For those of you who don't know, Repent America is an evangelical organization that protests against gays, abortion and everything else that disagrees with their narrow interpretation of the bible.

I'm posting this topic because some people think that them being arrested because they posted various anti-gay signs is evidence of a sinister plot to make christianity Illegal.

Personally I believe that any organization that exploits a tragedy to further a bigoted agenda is evil and certainly not conducting themselves in a fashion that would befit followers of an omnibenevolent god.

Check them out here http://www.repentamerica.com/index.htm

/idiots

ROFLMYASSOFF!!!

"Christians enter here | All others enter here"

It's virtual segregation at its finest!

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/5003/5003_01.asp

sick cartoon preaching hate against gays.

This pisses me off. People have different beliefs to help them get by in the world, and I respect their beliefs until they start imposing them on other people people, and when they start hurting other people.

These guys are facist cunts.

quote:Originally posted by TerminatorVinitiatoR:

ht tp://www.c hick.com/r eading/tracts/5003/5003_01.asp (http: //www.chic k.com/read ing/tracts /5003/5003 _01.asp)

sick cartoon preaching hate against gays.

Ugh. I dispise Chick.

Who's imposing beliefs on who? Who throws orgy parties in the street? I don't want to see that.

Cute pix:

http://www.cgpix.com/images/Newyork/gaypri6.jpg

http://www.cgpix.com/images/Newyork/gaypri10.jpg

http://www.shooter.net/pride.2005.gallery/source/pride.2005.305.html

http://www.shooter.net/pride.2005.gallery/source/pride.2005.446.html

http://www.shooter.net/pride.2005.gallery/source/pride.2005.649.html

http://www.pbase.com/ilanphoto/image/30743112

http://www.westhollywood.com/photos/lapride03/lapride03.shtm

http://gayprideboyz.com/02/sdpride02/sdp02-004.jpg

http://gayprideboyz.com/02/sdpride02/sdp02-075.jpg

http://gayprideboyz.com/02/sdpride02/sdp02-098.jpg

http://gayprideboyz.com/04/lbpride04/IMG_0161.jpg

Feel the pride...........

Funny thing is, I used to think when I was a kid that we were passed bigotry. I knew it was something that dumbasses did back in the day, but I assumed if I understood it when I was 3, the rest of the world should fucking well get it too.

As I grew up, I remember being constantly amazed with the stupidity and hate of adults around me. It was painful to learn how stupid people are, even 'educated' adults. I was sorely disappointed as I got out into the world and realized that people really are dumb as hell.

What's even scarier, is that not all of them know how stupid they are. Many consider themselves intelligent and correct. Not only that, but a few of them actually are relatively intelligent, yet incredibly self deceived.

Maybe the world should be run by a child. Gay bigotry would be gone if parents weren't dumb enough to teach it to their kids. It's exactly how racism spreads.

It just completely blows me away that bigots don't see the connection between themselves and slaveowners, white supremecists, and other bastards of the past. Un-fucking-believable.

quote:Originally posted by hyroglyphx:

Who's imposing beliefs on who? Who throws orgy parties in the street? I don't want to see that.

Cute pix:

http:// www.cgpix. (http: //www.cgpi x.com/imag es/Newyork /gaypri6.j pg) com/images /Newyork/gaypri6.jpg

http:/ /www.cgpix .com/image s/Newyork/gaypri10.jpg (http: //www.cgpi x.com/imag es/Newyork /gaypri10. jpg)

http:/ /www.shooter.net/pride.2005.gallery/source/pride.2005.305.html (http: //www.shoo ter.net/pr ide.2005.g allery/sou rce/pride. 2005.305.h tml)

http:/ /www.shooter.net/pride.2005.gallery/source/pride.2005.446.html (http: //www.shoo ter.net/pr ide.2005.g allery/sou rce/pride. 2005.446.h tml)

