Homestar Runner Wiki Forum :: View topic - Your honest opinion on homosexuality

Furthermore I don't think that the term "Bisexual" is more than myth, I don't think you can like both ladies and dudes no matter what your gender is.

You have heard that it was said, "Do not commit adultery." But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
--Jesus (Matthew 5:27-28)

By that standard, anyone who has looked at pornography on the internet is guilty of a sexual sin just as much as the inhabitants of the gay bathhouses in San Francisco.

I think chiu's argument is that your sexual orientation can be affected either at a conscious or unconscious level by social constructs.

It is my opnion that this debate is almost akin to that of the rights of slaves of oh-so-many years ago. We should all know that racisim is wrong. The Slaves couldn't marry. How is this diffrent?

However, people do have control over their own behavior, and, at least as far as I'm concerned, homosexuality is a moral issue, not a racial one.

How do you know if people can control their sexual preferences? That statement to me said. "Its the Gay's fault they are Gay" acting like its just a bad behavior.
Not cool man,
Not cool at all

Didymus wrote:

However, people do have control over their own behavior, and, at least as far as I'm concerned, homosexuality is a moral issue, not a racial one.

How do you know if people can control their sexual preferences? That statement to me said. "Its the Gay's fault they are Gay" acting like its just a bad behavior.
Not cool man,
Not cool at all

You are assuming that people don't have a choice regarding their sexuality.

seamusz wrote:

You are assuming that people don't have a choice regarding their sexuality.

You seem to be making the bigger assumption here: that just because some friend of yours though he/she was gay but found out otherwise means that every one of the millions of homosexuals in the world must also just be mistaken. That's a special kind of arrogance.

What? No response the rest of my post backing up what I said there?!

seamusz wrote:

What? No response the rest of my post backing up what I said there?!

No response is necessary because the rest of your post does not "back up" anything except an opinion based on an assumption based on your very limited personal experience.

Oh... because you say so, I see.
:rolleyes:

As previous discussion above has demonstrated, there is a very strong possibility that homosexuality is not hardwired, as many people assume. There is a very strong possibillity that it is at least equally psychological. The fact that there are people who seem to switch orientations points to this possibility.

I have known and read about people who have dealt with same-sex attraction have overcame this and lived full and vibrant lives (by their own words).

Now for the cliche "They aren't hurting anyone, so let them be".

ModestlyHotGirl wrote:

Now for the cliche "They aren't hurting anyone, so let them be".

Not according to some right-wing extremists. Saying homosexuals can't be allowed to marry because they would only have homosexual kids and would be "recruting" Sounding like they are makign an army or something.
But you do have the best point so far MHG

You need to really study the circumstances of the "change" to see if it is genuine or not. Say, in the case of a gay person switching orientation because s/he is very religious, that's not a genuine change. There are external influences guiding the change.

Author:	Jerome [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:18 am ]
Post subject:
Sabaku no Gaara wrote: Furthermore I don't think that the term "Bisexual" is more than myth, I don't think you can like both ladies and dudes no matter what your gender is. Well, I happen two know two people who are bisexual and open about it, and that's just people at my school that I know who have said so. Bisexuality is actually more common than homosexuality (but not as much as heterosexuality). We learned that in health class . Hey! TOPTD!!!

Author:	BigBrudder [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 6:18 am ]
Post subject:
The Bible is pretty clear that any sexual activity other than between a man and woman married to each other is wrong. That includes everything from hetero sex between unmarried man/woman, incest, rape, bestiality, adultery, orgies, and homosexuality. If anyone wants to debate this, I'd be more than happy to post the relevant passages, which are pretty clear and self-explanatory. You can dispute the authority and relevance of the Bible if you want, but you cannot construct a logically consistent argument that the Bible condones or approves of homosexuality. That said, I don't see anywhere in the Bible where Christians are commanded to persecute, harass, or abuse those who practice consensual homosexuality any more than we do practitioners of adultery or consensual extra-marital hetero sex. I believe that such behaviors are wrong, but the proper attitude is to love the person (even if not the behavior) and attempt to respectfully persuade them that their lifestyle choices are not what's best in the long run. In the long term, that approach is generally more effective than calling them names and hitting them in the head with a Bible. Non-consensual sex (rape, incest, etc.) is a bit different, as being forced to engage in a sexual act against your will is much more psychologically damaging than any consensual act, and those who force others to engage in sexual acts are also far more likely to commit other acts of violence against others, especially while forcing the other person(s) to engage in sex against their will. It is a good thing to imprison or otherwise remove from society those who engage in such acts, not just from a religious/moral perspective, but from a practical cost/benefit analysis of allowing such people to run around loose in society. I support the death penalty for child molesters and rapists, whether hetero, bi, or homo.

