HOME | DD
Published: 2010-12-30 02:39:44 +0000 UTC; Views: 2852; Favourites: 33; Downloads: 8
Redirect to original
Description
Alright, I'm sick of being quiet about this. Homosexual marriage and rights. I'm going to go ahead, right now, and say this, I'm female, under age fifteen, and straight. Keep that in mind. I also love the gays, and think love is love. We are equal. Bans on gay marriage, gay adoption, and anything of the like baffles me and makes me angry. Love is love, right? Who cares if the gender is different?Some people say the bible says it's wrong. I don't get it. I am agnostic, and have always been raised to know that organized religion is silly and bad, particularly Mormonism. Despite that, I have respect for religions, and I'm friends with Mormons, a Greek, and a Muslim (just off the top of my head). However, if the Bible does ever explicitly say that being homosexual makes you damned, I'm not sure I can take the Bible seriously. I've seen people say that some parts of the Bible actually promote homosexuality, and I've seen people say it considers it a very high sin. To be honest with you, I've only ever read or seen the Bible a handful of times, so I can not argue these claims or support them. However, I can say this: would God really create someone to be damned? Is he really that sadistic? And if you say that God does not create them that way, I assure you, it is not a choice. Ask any homosexual, or scientist that has looked into it. It isn't a choice. If it was, why would someone choose a life of condemnation where so many people would look down on you, reject you, hate you, or even attack you? Why would you choose that? So there is a hole there. Scientists have observed many species of animals that have been homosexual. Now, some people say that everyone has urges, but when you give in, that is when it's wrong. We have urges to go to the urinate as well, is that bad? We have urges to go to sleep, is that bad? We have urges to wake up and go to school/work, is that bad? We have urges to kiss someone of the opposite sex, is that wrong? No! Why does gender or sex matter? It's okay to have sex with someone of the opposite race, why not the same gender? Both race and gender are things that we are born with.
Okay, so let me take over on gay adoption now. Why would someone not let a homosexual couple be the parental of children? Care to fill me in on that? Oh? Because... wait, what? Because they might raise them gay? I thought that only happened in that one fanfiction I read... Oh? And because they might be... ridiculed by others kids? Well who's fault is that?! Oh my god/gosh. Are you kidding me? Yes, gay parents will raise their kids gay, the same way a mommy and daddy will raise their child to only want the other gender. Yeah, that makes total sense. No. It sounds more like this: the person against gay adoption thinks that a little boy's two dads are going to sprinkle glitter on it and sodomize it on a nightly basis, right? Or a little girl's two moms are going to force her to wear nothing but flannel and play with adult-style barbie dolls? And then the kids will make fun of them. Excuse my caps lock, but THAT IS THE PARENT'S FAULT FOR TEACHING THEIR KIDS TO BE HOMOPHOBIC, ISN'T IT?
Now, I think we need to wake up. This is a serious thing. One in three suicides is by an LGBTQ teen. Think about that. Think about how that means that people have drilled it into others minds that who they are is so terribly wrong there is no other option than killing themselves. And there are people that think society is cheery and great. How can we be like this? We are all humans, aren't we? Why is gender an issue?
Love is love.
Related content
Comments: 103
MMax88 [2016-06-05 16:36:12 +0000 UTC]
Being homosexual is being a failure in evolution. Natural selection should not allow this. If you can't reproduce with your sexual partner, then you are bending the laws of nature. Besides, the number of non-hetero humans has quadrupled in the past decade. I don't know if this change is good or bad and it might have a negative impact on humanity in the near future.
π: 0 β©: 1
Fluffy-Artist [2011-02-19 03:55:34 +0000 UTC]
You speak the truth! I agree with you completely.
π: 0 β©: 0
GreenDayGirl18 [2011-02-17 08:19:51 +0000 UTC]
Hear Hear!
I agree with you, kiddo! I'm straight, but I am all for love is love. Love truly conquers all! Rock on!
π: 0 β©: 0
evez14 [2011-01-31 00:11:13 +0000 UTC]
^-^' You get bored easy, huh? But i must admit, THAT WAZ TRUE. I almost thought you got off-topic, but it had a deep meaning. . .(i waz just slow to see it) Whaddoya mean it waznt bursting wit rainbow joy? of course it twas! XP Wow, i totally suck at writing comments.
π: 0 β©: 1
Pinkcatnip In reply to evez14 [2011-01-31 02:41:04 +0000 UTC]
SHAYLA THIS ENTIRE COMMENT CONFUSES ME SO MUCH.
π: 0 β©: 1
IWonderIWander [2010-12-31 22:16:42 +0000 UTC]
I completely agree. I don't know why people are so down on gays. I mean, I agree that gay people are a freak of nature, but whoever said that being a freak was a bad thing? I'm straight, but I support gay love all the way.
π: 0 β©: 1
Pinkcatnip In reply to IWonderIWander [2011-01-16 06:16:57 +0000 UTC]
"whoever said that being a freak is a bad thing" precisely
π: 0 β©: 0
gaarasgirl999 [2010-12-31 17:48:21 +0000 UTC]
Purely fantastic. This work should be honored.
π: 0 β©: 1
Pinkcatnip In reply to gaarasgirl999 [2011-01-16 06:17:11 +0000 UTC]
Not quite, but thank you
π: 0 β©: 1
gaarasgirl999 In reply to Pinkcatnip [2011-01-17 00:44:09 +0000 UTC]
I think it should No problem.
π: 0 β©: 0
TheAlbinoKirby [2010-12-31 02:27:32 +0000 UTC]
As a debater, I feel obligated to point out the flaws in this argument.
Firstly, there's no such thing as a "high sin." There are sins and you go to hell for committing them, unless saved by faith, according to the Christian beliefs, AKA, the Bible. Acting on homosexual urges is just as bad as a while lie, according to the Bible.
The Bible does say that acting on homosexuality is a sin in Lev. 18:22, Lev. 20:13, 1 Cor 6:9-10, and Rom 1:26-28.
