<p>I’m not going to reply to you anymore after this because this illustrates how you aren’t even reading what I type.</p>
<p>I CLEARLY, just said in that same post that if the topic has nothing to do with a gay rights issue, then it has nothing to do with a person’s feelings on homosexuality.</p>
<p>I already said that if its on a different topic like immigration, or … murders, their orientation doesn’t make a difference. It has nothing to do with a person being gay.I literally just said that it doesn’t make you a homophobe for something like that.</p>
<p>& You say the exact opposite.
So illogical, not responding anymore to you.</p>
<p>No, objectively, Homosexuality IS normal. The only reason it’s seen as NOT normal is because some people decided to start screeching that it wasn’t. It is normal… look at the number of societies that accepted homosexuality without issue. Objectively, the state of nature is really bisexuality with people reproducing to continue the species. You come from a heteronormative worldview, that’s why you don’t look at LGBTs and see normal people.</p>
<p>I don’t see the hate towards the anti-bullying laws. Bullying is a massive problem in our schools, it’s unacceptable and it has to be stopped. When it’s gotten to the point that kids are committing suicide over things, when you have five or six suicides all over anti-gay bullying in ONE MONTH, then something is really, really wrong.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What’s with you and the Dolphin thing? That was an episode of South Park, Dolphin-people do not exist. That you’re comparing the struggles of LGBT people to “Dolphin-people” is really REALLY offensive. One exists, is real, has real problems, suffers real offenses, the other does not exist. Very simple. </p>
<p>Or you’re talking about Thalidomide babies, in which case calling them “Dolphin-People” is STILL offensive.</p>
<p>You may or not disagree with this, but it’s widely accepted:</p>
<p>Humans are bisexual creatures by nature. Through their lifetime, they just sway one way or the other, or stay in the middle. </p>
<p>To all the straight people- how do you know you aren’t gay? Just because you haven’t encountered someone of the same sex as you that you were attracted to doesn’t mean you’re “straight.” same thing for gays, too. </p>
<p>Every human goes through that awkward stage where they are confused about their sexuality, hormones, and just sex in general. I dare a straight person to stare me dead in the eyes and tell me they were never curious. That they never stole a glance or wondered. It’s natural.</p>
Yes, I recognize that dolphin people don’t exist. That’s not my point and i wasn’t making a comparison per se - my point is that if any other group of people was trying to FORCE me to accept their lifestyle at risk of being called an ignorant bigot (which I’ve been called repeatedly here) I would have the same reaction. again, my life was wrecked by someone’s homosexuality so you have to understand where I’m coming from and you have to understand that even if this thread goes on for 500 pages we’re going to disagree about the fundamentals of the issue. </p>
<p>
Semantics I guess – What I meant by “objectively normal” is that heterosexuality is the most common and that it’s required for the preservation of a species. Things not fitting this description I won’t call “abnormal” at risk of being personally insulted again but are at the very least outside of the biological and societal norm.</p>
<p>Still not sure how any gay person could “ruin your life” – you keep mentioning this event that happened that was somehow horrible. I won’t say it was or it wasn’t because I dunno what it was but it’s kinda weird that you’d judge an entire group by the actions of one jerk… that’s not really fair dude. I’m sorry if something happened to you, but whatever happened to you is no reason to grow to hate an entire group of people. Whatever it was I’m 100% sure that not all of us are like that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The only time “bigot” is thrown around is when it’s against someone who says they find LGBTs inferior to themselves, or imply they would treat them differently. A thing the anti-gays (like Maggie Gallagher) like to do now is to complain “they call us bigots when we just want to defend traditional marriage from them” basically claiming we have no right to do so… you should see the firestorm when the Southern Poverty Law Center added several anti-gay groups to its hate groups list and put NOM “on notice” they about had a major freakout. The problem is… they’re being called bigots because they are bigots, they’re trying to subvert the law to discriminate against another group for no logical reason whatsoever, that’s bigotry. </p>
