Phoenix Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 This is just a theory, but I'm pretty sure that enough psychological torture can turn a perfectly straight, bouncing breast loving, spread leg gawking, guy into a homosexual. I'm not going to test this theory though, because I'm the only subject that'd be willing to participate, and as of right now, I'm not willing to participate. Therefore, my theory remains just that. A worthless theory... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 This is just a theory, but I'm pretty sure that enough psychological torture can turn a perfectly straight, bouncing breast loving, spread leg gawking, guy into a homosexual. I'm not going to test this theory though, because I'm the only subject that'd be willing to participate, and as of right now, I'm not willing to participate. Therefore, my theory remains just that. A worthless theory... Sorry, but you're wrong. There have been multiple cases of "de-homosexualising therapy" and none of them have worked. There (used to be/are) hypnotism camps for gays in the world, and none of them work. In fact, the only thing any of them have ever done is turn them off both sexes, which might even be for the worse (since you're stripping someone of the ability to love). Like many others have said, you can't make bend someone else's sexuality. It's just the way they are, like how some people like no tomato sauce and some like it with tomato sauce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLSothe Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Alexis, I hate you for that second post of yours. Anyway, you should all know that I don't have a problem with homosexuality. I used to date dudes. Married to a woman now, but I'm still bisexual. So yeah. Nothin' wrong with it. And it's totally not a choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 This is just a theory, but I'm pretty sure that enough psychological torture can turn a perfectly straight, bouncing breast loving, spread leg gawking, guy into a homosexual. I'm not going to test this theory though, because I'm the only subject that'd be willing to participate, and as of right now, I'm not willing to participate. Therefore, my theory remains just that. A worthless theory... There are numerous studies which state that homosexuality is the end product of sexually abused children. Those studies come from institutions which have other interests in mind. It's propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Spoon Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 How about we listen to what the homosexuals have to say about being gay? Hmm...well they seem to agree that it isn't a choice. Why are we debating if its a choice again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melodia Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 I have no problem with homosexuality, since I'm gay. While I can't say for sure whether it's entirely genetic, I can say for sure that I never chose to be gay. Honestly, why would anyone chose to be part a group that is hated so much, that is so easy to target? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSu Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 How about we listen to what the homosexuals have to say about being gay? Hmm...well they seem to agree that it isn't a choice. Why are we debating if its a choice again? Because people are stupid. If somebody of higher authority says something they WANT to be true, they'll believe it over many people telling them the real truth. Seriously, what makes you believe the scientists over the actual gays? If someone else told you "It's been scientifically proven that you're gay but you just choose to be straight.", are you gonna believe it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolDeath Posted January 19, 2009 Author Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) Scientists agree with what is being said by gay members here so there is no need to believe one over the other. Unless you want to believe propaganda, that is. I can also show you a scientist or two that can "prove" this planet is hollow. Edited January 19, 2009 by Death Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSu Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Guess my point is nobody knows you like you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destiny Hero Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Gay people... Gay people... Judge Judy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Judy Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Gay people... Gay people... Judge Judy. *hugs* You finally realised smexy! *kisses* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ϲharlie Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Gay people... Gay people... Judge Judy. *hugs*You finally realised smexy! *kisses* This is supposed to be a serious discussion, you two. Keep this sort of thing out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Judy Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 This is supposed to be a serious discussion, you two. Keep this sort of thing out of it. Of course. I will restrain myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Media Junkie Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 I don't have a problem with it personally, but I think that the accusations of religious people as biggots is ignorant. I myself am no longer a religious man, but I still get offended when something is done to hurt those who still have faith. When prop 8 passed in California, homosexuals were destroying churches and violently interupting services because they believed that those people were intorelant. Truth be told, those who voted for prop 8 were just supporting their religious values by voting against prop 8. So, in this case, homosexuals were the intolerant ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shuuda Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) Truth be told, those who voted for prop 8 were just supporting their religious values by voting against prop 8. So, in this case, homosexuals were the intolerant ones. What? Those same religious values which are thousands of years old and clearly outdated; not to mention corrupt by greed and power? The same religious values that had nothing against burning "witches", creationism, the inquisitions, and other past prejudices? The same religious values that ignore the peace and tolerance that Jesus preached? I am not supporting what those homosexuals did; burning churches only gave them a bad image. But using "religious values" to justify voting on the clearly prejudge prop 8 is not a good argument. Edited January 19, 2009 by Man of the Year! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Judy Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 What; those same religious values which are thousands of years old and clearly outdated; not to mention corrupt. The same religious values that have nothing against burning "witches", creationism, the past inquisitions, and other past prejudices. The same religious values that ignore the peace and tolerance that Jesus preached? Agreed. Many people use religion to their advantage to get what they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaoman Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 I don't have a problem with it personally, but I think that the accusations of religious people as biggots is ignorant. I myself am no longer a religious man, but I still get offended when something is done to hurt those who still have faith. When prop 8 passed in California, homosexuals were destroying churches and violently interupting services because they believed that those people were intorelant. Truth be told, those who voted for prop 8 were just supporting their religious values by voting against prop 8. So, in this case, homosexuals were the intolerant ones. Except that, ya know, those people's religion is intolerant.