Experience is a great teacher. It wipes away myth and hype and the BS associated with agendas.  Oh, and thanks for not going to the self-loathing gay guy gimmick. You gays have great control of your opposition. Almost supernaturally so. You have every angle covered with a comeback. It's impressive to see it implemented. Like when Satan was dealing with Jesus.

i've never been a fan of the self-loathing gay guy gimmick. seems stupid to me to use our sexuality as an insult. i've tried to explain this to gays who use it, but nobody ever gets it.

experience may be a good teacher, but what is it teaching us? gotta take personal experience with a grain of salt. personal experience can skew our perception. especially when it is an unpleasant experience. 

did you just compare me and other queers to satan? SWEET.  

Maybe. I know the writers of the New Testament had great trepidation about same-sex adherants. Nero (a man who married a man)  is thought of by many to be the the Anti-Christ mentioned in Revelation. To see how incompatible the GLBT community and culture is with and towards Christians, I do not think the comparison is off-base. If you are an atheist, just laugh it off. I will never proselytize you nor will I ever support violence against anyone other than an attacker.

One of my best friends engages in homosexual sex and he is still a beloved friend to this day. We talk all the time. There's always hope he will voluntarily change his ways. I find the whole homosexual orientation thing congenital sexism.

When GLBTers gain whatever they think they are gaining in their quest for so-called civil rights, they are still always going to be living in an alternate universe simply by numbers and societal/human  norms. That is no ones fault but a genetic mutation right?

Imagine a Christian invited to Hajj?

Now think about a same-sex married lesbian trying to talk at a Church group about husbands? Square pegs in round holes will never work without a great deal of force.

Whatever made a person desire to have same-sex relationships and carry out those "feelings" into behaviors and actions, is not the fault nor the problem of the 99.9% of us on this planet that do not suffer from the condition. (Well I guess it is a problem when the diseases acquired during promiscuos sex infects the rest of us somehow.)

I apologize for applying your name to someone elses post.

Good night.

Parental rights from what. Gays aren't going to go stealing your children! They aren't going to pressure your children into being gay! If your kid turns out gay it's quite simply because your kid is attracted to others of the same sex. Would you love your kid any less? All humans have sexual attractions. You are sexually attracted to women. As am I. My mate Conor is attracted to men. My mate James enjoys anal sex with women. I quite like Asian women. You might prefer Caucasian. What makes one sexual attraction superior to another? They are all natural, it is only when they are harmful (in that it is against consent) that they should not be allowed, i.e. paedophiles, rape fantasists etc. Live and let live I say, so long as you are allowed to live. You play the persecution card too much, no gay person wants to persecute you, they just want the same rights you do!

Actually he was probably a bad example. He does tend to meet girls who actually enjoy it. Usually masochists. He is a real weirdo though, I say mate, I don't really like him that much, but he's fun to hang out with sometimes. My point was that everyone has fetishes.

I'm pretty late in this thread, so I'm just going to comment on several things from several points througout. You'll have to forgive my lack of quotes; it would take more time than I care to put into it to search back through the twenty-some-odd pages of this thread to get them.

I agree with Jacob Cordingly, and to further his point, we all have fairly specific things that we are attracted to. I tend to like women with sharp and angular features, and have noticed that the farther a woman's ancestors lived from mine, the less likely I am to be attracted to them. The catch is that there are exceptions all across the board, and the reason that's a "catch" is because there is no choice involved! We all have things that make us attractive to some people and not others. There are no consistent or objective traits that determine what attracts us to certain people and not others. This doesn't change at all if someone is gay. They don't look at another person of the same gender and say "I want to be attracted to that person.. aaarrrrrnnnnggghhh! There!" any more than you or I do. I've even had plenty of women that were attracted to me, and that I thought were the greatest people in the world that I would love to have as friends for the rest of my life, but simply had no attraction to whatsoever. I loved them as a sister, no matter how much I wished for it to be otherwise (and really truely did).

