Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: RKS
I am just ecstatic that the OP isn't my child.
Yes. This would be much, much worse.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: RKS
I am just ecstatic that the OP isn't my child.
Yes. This would be much, much worse.
Originally posted by: Modelworks
How do you tell if a child, say 5yo is gay ?
When half of the adults that say they are gay aren't sure ?
Originally posted by: Modelworks
How do you tell if a child, say 5yo is gay ?
When half of the adults that say they are gay aren't sure ?
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
whatever makes them happy will make me happy
This is one of the most ignorant posts I have ever read here. I am seriously hoping you are being sarcastic, but just in case you really believe what you've typed I have something to tell you. People do not chose to be homosexual. Why would someone WANT to be homosexual with the intolerance and shunning they would have to put up with? No one would.Originally posted by: RedSquirrel
I would first find out where they got this whole idea of being gay, then whatever source that is, they'd be forbidden from. If it's a group of friends, they could no longer hang out with those friends, if it was the internet, I'd apply some serious web filters or just dissallow them altogether.
From there, in a loving matter, explain and drill through them the fact that it's not correct to be this way, and send them to Bible school, counseling, anything that can help them out to repair their life style. This would not be easy though specially if the child is rebelious about it. But sometimes they just need to be led in the right directions. it's like trying to get a child to get off drugs.
Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
whatever makes them happy will make me happy
Put it in your butt?
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The biggest proponents of the idea that homosexuality is a 'choice' are people who are homosexual themselves but have 'chosen' to repress their sexuality and lie to everyone and themselves. IMO, these people will often despise openly gay people because they themselves have sacrificed so much to not live gay lifestyles. Unfortunately, so many people think that homosexuality is so wrong (thanks bible) that they end up rewarding people with these views and endorsing their political and social agendas.
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The biggest proponents of the idea that homosexuality is a 'choice' are people who are homosexual themselves but have 'chosen' to repress their sexuality and lie to everyone and themselves. IMO, these people will often despise openly gay people because they themselves have sacrificed so much to not live gay lifestyles. Unfortunately, so many people think that homosexuality is so wrong (thanks bible) that they end up rewarding people with these views and endorsing their political and social agendas.
I would say religion in general. Dont for get that Mr. Immadinnerjacket told a group of US students that gays "dont exist" in his country. You get stoned to death in the muslim world.
Im about as far from religious as it gets, but two dudes kissing still doesnt look right. I wouldnt want my son to have to deal with seeing that until he was old enough to be explained everything.
It seems today that most parents are much more concerned about what strangers think of their kids than how their kids percieve themselves.Originally posted by: Poulsonator
It's your child. Why would them being gay matter in the slightest bit?
I'm serious. For those who talk shit about throwing them out of the house (which is all talk, by the way), etc., why? You afraid of what others are gonna think?
Originally posted by: Platypus
lol.. there's a large whooshing sound somewhere in this thread.
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: Platypus
lol.. there's a large whooshing sound somewhere in this thread.
The sound of K1052 throwing his gay children off a cliff, right?
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Im about as far from religious as it gets, but two dudes kissing still doesnt look right. I wouldnt want my son to have to deal with seeing that until he was old enough to be explained everything.
Originally posted by: shortylickens
It seems today that most parents are much more concerned about what strangers think of their kids than how their kids percieve themselves.Originally posted by: Poulsonator
It's your child. Why would them being gay matter in the slightest bit?
I'm serious. For those who talk shit about throwing them out of the house (which is all talk, by the way), etc., why? You afraid of what others are gonna think?
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The biggest proponents of the idea that homosexuality is a 'choice' are people who are homosexual themselves but have 'chosen' to repress their sexuality and lie to everyone and themselves. IMO, these people will often despise openly gay people because they themselves have sacrificed so much to not live gay lifestyles. Unfortunately, so many people think that homosexuality is so wrong (thanks bible) that they end up rewarding people with these views and endorsing their political and social agendas.
I would say religion in general. Dont for get that Mr. Immadinnerjacket told a group of US students that gays "dont exist" in his country. You get stoned to death in the muslim world.
Im about as far from religious as it gets, but two dudes kissing still doesnt look right. I wouldnt want my son to have to deal with seeing that until he was old enough to be explained everything.
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The biggest proponents of the idea that homosexuality is a 'choice' are people who are homosexual themselves but have 'chosen' to repress their sexuality and lie to everyone and themselves. IMO, these people will often despise openly gay people because they themselves have sacrificed so much to not live gay lifestyles. Unfortunately, so many people think that homosexuality is so wrong (thanks bible) that they end up rewarding people with these views and endorsing their political and social agendas.