http:/ /www.shooter.net/pride.2005.gallery/source/pride.2005.649.html (http: //www.shoo ter.net/pr ide.2005.g allery/sou rce/pride. 2005.649.h tml)

http://ww w.pbase.co m/ilanphot o/image/30743112 (http: //www.pbas e.com/ilan photo/imag e/30743112 )

http ://www.wes thollywood.com/photos/lapride03/lapride03.shtm (http: //www.west hollywood. com/photos /lapride03 /lapride03 .shtm)

http ://gayprid eboyz.com/ 02/sdpride02/sdp02-004.jpg (http: //gaypride boyz.com/0 2/sdpride0 2/sdp02-00 4.jpg)

http ://gayprid eboyz.com/ 02/sdpride02/sdp02-075.jpg (http: //gaypride boyz.com/0 2/sdpride0 2/sdp02-07 5.jpg)

http ://gayprid eboyz.com/ 02/sdpride02/sdp02-098.jpg (http: //gaypride boyz.com/0 2/sdpride0 2/sdp02-09 8.jpg)

http: //gaypride boyz.com/0 4/lbpride04/IMG_0161.jpg (http: //gaypride boyz.com/0 4/lbpride0 4/IMG_0161 .jpg)

Feel the pride...........





Right, because the crusades, the inquisition, creationism, attempting to outlaw gay marriage (as if we were governed by your religion) are not imposing at all. I mean sure, you might've been killed, tortured, or put in jail for not agreeing, but hell, you had a choice right?

And petitions for women's rights, civil rights movements, peaceful marches (like Dr.King) were horrible things that imposed their beliefs on everyone, right?

You christians are funny ass people to talk.



It does occur to you that minorities have always been marching for great things in the past and that today we recognize their courage.

I know you think you are special and right, but history repeats itself, and to everyone but you, it's exceedingly obvious that are descendants will look back and admire their courage like we do for Dr.King. That is, assuming we continue improving and making the world better, instead of keeping it the shitty way it is (or conserving it- see where the word conservative comes from? I never got that- the world has always gotten better, why the hell would you want to slow it down? The way things will be has always been better then the way they are now. I don't get it.)

There's no commandment about it, and God commits this moral crime often enough, but never the less it is morally wrong to be a bigot.

Come on, grow some balls (mentally) and learn how to accept everyone. You can probably do it, I swear.

I think me and some friends are going to "call" repent america this weekend. TBN is so boring. They didn't even know who Allah was.

quote:Originally posted by IanBoyd3:

Maybe the world should be run by a child. Gay bigotry would be gone if parents weren't dumb enough to teach it to their kids. It's exactly how racism spreads.

Well Ian, here's my take on it. I grew up thinking that homosexuality was no big deal. My parents are very liberal Republicans. There's an oxymoron for you. In any case, we know lots of gay people. Like my neigbor who molested me when I was 10. But even in spite of this, I didn't let it concern me too much. In any case, I was perfectly fine with homosexuals. For the most part, I've met some really cool ones and befriended many of them. However, as I grew older, I began to understand the nature of homosexuality more and more. I began to understand the psychological and physiological implications of homosexuality. In any case, I came to the saving grace of God when I was almost 24. What I've learned along the way is that the Christians I know don't hate homosexuals. To the contrary. We feel that they are deceived, either by their fleshly pleasures or manipulated by a more sinister presence. In any case, I don't hate homosexuals, as much as it might fill your heart with joy to hear that I did. I see homosexuality for what it is. Its just another form of abased lust and unabashed pride. Yes, its all about pride. Its all about salaciousness.

It just completely blows me away that bigots don't see the connection between themselves and slaveowners, white supremecists, and other bastards of the past. Un-fucking-believable.

