Bisexuality in the year 1000 BC

[Greenman]

Preducial bigotry against race, religion, national identity, and sexual persuasion is not tolerated by society and to the vast extent, within law.

Expressed hateful opinions are not sacrosanct against justified critique and condemnation. If you are offended by applicable charcterising language then do not offend.

Unfortunately there are those, such as yourself, upon this forum have tend to promote and defend prejudicial bigotry but have this innane persecution complex that lends themselves to twist that they are the prime targets of oppressive attack.

If one finds offense to being critiqued as a bigot, the cvilised solution is simple - stop portraying yourself as one.

You missed the boat entirely. There is no law against bigotry that I've ever heard of. There is in fact, hate groups that are protected under the law. But that's beside the point. Just so we're clear here, I don't see your intolerance as being any better than anyone else's. You feel it's ok to hate people for hating people, I don't. Is that so hard to understand? I know you feel you're hate is justified, but the same can be said for the folks you hate.
Also, I have no persecution complex. I get along fine with just about everyone, and there is no one I would wish harm on, can you say the same thing?

 

[Retro Rob]

Well, yes it does say plenty. It say's that I don't care for your form of hate more than any other.
Just an FYI, no one has to like, approve of, or condone, anyone or group that bothers them. The one thing they are required to do is tolerate them, that's it.

You missed the boat entirely. There is no law against bigotry that I've ever heard of. There is in fact, hate groups that are protected under the law. But that's beside the point. Just so we're clear here, I don't see your intolerance as being any better than anyone else's. You feel it's ok to hate people for hating people, I don't. Is that so hard to understand? I know you feel you're hate is justified, but the same can be said for the folks you hate.
Also, I have no persecution complex. I get along fine with just about everyone, and there is no one I would wish harm on, can you say the same thing?

Good points, dude.

 

[werepossum]

Good points, dude.

Seconded. At some point tolerance can itself be stretched into intolerance.

However, the OP's point - that homosexual behavior - is not a modern creation - is certainly valid. I don't think anyone even denies this. There is a point to be made that widespread acceptance of homosexual behavior is fairly modern in society, but there have always been accommodations - the Persian or Greek form of man-boy love and/or warrior-warior sex are probably common to more societies than not. And with modern hygiene, motorized science-driven farming, and medicine, homosexual behavior should be more accepted as it no longer forms any threat to society.

 

[Retro Rob]

Seconded. At some point tolerance can itself be stretched into intolerance.

However, the OP's point - that homosexual behavior - is not a modern creation - is certainly valid. I don't think anyone even denies this. There is a point to be made that widespread acceptance of homosexual behavior is fairly modern in society, but there have always been accommodations - the Persian or Greek form of man-boy love and/or warrior-warior sex are probably common to more societies than not. And with modern hygiene, motorized science-driven farming, and medicine, homosexual behavior should be more accepted as it no longer forms any threat to society.

Yeah, but I think that it's modern in the sense that now it's gotten politically powerful.. especially compared to like 50 years ago. We even have our president publicly endorsing it -- during the Inaguration Speech as well.

I don't think its ever been done before.

I personally never saw it as a "threat to society" myself, but I think it is immoral behavior.

That being said, I tolerate it and won't try to influence laws to fit my opinion, while not endorsing it, or accepting it at the same time. Each to their own. Whatever floats your boat... that's basically my view of it.

 

[werepossum]

Yeah, but I think that it's modern in the sense that now it's gotten politically powerful.. especially compared to like 50 years ago. We even have our president publicly endorsing it -- during the Inaguration Speech as well.

I don't think its ever been done before.

I personally never saw it as a "threat to society" myself, but I think it is immoral behavior.

That being said, I tolerate it and won't try to influence laws to fit my opinion, while not endorsing it, or accepting it at the same time. Each to their own. Whatever floats your boat... that's basically my view of it.

I'd say the President is not so much endorsing it as endorsing not legally discriminating against it - which seems reasonable. But no, I don't think that's ever been done before.

 

[Whiskey16]

In brief:

Those intolerant of gays expect tolerance for their intolerance....

They expect us to endure and not interfere with condemnation against the presented bigotry.

Is this inane and total detachment from reality due to piss poor language skills and/or a detachment from reality....?

Some voices on this forum are the antisocial and destructive dregs of society.

Their stubbornness will not deter me from calling a spade a spade. Bigotry is easily identified and open for derision. None should expect tolerance for prejudicial derision and a forum safe from rebuttal.,

 

[Whiskey16]

I personally never saw it as a "threat to society" myself, but I think it is immoral behavior.

That being said, I tolerate it and won't try to influence laws to fit my opinion, while not endorsing it, or accepting it at the same time.

