official Gay/Homosexual Debate Thread

[Malchik]

When it comes to sex I'm probably the most the most liberal guy in town, so my stance is obvious.

[Mitchal]

My favorite vampire is gay. No you asshats I'm not talking about Edward Cullen.

[HeiseiGodzilla117]

My views on this subject are very, very simple.

Gays are human beings. I treat them as such.

Ditto. Why this is even up for debate anymore is beyond me.

[wataru]

There was this gay manager at Sears. He came in one day in a purple 3 piece suit and white leather shoes. And I admit, I thought the shoes were AH-MAZE-ING!

Look. People are gay, bi or straight. So what? Even Ive re-evaluated my stance on gay marriage and gay adoption.

[King Caesar]

My views on this subject are very, very simple.

Gays are human beings. I treat them as such.

Ditto. Why this is even up for debate anymore is beyond me.

Yeah, there shouldn't be any "debate". They are what they are.

[wataru]

My views on this subject are very, very simple.

Gays are human beings. I treat them as such.

Ditto. Why this is even up for debate anymore is beyond me.

Yeah, there shouldn't be any "debate". They are what they are.

Except in this world, human rights themselves are debatable.

[anguirusnut94]

You can choose who you skreeonk, but not who you want to skreeonk.
On the side note, I'm bi, my 'sister' (we've been friends for years, it's a sibling in arms sort of thing) is bi, my cousin John is gay (I had NO idea until just yesterday, really. I feel bad for him, because his parents are ultra-conservitave, gungho, hellfire and damnation to gays types of folks), a good majority of my friends are bi, my great Grandpa has admitted "I'd've gotten with that one fellow back in the 40's if your Great Granny hadn't been back here waiting for me.", so Gay rights is really a no brainer for me. I'll skreeonk who I want to skreeonk, and as long as it's between consenting adults, who gives a shit?

[Rockzilla]

Gay marriage being legalized = more women for us straight guys.

[o.supreme]

Greetings All,

Just trying to add some level headed thinking to the playing field. If people don’t agree, please let me preface the below statements that I have no feelings of hate or animosity towards any individual or group of individuals.

As a Christian of a specific denomination, I believe the Scriptures to be the word of God. It clearly states that acts of Homosexuality are wrong. Now that being said, I think the more important issue is acknowledging that this truly is a choice of lifestyle. I do not have any friends that are of that lifestyle, but I have known people growing up, and they chose this for themselves. By contrast I have known people that previously were, and have for whatever reason decided not to be. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 mentions several unclean practices and Paul says “That is what some of you were” past tense.

I know some people point to so-called scientific reports etc… that try to state that sexual orientation is genetic. But the proof really isn’t there if you examine it. It is a choice each person makes based on the events of one’s life. I agree that a person just doesn’t wake up one day and decide they are gay or straight, or somewhere in the middle. But by the same token I can’t see how a doctor when delivering a new born baby can write on the birth certificate “Sexual Orientation” next to gender, height, weight, and skin color.

I do not associate myself with any political party, so the efforts of Homosexuals to obtain perceived rights within the political element really don’t affect me one way or another. I just think that those who make this choice should stand by it themselves. To say “I was born this way” is the ultimate cop out IMHO. I was not born a Christian. My parents NEVER went to church except for weddings, funerals, and the occasional Easter (if my grandparents nagged them enough). It is a choice I have made and I am proud of. Although I cannot agree with the actions of the homosexual life style choice, I can sympathize in that I know what it is like to have people you love be persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for their choices. But I do not go on blogs and websites and demand a stop to the hate. I can’t stop it and I know exactly why it’s happening. Also I do not let it take my joy away. I only ask that those who have made the choice to live an alternate lifestyle to have the courage to acknowledge that they have in fact done so, and not hide behind the “I was born this way” stance.

[Cimmerian Dragon]

So they "choose" to be gay just like you "choose" to believe that the scriptures are the word of God. You don't believe that there is sufficient scientific evidence to support the idea that actual, purely-homosexual people exit, and in contrast you have utter faith in a being whose existence cannot be scientifically verified. Okay, I understand your position.

I choose to believe that homosexuality is a biological predisposition. I also choose to believe that any words set down by the hands of human beings are rendered suspect thanks to the fallible nature of those human beings.

Even if we could all respect each-others' right to choose our own beliefs, regardless of whether or not we approve, the world would be so much more pleasant. You were doing pretty well with that, until you made accusations of cowardice with your "hiding" comment.

[kaiju_wars]

I am still waiting for the links to articles where gays have been wronged in court and other forms of law.
And I have given up on valid points and "scientific evidence" on gay not being a choice.

Like I said before, I have nothing against gay people, but for some reason, people have something against me for asking to explain what "gay rights" is all about, and how it is, or isnt' a choice.

[TheSecondComing]

And I believe that the Bible is actually a worse source than Wikipedia, considering the hundreds of translations (both well done and awfully done), mis-translations (both on purpose and not), editing changes, leaving books in, taking books out, smear-campaign editorializing and whatever else can be done to a 2000 or so year old book. Not to mention the fact that there are many different versions, so even that is a major problem with taking it seriously.

I've been a churchgoer my whole life and despite that I lean towards atheism. Christianity offers some good social rules, but not much else in my opinion.

[Crocodile]

And I believe that the Bible is actually a worse source than Wikipedia,

This analogy is glorious, I'm slow clapping SecondComing.