The Christian God seems sadistic if you're being narrow minded. In my opinion, he creates people and sets certain trials before them to see what truly matters to them. It makes more sense than just explaining it like, "well, God's a jerk." For example, he might create someone with kleptomania and see if they resist the urge or act on it, saying to them self, "if I'm born with the desire to steal, I should act on it." Of course, that's assuming for the sake of argument that the Christian Bible is the absolute truth and that homosexuality is wrong.
Now, about the urge to urinate and eat being the same as the urge to have sex with someone of the same gender. How in the world are those equal? You need to pee and eat to live. You don't have to do another guy up the ass to survive.
If homosexuals adopt kids, I think that the kids might be introduced to lifestyles that people shouldn't take on, for their own health. The chosen lifestyle of a majority of homosexuals, just based on what I've seen of it, seems pretty crazy. Also, people are homophobic. Kids adopted by homosexuals will have one hell of a childhood to get through. I hope that will change in the future, that people will be more tolerant, and that laws will be modified to suit the change, but for now, for the kids' sake, things need to stay the way they are.
People should all be allowed to love one another. If two people of the same gender want to devote themselves to one another, I'm all good with it. But the moment things twist into perversions like gay sex, I'm repulsed. Who would want to do that anyways? I mean, THINK ABOUT THE TECHNICALS. Gross.
π: 0 β©: 1
Tinyfeather In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2010-12-31 02:53:25 +0000 UTC]
excuse me? my lifestyle is perfectly "normal", thank you very much, as is my girlfriend's and my ex-girlfriends' and my gay friends and all gay people i know. would you care to elaborate on that?
and who would want to stick an organ that starts out limp and gets hard when you touch it into your lady-parts by breaking a wall of flesh open? that doesn't sound very appealing either. people should all be allowed to have whatever kind of (consensual!) sex they want with each other.
yes, you do have some true points. yes, the bible DOES say homosexuality is a sin, although i will go out on a limb here and say that back then, hebrew and greek did not have a word for 'homosexual'. also, it's an ancient book written over 2000 years ago. men shave, we eat shellfish and pork, round haircuts are just fine, women have rights...so why are we so hung up over homosexuality?
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to Tinyfeather [2010-12-31 03:29:24 +0000 UTC]
If your lifestyle is healthy, I'm not talking about you.
In San Francisco and Los Angeles, there is a stereotype I'm sure you're familiar with for homosexuals; that's the one I'm talking about.
However you describe it, there's a massive difference between straight sex and gay sex that has mostly to do with the health facet of the issue. I'm grossing myself out now, but there's a lot of bacteria in fecal matter that isn't in a girl's lady-parts.
What we have to look at is the reason why the 2,000 year old book was telling people to shave and not eat shellfish and pork and etc.
I recently read a book called Cows, Pigs, Wars, and Witches that basically said, there's a practical reason for every culture and tradition behind the actual culture or tradition.
People were asked to shave likely because lice were an issue and there was no lice shampoo 2,000 years ago. People were asked not to eat shellfish because shellfish carry bacteria and such that people didn't know to get rid of with proper cleansing and cooking. People were asked not to eat pork because pigs were incredibly impractical and a health hazard to raise in the middle east, where the 2,000 year ago Christians and Jews lived.
Or that's what conclusion I've drawn, anyways.
So we can assume that the God of the Christians and Jews made the law against homosexuality for a practical reason that we may or may not understand yet. Until we know why two guys aren't supposed have sex (like we now understand why we weren't supposed to eat shellfish) , they probably shouldn't. And if when we do know, we need to decide if it's worth it or not, as we have with the eating of pigs and shellfish and our choice in hairstyles.
Of course, that's my own take on the Bible and it's Old Testament relevance today.
You're free, of course, to believe whatever you like.
π: 0 β©: 2
Tinyfeather In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2010-12-31 18:00:06 +0000 UTC]
um..so does stereotype mean majority now?
i'm a girl. i'm not going to be having anal sex. i would never want to. but honestly, it's their choice if they want to, and i'm sure there's a good number of gay men that don't do it.
er..the 2000-year-old book told people not to shave.
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to Tinyfeather [2010-12-31 18:12:47 +0000 UTC]
Stereotypes usually have truth to them or they wouldn't be stereotypes. Like, to say that emo kids wear skinny jeans is a stereotype. I'm sure there are emo kids that don't wear skinny jeans. Most of them do, though.
If gay men aren't having anal sex, I guess there's no Biblical problem with it, since the Bible's argument against homosexuality is that people having gay sex are sinning.
Not to shave? That's harder to guess at, but there might be something to that, too. Like, maybe, for example, in the middle east, where the original Jews and Christians lived, there was a danger in having an exposed bald scalp to the sun all during the day. Think skin cancer and over heating.
π: 0 β©: 1
Tinyfeather In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2010-12-31 18:24:46 +0000 UTC]
well, yes, stereotypes do have some truth to them. but there are FAR more gays in the world than those in san fransisco or los angeles. it's like saying all americans are fat and greedy, or all furries are freaks who like furry porn or something. it's not right to judge people like that.
and i meant shaving their beards, but i suppose that works too.
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to Tinyfeather [2010-12-31 18:27:22 +0000 UTC]
Okay, I agree with you on this last post, I think.
π: 0 β©: 0
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2010-12-31 10:34:01 +0000 UTC]
"there's a massive difference between straight sex and gay sex" - haha, 'gay' sex involves lesbian sex too. So, you wanna say lesbians are allowed but male gays not? Because lesbian sex is just like straight sex but without the penis. And penises can be too big for a woman and this can hurt her and and and...
"So we can assume that the God of the Christians and Jews made the law against homosexuality for a practical reason that we may or may not understand yet."
We CAN understand it. Let's go into the times where the bible was written.... WOW, what do I see. Omg, rape! Wasn't it because men raped young boys and other men back then until they bleed and made them to their sex slaves? There are some good documentaries out there ^,^. Theres no other reason to be against homosexuals and the discrimination of homosexuals is today BECAUSE of the religions. I think without the religions on earth we would see them as normal now. Hundreds of years ago females had no soul for the church. And they had their points too at the time, not because they were more primitive as us today.
For example the priest of our town said:"You don't need to follow things in the bible when they have no sense for us. The bible was written in another time and god made the bible just for us and WITH us."
