste for gay people by saying 'it's fine but keep it off the streets'.

jim o doom

Lu Tze wrote: »

Thats ok Jim, we have a support group...AH

Hey everybody - my names jim and I've been a moronophobe & well.. I guess now that I can admit it to myself *sobs* I've been a closet moron the whole time! *shudder* Just being able to talk about it is helping me!

jim o doom

stovelid wrote: »

Fair enough.

Nah, I don't like really graphic PDAs either - no matter who it is.

I just meant that some people seem to be sugaring up an obvious distaste for gay people by saying 'it's fine but keep it off the streets'.

I actually read a lot of them that way myself. PDA's have never bothered me though
any stranger in my face - that bothers me, or rude cnuts being ignorant to be for no good reason? makes my blood boil - but those people are actually doing something TOO me..
stuff that's harmless and doesnt affect me? I don't see the point in caring.. but then again I am lazy.. maybe caring about nonsensical rubbish is just too much effort for me!

turgon

What difference is it to ANYONE if two consenting (wo)men have sex in a private residence? None. Its none of your buisness.

Stercus Accidit

OP you really need to have a long think about this "issue" (non-issue) before you go spouting all this IMO shyte again.

Knowing a few gay people doesn't make a damn bit of difference to your opinion, and usually I'll read these threads but its just impossible with this one, its such random aimless yammering and your replies seem to be constant compromise, self contradiction and some vague opinion or another.

Marriage is a legal contract, gays should be allowed enter a legal contract, we have come on a bit in this country in the last few years.


The church is a little club with silly little rules, they can say no to whoever asks them for one of their weddings, which is just a marriage with some added bells whistles and churchy goings on.

I don't think any homosexual would want a ceremony approved by one of the most homophobic, hypocritical organistaions in the world, and even if they did, well, maybe the church should be legally obliged to allow them.


It comes down to equality, and gay people are people first and foremost, just like you, and any legal right you have, they have.


You can say you think what they do is disgusting, whatever, feel free, I know I wouldn't fancy giving some chap a billy joel, but they can do whatever the hell they want once no-one is involving me. But what they want to do, is very much ok, regardless of whether or not you would enjoy it.


Anyone in this day and age who considers the fact that there are gays in the world as a problem or something for them personally to have an issue with, or consider as an issue that affects them, needs to have a long think about why that is, and why it shouldn't be.

me-skywalker

Sesudra wrote: »

ok,to reply to your original point which was to talk about homophobia,and your opening remark was that we should never be allowed marry and that the "act" sickens you.as a gay man,those remarks offend me,as did your wheeling out of your gay friends at the end of the original post.

fair enough. im sorry your easily offended.

Jesus Juice

me-skywalker wrote: »

why because my opinion doesnt agree with your opinion? i havnt used any slanderous or vulgar terms, yes im homophobic but i have alot of respect people and their lives and if there is a contradiction tahts because there's a contradiciton in all of us. Homosexual activity is a contradiction to life, the basic human nautre to procreate and reproduce.



what do you mean why do i care? thats just a silly statement, why does anyone care about anything? why does anyone have an opinion? or vote? because i live in this world. life affects life.

I seen this thread and i thought this was going to be a good formal disscussion until I seen the OP could only back up his narrow minded views by sprouting nonsense...Also it has been found that dolphins,penguins,whales and many more species of animals have homosexual tendencies so how is it a contradiction to human nature?

Life affects life?:rolleyes:Only if you let it

Jigsaw

Help is at hand

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-7858.html

n1ck

OP, have you ever thought that the way your gay friends act is because they are in the presence of a someone like you? Who thinks what they participate in and enjoy in their own lives is wrong?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Actually, now that I think about it, I have some friends who can't or won't present a logical argument, nor apologise for being quite offensive, and constantly back track and contradict themselves and I'm grand with it like, I just wish they wouldn't do it in public it's not right and I don't want it waved in my face.

me-skywalker

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

OP you really need to have a long think about this "issue" (non-issue) before you go spouting all this IMO shyte again.

Knowing a few gay people doesn't make a damn bit of difference to your opinion, and usually I'll read these threads but its just impossible with this one, its such random aimless yammering and your replies seem to be constant compromise, self contradiction and some vague opinion or another.

Marriage is a legal contract, gays should be allowed enter a legal contract, we have come on a bit in this country in the last few years.


The church is a little club with silly little rules, they can say no to whoever asks them for one of their weddings, which is just a marriage with some added bells whistles and churchy goings on.

I don't think any homosexual would want a ceremony approved by one of the most homophobic, hypocritical organistaions in the world, and even if they did, well, maybe the church should be legally obliged to allow them.


It comes down to equality, and gay people are people first and foremost, just like you, and any legal right you have, they have.