Author:	StrongRad [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 1:51 pm ]
Post subject:
I like most of what you just said. Especially the whole thing about homosexual sex not being the only kind of sinful sex.. It goes back to what I posted earlier about my dad's preacher... If you're going to point a finger, remember that you're pointing 3 more back at yourself.

Author:	BigBrudder [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:32 pm ]
Post subject:
Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? --Jesus (Matthew 7: 1-3) It's a bit hypocritical to get all up in a homosexual's face when you've had sex with someone you're not married to, or even used pornography: You have heard that it was said, "Do not commit adultery." But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. --Jesus (Matthew 5:27-28) By that standard, anyone who has looked at pornography on the internet is guilty of a sexual sin just as much as the inhabitants of the gay bathhouses in San Francisco. Which means that the vast majority of us (including yours truly) are in no position to cop a holier-than-thou attitude to a homosexual. My position is that God made the rules, He is the best one to enforce them and judge violators. I'm not qualified to throw the first stone.

Author:	InterruptorJones [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:46 pm ]
Post subject:
BigBrudder wrote: You have heard that it was said, "Do not commit adultery." But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. --Jesus (Matthew 5:27-28) By that standard, anyone who has looked at pornography on the internet is guilty of a sexual sin just as much as the inhabitants of the gay bathhouses in San Francisco. This is off-topic (and I agree with your post its entirety), but the Bible seems to have a pretty wacky definition of adultery, as last I checked you can only commit adultery if you're married. But, I'm sure Didymus will swoop in with some rigorous explanation about the original Hebrew and how it's really the translation that's wacky, so I guess I'll just toast paint myself...

Homestar Runner Wiki Forum http://forum.hrwiki.org/

Your honest opinion on homosexuality http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5638	Page 4 of 18

Author:	BigBrudder [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:09 pm ]
Post subject:
It's not a matter of redefining adultery; the underlying concept is the same whether you're married or not. The point Jesus was making is that looking at someone with the intent of deriving sexual gratification is just as sinful as physically consummating a sex act with that person. It doesn't matter if one or both people are married, or neither, it's still a sin.

Author:	Didymus [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:46 pm ]
Post subject:
BB is right, Jones. While you are right in saying that the classical definition of adultery, as stated in the commandment, requires violation of marriage vows through sexual contact, it is also clear that the Scriptures elsewhere extend that principle to include any inappropriate sexual contact, and even inappropriate sexual thoughts. In the Ten Commandments, coveting is prohibited, and lust is basically a form of coveting. Furthermore, Jesus does explicitly state in the Sermon on the Mount that lust is essentially a form of mental adultery and is also a sin. The basic point is that God intends people to live chaste and decent lives and to enjoy appropriate sexual contact with one's spouse. I never said this was easy, nor that I myself am entirely guiltless in this matter. Only that it is in fact the goal toward which we are all to strive.

Author:	khan earl [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: I think chiu's argument is that your sexual orientation can be affected either at a conscious or unconscious level by social constructs. acually other way arouwd, I think you cant change your sex only denie it.

Author:	Didymus [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:24 pm ]
Post subject:
I'm going to assume you meant "orientation," and continue to disagree. Your claim that you can't does not seem to take into account that some people actually have.

Author:	khan earl [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:34 pm ]
Post subject:
you do mean gay to straight right?, I do beleive a gay can turn bi but not completely straight.

Author:	Didymus [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 6:11 pm ]
Post subject:
But even if that's the case, then doesn't it mean, therefore, that sexual orientation isn't hardwired, i.e., that it is primarily psychological and not biological?

Author:	khan earl [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 6:20 pm ]
Post subject:
well your right on that, sorta, It could just mean that the person just found out that he/she likes them.