Why should we be against gay sex, gay love or whatever (which involves lesbian, and the sex of lesbians is just like straight sex) BTW: straight people have anal sex too. IS THAT A SIN?
And things changed, look at this:
"But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any workβyou, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns."
huh, "male or female slave"? So, past then slavery was allowed, but why don't we do it now? In the past women and black people had no souls for the church. The men just said that they're so super fantastic. Just read the old testament, I mean- HELLO?
AND interpretation of bible is different. I read the german and the english bible and it was totally not the same o_o I understood even some important different.
Some translation of the bibles say 'homosexuals' but that word didn't existed (just like tinyfeather said).
I don't think I can change your point of view. I mean believers never do that o_o or?
Well if you have any other arguments read this [link] and that [link] before o,o. hese are written from a personal hero from me. He's gay. You don't have to read everything just a little peek is enough.
I think I can't change your opinion (I mean who ever changed the opinion of a christian, haha ^-^)
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to roozard [2010-12-31 18:07:50 +0000 UTC]
The bible doesn't say anything about lesbian sex. It just says that a guy can't do another guy.
But the bible isn't the one saying that women have no souls. There were common misconceptions or beliefs back then that the bible either supported or did not support. Homosexuality is not supported by the bible. You can say that the reason is because it was way out of hand back then. But it would be more consistent with the reasons why other things were not allowed (if you go back to my examples on the second post) to say that we aren't allowed because it's unhealthy.
Straight people shouldn't be having anal sex, according to the Bible. Sodomy is a sin for Jews and Christians.
By saying that your slaves had to have the sabbath off, the Bible was merely acknowledging the existence of slaves in the day of the bible, not supporting slavery by, for example, saying something ridiculous like, "thou shall have slaves."
The Bible never says that blacks or slaves or women don't have souls. We aren't going by what the Catholic church said in this and that year. If we were, there would be no way I could argue this side of the debate because the Catholic church once believed that unmarried old women were witches and flew to sabots in their minds and needed to be tortured so that the church could cleanse the masses of witch craft. Which is ridiculous.
In the Bible's I've read, it doesn't say, "homosexuality," it says, "men lying with other men as a man does with his wife," or, "men lying with other men as a man does with a woman."
I myself am not a Christian. I know a lot about Christianity because a lot of my family is Christian. I'm actually just looking for the truth. I'm defending the Christian/Biblical view to see if anyone here has anything that can stand against it.
π: 0 β©: 2
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-01 14:53:55 +0000 UTC]
1)"The bible doesn't say anything about lesbian sex. It just says that a guy can't do another guy."
So, you say. The bible is not 'against' lesbians? But why do you use the word GAY.
From wikipedia:"In modern English, gay has come to be used as an adjective, and occasionally as a noun, referring to the people, practices, and culture associated with homosexuality"
homosexuality= lesbians and male gays.
So this is a problem with the definition.
Isn't that a little unfair? I mean, then lesbians shouldn't be discrimintaed and lesbian marriage should be everywhere allowed then. -and not all male gays like anal sex. There's oral sex, petting, etc too.
So, if it's so, there shouldn't be any female kids who kill themselves because their sexuality but only male kids. O,o
Isn't it a little idiotic from thousands of people to say 'god hate gays' ?
That's totally confusing. It's just- unfair. I mean why should lesbains "be allowed" to have sex but gay males not?
2)"You can say that the reason is because it was way out of hand back then. But it would be more consistent with the reasons why other things were not allowed (if you go back to my examples on the second post) to say that we aren't allowed because it's unhealthy."
Anal sex does not have to be unhealthy. God never said that we shouldn't do bungee jumping, because it's unhealthy for your muscles when you do it too often? Maybe some gays have only sometimes anal sex o_o. -not all are sex driven crazy bitches.
3)"We aren't going by what the Catholic church said in this and that year."
Probably in 1000 years the church says:"1000 years ago they were against gay sex, they were so idiotic!"
Like we say today:"Omg, hundreds of years ago women had no souls for them!"
4)"In the Bible's I've read, it doesn't say, "homosexuality," it says, "men lying with other men as a man does with his wife," or, "men lying with other men as a man does with a woman.""
"men lying with other men as a man does with a woman" <- that means what? i could put a really idiotic interpretation out of it. (like the church has done it too with black, female ppl and other things back then).
For me, this sentence says one clear thing: Gay men shouldn't act like females and there shouldn't be a role thing in the relationship. They have to be in their natural role. ^-^
Or: Men shouldn't have a romantic relationship
"lying" <- when we looks at this single word, WHAT has it to do with sex? When we put it in the context we think about sex, but it could be meant as 'you should respect the man and just don't lay there. '
5)AND you said gay 'love' is okay but many MANY priests and religious people drive (not directly) young people to suicide. Shouldn't that be changed, or is it okay? They are bullyied because they're different just like black people back then, but why it hasn't changed long before: because of the church. It has changed, but only slow in some countries. We're in the 21st century.
I think the views of persons has to be changed.
6)"I myself am not a Christian. I know a lot about Christianity because a lot of my family is Christian. I'm actually just looking for the truth. I'm defending the Christian/Biblical view to see if anyone here has anything that can stand against it."
Oh, that's interesting (sometime sdiscussions can make fun too xD).
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to roozard [2011-01-01 22:52:58 +0000 UTC]
1. Because "gay" is for a guy who likes other guys and "lesbian" is for a girl who likes other girls. Homosexual covers them both.
The bible doesn't have anything against homosexuality when homosexuality is merely a clean love for a person of the same gender, but when it moves into sodomy and such, that's where the Bible begins to say, no. Since homosexual men are the ones into sodomy more than homosexual women (in most cases), men tend to be targeted. And what kind of lesbian sex can women really have? What do they even use? Their fingers? There isn't really much that's too unhealthy with that, as long as both individuals are clean.
2. Gay sex isn't healthy because gay sex between guys involves, as I've said before, the spread of bacteria to places where it shouldn't be.
Bungee jumping wasn't around back then. And the two are drastically different in terms of severity.
