No, he's got a thing for men in uniform

This thread is gay.

I'm not questioning my orientation, this is a thread about what others think about homosexuality, and obviously there is a lot of people who have some issues that need to be discussed. And they need to be discussed because I have the foolish notion that maybe by discussing these issues we can disperse some of the prejudice that still exist regarding homosexuality which can lead toward a more tolerant society. I don't believe sweeping things under the carpet benefits anyone...

Loooool. Isn't that an old tool? I've seen it used before, often before something fairly bigoted. "I'm not racist, one of my friends is black. But I don't let him come to my house for dinner parties because he'll probably steal all my expensive china."

Not that what you were saying was all that bigoted; I just find it extremely funny when people say things like that, because more than half of the time I can tell you that their circle of friends really isn't as diverse as they present it to be. (;

My personal conviction is yes on gay marriage, because a domestic partnership isn't worth **** in legal matters. But you're entitled to your own opinion.

That's less a definition and more a tradition, unless you're on about semantics. In which case, we can totally change the word "marriage" in gay marriage to something else. Possibly change a vowel?
Then you can rest well at night knowing that homosexual couples can be legally considered husband and husband or wife and wife without infringing on your belief system.

As far as marriage meaning you have to procreate, that's just ridiculous.
I wonder if you protest against married couples that don't ever have kids?

I really f*cking hate people who think humans still have to follow strict biological rules based on their evolutionary history.

Weither it's vegans who use every scare/guilt tactic they can to convert you to their cause or radical feminists who want all chicks to get hairy or fundamentalist christians who oppose homosexuality for not being what was biologically intended or christians who think we STILL need to procreate because that is our only biological purpose.

These are all hypocrites because they all do SOMETHING unnatural in one way or the other. I really hate this obsession everyone now has about being as natural as possible at least when they have a terrible imperialistic attitude about it. We're at a state in evolution where our "evolution" doesn't have to control us anymore so all arguments about how "natural" something is are useless to me and anyone who tries to pin the lack of human evolution (why are people getting in such a goddamn hurry) on people's lifestyle choices are just self righteous assh*les.

The bible also opposes pork and shrimp and masturbation and debate (yes it's in the bible, debate is a sin) and god knows what else. How many christians are consistant with everything the bible says?

To be consistant with the bible ironically means you'd have to be inconsistant because the bible is inconsistant. :laughing:

Sorry if most of this rant is off topic but yeah. People who believe in right and wrong lifestyle choices are self righteous f*cks in any context. The only truly wrong lifestyle choice is to try and oppress or threaten the lives of others.

Well said. I suspected that was why you started this thread.
Your absence since has been obvious. I can only assume you've been reading with mixed feelings.
Probably laughing at some and shaking your head in despair at others. Maybe, nodding in agreement now and then too.

I'd like to see you quote some of the posts in here and address them in your own way.
I'd also like to hear some of the problems you have with homosexuals/homosexuality.
At least I'm hoping you do have certain issues and aren't going to defend particular aspects of homosexuals/homosexuality out of blind loyalty.

Look forward to your perspective and insights...

btw, I'm willing to stand corrected on any of the points I've outlined in the posts I've made, describing my problems with this subject.

Also, I'd like to see religion left out of any future debate.
It's the 21st century and trying to square religion with morals, is like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. It ain't gonna happen.

...What RT said in his last 2 posts.

I agree with you that a "wrong" lifestyle choice is to try and oppress or threaten the lives of others, since as a vegan I oppose threatening (and taking) the lives of others.

I also agree that people shouldn't be expected to follow biological possibilities as if they were rules. Whether or not some behavior is "natural" does not determine for me whether that behavior is a "good" one that I want people to do; instead, I look at the actual behavior and consider it on its own merits.

For example, having leg hair hurts no one, so a society that demonizes women who have/keep their body hair is a society that I want to change. Similarly, loving and being in a romantic relationship with someone who is of the same sex hurts no one, so a society that demonizes homosexuality is one that I want to change.

Supporting women who have leg hair and supporting people who are homosexual are linked in that both causes try to make it okay for people to be who they are naturally when that naturalness does not hurt others.