I would say religion in general. Dont for get that Mr. Immadinnerjacket told a group of US students that gays "dont exist" in his country. You get stoned to death in the muslim world.
Im about as far from religious as it gets, but two dudes kissing still doesnt look right. I wouldnt want my son to have to deal with seeing that until he was old enough to be explained everything.
As in my last post, while I love blaming religion for most things wrong with society, I think this supersedes religion...
the idea of homosexuality only being socially wrong because of religion is, imho, bullshit.
The idea of life is that well... you make babies so that your lineage continues. Being gay means, well... no babies in your future. I doubt any society in history ever accepted full-on homosexuality, because that meant you no longer cared about the natural need to have children.
Again, in some societies, bi-sexuality seemed to be accepted, but I still don't know a lot of the reasoning. But even these people had wives and children, just had something else on the side...
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The biggest proponents of the idea that homosexuality is a 'choice' are people who are homosexual themselves but have 'chosen' to repress their sexuality and lie to everyone and themselves. IMO, these people will often despise openly gay people because they themselves have sacrificed so much to not live gay lifestyles. Unfortunately, so many people think that homosexuality is so wrong (thanks bible) that they end up rewarding people with these views and endorsing their political and social agendas.
I would say religion in general. Dont for get that Mr. Immadinnerjacket told a group of US students that gays "dont exist" in his country. You get stoned to death in the muslim world.
Im about as far from religious as it gets, but two dudes kissing still doesnt look right. I wouldnt want my son to have to deal with seeing that until he was old enough to be explained everything.
As in my last post, while I love blaming religion for most things wrong with society, I think this supersedes religion...
the idea of homosexuality only being socially wrong because of religion is, imho, bullshit.
The idea of life is that well... you make babies so that your lineage continues. Being gay means, well... no babies in your future. I doubt any society in history ever accepted full-on homosexuality, because that meant you no longer cared about the natural need to have children.
Again, in some societies, bi-sexuality seemed to be accepted, but I still don't know a lot of the reasoning. But even these people had wives and children, just had something else on the side...
1) yes agreed, religion rather than bible is a better term. also I agree that religion only accounts for some of the stigma... and that some stigma would be likely regardless of the influence of religion.
2) The evolutionary arguement implied by desketor doesn't hold water with me. Mostly because we don't know what made early humans successful and we don't know the genetic underpinnings of homosexual behavior. We do know that its possible to induce homosexual orientation in mice with in utero exposure to certain hormones (link) but we don't know why or how homosexual behavior in populations would or wouldn't be advantagous. I could imagine several ways in which having some non-competing males in the tribal line up would be very advantageous, assuming that the hetero and homo males were related... As long as some of the tribe reproduces, then the adaption is beneficial. I know I'm making a few leaps here, but I'll leave it to others to tell me how wrong I am.
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The biggest proponents of the idea that homosexuality is a 'choice' are people who are homosexual themselves but have 'chosen' to repress their sexuality and lie to everyone and themselves. IMO, these people will often despise openly gay people because they themselves have sacrificed so much to not live gay lifestyles. Unfortunately, so many people think that homosexuality is so wrong (thanks bible) that they end up rewarding people with these views and endorsing their political and social agendas.
I would say religion in general. Dont for get that Mr. Immadinnerjacket told a group of US students that gays "dont exist" in his country. You get stoned to death in the muslim world.
Im about as far from religious as it gets, but two dudes kissing still doesnt look right. I wouldnt want my son to have to deal with seeing that until he was old enough to be explained everything.
As in my last post, while I love blaming religion for most things wrong with society, I think this supersedes religion...
the idea of homosexuality only being socially wrong because of religion is, imho, bullshit.
The idea of life is that well... you make babies so that your lineage continues. Being gay means, well... no babies in your future. I doubt any society in history ever accepted full-on homosexuality, because that meant you no longer cared about the natural need to have children.
Again, in some societies, bi-sexuality seemed to be accepted, but I still don't know a lot of the reasoning. But even these people had wives and children, just had something else on the side...
1) yes agreed, religion rather than bible is a better term. also I agree that religion only accounts for some of the stigma... and that some stigma would be likely regardless of the influence of religion.