3. Maybe in 1,000 years they'll say, "they allowed gay sex! did they realize how bad for people that stuff was?!" It's not good for you. The walls of the anus aren't designed to handle that kind of thing, unlike the vagina, which can handle about anything. Aside from that, getting shit in your dick can cause all kinds of problems. Hell, there's probably a link between prostate cancer and anal sex. I wouldn't be surprised, given the truth of what's going on, there.
4. Whenever the bible talks about "lying" with someone, the context is about sex. The bible says thing such as, "if a man lies with a woman who is not his wife in this and that such case, he must marry her" and da da da. You're free to interpret the Bible however you like, of course. But the reason why so many people interpret in that way is because the meanings of "lying" are consistent, that way.
5. Of course people shouldn't be driven to suicide over a lifestyle choice that someone may just so happen to disagree with. My problem with Christians is that they're so fixed on the way their churches teach that they don't search for the true meaning in the text that is supposed to be their absolute truth. They hear, "men shouldn't have anal sex" from their priest, and then go charging off saying "all homosexuals are dirty and going to hell." Kind of twisted. People's views do need to change. Lucky for us, the world is becoming more globalized and different lifestyles are more widely accepted as people become more educated and are forced to open their minds to other povs.
π: 0 β©: 2
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-02 01:41:47 +0000 UTC]
oh sry forgot to close b tag ^-^i just wanted to 'b' the that=this things
π: 0 β©: 0
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-02 01:36:00 +0000 UTC]
1. Because "gay" is for a guy who likes other guys and "lesbian" is for a girl who likes other girls. Homosexual covers them both.
-just, um, no - you're just not right ^-^
homosexuality means lesbians AND gay males. just because many use gay as a word for only gay men, it doesn't have to be right. (you live in the united states, probably gay is there misunderstood as only 'male gays', because theres a word for female gays 'lesbians'. but the worldwide english translations in context define gay as homosexual ppl. i copied something from wikipedia for you but just read again:
"This article is about gay as a term. For homosexuality, see Homosexuality. For other uses, see Gay (disambiguation).
Page semi-protected
"The term gay was originally used to refer to feelings of being "carefree", "happy", or "bright and showy"; it had also come to acquire some connotations of "immorality" as early as 1637.[1]
The term's use as a reference to homosexuality may date as early as the late 19th century, but its use gradually increased in the 20th century.[1] In modern English, gay has come to be used as an adjective, and occasionally as a noun, referring to the people, practices, and culture associated with homosexuality. By the end of the 20th century, the word gay was recommended by major style guides to describe people attracted to members of the same sex.[2][3]"
[link] <- the article.
SO, where did it even said that it were only MALES? WHERE? - so thanks
I know wikipedia isn't the best source but my english translators (english to german) define them as "Homosexuell orientiete Personen(homosexual ppl)" (Noun) and "homosexuelle Handlung(homosexual action)" (Adjective) <--- and that says nothing about only males.
Want more proofs? Just ask me, I'll search some for you ^-^, Until you understood it.
2."Gay sex isn't healthy because gay sex between guys involves, as I've said before, the spread of bacteria to places where it shouldn't be. "
And now I'm dying or what? SO many things are unhealthy. Eating a 2 day old chicken soup or using a public toilet(that sometimes involves more bacteria) AND not all beacteria are unhealthy. GERMS are unhealthy. I understand that it's not healthy, but you won't die or be ill from it. o-O Unless you fuck every week, but that's for straights the same, it's not good in gods eyes. That doesn't mean that this is the reason why god said that a men shouldn't lay with another man etc etc. Back then male homosexual rape was normal, but that's disgusting.
3."Hell, there's probably a link between prostate cancer and anal sex. I wouldn't be surprised, given the truth of what's going on, there."
You talk like all male gays are stupid, dirty assfuckers. That's a stereotype. I know many do that, fucking all the time, but not all. The 13 year old boy and his best friend who fell in love aren't dirty fuckers they only explore their bodies.
When straights do this (too much sex with too many ppl) it's a sin too.
4.Okay, i agree.
5.So WHY is there so much hate. Normally that should be forbidden. It's KILLING. Yes they're fixed, so fixed that they make sins by themselves. But "Jesus died for them" so they can use gods words (the bible) to make HATE (god LOVES the only thing he hates is the sin)
the definition of sin in my church is= a sin is everything which seperates us from god. OMIGOSH anal sex seperates us all from god, noees.
"They hear, "men shouldn't have anal sex" from their priest,"
I'll copy something from inspiredcreativity it's from his life. he wrote it.
"When I was 13, all i could think of was dying, fear of the next beating, of escaping, of being trapped, being desperately alone and isolated, of looking through metal bars at a life I could never fit into"
"I had a horrible childhood and I have tried to kill myself 3 times and came very close 2 more time. The last time, at age 34, I finally got some help and finally found happiness. I started hating being Gay, but now I would not want it any other way."
NOW comes the reason for it:
"I was also an Altar Boy wanting to be a Priest, when our priest told us boys, "Boys who are physically attracted to other boys are an abomination in the eyes of God, doomed to burn for an eternity in the everlasting fires of Gahanna." I could not understand it. I was simple, autistic, and I lived to be a good boy. I had not done anything to make these feeling for boys happen. God must have made me this way, so why would he hate me? I would kneel at my bedside praying, "Please God, make me Normal." Just before trying to kill myself, I lost all FAITH, and truly felt adrift and alone, a mere speck in a vast universe."
SO the priests aren't telling anal sex is no good, they're saying THAT.
And now, when you call him (one of my personal heroes) bad because YES i'ms ure he practiced and practices anal sex with his husband they're together since 21 years. TELL me whats wring with this. They're not ill, and not dead.
Just cause many people are grossed out of anal sex (like people were grossed out of black people)it doesn't give ANYBODY the right to call their PRIVATE practices sodomy as a bad thing.
I'm (for example) a vegetarian and I eated meat before. But now it just grosses me out! That doesn't mean I call the meateaters bad names, because I don't have to eat their meat. I don't have to look at it and I can go out of the room because of the smell when I want.
Now: Mister Somebody 'isn't against'/'grossed out because of' anal sex (without being a gay male or practizing it). Before then he was grossed out of anal sex. But now he can't understand the brouhaha about this. He doesn't have to look at it and he's not the one who choses having bacteria in his ass.