<p>Look, nobody’s saying you have to like LGBT people, nobody’s forcing you to. What you are being forced to do is accept that they are people, that they deserve equal rights, and that they are not to be discriminated against for any reason. I find it baffling that this is somehow… difficult, for some people. I find it extremely queer that when there are laws saying “you can’t fire someone just because they’re LGBT (or any other group), or discriminate against them in housing” that this is seen as somehow… a bad thing. It’s like “WHAT?! YOU TELLIN’ ME WE CAN’TS DISCRIMINATE NOW? HOW DARE YOU!!!” It doesn’t make sense that rational, thinking people can see anti-discrimination laws as anything other than good, unless they’re already prejudiced… and then if they are they shouldn’t get mad when people call them racists, bigots, etc.</p>
<p>Again, you don’t have to like us, but you are not allowed to discriminate against us. If you don’t like that? Too bad. You need to grow up and deal with it. It’s really just that simple.</p>
<p>i agree mostly with mldwoody. he gets extra points for being very amusing.</p>
<p>i also find amusing how some people take a public forum so ridiculously serious.</p>
<p>my view is more like, people will believe what they want. you can try to change someone else’s views and perhaps establish “equality” in terms of political equality and legal equality but seriously man, don’t take offense just because he/she doesn’t agree with you.</p>
<p>I am new to this whole thing, but I thought I’d share my thoughts. I’m a gay high schooler, in a highly conservative school. Because of that, I am not publically out. I’m seventeen, and just told my immediate family. They were all shocked, but supportive. My best friend knows, but no one else from my school does. Some of my closet friends are openly homophobic, and while it makes me uncomfortable, I see past that, and see I’m still their friend. Whether it is ignorance, religious bias, or something else, it’s not worth fighting. I definitely see the point of those who say that homosexuals tend to shove their views in others’ faces. I’m gay, and I don’t care. You don’t like it, that fine, I won’t fight you on it, and I won’t assume your dumb or a horrible human being. I don’t see it as better or worse than any other lifestyle, and I know that for me at least, it was not a choice. But, if you think it is, I won’t change your mind so I won’t fight you on it. Basically, I’m gay, and I want to live my life like everyone else, and unless you ask me about it, I see no reason to talk about it with you. Live and let live. My life doesn’t have to be about being gay, it’s just a factor of it.</p>
<p>^Which in a perfect world would be absolutely enough, what you just said is exactly the thoughts of nearly all LGBTs. The problem is as you are now, you’re already too “in their face” for some of the anti-gay crowd for them to be satisfied. But it’s good that your best friend and family know and are supportive, that’s an incredibly important step.</p>
<p>But the premise there is that sex is primarily for reproduction. So what about sterile, infertile, extreme loners (don’t want to interact with anyone at all), people who just don’t want to have kids, old virgins (aka virgins in like there 40s), etc. Would they be grouped with us since they can’t reproduce either? </p>
<p>This is not to you Al023, but I always hear people say that homosexuals can’t reproduce. False. We can’t reproduce in a homosexual relationship but we do have the ability to reproduce.</p>
<p>How do you know homosexuality didn’t develop as a way for two males or two females to get together and protect a child whose own parents have been killed? Genetic altruism of sorts. We see it very clearly in the animal kingdom, I could provide you with a list of animals who engage in homosexual acts as justification for it being natural. And I could provide you a SCIAM article from 2008 a study where it was found the brains of gay men more closely allign with straight women and lesibian women with straight men in the shape of their amygdala and such. This supports homosexuality having a neurological-biological basis.</p>
<p>There are also a few studies suggesting that gay people are born for the evolutionary reason of helping families take care of children. A study that might support this showed that the more older brothers a man has, the more likely he is to be gay, and evolutionarily the more children his brothers would have in theory. (There’s not a lot of research done on lesbians or bisexuals, so the effect could be the same for women or different.) It’s like they’re born to be permanent aunts and uncles, in a way, to help with many children. It’s a theory of course, like every other theory, but I think it’s a fairly sound one.</p>
<p>Not really sure why’d they have to be attracted to eacho other to do this</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not suprising, haha</p>
<p>@Rox, hmm, that’s interesting and kinda makes sense. Is the reverse true for lesbians? The more daughters a man has the better change he gets a lesbian to help him on the farm?</p>