Author:	Prof. Tor Coolguy [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:08 pm ]
Post subject:
The Japanese Geek wrote: It is my opnion that this debate is almost akin to that of the rights of slaves of oh-so-many years ago. We should all know that racisim is wrong. The Slaves couldn't marry. How is this diffrent? Because slavery in general was part of the causes of the Civil War, let's hope the fight over gay marrage never gets to that point.

Author:	Didymus [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:13 pm ]
Post subject:
It's different because no one can control the color of their skin, or whether some outside oppressor buys or sells them like cattle. However, people do have control over their own behavior, and, at least as far as I'm concerned, homosexuality is a moral issue, not a racial one.

Author:	DeadGaySon [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:25 am ]
Post subject:
seamusz wrote: because you say so THE EMILY POSTULATE!!!!!!! Sorry inside joke...

Author:	khan earl [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:54 pm ]
Post subject:
whf thanks for taking this one, I hate having to argue when religion is invoved, cause its imposible to convert one that has religion on mind, so why fight a imposible to win battle.

Page 4 of 18	All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	DESTROY US ALL! [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:16 pm ]
Post subject:
Didymus wrote: However, people do have control over their own behavior, and, at least as far as I'm concerned, homosexuality is a moral issue, not a racial one. How do you know if people can control their sexual preferences? That statement to me said. "Its the Gay's fault they are Gay" acting like its just a bad behavior. Not cool man, Not cool at all

Author:	khan earl [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:23 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: How do you know if people can control their sexual preferences? That statement to me said. "Its the Gay's fault they are Gay" acting like its just a bad behavior. Not cool man, Not cool at all thaaank yoou! destroy_us_all, thaank yoou!

Author:	seamusz [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:57 pm ]
Post subject:
destroy_us_all wrote: Didymus wrote: However, people do have control over their own behavior, and, at least as far as I'm concerned, homosexuality is a moral issue, not a racial one. How do you know if people can control their sexual preferences? That statement to me said. "Its the Gay's fault they are Gay" acting like its just a bad behavior. Not cool man, Not cool at all You are assuming that people don't have a choice regarding their sexuality. Even though one may be born with an amount of predisposition toward same-sex attraction, it doesn't justify homosexuality. Everyone has certain dispositions in life, some good and some not good. We could all probably agree that some people are naturally predisposed towards violence, and that violence is not an ethical behavior. So as a society, we expect those who have this predisposition toward violence to suppress their impulses to act violently. So what this issue boils down to is whether or not the behavior is ethical. This is a pretty subjective issue. Those who believe the Bible is God's word will most likely take the stance that homosexuality is not ethical. But there are those who will assert that a non-bias approach on the subject will concede that the behavior itself is not a healthy one. On the other hand there are many studies done and organizations who support homosexuality as a natural and positive behavior. I have known and read about people who have dealt with same-sex attraction have overcame this and lived full and vibrant lives (by their own words).

Author:	InterruptorJones [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:07 am ]
Post subject:
seamusz wrote: You are assuming that people don't have a choice regarding their sexuality. You seem to be making the bigger assumption here: that just because some friend of yours though he/she was gay but found out otherwise means that every one of the millions of homosexuals in the world must also just be mistaken. That's a special kind of arrogance.

Author:	seamusz [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:08 am ]
Post subject:
InterruptorJones wrote: seamusz wrote: You are assuming that people don't have a choice regarding their sexuality. You seem to be making the bigger assumption here: that just because some friend of yours though he/she was gay but found out otherwise means that every one of the millions of homosexuals in the world must also just be mistaken. That's a special kind of arrogance. What? No response the rest of my post backing up what I said there?!

Author:	seamusz [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:23 am ]
Post subject:
InterruptorJones wrote: seamusz wrote: What? No response the rest of my post backing up what I said there?! No response is necessary because the rest of your post does not "back up" anything except an opinion based on an assumption based on your very limited personal experience. Oh... because you say so, I see.

Author:	khan earl [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:39 am ]
Post subject:
Quote: You seem to be making the bigger assumption here: that just because some friend of yours though he/she was gay but found out otherwise means that every one of the millions of homosexuals in the world must also just be mistaken. That's a special kind of arrogance. thanks to enother that agrees with me, now I dont feel alone on this. Quote: Oh... because you say so, I see. thats not what he ment, and you know it!