I'm talking about the FREE WILL of a human and the FREE WILL is mainly the 'CHOICE OF ENVIRONMENT'
I'm a vegetarian = Mister Somebody isn't against anal sex.
that's the information which is for many people disputable.
Why should I be a vegetarian meat is healthy!/ Why does he tolerate anal sex, I don't find it normal.
and I eated meat before = Before then he was grossed out of anal sex.
The 'mistake' of action/thinking by THEMSELVES (doesnt include others, you can eat as much meat as you want) in the eyes of the actual standpoint of the person.
But now it just grosses me out!= But now he can't understand the brouhaha about this
The thing which has changed for themselves.
He doesn't have to look at it and he's not the one who choses having bacteria in his ass.
=That doesn't mean I call the meateaters bad names, because I don't have to eat their meat. I don't have to look at it and I can go out of the room because of the smell when I want.
That's the CHOICE OF ENVIRONMENT! This thing make their point of view to NEUTRAL. And NEUTRAL is always the best in social things. You don't have to argue with people because you're NEGATIVE or POSITIVE about something.
And getting the NEUTRAL view on things which aren't hurting others rights (anal sex and not eating meat doesn't hurt others right but child rape, etc) is the best thing you can do ^-^. (Thinking that anal sex is bad hurts the personal feelings of male gays in some way.) You can think what you want, but I would be happy if you try to stand and think NEUTRAL about this anal thing. You don't have think about male gays in their bed. You don't have to look at them and their bacteria because you have the CHOICE OF ENVIRONMENT.
^-^ I hope I didn't offend you with my way of writing or something like that, but i just want to say that it's a major discussion ^-^ (my english isnt that good, i mean i'm a 13 year old little kid from germany XD so i cant say if somethings sounds more bad or neutral ^,^ sry about that)
riki
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to roozard [2011-01-02 05:12:22 +0000 UTC]
1. I didn't know that "gay" meant both guy and girl homosexuals. Thanks for straightening that up for me.
2. There are specific known harms that come from anal sex. If you know that sitting on a public toilet seat is unhealthy and that you can get stds from it, don't sit on a public toilet seat. Put toilet paper between it and yourself or squat above it. Why would you want to put yourself in the position to be sick due to a known dangerous situation?
3. The bible isn't talking about the 13 year old boys who fell in love. I don't think it even specifically targets homosexuality. The only thing on the issue I'd read is just the act of sodomy between two men.
5. Your ability to understand concepts is pretty awesome for a 13-year-old. I'm good with your description; bear with me, too, k?
Let's not use vegetarianism as a similar instance. Let's use self-harm (cutting) , because the people who self-harm are hurting themselves (not the people around them) as a personal choice. It brings us to the question of whether or not there is a "right" and "wrong." This is a question for you so that I can continue with my thought process once I know your stand: should self-harm be accepted because it's not hurting other people, just the people who choose it for themselves?
π: 0 β©: 1
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-02 16:26:27 +0000 UTC]
shit >-< i wrote so mmuch and then i closed my browser window, soo again xD i will shorten it >-<
2. just like the toilet paper you can use condoms
3. but 13 year old boys make sometimes sodomy o_o
5. self-harm has to be allowed, because every human can do what he want even when our ethics says it's cruel to allow this.
i'm not cruel, but ALLOWING is not the thing in such situation it's HELP, CARING and STOPPING self-harm. self-harm victims can't do that by themselves
self-hram is caused of depressions or/and sad feelings or/and other problems in your mind/etc which is caused of bullying/past things/traumatic experiences/dysfunction in your brain/etc
the thing we dont have to allow or stop are the last ones "bullying/past things/traumatic experiences/dysfunction in your brain/etc" by giving help, giving them medica, stopping the bullying etc
that doesn't mean "depressions or/and sad feelings or/and other problems in your mind/etc" will stop in one moment, but it's the important step for healing.
self-harm is not caused of the FREE WILL it only seems so, beause the action is taken by the victim itself. but the system behind this is much bigger.
let's look at male gay anal-sex
lust and attraction to another man are causing anal-sex because theres no vagina.
okay we have two options: not allowing lust and attraction or umm an operation...
a normal human wouldn't self-harm, because the urge to survive which is in our human nature.
a normal human (normal human are also gay ppl, straight ppl too) would have anal sex because you don't think of dying or hurting yourself and the attraction and lust are stronger. there are women who LOVE it in the ass.
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to roozard [2011-01-02 19:53:22 +0000 UTC]
2. Condoms only limit the bacterial hazard to one person. There's still the danger to the person on the other end of tearing and weakening of certain muscles. I've heard that some people on the receiving end of anal sex end up in diapers as elderly.
3. I guess that's where the line is.
5. I wouldn't classify gay people as "normal" just because they're a minority case in this debate. When people self-harm, it's not because they want to die and defy the urge to survive (if it was, they wouldn't be self-harmers, they would be suicide victims). Most of the cutters I know love life, but get a kick off the endorphins or attention that comes from self-harm.
I've heard, from a few different statistics, that most homosexuals have had bullying/traumatic experiences/abuse in their pasts. If that was true, wouldn't it also only seem that the action is being taken by the victim, but that it also may not be a choice, and that the system is much bigger behind the fact.
π: 0 β©: 1
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-02 22:24:20 +0000 UTC]
2. "I've heard that some people on the receiving end of anal sex end up in diapers as elderly."
When they fuck too much. We're not talking about your nice sterotype, because you're in the United States and the youth and everything there is seen in other countries as... extreme...
5. "I wouldn't classify gay people as "normal" just because they're a minority case in this debate."
thanks. YOU wouldn't classify ME as normal. you wouldn't classify MILLIONS of people today and endless people from the beginning of the humanity as not normal. you wouldn't classifiy MILLIONS of gay animals as normal? do you know the story of the two male penguins who saved an egg which wasn't accepted from its mother and they hatched about and cared about the baby? the gay flamingos from a national zoo? ETC ETC? You want to say that germans foreign minister is and his husband aren't normal. my best bisexual friends and the endless kids who killed themselves BECAUSE OF THE CHURCH?
