Is being gay wrong?

Post Reply New Topic

There is nothing wrong with being Gay.
The people who will do anything to "solve the gay problem" have homophobia. However people that have a problem with it do not necessarily have homphobia. Just as long as they dont provoke others or engage in hostile action (mind your own business).

I don't see anything wrong with it because, you don't affect me at all.
Why should we try to stop two people that love each other?

I blame society and our culture taboo of male homosexuality
Around the interent, photo's of lesbians are everywhere and alot of people like it.
Yet if you post gay-pornography on a male dominated porn site, watch the reaction.
(female dominated web sites tend to be more open)

Alot of people are against homosexuality because their own sexual preference is in question.
The other reasons for homophobia are the 5 theories of racism. I think upbringing and fear are the main ones.

"A gay man is incapable of falling in love with a woman. A gay woman is incapable of falling in love with a man."

Everyone has a small percentage of attractiveness towards the same sex. Its just we tend to be all out against it to fit into society. You are also excluding Bi people who prefer both.
And if someone likes homosexual sex, that doesn't necessarily mean they are homosexual.

As for me, I am straight and proud of everyone!

Until recently, they were rarely allowed to marry and did not have the same legal rights of inheritance, pension, and so on. That demonstrates how they were considered less human than heterosexual people, despite being productive members of society that added value to the economy and culture. This still eludes homosexuals in the US, where we like to pretend we can still stomp down on a minority of the population. The movements to prevent equal marriage rights for homosexuals in the US is very similar to some of the movements to try and keep "Blacks"/"African Americans" separate in the South and prevent them from exercising their right to vote.

If you look at statistics on income it's a false notion.

What is a false notion? Are you replying to me or someone else? Are you saying statistics on income indicate they are not productive members of society?

No, it's just that when you quoted my post, you didn't address that point. If you look at census stats on income levels of those who declare themselves to be homosexual, you find it's higher than average, so I'm questioning the notion of a 'victim class' here.

In any case, I'm also saying that this is all boring and pointless and not a 'real' debate. As Jetson has also pointed out, all this stuff has been said a million times, I would just like to see something new, interesting and true said in a homosexual issues thread, but everyone seems to just want to bang on about what victims they are, which is essentially a weapon, and just regurgitate all the boring, self serving stuff.

I said they positively contributed to society and the economy, which is a comment directly in line with your claim that their income is relatively high. You don't make a significant amount of money by being derelict and leeching off society. It proves that they must have something positive to offer. It's strange that with them apparently being such positive members of society, the heterosexuals band together to prevent them from marrying each other, adopting children, and so on.

There's lies, damn lies, and statistics....

1: Adults who delare themselves gay in a survey/census tend to be those who are not afraid of disclosure or discovery. Those who are insecure about their employment and/or accomodations are more likely to stay in the closet. Another thing to consider is that the census is usually filled out by the head of the household, which means that many gay teens are misrepresented as straight on the form because they aren't out to their parents. It's quite likely (but impossible to prove) that the income figures are distorted upward for gays and downward for straights due to misrepresentation at lower income levels.

2: Having a high income doesn't prevent someone from being a victim of hate crimes. If anything, those with higher incomes probably attract more unwanted attention.

3: In places where the government has decided to legalize discrimination against gays (marriage, adoption, inheritance, spousal pension, etc.) having a higher income does not grant you immunity from that discrimination. It *does* give you an opportunity to circumvent the system (marriage-vacation in a foreign country, foreign adoptions, self-funded retirement, etc.), but then you're going through a lot of effort and expense just to get what straight people take for granted.

About the only thing that can be said about income levels and victimization is that wealthy people aren't victims of poverty....

If homosexuals did get to adopt, there would be cause for concern over the emotional well-being and the physical safety of the kids.

I guess theyll just have to only adopt girls, so they won't be tempted

On what grounds are you making that assertion Sean?

No more so than with other adoptive parents. I know people who have been adopted by so called "Good Christian Parents" who were then abused by their adoptive parents.

I know gay people who have been foster parents for kids who had AIDS, as well as kids who were sexually abused by their own parents.

As in all communities, there are people who are beneficial to the needs of kids, as well as people who are not. Making the blanket assumption that gay people will pose any more of a threat to their adoptive kids , as straight parents will, is patently wrong. --Taking people's sexual orientation, and using it as the definitive criteria to make blanket assumptions about what they do outside of the bedroom is patently opressive, and needs to be changed.

that's an outrageous thing to say. please re-read the stats on paedophiles - the vast majority are hetero. gay parents are no more likely to sexually abuse their kids than hetero ones.

i am appalled, quite frankly.

and i echo dunc's question - any valid foundation for your statement, sean, or is it just bigotry?

Why?

It may not be based on bigotry with Sean, but it is certainly based on ignorant conjecture.

FFS people, why is this such a topic of hot debate? There are so many more important things out there then to worry about what other people do behind closed doors.

I personally don't give a damn either way- its not an issue that concerns me, so I really don't have to worry about it.

I don't know why so many people care so much, but clearly they do. If they didn't, there wouldn't have been such phenomenal pushes to try and prevent gay people from marrying each other. There would not be laws on the books of several states that attempt to prevent homosexual activities. Apparently people, long before I was born, set out with an intent to make 'being gay' an illegal activity. Forced to back down from that when it was no longer considered 'deviant' by psychologists, they are working on preventing gay people from aspiring to equal heterosexuals in rights and liberties. I really do wonder why so many people care so much about it that they would amend their state constitutions to prevent these sorts of things. There are so many heinous things out there that don't even get to the level of amending a constitution, but the fear of gay people getting married warranted such a thing. I would say the actions by society itself demonstrates that this is actually a bigger issue than you think.

It is certainly ok if you don't think equal rights and liberties regardless of sexual preference are important, but I don't understand why you get angry with those who do consider it important. It's about justice in society for everyone. If everyone had to be directly affected for something to be changed, we would really be in a big mess. It is that kind of thinking that allows the discrimination of minorities to occur.