I wonder, though, if people like bobblehead think that people actually choose their sexuality at 18 months, which is when the traits (non-sexual in nature) of homosexuality begin to appear?

The only exception to this would be with someone that is bi-sexual. Someone that is "bi" could, assuming they are truely equally attracted to both genders, plausibly decide to stick with one and not the other, and still live a perfectly happy and fulfilled life. I would imagine that a certain amount of such people do, at least to some extent (whether they declare themselves totally straight is another matter, although I'm sure the religious ones do and then declare themselves "cured!&quot.

There's also the fact that with so many people like bobblehead around, that care SO much about what everyone else does behind close doors, that they would never actually want to be homosexual. To say that it's "trendy" is absurd, nobody gains acceptance by being gay, they end up loosing a lot of their freedoms by doing so, and place themselves directly at a disadvantage, and in some places they place themselves directly in harms way (gay bashing still exists).

Bobblehead's presentation of homosexuality as being somehow against evolution is also a big fat strawman, and I would say he's been around this site enough to darn well know that, or at least should. Evolution is about the long-term survival of the species, not the perpetuation of a single person's genes. Homosexuality could very well be a balancing factor in a society where the male-to-female ratio is not well balanced, or at least soften the potential effects of potential overpopulation. It was also noted that homosexuality is more likely to occur in the youngest of boys in families with lots of male children; as such, this is perfectly in line with evolution, even bobblehead's strawman of it, as there are already plenty of males to pass on the genes to even an excess. On a wider scale, the youngest one(s) being gay would help to limit one particular set of genes being spread too widely to enhance the chances of genetic diversity, which enhances the opportunities for natural selection to occur.

I would also say that to consider homosexuality "wrong" for the single reason that one act, that comprises only a small part of any relationship (granted it's often considered important, but only to a limited degree), does not eventually result in reproduction, and feel so strongly about it as to want it put into law, that you need to be ready to say that any relationship, and any sexual act, that does not result in reproduction should be banned. After all, many straight couples do all the same things, and not every straight person will have a child. My girlfriend, for example, has a condition that would make it extremely difficult, if not outright impossible, to ever have a child. So by bobblehead's reasoning (rationalization) she should never be allowed to legally marry.

The bottom line is that allowing them to marry would not harm anyone, or interfere with anyone's rights, in any way whatsoever.

Bobblehead talks about things like AIDS, but promiscuity would more likely go down if they were allowed to get married, as would drug use (another important factor in the spread of AIDS and Hep-C). Giving them all the same rights and the same respect as anyone else would resolve a lot of the complaints: the subject wouldn't be "in their face" anymore. They wouldn't have the same emotional stigma about their sexuality so they wouldn't need counseling and wouldn't as likely to engage in self-destructive behavior anymore than anyone else. There wouldn't be complaints of discrimination to take up tax payer money when they file complaints. Things like parades would no longer be necessary, and so the subject would likely fade into the background. Being treated like everyone else would mean that they'd be held up to the same standards as everyone else, after all. Ultimately it would be beneficial for everyone.

Why bobblehead would think that allowing gay marriage would force homosexuals into their church is completely beyond me. Personally I wouldn't have any problem with allowing churches to decide, on an individual level, who they will and will not marry, and I'm sure that many would agree. Why would a gay couple want to get married at a church that so heavily disapproves of them, when they could go to another church that would happily accept them? That's like saying that *I* would want to force your church to perform my marriage. It's been said a hundred times over already, but they are not trying to force homosexuality on anyone. They also know quite well that homosexuality is not a choice, and so to think that they are trying to "recruit" people is patently absurd. At the very most, a few may be trying to get people that are already gay to come out of the closet.