"When people self-harm, it's not because they want to die and defy the urge to survive"
thanks for your not-existing knowledge about human nature: the URGE TO SURVIVE is also the urge to not cut yourself. it's the same. i never said they try to kill themselves. ever tried to box yourself hard in the stomach. you'll have to try it many times. (unless you are boxing everyday, then it won't be a problem)
"Most of the cutters I know love life, but get a kick off the endorphins or attention that comes from self-harm. "
You can't say if somebody loves his life or not, only because it seems so or he thinks it or says it it's not like that. If they do it for attention the cause is that they don't have eniugh attention. The endorphin think is that they're bored and when they made it the first time it's like a drug. (your brain gives you something nice and you see heya do it again! - when you want to say i'm not right with this please research about drugs and other dependences and how they work)
"I've heard, from a few different statistics, that most homosexuals have had bullying/traumatic experiences/abuse in their pasts."
NOW question WHY? because of people who don't see them as normal. everybody who comes out and says 'gays are not normal' has the chance to be a murder. yes, every word a homo gets bashed on his head even if it's only a 'i wouldn't say you're normal' is a step closer to his suicide. it's much more than everything.
when you say to somebody 'you're ugly' it's NOTHING compared to 'i dont think gays are normal' THIS is killing. because you take his right away to be a HUMAN. even if he/she's the prettiest, funniest, best person. SHE/HE'S A NOTHING. because a thing he/she can't change.
thanks. if you can't imagine/believe that it's so hard, just imagine you have a big scarf in your face, you look so ugly and everyone is grossed out of you. you have no friends you are bullied they all HATE you. and then someone comes and says 'heya you're not normal'
you're catched in your own body, you CAN'T CHANGE it. the more they say to you you're not NORMAL the more you think exactly that.
but are you not a normal person?
I ask you: would you go to a crippled person and say him that he's not like the rest?
How would you feel?
It's killing.
"If that was true, wouldn't it also only seem that the action is being taken by the victim, but that it also may not be a choice, and that the system is much bigger behind the fact."
Of course is the system of DISCRIMINATIOn bigger.
But we talked about ANAL-SEX
ANAL-SEX=/ISCRIMINATION
discrimination is caused of other people/systems this is caused by a higher thing
let's take the nice example: catholics and the islam ppl.
they're a big system of people. when a priest says: 'gays are not allowed' the little humen believe it
it's a simple pride effects. we're all trough our instincts subordinatet (like a pride of lions - the leader says something, and they all believe it, the parents say it and the kids believe it in a ayoung age. of course there are other things)
making his own meaning and being unsubordinatet is never possible but nearly possible.
i'm trying this, but to assure other people is hard when you're a little kid. when theres a priest who says i believe homos suck and i say him the best arguments, his followers won't believe me.
when i say: god is only against anal-sex not the relationship and give the BEST proofs. they won't believe me.
if i would be your dad and would discuss about you when you were 5 years old, you would believe me, huh?
so, this discussion is only about anal-sex yes/no and homsexuals normal/or not? all other arguments were cleared. i think so
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to roozard [2011-01-03 01:44:40 +0000 UTC]
2->1. What is too much? Is there some standard?
5->2. I think you're misunderstanding me. Being abnormal doesn't have negative connotations. If everyone was normal in every way, the world would be a terribly boring place. If someone came up to me and said, "hey, you are waaayyy into debate: you're not normal," I'd be like, "well, thanks for noticing " and go on with my life. Someone else's opinion, negative or positive, should not determine how I view myself. I can take someone else's opinion and advice into consideration and say, "maybe i'm hurting people's feelings and sense of self by challenging what they believe" and then modify myself for my own betterment, but I shouldn't shut myself down and conform for someone else's approval.
If people have chosen to accept a tendency for a homosexual life style, why are they looking for acceptance from the people who believe that homosexuality is wrong and disgusting? You can't know that someone hates the color purple, wear the color purple, and then be upset when the person who hates purple tells you that he hates you and your purple clothes.
π: 0 β©: 1
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-03 15:01:37 +0000 UTC]
2/1.) no, but is there a standard for the word 'normal' 'big' or 'tiny'`? when you fuck every week with another person. if you have a relationship it's something else. body builder will be ill in their ages too and when the gays want to wear diapers then let them.
5/2.) well, then being heterosexual (when we look only at this single thing) is normal and homosexual not in your eyes. let it be like that.
"If people have chosen to accept a tendency for a homosexual life style, why are they looking for acceptance from the people who believe that homosexuality is wrong and disgusting"
because they're LIVING and LIVING is only really possible in a social way. and when 80% of people who are in your city are against homosexuality living isn't nice?
in germany (where i live) is one of the highest acceptance of homosexuality in the youth. so, i dont care about the some percent who dont like me.
but in the united states they bully you do death (the first ones kill themselves with 11). now you could say: why dont they hide it?
because it's so HARD. it's like you wanna hide a tongue piercing from your parents. it works when you dont laugh or speak and eat much when they're around. but when you make this, they think something is wring and look after you and theeen they see your piercing. o_o
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to roozard [2011-01-03 22:32:55 +0000 UTC]
1. So we've acknowledged that gay sex is frequently harmful to the individuals that engage in it?
2. As a person who lives in the US, I know that by and large, people are accepting of gays. There are the religious kids who turn up their noses, maybe 1 in 30 kids, and there are the people who are assholes and make fun of everyone, maybe 1 in 20. In the more central states, there are less accepting people, in the east and west states, there are more. In the US, there are places you can live after you leave your parents' houses that are very accepting of gay lifestyles. You don't have to go to the places that don't accept you. In fact, you shouldn't, or else you'll end up living in a society that rejects everything you've determined yourself to be and living will be hard.
People reject all kinds of lifestyle choices. Nerds have been dumped in trashcans for years, but you don't hear the hype about the very few of them who may or may not have committed suicide because of the vicious bullying they face. Emo kids are looked down on by many of the same kids that reject gays. Latinos and Latinas on the east coast are socially isolated by people who don't understand them and don't want to understand them.
Gays aren't the only ones who face this kind of segregation. What the nerds and emo kids and latinos/as do is they find their own groups, people who are like them, and hang with them. They realize that the others look down on them because of jealousies (for nerds, it might be intelligence, for gays, it might be self confidence) or/and a lack of understanding. In most cases, the kids aren't killing themselves over it.