Author:	Didymus [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:02 pm ]
Post subject:
As previous discussion above has demonstrated, there is a very strong possibility that homosexuality is not hardwired, as many people assume. There is a very strong possibillity that it is at least equally psychological. The fact that there are people who seem to switch orientations points to this possibility. And it is my point that, unless homosexuality can be demonstrated to be purely biological and not psychological, then it is a behavioral and moral issue, not a genetic or "racial" one, as some argue. My attitude toward homosexual behavior is based primarily on what I understand to be God's intention for human sexuality, not on biology or the popular opinion of our modern culture. So I will thank you not to try to equate my opinion with that of Klansmen or Those Really Mean German Guys!

Author:	What's Her Face [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:19 pm ]
Post subject:
Didymus wrote: As previous discussion above has demonstrated, there is a very strong possibility that homosexuality is not hardwired, as many people assume. There is a very strong possibillity that it is at least equally psychological. The fact that there are people who seem to switch orientations points to this possibility. seamusz wrote: I have known and read about people who have dealt with same-sex attraction have overcame this and lived full and vibrant lives (by their own words). In principle, I wouldn't disagree with you. But in cases where people seem to "switch orientations" all of a sudden, it's worth keeping a critical eye. Because denial can still be a factor. A gay man can sudden run off and marry a woman, have twenty children, and protest to the whole world that he's straight - but that doesn't mean it is so. And he - and his wife and children - could end up absolutely miserable and heart-broken as a result of this denial. You need to really study the circumstances of the "change" to see if it is genuine or not. Say, in the case of a gay person switching orientation because s/he is very religious, that's not a genuine change. There are external influences guiding the change. I must say that I can't support a change of sexuality unless it is absolutely genuine (even then, it's a little fishy). Because to be in denial is one of the most damaging things you can do to yourself psychologically, other than anger and guilt. And while you may hear of gay people suddenly getting married to members of the opposite sex, how happy are these relationships? How successful? Also, depending on how old the person was, changes in orientation could indicate sexual immaturity. This isn't a positive attribute. I know I wouldn't want to get in a relationship with a "changed" gay man. The risks that he could revert are too great.

Author:	ModestlyHotGirl [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:56 pm ]
Post subject:
I'm totally fine with homosexuality. I don't follow any religion, and part of the reason for that is that I believe organized religions hold narrow-minded views on certain issues, homosexuality being one of them. Now for the cliche "They aren't hurting anyone, so let them be".

Author:	DESTROY US ALL! [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:48 pm ]
Post subject:
ModestlyHotGirl wrote: Now for the cliche "They aren't hurting anyone, so let them be". Not according to some right-wing extremists. Saying homosexuals can't be allowed to marry because they would only have homosexual kids and would be "recruting" Sounding like they are makign an army or something. But you do have the best point so far MHG

Author:	StrongRad [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:
destroy_us_all wrote: ModestlyHotGirl wrote: Now for the cliche "They aren't hurting anyone, so let them be". Not according to some right-wing extremists. Saying homosexuals can't be allowed to marry because they would only have homosexual kids and would be "recruting" Sounding like they are makign an army or something. But you do have the best point so far MHG They're called "extremists" for a reason... I'm a "right wing nut job" (I have an NRA membership card to prove it), and a Christian, AND from Kentucky, and I don't hate gay people. My take is a bit more selfish on the matter than MHG's, though.. If they're not hurting me, why should I care who someone loves? I love how some guy (or woman) that cheats on their spouse thinks that they're actually better than someone who loves a person of the same sex.. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Author:	Didymus [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:16 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: You need to really study the circumstances of the "change" to see if it is genuine or not. Say, in the case of a gay person switching orientation because s/he is very religious, that's not a genuine change. There are external influences guiding the change. Depends. If you mean that they "switch" merely to please their church or other people, and not because of their own love of God, I might be tempted to agree with you. However, if you are denying the transforming power of the love of our Lord Jesus Christ (the same power that turned the murderous Saul of Tarsus into the apostle St. Paul), then I wouldn't agree with you one bit. I would in fact challenge you that you are in fact the one in denial, and basing your assessment on assumptions you've made about the nature of sexual orientation.