When it comes down to it, the gay marriage issue is NOT about the churches at all; it's about the government, and they have absolutely no right to dictate morality in matters that do not directly interfere with anyone else's constitutional rights. That's what "Separation of Church and State" is all about, and what anyone thinks about homosexuality is really besides the point. THAT'S what the christians in America need to understand. If their church wants to refuse to marry someone, gay or not, because that person/couple doesn't meet their moral standards then fine, whatever. The government, though, has no right to make such a distinction.

The assertion that homosexuals are somehow "opressing" christians is, however, both offensive and disturbing. It's like saying that whites have been oppressed by blacks since segregation ended. How anyone can claim to be a victim from a minority trying to gain acceptance is beyond me, and I find it disgusting and dishonest to the absolute extreme, and anyone that tries to claim as much instantly loses any morsel of credibility in my eyes. The fact that it's used to justify extreme measures of opression (in my state they actually tried to pass a bill to ammend the state constitution to disallow gay marriage) is sickening to an extreme. It's almost as disturbing as their general obsession with the act of sex in general. With that kind of self-destructive obsession and repression, it's no wonder so many of the clergy are homosexual pedophiles!

One of the reasons that I feel strongly about the subject is that my gf and I have a lot of homosexual friends, and I have known many over the course of my life. I've seen a number of them that remain emotionally traumatized due to the stigma of their sexuality, living in a constant state of fear. To make matters worse there are then others that we know that are very well balanced and secure in who they are, who you would never even think are gay, and they have the hardest time finding a real relationship purely because so many others are so insecure that they just can't co-exist for any period of time. So they have lots of "flings", but only because they can't find someone "real" enough to settle down with. I also knew a homosexual man, a doctor, who had adopted an orphan from Africa as an infant. The child was about 3 years old, very very intelligent and well balanced - and very very clearly because of the obviously overwhelming amount of love and care that this man had for the child. The man was simply the single best father I had ever seen, who was giving this child the kind of education, care, and love that makes Norman Rockwell families look like trailer trash, and they were going to take the child away from him because he's gay. The fact that he has the ability, will, love, and resources to give the child a better upbringing than 99.999999999% of everyone else in the world didn't matter.

If the stigma were removed, the majority of them would just lead quiet lives no different than the rest of us, save for what they may or may not do behind closed doors.

That is patently false. massresistance.org has proof that the GLBT community recruits heavily in grades as low as they go.  

It would prove that my child lacks good reasoning powers. And I would love my child differently as their "friends" would not be welcomed in my house. No differently than any other out of control promiscuous pals, drug addicts or mentally ill buddies or other bad influences.  My children are human beings. Capable od using a reasoning brian to overcome animalistic behaviors. If all goes well that is.

Neither anal or oral sex are "natural" in the sex act. It is amazing that you do not know that. It's the reason why gay flamingos cannot produce baby flamingos.

See, it is not the anti-gay crowd that is the ignorant one.

I just prefer to hang with a more morally sound - and therefor less diseased - group of friends. That is wrong how, or why?

Funny thing, my mom is an atheist. (She goes on here, but I'm not saying who she is just in case she gets mad ) And is trying to convert me to atheism DON'T GET ME WRONG! I'M KINDA IN THE MIDDLE RIGHT NOW . So I decided to interview some of my friends about this issue *Homosexuality* . Again, I DO NOT HATE THEM, (In fact. My ex was bi )
Moving on...
So I was interviewing my Protestant Christian friend.
Me: "What's your opinion on Homosexuality?"
Friend: "Well religiously-"
Me *Cutting in*: I don't care about religiously. I want your opinion."
Friend: Well, I don't really mind them. I mean, a lot of our friends are at least bi. But religiously
(Yes, I go to an art school. There are lots of different kinds of people there.)
Me: I don't care about your damn religion. (Sorry mom, it slipped) How about gay marrage?
Friend: Well religiously-
Me: I give up.
So then I turn with my camera to my another one of my friends. I didn't even open my mouth...
Friend2: Go athiesm!