You can say you think what they do is disgusting, whatever, feel free, I know I wouldn't fancy giving some chap a billy joel, but they can do whatever the hell they want once no-one is involving me. But what they want to do, is very much ok, regardless of whether or not you would enjoy it.


Anyone in this day and age who considers the fact that there are gays in the world as a problem or something for them personally to have an issue with, or consider as an issue that affects them, needs to have a long think about why that is, and why it shouldn't be.

why because my opinion that gay people shouldnt be allowed to marry contravenes your opinion that i shouldnt have an opinion that doesn adhere to the 'new age' society principles of liberalism and fredoom... and that through knowledge and experience which form bases of opinions i shouldnt be allowed to use this as sound construct to use in a discussion about homosexuality... and because you come in all high and mighty with a stomp and romp about this day and age and equality and and the church that your opinion is anymore valid or appreciated than mine?

really at the end of the day this has been ran for years and years and everybody has their own opinion and thats good and discussin them openly can only benefit all sides of the equatation..... as a man without a voice is a man benign.

Lu Tze

Jesus Juice wrote: »

Also it has been found that dolphins,penguins,whales and many more species of animals have homosexual tendencies so how is it a contradiction to human nature?

First things first, i completely disagree with the op, his opening statement is ridiculous.

Secoundly, i don't think anybody should be using facts like the above to back up the human nature arguement, as it can be easily turned. It is well known that rape occurs with dolphins, however i can't see anybody justifying it here as natural and part of human nature (though i am sure somebody will try and do just that now )

midlandsmissus

n1ck wrote: »

OP, have you ever thought that the way your gay friends act is because they are in the presence of a someone like you? Who thinks what they participate in and enjoy in their own lives is wrong?

Im not the OP but have said a few similiar things to him.

Something else to add..I got talking to this guy in a nightclub who told me that he had been beaten up in a savage attck for being gay. Got set upon by three lads in a park. I sat the whole night with him consoling him and I meant it.

I dont like some things they do, but I want them to have the same rights as every body else and be able to go around with about being attacked.

tipex

as we're on the subject of homosexuality there's something that I and a good friend of mine are always curious about and I don't have a close enough gay friend to ask of. Why quite often is that gay people present themselves physically almost like the opposite sex. For example you often see lesbians who dress and present themselves in quite a masculine manner and vice versa for gay men. I understand this is somewhat of a generalisation but not a massive one, and I'm not totally backwards just genuniely curious and perhaps noone can answer this but i'm just wondering regarding opinions why. But it sometimes seems a contradiction if you see a lesbian with someone who moreso represents a man than a woman. I know if I was with a girl I'd go for someone like pink or kelis as opposed to kd lang

MIN2511

Lads, take it easy with the OP... he's entitled to think what he wants...

me-skywalker

n1ck wrote: »

OP, have you ever thought that the way your gay friends act is because they are in the presence of a someone like you? Who thinks what they participate in and enjoy in their own lives is wrong?

an what might i ask is someone like me? i dont hit gay people, or spit on gay people, or attack them. And would never do that to any persons and would intervene if i saw someone doing this wheter it was agaisnt my beliefs or not.

sure if my friend is into drugs,self-harm,abuse, and i think that is wrong and 'oh sure it doesnt affect me' 'whats happens behind their doors is upto themselves' it doesnt mean im not entitled to an opinion... and im not out spouting about it this is a forum for discussion on such topics and ive seen many views here and still my mind is not changed.

Puddleduck

I couldnt give a sh!te either way. Marraige is a legal contract and allows a couple certain benifits etc so yea, I think they should be allowed to marry, regardless of the church, coz at the end of the day, its a man in a dress telling you your going to hell for being human.

I actually think that being gay is natural, I think its a way for nature to try reduce its numbers. It does happen in nature, and while yes, animals can rape other animals it is still a 'natural' thing. That they have the drive to do it. Animals dont have a concience though.

liah

So if you believe homosexuality isn't a choice, how exactly are you going to go about contesting the natural occurrence homosexuality (as well as other "taboo" sex acts) among animals, which is quite well-documented?

From Wikipedia (and don't bring up the "oh, it's wiki, it's not able to be used-- the content there is well-cited, thank you):

An estimated one-quarter of all black swan pairings are homosexual and they steal nests, or form temporary threesomes with females to obtain eggs, driving away the female after she lays the eggs.

Studies have shown that 10 to 15 percent of female western gulls in some populations in the wild are lesbian.

Mallards have rates of male-male sexual activity that are unusually high for birds, in some cases, as high as 19% of all pairs in a population.

The Amazon River dolphin or boto has been reported to form up in bands of 3-5 individuals enjoying group sex. The groups usually comprise young males and sometimes one or two females. Sex is performed in non-reproductive ways, using snout, flippers and general rubbing, without regards to gender. They will sometimes perform homosexual penetration of the blowhole, the only known example of nasal sex.