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Media Junkie Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 I know what you guys are saying, but I don't agree with it fully. True it's rather stupid for churches to amend their teachings over and over again but suddenly take a stance not to change when gay marriage became big; however, I don't see how peacefully passing a law and exercising religion as protected by the First Amendment, no matter how prejudice, justifies an act of terrorism. How is this situation any less wrong than the burning of African American homes to scare them from voting? The churches are probabbly gonna break down and change their teachings as they've done in the past, so there is no use in resorting to violence to get what you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liz Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 last time i checked, there had been a split between religion and government in the constitution. my main point is that under the constitution, everyone is entitled to the same rights. by denying homosexual couples the right to be married, they are denying the protection and rights that a married couple receives. why shouldn't they receive the same rights? after all, homosexuals decided to spend their lives together "until death do them part" or whatever that quote is. Government and religion are different institutions. by religious people denying homosexuals the right to be married, they are effectively enforcing their religion upon them, which goes against the first amendment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Judy Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 last time i checked, there had been a split between religion and government in the constitution.my main point is that under the constitution, everyone is entitled to the same rights. by denying homosexual couples the right to be married, they are denying the protection and rights that a married couple receives. why shouldn't they receive the same rights? after all, homosexuals decided to spend their lives together "until death do them part" or whatever that quote is. Government and religion are different institutions. by religious people denying homosexuals the right to be married, they are effectively enforcing their religion upon them, which goes against the first amendment. I think there no point using religion as a form of law making any more. The main reason, everyone has different views and there will never be an agreement over controversial issues as long as religion is used as a source of law. Influences can be retrieved from religion scripts to influence government on statutory law making as long as it does not cause affect an individual's human rights. Of course, even if the government make laws, there still will be individuals who disagree. However, I think religion and law making should be separate institutions. Law applies to the whole state and a religion is for an individual to follow. Religion ideology should not be forced upon everyone. In this context preventing homosexual couples from getting married. Religion can never adapt to the social changes in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaoman Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 How is this situation any less wrong than the burning of African American homes to scare them from voting? Wellllll I don't necessarily support their actions but... I'm not sure you can compare homosexuals who are having their rights taken away by the religious community to white people that hate the idea of blacks voting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Media Junkie Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 last time i checked, there had been a split between religion and government in the constitution.my main point is that under the constitution, everyone is entitled to the same rights. by denying homosexual couples the right to be married, they are denying the protection and rights that a married couple receives. why shouldn't they receive the same rights? after all, homosexuals decided to spend their lives together "until death do them part" or whatever that quote is. Government and religion are different institutions. by religious people denying homosexuals the right to be married, they are effectively enforcing their religion upon them, which goes against the first amendment. Ever heard of the free exercise clause? It's, "The freedom of religion and the exercise thereof." Unfortunately, any church has the right to exclude homosexuals from their practices on the grounds of, "That's how we do things around here." So that's one reason why things went down how they went down with prop 8. Also, your reference to a separation of church and state is valid, but there are links between the two that can't be broken. Churches can send lobbyists to try and convince members of Congress to pass legislation, but we shouldn't refuse anyone the right to do that. Also, the very line, "separation of church and state" is open to interpretation as well as the rest of the constitution. I believe when Congress proposed this bill, there were some homosexuals who took it to the Supreme Court thinking it is unconstitutional. As you may notice, there are no homosexuals in the Supreme Court, so they can and did interpret the separation of "church and state" irrelevent to a separation of "church and nation." This is bullshit but that's how it went down. You said that everyone should be allowed the same rights and everyone is, which is why prop 8 was able to pass legally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Media Junkie Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) I'm not sure you can compare homosexuals who are having their rights taken away by the religious community to white people that hate the idea of blacks voting Why not? Elaborate on your thoughts. *sorry for the double post* Edited January 19, 2009 by holyr9k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaoman Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Why not? Elaborate on your thoughts. Because there had already been a California Supreme Court ruling that gays could marry, yet the public was allowed to vote to take away their rights. You mention their first amendment rights, but there is nothing in the first amendment that says a religious group has the right to take the rights of a minority away. and the blacks weren't voting to take away white people's rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolDeath Posted January 19, 2009 Author Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) I don't have a problem with it personally, but I think that the accusations of religious people as biggots is ignorant. They are intolerant of those different from themselves and those who do not follow their beliefs. You do know the definition of the word bigot, right? I myself am no longer a religious man, but I still get offended when something is done to hurt those who still have faith. When prop 8 passed in California, homosexuals were destroying churches and violently interupting services because they believed that those people were intorelant. Straight people did it too, everyone had plenty reason to be pissed off. Shit was completely made up, lies invented by religious groups, in order to blind the general population. Truth be told, those who voted for prop 8 were just supporting their religious values by voting against prop 8. So, in this case, homosexuals were the intolerant ones. There is a large difference between supporting your religious values and trying to make them LAW, effectively pushing them on everyone if they agree or not. This was a case of religious propaganda being used to step on the toes of the California supreme court. "If gays can get marries they will start teaching about homosexuality in kindergarten, that will make young children choose to be gay!" Or my favorite, the letter actually claiming that gay marriage will cause the apocalypse. There is no reason for homosexuals and heterosexuals to be seen any differently according to the law. It is just plain fear and hate that fuels these people, and if you doubt me, I can show you an 8 year old child holding a "God hates fags" sign because mommy said it's right. Edited January 19, 2009 by Death Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.