To declare homosexuality as immoral and wrong is most certainly you not being tolerant. Such a declaration is a negative action that interferes with society at large and specifically upon the lives of homosexuals.

One may tolerate a subject, but to go beyond personal and private feelings to public denunciation nullifies any semblance of toleration.

This is language as it is, not what you feel or wish it to be. Too many here have misused the word 'tolerance.'

Your statements have harmful repercussions, therefore they may not be examples of tolerance.

You denounce gays. You lower them in the social order and enable oppression to hateful acts.

Your self contradictions identify yourself as being detached from reality.

 

[nehalem256]

One may tolerate a subject, but to go beyond personal and private feelings to public denunciation nullifies any semblance of toleration.

Your statements have harmful repercussions, therefore they may not be examples of tolerance.

So you are admitting you are intolerance.

You denounce gays. You lower them in the social order and enable oppression to hateful acts.

You denounce people who denounce gays. You lower them in the social order and enable oppression to hateful acts

 

[Retro Rob]

To declare homosexuality as immoral and wrong is most certainly you not being tolerant. Such a declaration is a negative action that interferes with society at large and specifically upon the lives of homosexuals.



You denounce gays. You lower them in the social order and enable oppression to hateful acts.

Your self contradictions identify yourself as being detached from reality.

...and you're an idiot.

Denoucing behavior is not denouncing the person.

"Hateful acts"?

How is that? I simply mean, while I don't agree with it for my personal reason, they are free do live and thrive as well as I am.

I don't at all care enough or am intolerant to the point of trying to put a stop to it. How is that "intolerant"?

 

[LumbergTech]

...and you're an idiot.

Denoucing behavior is not denouncing the person.

"Hateful acts"?

How is that? I simply mean, while I don't agree with it for my personal reason, they are free do live and thrive as well as I am.

I don't at all care enough or am intolerant to the point of trying to put a stop to it. How is that "intolerant"?

Generalizing and denouncing behavior in an unwarranted fashion is worse than personally attacking an individual for their behaviors because it affects more people who you have never even come in to contact with. At least have the balls to confront people to their if you are gonna trash talk their lifestyle. Otherwise, drop the bullshit and just admit you really don't care and you just parrot that garbage because you've been brainwashed.

 

[Whiskey16]

Denoucing behavior is not denouncing the person.
...
How is that "intolerant"?

Denunciation of homosexuals may certainly be personal. Thank you for coming clean (though likely unintentionally... ) with your intolerance.

...and you're an idiot.

And there we have it. This sub forum rarely fails to present its infamous failings and intellectual failures.

Good bye, Rob. With your promotion of bigotry and personal rudeness, I doubt to find you surviving long in the new forum. I will soon continue this discussion there.

 

[Retro Rob]

Generalizing and denouncing behavior in an unwarranted fashion is worse than personally attacking an individual for their behaviors because it affects more people who you have never even come in to contact with. At least have the balls to confront people to their if you are gonna trash talk their lifestyle. Otherwise, drop the bullshit and just admit you really don't care and you just parrot that garbage because you've been brainwashed.

It's an opinion, nothing more, nothing less. You think I'm brainwashed, I think homosexuality is immoral -- and, so?

You don't have the right to NOT be offended. Please, grow some thicker skin and tolerance toward other people's different opinion.

 

[Whiskey16]

It's an opinion, nothing more, nothing less. You think I'm brainwashed, I think homosexuality is immoral -- and, so?

You don't have the right to NOT be offended. Please, grow some thicker skin and tolerance toward other people's different opinion.

Translation:

Distasteful opinions must be tolerated. Wince and bear it - but don't dare be so intolerant as to react negatively.

It's an opinion and opinions cannot be critiqued let alone condemned.

..... yes, this irrational member suffering from a persecution complex is most certainly detached from reality.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Condemnation of such a group, dehumanising them, and labelling them as "bad" is mightily uncivilised and immoral of you.

Bigotry against homosexuality remains. Bigots such as yourself sadly exist, and should never again feel freedom to express and advocate that bigotry without facing the valid social stigma and condemnation for your anti-social and destructive views.

I'm not saying they are subhuman. I'm not saying to remove any of their rights, or treat them as lesser beings. I don't wish them harm. I'm simply saying what they're doing is wrong. Same as I also firmly believe that straight sex between two people who aren't married is also morally wrong. This again doesn't mean I devalue them as people.

You're taking everything and turning it on its head. You're taking something immoral and calling it moral, then calling me immoral for standing for morality. You're twisting everything.

Look at history and look at what happens to society when morality decays. Society gradually falls apart also. Sorry, but trying to redefine morality as immoral doesn't help your case.