I don't see the connection. Supremecy is also a form of pride. Put it this way, if homosexuals were truly born gay, then why the need to parade around to tell us how they're gay? For instance, I have no compulsion to tell the world that I'm male. I have no compulsion to tell people my sexual preference. I have no compulsion to propagate my race. Why? Because I was born that way and it does not instill any pride in me? Why? Because I had no control over it whatsoever. What would grant me the right to be prideful about being born? I had no control over the color of my skin, or what sex I was going to be. But see, homosexuals are different. They feel the need to tell us all how gay they are which is not in keeping with the assertion that they were born that way. For staters, I don't care enough to hear about it, unless they recognize that it is inherently against nature. All its about is sex. I'm sorry to relay this message to you, but its so obvious that I scarcely can think how anyone could miss that. Homosexuality has everything to do lust and pride, and nothing to do with anything else.

So, I don't hate homosexuals. I disagree with it. I retain the right to do so. That is my unalienable right. Your little slavery tantrum just doesn't hold a candle to actual slavery. Furthermore, homosexuals only real fear these days is patronized to death, not beaten.

They want equal rights, which they deserve, that’s why they’re parading.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by IanBoyd3:



Right, because the crusades, the inquisition, creationism, attempting to outlaw gay marriage (as if we were governed by your religion) are not imposing at all.

What does they have to do with Christ's teachings? Nothing at all.

I mean sure, you might've been killed, tortured, or put in jail for not agreeing, but hell, you had a choice right?

No, its hard to escape Roman jails. They didn't have a choice.

And petitions for women's rights, civil rights movements, peaceful marches (like Dr.King) were horrible things that imposed their beliefs on everyone, right?

Dr. King was a Christian.

You christians are funny ass people to talk.

Okay.



It does occur to you that minorities have always been marching for great things in the past and that today we recognize their courage.

What does minority mean to you?

I know you think you are special and right, but history repeats itself, and to everyone but you, it's exceedingly obvious that are descendants will look back and admire their courage like we do for Dr.King. That is, assuming we continue improving and making the world better, instead of keeping it the shitty way it is (or conserving it- see where the word conservative comes from? I never got that- the world has always gotten better, why the hell would you want to slow it down? The way things will be has always been better then the way they are now. I don't get it.)

I'm still not seeing your correlation, especially when the majority of charities are run by Christian organizations.

There's no commandment about it, and God commits this moral crime often enough, but never the less it is morally wrong to be a bigot.

So God created different races in order to create bigots.....?

Come on, grow some balls (mentally) and learn how to accept everyone. You can probably do it, I swear.

Wow, this post was so elegant and eloquent.

Are you done with that soapbox, cause I'd like to do my laundry now?

Exactly, they often parade because they are treated like second or third class citizens and many people want to prevent them from gaining equal rights. Blacks marched for equal rights, so did women. Don't complain when gays do.

quote:"Homosexuality has everything to do lust and pride, and nothing to do with anything else."

Really? I'll have to tell that to the monogamous gays I know, some who didn't have sex until they were 'married.'

quote:Originally posted by hyroglyphx:

I don't see the connection. Supremecy is also a form of pride. Put it this way, if homosexuals were truly born gay, then why the need to parade around to tell us how they're gay? For instance, I have no compulsion to tell the world that I'm male. I have no compulsion to tell people my sexual preference. I have no compulsion to propagate my race. Why? Because I was born that way and it does not instill any pride in me? Why?



You show pride in other ways. Holding hands with a female as you walk down the street is a form of heterosexual pride.

quote:Homosexuality has everything to do lust and pride, and nothing to do with anything else.

If homosexuality is so evil why haven't the studies shown a negative affect on children in homosexual families?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Beta69:

Exactly, they often parade because they are treated like second or third class citizens and many people want to prevent them from gaining equal rights. Blacks marched for equal rights, so did women. Don't complain when gays do.

I don't think anyone can say that the majority treats them like second class citizens. I mean, where would syndicate television be if they didn't exploit homosexuality for monetary gain? I don't know about you, but I'd really like to see a tv show without the witty banter of the silly-hearted gay guy. Blacks were born black, women were born women, homosexuals had the choice. I believe that. I didn't always, but I have for the last five or six years.