Courtship, mounting, and full anal penetration between bulls has been noted to occur among American Bison. Also, mounting of one female by another is common among cattle.

The Bonobo, which has a matriarchal society (unusual amongst apes), is a fully bisexual species -- both males and females engage in heterosexual and homosexual behavior, being noted for lesbianism in particular. About 60% of all sexual activity in this species is between two or more females. While the homosexual bonding system in Bonobos represent the highest frequency of homosexuality known in any species, homosexuality has been reported for all great apes (a group which includes humans), as well as a number of other primate species.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals for boatloads more.

Don't you dare go telling anyone here that it's "unnatural" and "wrong." It is an entirely natural part of life, so grow up, there's a lot bigger things to be worried, concerned, or upset about.

Seriously.. some people absolutely astonish me.

stovelid

Puddleduck wrote: »

I actually think that being gay is natural, I think its a way for nature to try reduce its numbers.

I wish we wouldn't go down the road of saying what is 'natural' even if, in this case, it's a well-meaning counter-assertion.

Lu Tze

Puddleduck wrote: »

Animals dont have a concience though.

Showing my reason for saying its not much of an arguement, bring on the holier than thou brigade to tell you how you are proving there point, homosexual acts are a sin, and it is our "conscience" which keeps us from doing it yada yada

pierrot

Having read the thread straight through, it seems like almost everybody is rejecting the OP and defending the rights of gays with quite a lot of passion. If boards.ie is to be taken as a fairly varied slice through the demographic of modern Ireland, I say Yay Ireland!!!!

Genghiz Cohen

liah wrote: »

An estimated one-quarter of all black swan pairings are homosexual and they steal nests, or form temporary threesomes with females to obtain eggs, driving away the female after she lays the eggs.

Savage, that's well clever.:D

Chimps have a form of conscience, if a rig is set up so they have to pull a lever/other to get some food and sends an electric jolt through a nearby chimp, they will starve them selves rather than hurt their comrade.
If chimps have that, why not those crafty homo-swans, and other animals?

raah!

I think they should have the same right to legal marriage as infertile straight couples.

But it would be a bit of a strech to not allow them but then allow a straight(infertile) couple. Unless the government didn't think that two men/women could raise an adopted child as well as two straight parents. Which is a legitimate concern really, and one which is hard to test scientifically.

"oooh but Iiiiim not religious"

Stercus Accidit

me-skywalker wrote: »

why because my opinion that gay people shouldnt be allowed to marry contravenes your opinion that i shouldnt have an opinion that doesn adhere to the 'new age' society principles of liberalism and fredoom...

No, I simply dissagree with your opinion, understand? We don't all have to get along you know, ironic, in that you are accusing me of being the one following idealism

oeb

MIN2511 wrote: »

Lads, take it easy with the OP... he's entitled to think what he wants...

And would it be ok if I started threads on AH saying that I think black people should be treated as second class citizens? Just because it's something you don't care about min, it does not mean that other people do not feel strongly about them. Sure, he has a right to his beliefs, and I have a right to attack his beliefs if I think they are idiotic.

Zadkiel

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Savage, that's well clever.:D

Chimps have a form of conscience, if a rig is set up so they have to pull a lever/other to get some food and sends an electric jolt through a nearby chimp, they will starve them selves rather than hurt their comrade.
If chimps have that, why not those crafty homo-swans, and other animals?

Bonobo chimps will also have recreational sex, are they sensitive lovers....who knows. I still think All references to animals are irrelevant in a discussion about people.

Stercus Accidit

Zadkiel wrote: »

Bonobo chimps will also have recreational sex, are they sensitive lovers....who knows. I still think All references to animals are irrelevant in a discussion about people.

I saw a mouse be homophobic to another mouse once... oh hang on.

Genghiz Cohen

Zadkiel wrote: »

I still think All references to animals are irrelevant in a discussion about people.

Well it's just to prove that all of 'gods creations' can be a little fruity, so it's wrong for churchies to bash gays.
Everything else is Ot but plain interesting.

JC 2K3

me-skywalker wrote: »

Homosexual activity is a contradiction to life, the basic human nautre to procreate and reproduce.

Are you against condoms too?

raah!

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Well it's just to prove that all of 'gods creations' can be a little fruity, so it's wrong for churchies to bash gays.
Everything else is Ot but plain interesting.

"Wrong" for churchies is defined by the bible. The bible says homosexuality is wrong. If you want to show "churchies" something is wrong, you should use the bible, not evolutionary biology

Puddleduck

Zadkiel wrote: »

Bonobo chimps will also have recreational sex, are they sensitive lovers....who knows. I still think All references to animals are irrelevant in a discussion about people.