KW Gay Rights is about equal civil rights for Gay couples. The right to marriage is a fundamental right philosophically, and there's really no reason they should be denied it. Gay Rights is mostly about them enjoying full legal status as a married couple, and none of this "Domestic partner" shit which just equates to living together.

[kaiju_wars]

And I believe that the Bible is actually a worse source than Wikipedia,

This analogy is glorious, I'm slow clapping SecondComing.

KW Gay Rights is about equal civil rights for Gay couples. The right to marriage is a fundamental right philosophically, and there's really no reason they should be denied it. Gay Rights is mostly about them enjoying full legal status as a married couple, and none of this "Domestic partner" shit which just equates to living together.

Ok thank you. Thank you for clearing that up, because everyone kept avoiding it when I asked.

But, again, marriage is not actually a federal law, it is a state by state thing, for everyone. That could mean, a white man couldn't marry a black woman, but civil rights laws changed that, so States cannot outlaw marraige by race.


But they can outlaw it of a single person... or "sexual-orientations" or 'LIfesyles" whatever you want to call it. Mainly because they are not race.

[Crocodile]

But, again, marriage is not actually a federal law, it is a state by state thing, for everyone. That could mean, a white man couldn't marry a black woman, but civil rights laws changed that, so States cannot outlaw marraige by race.

That's because the 10th Ammendmant only grants power not delegated to the Federal level to the states, never said the Federal Government couldn't delegate power to itself. It's taken States rights to do things before.

Mind you if the number of the states that legalize it anyways, increases it's a moot point.

[Tohosaurus]

As a Christian of a specific denomination, I believe the Scriptures to be the word of God. It clearly states that acts of Homosexuality are wrong.

That's not entirely correct. The original word used in the OT Bible was to-ebah (hopefully I didn't butcher the spelling), which would mean something more along the lines of something offensive/disturbing to Jews, who were at the time experiencing a population issue as compared to the Palestinians. Thus, the speculation exists that Jewish higher-ups wanted to maximize their population, and with good reason. Just as well, different words from this are used in NT, none of which actually would have the Hebrew translation of homosexuality or sexual involvement with the same sex. Again, translations vary widely and looking to some of the literal meanings of the original Hebrew text is crucial.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 mentions several unclean practices and Paul says “That is what some of you were” past tense.

Leviticus describes rules prohibiting intercourse when a woman is on her period, shaving, eating of foods like shellfish, and countless other practices that 99% of Christians would not condemn. Jesus ended many old "laws" as well. Even in the event that God's word really does condemn homosexuality to the very end, as a Christian one has to ask themselves why their religious belief should rule others. I do NOT favor Rick Santorum's religious interpretations and some unrelated old world opinions, as simple as that women should not serve in the front lines of war, etc. But guess what? He wants to rule with his own beliefs and the rest of us would just have to follow. How fun would that be? That's what happens when we let ANY version of ANY religion (or lack of religion) rule us all.

And I won't even touch the "choice" discussion.

[Cimmerian Dragon]

And I believe that the Bible is actually a worse source than Wikipedia, considering the hundreds of translations (both well done and awfully done), mis-translations (both on purpose and not), editing changes, leaving books in, taking books out, smear-campaign editorializing and whatever else can be done to a 2000 or so year old book. Not to mention the fact that there are many different versions, so even that is a major problem with taking it seriously.

Exactly. It all boils down to accepting the word of HUMAN BEINGS who claimed that they were faithfully transcribing the word of God. Now, you may believe in God or not, that's a matter of faith. However, when you say that you believe that the Bible accurately relates his desires and intentions, you aren't placing your faith in God, you are placing faith in the MEN who wrote the Bible. At even the most basic philosophical level, it's obvious that these are two very different things.

[anguirusnut94]

And I believe that the Bible is actually a worse source than Wikipedia, considering the hundreds of translations (both well done and awfully done), mis-translations (both on purpose and not), editing changes, leaving books in, taking books out, smear-campaign editorializing and whatever else can be done to a 2000 or so year old book. Not to mention the fact that there are many different versions, so even that is a major problem with taking it seriously.

Exactly. It all boils down to accepting the word of HUMAN BEINGS who claimed that they were faithfully transcribing the word of God. Now, you may believe in God or not, that's a matter of faith. However, when you say that you believe that the Bible accurately relates his desires and intentions, you aren't placing your faith in God, you are placing faith in the MEN who wrote the Bible. At even the most basic philosophical level, it's obvious that these are two very different things.

Never place your faith in the man who wrote a word, place it in the Lord who spoke the Word.

[Crocodile]

And I believe that the Bible is actually a worse source than Wikipedia, considering the hundreds of translations (both well done and awfully done), mis-translations (both on purpose and not), editing changes, leaving books in, taking books out, smear-campaign editorializing and whatever else can be done to a 2000 or so year old book. Not to mention the fact that there are many different versions, so even that is a major problem with taking it seriously.

Exactly. It all boils down to accepting the word of HUMAN BEINGS who claimed that they were faithfully transcribing the word of God. Now, you may believe in God or not, that's a matter of faith. However, when you say that you believe that the Bible accurately relates his desires and intentions, you aren't placing your faith in God, you are placing faith in the MEN who wrote the Bible. At even the most basic philosophical level, it's obvious that these are two very different things.

Never place your faith in the man who wrote a word, place it in the Lord who spoke the Word.

Yeah....that doesn't really detract from his point

In fact if anything, it kinda supports it.

[anguirusnut94]

^That's what I was going for...