π: 0 β©: 1
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-04 14:36:12 +0000 UTC]
1. no, not frequently, do you think when you have once per month anal-sex you end up in diapers? or every day for 3 weeks and then not? when you kick-box your muscles regenerate too. you would've died with age 5 when your body hasn't got healing etc. EVERY 7 years your complete body with all flesh, bones and muscles has changed. anal-sex is just like a hard punch in you stomach. when you got very often punched over years regulary it's dangerous.
it's only dangerous when you practice it years over many periods of time when you're not that young. and MANY male gays do that^.^
the stereotype is that they fuck everybody they see and and and and theres some truth but only for the gays in those SZENES and they're mostly in big cities in the united states. and then they do that. thy have a codex. look somebody 3 seconds in the eyes and you go with him and... yeah that's somewhere sick, but it's only in the scenes! we're not talking about these extraordinary examples. normal gay males have sex just like a straight man, mostly.
men are perverts and when they meet together they fuck like...
just look at the lesbians they don't fuck that much than the male gays. it's only the truth. why are straight and gay males rapists and women often not? because men are perverts it's in their nature to 'want to make babies'.
i dont mean pervert in a negative way, it'S normal ^-^
2."In most cases, the kids aren't killing themselves over it."
here some quotes (GLBT= gay lesbian bi transgender)
"WORDS CAN KILL GBLT KIDS. There are Christians whose words drive GBLT CHILDREN TO THEIR DEATHS IN VERY LARGE NUMBERS. It may seem that the Christian Fundamentalists are harmless, but the poison and lies they spread do great, great harm. Since many of these Fundamentalist Christians believe that their Bigotry and Discrimination is Justified by the Bible, they could care less if they drive children to suicide. After all they are doing "God's Work.""
[link] <- please download this pdf and look at these children. DID THEY DESERVE IT?
In America, Half (50%) of ALL boys who attempt or succeed in killing themselves, are Gay or Bisexual. Two 11 year old boys (Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover and Jaheem Herrera) committed suicide in 2009, from harassment at school for being assumed gay. I started figuring out I was gay at age 11. Kids in parts of this country are in a living hell at school.
If you include girls, 30% of ALL CHILDREN who attempt or succeed in killing themselves, are Gay, Bisexual, Lesbian, or Transgendered. 85% of ALL GBLT Youth have thought seriously about committing suicide (73% in a 2004 study).
EVERY YEAR, about 640,000 GBLT Kids, as young as 12 years old, go onto the street, and 39% of those were thrown out of their homes after βComing Outβ or discovery of their homosexuality or bisexuality, because of conflicts with moral and religious values. The vast majority of those parents are Christians.
A gay, bisexual, lesbian, transgender and/or questioning youth commits suicide every five hours and 48 minutes.
50% of gay males experienced a negative parental reaction when they came out.
GBLT Youth become an easy target for adult caretakers. More than 30% of lesbian and gay people have suffered physical violence at the hands of a family member.
GBLT Youth were more likely to report symptoms of a major depressive episode than heterosexual youth, with gay males significantly more likely to meet the criteria for a major depressive episode than heterosexual males (42.1% compared to 24.4%). GBLT adolescents were also more likely to have posttraumatic stress disorder.
For GBLT Youth, short of a guarantee of parental acceptance and ongoing financial and spiritual support if they come out, SECRECY seems like the best option in order to remain at home. They want to tell their parents the truth, but fear the consequences of doing so, and are forced lie about what activities they are involved in and with whom they are involved. This can make you feel unloved and an outcast. If there are strong family religious homophobic beliefs, this can sometimes result in internalized homophobia, and feeling that you are inherently bad, a degenerate, etc. Stress can be incredibly high and self-worth incredibly low.
Gay and Lesbian youth are less assertive that Bi-sexual and Heterosexual youth, particularly in communication skills. This has a significant impact on Safe-Sex practices. GBLT Youth are less likely to insist of protection for sex, and less likely to say, βno,β when they want to say, βno,β to sex or alcohol/drug use. By being aware of this, you can choose to be more assertive.
Once in a Youth Shelter, GBLT kids are badly discriminated against, like having to wear Orange jumpsuits so that they can be easily identified, and having the doors to their rooms removed or locked in the open position. Transgendered youth are forced to look like their birth gender and use their birth name. GBLT Youth are often treated in unfriendly ways. Because more and more shelters are now Christian run, abuses have actually gotten worse, sometimes receiving forced counseling that their sexual identity is a choice they can change through prayer. Some shelters require listening to a Christian sermon and prayers before they can eat.
Of those GBLT Youth who experienced physical assault when they CAME-OUT, 35% of them became runaway youth, 36% became throwaway youth, and 56% of them are in the state child welfare system.
Physical abuse in the home is a consistent factor leading to homelessness, with 40% to 60% of all homeless youth saying it contributed to their no longer living at home.
Other reasons GBLT Youth become homeless are:
- Conflict at home (63%)
- A family that will not tolerate their presence in the home and demand they leave (39%)
- Parental substance abuse (24%)
- Criminal activity (19%)
- The risk of emotional abuse (22%)
- The fact that their sexual orientation specifically is unacceptable to their parent or guardian (7%)
Homeless youth, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, experienced more maltreatment and lived in more conflict-ridden situations than did their still-housed contemporaries.
73% of gay and lesbian youth left home because of parental disapproval of their sexual orientation, whereas only 25.6% of bi-sexual youth left home for this reason.
3% of heterosexual youth left home because of drug and alcohol use, whereas 26.3% of bi-sexual youth and only 6.3% of gay and lesbian youth left for this reason.
More gay and lesbian youth left home due to sexual abuse, and more bi-sexual youth left due to physical abuse. Overall, females reported more emotional abuse.
For GBLT Street Youth:
35% of have been beaten up at least once,
39% have been robbed,
44% have been threatened with a weapon,
47% of females had been propositioned to partake in the selling sex,
37% of males had been propositioned to partake in the selling sex,
31% of females had been sexually assaulted,
13% of the males had been sexually assaulted.