So basically my point is... Churches don't allow Christians to have their own opinion... I mean, I believe there is a God. I'm here to maybe research more and prove or disprove it.. So.... But really, what is wrong with homosexuality? If their happy then who gives a crap.... I believe my mom told me a bible quote.

"If man lies with man, the way man lies with woman. He shall be put to death."

I got to thinking about that...And it never said anything about women... XD
But if that is true. Than "God" Is harsh... And I guess the Church is making it so Christians hate everyone who is; gay, not of their faith, and maybe some others....
So I guess it's still considered wrong because our idiotic president Bush said so...

Of course gay people are going to attack fundamentalist Christianity, because Christianity oppresses them! You might believe that it is God's word that it is wrong. But you cannot justify those claims rationally or logically.

attraction has nothing to do with reasoning powers. you can't reason yourself in and out of attraction any more than a gay person could. it's like thinking you can reason yourself out of being hungry.

how is it not natural?

and yet your posts are chalk full of ignorance. and contradiction. so you haven't come even close to showing that this statement is true.

you hang out with lesbians?

btw, none of my friends is diseased. and they're also morally sound.

Bobble Head,

Please justify your claims more vigorously. My point is that in order to justify your claims you would need to justify the truth of the Bible, something that is logically impossible.

[Edited for Ad Hominem]

Yes, that's fine.  Even better, a nice picture of a chinchilla! 

Maybe he thought "The Manhole" was a bar for construction workers?

I learned something today, a radar is what a ship uses when the ship hits on another ship.

 To you. Those of us that see "in the Bible" a great amount of factual evidence that those that wrote it were not writing fiction, your views and opinions are just that you want another way of life.

That's OK.

I noticed today in the news, that "Jerusalem" is a real city.

Keep them for Rosie O'Donnell and the legions of other sad and miserable people living the homosexual lifestyle. Those that survive it that is.

I'm off to watch my children (I mean MY children), get up and get ready to go to the pool.

Would you care to show me some evidence that it is not fiction? Or do you just believe their to be evidence?

I actually feel very sorry for you Bobble Head. You come across as being extremely young, almost like a little child I want to pat on the head and give a peice of chocolate to (but not in a creepy way). I'm sure you're probably actually a bit older than me (I'm only 20). Your conspiracy theory is no better than the common one that the Royal family are evil space aliens in disguise who want to abduct and probe our children.

If anything it is Christians who want to indoctrinate young children, "save" the sinners (or people who simply do not believe in the ridiculous) and spread the Christian Faith across the globe in a tirade of idiocy.

You haven't even shown what is wrong with promiscuity. Well, ok, it can lead to increases in STDs but there is such a thing as safe sex with a condom. But in general it is two consenting adults enjoying themselves. You don't even properly justify you just say "promiscuity promiscuity promiscuity" as if we're supposed to gawp in shock and horror at the word. I base my morality on what does harm here and now in the real world, if someone were to rape someone, that would be harmful, if two people have consenting adult sex that is not harmful to either party. I do not base my morality on some magical sky-daddy or an ancient bronze age text. All you have is an ancient text, a magical sky daddy, and a conspiracy theory. Not very convincing is it?

I don't think he can, I don't think he's that well endowed with mental faculties. Sad to say.

i also came from a "normal" family. my parents are heterosexual and have been married for over thirty years. they are fundamentalist christians, and i was raised to believe the bible was the literal and inerrant word of god. i attended christian school. i didn't meet another person i knew was gay until i was in my later teens. and yet from the time when i first started getting crushes on people (about age 12 or 13), they were on peoeple of the same sex. i was never recruited or indoctrinated by gay person or group, and i still managed to turn out gay (much to my parents' displeasure). so the idea of recruitment to me is so stupid. i wish i had been exposed to education about being gay when i was a kid, then maybe it wouldn't have taken 22 years for me to finally accepted i was gay. but i got lucky in that i didn't get married and try to have a family before i accepted it. now THAT would have made me sad and miserable. but being gay? far from it.