2) The evolutionary arguement implied by desketor doesn't hold water with me. Mostly because we don't know what made early humans successful and we don't know the genetic underpinnings of homosexual behavior. We do know that its possible to induce homosexual orientation in mice with in utero exposure to certain hormones (link) but we don't know why or how homosexual behavior in populations would or wouldn't be advantagous. I could imagine several ways in which having some non-competing males in the tribal line up would be very advantageous, assuming that the hetero and homo males were related... As long as some of the tribe reproduces, then the adaption is beneficial. I know I'm making a few leaps here, but I'll leave it to others to tell me how wrong I am.
Originally posted by: waggy
i would prefer if they were not gay. but wouldnt stop me from loving them and supporting whatever lifestyle (long as its legal!) they choose.
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The biggest proponents of the idea that homosexuality is a 'choice' are people who are homosexual themselves but have 'chosen' to repress their sexuality and lie to everyone and themselves. IMO, these people will often despise openly gay people because they themselves have sacrificed so much to not live gay lifestyles. Unfortunately, so many people think that homosexuality is so wrong (thanks bible) that they end up rewarding people with these views and endorsing their political and social agendas.
I would say religion in general. Dont for get that Mr. Immadinnerjacket told a group of US students that gays "dont exist" in his country. You get stoned to death in the muslim world.
Im about as far from religious as it gets, but two dudes kissing still doesnt look right. I wouldnt want my son to have to deal with seeing that until he was old enough to be explained everything.
As in my last post, while I love blaming religion for most things wrong with society, I think this supersedes religion...
the idea of homosexuality only being socially wrong because of religion is, imho, bullshit.
The idea of life is that well... you make babies so that your lineage continues. Being gay means, well... no babies in your future. I doubt any society in history ever accepted full-on homosexuality, because that meant you no longer cared about the natural need to have children.
Again, in some societies, bi-sexuality seemed to be accepted, but I still don't know a lot of the reasoning. But even these people had wives and children, just had something else on the side...
1) yes agreed, religion rather than bible is a better term. also I agree that religion only accounts for some of the stigma... and that some stigma would be likely regardless of the influence of religion.
2) The evolutionary arguement implied by desketor doesn't hold water with me. Mostly because we don't know what made early humans successful and we don't know the genetic underpinnings of homosexual behavior. We do know that its possible to induce homosexual orientation in mice with in utero exposure to certain hormones (link) but we don't know why or how homosexual behavior in populations would or wouldn't be advantagous. I could imagine several ways in which having some non-competing males in the tribal line up would be very advantageous, assuming that the hetero and homo males were related... As long as some of the tribe reproduces, then the adaption is beneficial. I know I'm making a few leaps here, but I'll leave it to others to tell me how wrong I am.
leaps? yeah that's about what I got out of that.
It's not about evolution, it's about species survival. Sure, it's a moot point now because the world will easily go on and continue to grow in population even if a large percentage stops reproducing due to homosexuality.
But seriously? There is absolutely no way having homosexual males would be advantageous at all to a tribe. If the straight men die in tribal conflict, what... are the homosexual men going to cry with the women and then the tribe dies off?
I don't want to make some kind of debate out of this, I just want to know how you came to that massive leap. More competing males is always more beneficial than less.
However, I do also want to restate that my previous post had absolutely nothing to do with religion, but rather social standards and, well basically just pure nature - animals breed. Animals breed with opposite sex to produce offspring. It's a simple as that. Very few animals have ever shown homosexual behavior, and I don't recall any actually attempting to mate, rather, what I've read was always strictly attachment and bonding, as if taking friendship to a whole different level.
So... it's completely unnatural to want to ditch your instinct to mate with the opposite sex. However, humanity seems not to care about nature and instincts and this is where I begin to blame religion. Marriages, morals, sins, yada yada... good inventions for starting a successful and long-lasting civilization, but it should only last so long, and shouldn't trump observed science.
It's not about evolution, it's about species survival. Sure, it's a moot point now because the world will easily go on and continue to grow in population even if a large percentage stops reproducing due to homosexuality. But seriously? There is absolutely no way having homosexual males would be advantageous at all to a tribe. If the straight men die in tribal conflict, what... are the homosexual men going to cry with the women and then the tribe dies off?
Very few animals have ever shown homosexual behavior, and I don't recall any actually attempting to mate, rather, what I've read was always strictly attachment and bonding, as if taking friendship to a whole different level.
Originally posted by: OdiN
Originally posted by: Kadarin
Originally posted by: effee
if my child was gay...he wouldnt be my child for much longer
Props to you for being a beacon of tolerance and understanding. :thumbsup:
Back at you for not being tolerant and understanding of his beliefs or feelings on the matter.