Its a little arrogant of people to go on about being gay being 'unnatural' and completely dissasociating ourselfs from the animals. We all have animal urges. Thats fact. Some peoples urges are towards those of the same sex. To me that seems natural.

Also being gay is a 'sin' because the church makes it so. Having sex before marraige is also a sin but people pick and choose which sins should be adherred to.

Quint

me-skywalker wrote: »

Homosexual activity is a contradiction to life, the basic human nautre to procreate and reproduce.

Mr.Lizard wrote: »

No problem with them as a people and have no problem with them getting married or even adopting kids. But I am sick of these liberals who go round backing them up saying things like "it's natural behavior". It's not natural. Forget about the enjoyment you have have from being in a relationship with and/or having sex with a woman or a man .... or a sheep (and whatever component act that entail), basic biological design and historical experience indicate that sticking your cock up other mans arse is a way of propagating the species is not going to work.

Would you 2 think it's ok for a 10 year old menstrating girl to have sex with a 60 year old man? The woman can have kids, the man can produce sperm, they can reproduce and most importantly "it's natural".

Zadkiel

Puddleduck wrote: »

Its a little arrogant of people to go on about being gay being 'unnatural' and completely dissasociating ourselfs from the animals. We all have animal urges. Thats fact. Some peoples urges are towards those of the same sex. To me that seems natural.

Also being gay is a 'sin' because the church makes it so. Having sex before marraige is also a sin but people pick and choose which sins should be adherred to.

True but I didnt say it was unnatural.:)

TwoShedsJackson

OP Cliff Notes: I know some gay people so I can say what I like and be a judgemental, sexually repressed tool about them.

javaboy

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

OP Cliff Notes: I know some gay people so I can say what I like and be a judgemental, sexually repressed tool about them.

Careful now.

Ass

Hitler was rumoured to be a homosexual... just puttin' that out there.

Lu Tze

Puddleduck wrote: »

Its a little arrogant of people to go on about being gay being 'unnatural' and completely dissasociating ourselfs from the animals. We all have animal urges. Thats fact. Some peoples urges are towards those of the same sex. To me that seems natural.

Also being gay is a 'sin' because the church makes it so. Having sex before marraige is also a sin but people pick and choose which sins should be adherred to.

How do we decide which of those animal urges are illegal/immoral in our society? There is no point in using the natural world as justifying behaviour.

The church is a manmade institution, and makes mistakes (of which this is one of them). It is shocking what (especially in the old testament) is allowed and not. You either want to adhere to it or don't. But i don't think that you should force a change on those people who do believe in the institution, which is why for as long as the church doesn't want gay marriage, then there shouldn't be for marriages (within its remit).

I see no problem with civil marriages though

Genghiz Cohen

Lu Tze wrote: »

The church is a manmade institution, and makes mistakes

The pope is infallible, he can not be wrong.

useful_contacts

me-skywalker wrote: »

Homosexual activity is a contradiction to life, the basic human nautre to procreate and reproduce.

But i bet you enjoy lesbian porn though

Hypicrote much?

humanji

Quint wrote: »

Would you 2 think it's ok for a 10 year old menstrating girl to have sex with a 60 year old man? The woman can have kids, the man can produce sperm, they can reproduce and most importantly "it's natural".

You're confusing morality with nature.

aoibhebree

me-skywalker wrote: »

Homosexual activity is a contradiction to life, the basic human nautre to procreate and reproduce.

Oh so if a heterosexual couple decides they don't want to have kids, they're not worthy to share the same world as you either? :rolleyes:

I honestly cannot understand how someone could get so agitated about what other people do with their personal lives. It has no effect whatsoever on you or anyone else! OP, maybe you should concentrate on your own love-life instead of dictating to others who they should and should not be with.

Lu Tze

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

The pope is infallible, he can not be wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility

"Since the solemn declaration of Papal Infallibility by Vatican I on July 18, 1870, this power has been used only once ex cathedra"

Papal infallibility does not affect my statement.

javaboy

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

The pope is infallible, he can not be wrong.

Not quite true. The whole infallibility thing is a bit more complicated than that. The Pope can still commit sin and be wrong etc. Only certain utterances fall under the infallibility rule.

Homophobic people statistically have a 98.4% chance of being gay themselves and are merely trying to cover up their own flaming desires. Fact.

Morzadec

me-skywalker wrote: »

Homosexual activity is a contradiction to life, the basic human nautre to procreate and reproduce.

That's a fairly reductive view of human sexuality. I thought it was almost universally accepted (except by the odd ultra-conservative and extreme religious types) that human sexuality expands far beyond a biological 'programming' to reproduce the species.

I'm sure almost everyone on this thread has sexual urges that are completely seperate from any desire to reproduce hence condoms, the pill etc...

By your logic, a girl giving you a BJ is a 'contradiction to life'.