Have a good day.

 

[SolMiester]

I'm not saying they are subhuman. I'm not saying to remove any of their rights, or treat them as lesser beings. I don't wish them harm. I'm simply saying what they're doing is wrong. Same as I also firmly believe that straight sex between two people who aren't married is also morally wrong. This again doesn't mean I devalue them as people.

You're taking everything and turning it on its head. You're taking something immoral and calling it moral, then calling me immoral for standing for morality. You're twisting everything.

Look at history and look at what happens to society when morality decays. Society gradually falls apart also. Sorry, but trying to redefine morality as immoral doesn't help your case.

Have a good day.

Good post +1, half these crusaders forget the rights of the majority of people in their intolerance of those with morals.

 

[Whiskey16]

You're taking everything and turning it on its head. You're taking something immoral and calling it moral...

Most certainly not.

For you to prejudicially denounce homosexuals is very much an uncivilised, anti-social and damaging action that has long been an enabler to do exactly what you have blinders against:

I'm not saying to remove any of their rights, or treat them as lesser beings. I don't wish them harm.

Denunciating homosexuals has certainly been harmful and you continue to perpetuate the harm.

Look at history and look at what happens to society when morality decays. Society gradually falls apart also. Sorry, but trying to redefine morality as immoral doesn't help your case.

You declare homosexuality as a depravity that is detrimental to society. Your regressive bigotry is quickly becoming that of the past. Your actions and stance are that of doublespeak.

The reality is the opposite. Such prejudicial bigotry and vilification of gays truly is harmful to society rather than homosexuals doing the harm.

Thankfully the progression for social acceptance of gays through to that of legalised civil rights are relegating your viewpoints to that of vile history that presented dominating past generations of being against desegregation, suffragettes, slavery, etc.. They lost their conservative agenda.

SparkyJJO, as it was then, you are most certainly upon on the losing end of a moral and civil argument.

 

[Whiskey16]

Good post +1, half these crusaders forget the rights of the majority of people in their intolerance of those with morals.

The tyranny of your self-proclaimed majority is trumped by that of legalised civil rights in a sufficiently moral constitutional state.

Morally and legally, the bigots loose.

 

[badb0y]

Homosexuality is nothing new and I feel like it was more accepted in the past than it is now.

 

[Whiskey16]

Homosexuality is nothing new and I feel like it was more accepted in the past than it is now.

Yes, in many societies that was the case.

Thankfully, in my country, respectful acceptance of homosexuals has become the societal and legal norm. Unlike this forum's society, the practice and expectation is of bigotry and hate upon gays receiving quick and open condemnation.

The stupefying posts I am witnessing here can be ironically summed up by:

Let me practice intolerance in peace.

....yet if not left in peace, those same persecutors crying foul with, "HELP! HELP! I'm being oppressed!" :awe:

 

[Greenman]

Whiskey16, you really need to get over the idea that you have the right to force your beliefs on others. I'm actually surprised at how intolerant you are. And why do you keep accusing others of saying they're oppressed? No one here has said that, no one has in any way suggested it, yet you can't seem to get the concept out of your head. Whats up with that?

 

[Retro Rob]

Whiskey16, you really need to get over the idea that you have the right to force your beliefs on others. I'm actually surprised at how intolerant you are. And why do you keep accusing others of saying they're oppressed? No one here has said that, no one has in any way suggested it, yet you can't seem to get the concept out of your head. Whats up with that?

*sighs*

Thank you.

 

[Whiskey16]

I'm actually surprised at how intolerant you are.

I take civil pride in my intolerance to bigotry.

Against your will, I will never sit meekly by in silence to tolerate the present intolerant promotion of homosexuality being "wrong" and an bane upon society.

You bigots are exactly that.

May those never feel freedom to speak with impunity to advocate divisive and diminishing prejudice against those of differing race/nationality/ethnicity/sexual persuasion. Myself and others will remain present to rally back in intolerant condemnation.

....unfortunately, I've often felt to be going against an uncivilised grain in this forum of AnandTech.

 

[OutHouse]

Figures the cave painting was discovered by a guy named Wang.

 

[OverVolt]

I still think it was a teenager making a cave painting with a bunch of dongs 3000 years ago as a joke and people are reading way too much into it.

All because they painted it on a cave wall (crudely at that) doesn't mean its some witness account of a giant dong party or something.

 

[mikeymikec]

The Romans tolerated homosexuals/bisexuals.


Then their empire fell.

LOL, I can see the link there. Governments fall because same-sex couples are having more fun than you'd like them to have.

Do you do little rain dances because correlation = causation in your opinion as well?