Really? I'll have to tell that to the monogamous gays I know, some who didn't have sex until they were 'married.'

Fascinating. It doesn't change the moral stance on the matter.

But let me ask you a question specifically to you because its about evolution. Where does the homosexual fit in the evolutionary paradaigm? If evolutionists want to glean support from the homosexual community what kind of tailoring must be done in order to accomodate both? First off, if this were nature’s way of handling population control, then you would have to admit that nature has a mind if it is exhibiting cognizance. If nature has a mind, then you have to rule out the possibility of chance, which evolution needs. Another huge problem is the fact that evolution is based completely around reproduction. In the evolutionary paradigm, this is a death sentence to someone’s gene pool, which again, is the sole function of evolution. Evolving into homosexuals would be the exact opposite. That would be devolution! So then, if evolution were true, where does that leave the homosexual? If its true, then, homosexuals are singled out as weaker, and the lesser of the two, according to the terms of natural selection. I think some pro-evolutionists have no doubt realized the implications of this. They have tried to be inoffensive to the homosexual, yet still cling to the pretenses of evolution. It’s too late. The two cannot coexist. Therefore, we either have to abandon that homosexuality is apart of evolution, or that evolution is simply a fantasy. Personally, I reject both. Where do you, as an evolutionist and a supporter of homosexuality, stand?

You show pride in other ways. Holding hands with a female as you walk down the street is a form of heterosexual pride.

Holding my wife's hand is an endearing gesture shared by my wife and I, not 18 city blocks of an attention gathering spectacle, not pride. Secondly, wearing "Ass Master" t-shirts, screaming into megaphones, "We're here, we're queer!" is pride of the worst kind. You really can't tell the difference?

If homosexuality is so evil why haven't the studies shown a negative affect on children in homosexual families?

There has... But you will just discredit it no matter what it says.

http://www.narth.com/docs/RationaleBasisFinal0405.pdf

http://www.familyaction.org/PDFs/h-parenting.pdf

Hyro:

quote:I don't think anyone can say that the majority treats them like second class citizens.

I've talked to a number of homosexuals, some are my friends, they would say differently. Maybe you should get out more.

quote:I mean, where would syndicate television be if they didn't exploit homosexuality for monetary gain?

Where would the south be if it didn't exploit blacks?

What does this have to do with anything?

quote:Blacks were born black, women were born women, homosexuals had the choice. I believe that.

Prove it. If you can't then I don't think we should be prejudice against a group because of a belief that may or may not be true. Of course it shouldn't really matter. You have a choice to be christian. If you support the government taking away rights because of choice I assume you would fully support a bill removing rights of anyone who 'chooses' to be christian?

quote:Fascinating. It doesn't change the moral stance on the matter.

Correction, it doesn't change the moral stance of certain christians on the matter. In the past the same was said about Blacks, Women and interracial marriage. Many people get stuck in prejudice and will refuse to change no matter what.

For example, in the past "scientific research" was used to show the blacks were more animal than Human. When that racist research was dashed to pieces it didn't change many peoples minds, they just found other reasons to justify their hate.

The more interesting thing is I have yet to hear a reason beyond "christian morals and Majority rule" why things like homosexual marriage shouldn't be allowed. It's ok if people don't how other people live, but when they try to actively attack them just for being different, that's when it crosses the line from opinion, to small mindedness and finally full blown bigotry and prejudice.

quote:Where does the homosexual fit in the evolutionary paradaigm?

An interesting and complicated question. Before we can really make any guesses we would need to know where homosexuality comes from first. It would appear the genetic component is quite complex and it might take a number of factors to bring out homosexuality, thus it could lie dormant in many people just waiting for the right set of partner DNA to make an appearance. It may also have less to do with genetics and more with pregnancy. The sexual development of a baby is caused by the release of certain hormones at certain times. A slight adjustment can have an impact on the child and it's possible some homosexuals are that way because of this change while in the womb. In which case it isn't a genetic trait or a choice.