GLBT youths were significantly younger than heterosexuals in regard to age at first voluntary intercourse at age (means of 13 and 14, respectively).
Also, GLBT youths reported high rates of unprotected intercourse, (means of 50% and 43% respectively). More than twice as many GLBT youths as heterosexual youths reported that they neglected to use protection during sex βall of the time.β
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to roozard [2011-01-07 20:20:59 +0000 UTC]
Hey, school's back on in the US. I'm not going to have time to answer this now (or any time soon), but send me another message as confirmation that you want to keep this up and I'll leave it in my inbox until I do have time.
π: 0 β©: 1
roozard In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-07 20:55:36 +0000 UTC]
umm if you don't have time you don't have to answer ^-^!
π: 0 β©: 0
Tinyfeather In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2010-12-31 18:30:42 +0000 UTC]
"Sodomy is a sin for Jews and Christians."
sodomy back then meant wickedness. it was not originally a term referring to gays.
the bible told people how much you should pay for slaves. that sounds like supporting slavery to me.
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to Tinyfeather [2010-12-31 18:43:52 +0000 UTC]
I'm not sure what the wording of the Bibles of back then was, but the New James Versions say "sodomy" meaning what we all know the word today to mean. The new bibles employ new vocabulary. The old bibles or bibles that don't want to change wording merely say things like, "men shouldn't lay with men as they do with women," and that God was so displeased with the acts of the Sodomites that he smote them from the Earth.
It's regulating a trade. Like, you have to pay twenty-five cents for a gum ball. It's a rule supporting the economy, not a specific institution within the economy.
π: 0 β©: 1
Tinyfeather In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2010-12-31 19:09:03 +0000 UTC]
for the wording to be accurate and meanings kept in place, the same words should be used as they always were. if you are referring to something similar to this:
"And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel. (1 Kings 14:24, KJV)"
the word sodomites has a negative connotation here. the phrase "male cult prostitutes" is much more accurate than "homosexual offenders" or whatever it is most people think it means.
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to Tinyfeather [2010-12-31 20:50:36 +0000 UTC]
I agree with you when you say that the same words should be used. But they aren't, however much they should be.
I'm not going to argue with you that "homosexuals" is less accurate than "male cult prostitutes." It's the act that is being targeted, not the title of the people who do the act. The act of male cult prostitutes is gay sex, of course. What else would the Bible be referring to?
π: 0 β©: 1
Tinyfeather In reply to TheAlbinoKirby [2011-01-01 01:20:29 +0000 UTC]
exactly. the act. you don't have to be gay to have gay sex. you can do it just because you're lustful.
i'm going to go back to the fact that greek, latin, and hebrew did not have a word for "homosexual" in those times. in 1 corinthians 6, the phrase "male prostitutes" is translated from the greek word malakoi, singular malakos, and "homosexual offenders" is a translation of arsenokoiati, singular arsenokoites.
let's look at what all different bibles say malakoi/malakos means:
βeffeminateβ (king james version, american standard version bible);
βpervertβ (contemporary english version bible);
βmale prostitutesβ(new revised standard version bible);
βthe self-indulgentβ (new jerusalem bible)
and arsenokoiati/arsenokoites:
in 1 corinthians it is translated as "homosexual offenders", but in 1 timothy it is translated as "perverts". we all know there are heterosexual perverts, so obviously these terms mean different things. other translations are "homosexuals" and "sodomites", or phrases such as "men who practice homosexuality" (english standard version), "homosexual perverts" (good news bible), and "sexual perverts" (revised english bible, revised standard version (2nd edition).
okay. these are all different things. obviously something is wrong here, such as maybe - they don't know the true meaning of the word. if you asked four people what, say, uno meant, and they told you seven, cat, sky, and fish, you know that they can't all be right. there is no getting around the fact arsenokoiati doesn't mean what a lot of people think it does.
about malakos - it literally means "soft" and is used elsewhere like that in the new testament. it can also mean "effeminate". but that can't mean homosexual either, as not all effeminate men are gay, and not all gay men are effeminate.
so, yes, the question really is..what is the bible referring to?
π: 0 β©: 1
TheAlbinoKirby In reply to Tinyfeather [2011-01-01 22:59:46 +0000 UTC]
The Bible doesn't say that being gay is wrong. It says that having sex with a man (if you are a man) is wrong.
That's kind of bothersome. The Bible actually says somewhere that people who change the bible's wording will face God's wrath. I have no idea how people have managed to translate the Bible, but I hope, for their sakes, they've done it accurately.
In most of the Bibles I've read, the wording goes like this, "men must not lay with another man as they do with a woman." "Lay" or "lying" has been used in a bunch of instructions throughout the bible in reference to sex. The bible also says such things as, "when a man lies with a woman who is not his wife in this and that circumstance, he must marry her." So "lying" means having sex with and most bibles are very clean on men not being supposed to "lie" with other men.
π: 0 β©: 0
GlueGunsandDuctTape In reply to Pinkcatnip [2011-01-17 23:52:12 +0000 UTC]
Oh! And I absolutely adore your EA reference in your signature. I am currently listening to her at the moment!
We Plaguerats have to be nice to the gays if no one else will!!
π: 0 β©: 1
Pinkcatnip In reply to GlueGunsandDuctTape [2011-01-18 04:32:48 +0000 UTC]
Yes! Someone gets it! I'm going to her concert in February, I can't wait :3
We do :3
π: 0 β©: 1
Pinkcatnip In reply to GlueGunsandDuctTape [2011-01-19 05:03:50 +0000 UTC]
Yeah xD I'm going to wear a Victorian gown and everything.
π: 0 β©: 1
GlueGunsandDuctTape In reply to Pinkcatnip [2011-01-20 01:48:04 +0000 UTC]
Ahh, remember while your "suffering" and drinking your tea while basking in the muffin queen's presence, I'll be sitting all alone in my house wishing I was there.
π: 0 β©: 1
Pinkcatnip In reply to GlueGunsandDuctTape [2011-01-23 10:13:21 +0000 UTC]
I'm sorry D: You can always drink tea alone and speak with a ghost... of your imagination. It's quite easy to convince yourself a ghost is haunting you. I've done it myself :3
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>