From the people I have met I think I can say with certainty there isn't a single cause of homosexuality.

quote:[homosexual family research.]There has... But you will just discredit it no matter what it says.

With what seems to be your new found research in other scientific fields I would seriously recommend double checking all reports from supposed "family" groups. The leader of at least one group started it after being booted out of scientific research for falsifying data, he has continued to do just that in his new field. A lot of the research that comes out of those groups is BS and massaged data.

The big irony is they will trumpet the dangers of homosexual parents all day long and how they should be protecting the children but few make nearly the same amount of noise about divorce. The bible belt has the second highest divorce rate in the US (second to Las Vegas).

I plan to get around to reading both those articles by Friday. However, this caught my eye:

quote:

In 2004, Mills and his colleagues 17 reported a CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)-funded study of a household-based probability sample of men who have sex with men (N=2881) in four large USA cities. Among men who have sex with men, the 7-day prevalence of depression was 17.2%, which is higher than in adult US. men in general (who have a 3.8% 30-day prevalence rate). The 7-day prevalence of distress in men who have sex with men was 12%. The authors concluded, “Rates of distress and depression are high in men who have sex with men,” and were associated with “...lack of a domestic partner; not identifying as gay, queer, or homosexual; experiencing multiple episodes of anti-gay violence in the previous 5 years; and very high levels of community alienation” (p. 278).





It appears that your study is directly confirming a link between harassment and depression, which completely explains away all the paragraphs that follow it.

quote:

The children of lesbians seem not to have peer support available to them, since most of these children have either pulled away from their friends altogether or maintained friends but with a sense of their own differentness. (p. 202)” 104 Because the 50% rate of peer harassment and bullying experienced by children of homosexual parents is about five times the rate of that experienced by other children, Sears recommended that schools institute anti-harassment policies to include sexual orientation and the substitution of words such as “mother” and “father” with “parent.” 105 An eleventh grade boy with two lesbian mothers said, In the seventh and eighth grade, I was harassed by other kids who would say stupid things about my mom, mostly. ...People use the word “faggot” at lot. ...It’s basically used as a general insult. One teacher called someone in her classroom a “faggot,” and my friend said something to her. The challenge of school personnel is highlighted by Gillespie in 1999 who wrote, ...“dyke,” “faggot,” and “you’re so gay” are often the insults of choice among school-age children. Although school personnel usually respond swiftly to the use of racial slurs, anti-gay language is often routinely ignored and even tolerated in many schools and other public settings. Institutionalized homophobia also prevents many children of gays and lesbians from sharing personal information about their family structure with their friends. Fearing ridicule of their parents’ sexual orientation, many students with LGBT parents are also afraid of being called gay themselves. Interviews with students confirm these observations. Teenager Eric DeMarco Benjamin spoke about his painful encounters with prejudice and homophobia: “Growing up with lesbian moms wasn’t easy. Some kids teased me and tried to beat me up. They thought that I was gay just because my parents are. ...Still, sometimes, I don’t tell people about my family. Its’ hard to bring girlfriends home because I don’t know how they will react. 106



quote:

More homosexual men and women reported having experienced any kind of discrimination in the preceding year than heterosexual men and women.” 113



EDIT:

Hyro, if gay's are inherently immoral as you say, why does the article admit that harassment and violence are the causes of dysfunctional parent behavior?

[This message has been edited by Atomical (edited 04-12-2006).]

Transmission categories of male adolescents and

adults given a diagnosis of AIDS, through 2003 (http://tinyurl.com/egf43)

Source: US Center for Disease Control

HOMOWNED!

AIDS Only in the US. If we saw a world graph you would find heterosexual women as half of all AIDS cases. (you can thank christians (mainly catholics) for slowing down the small amount of protection the oppressed women might get by spreading lies about condoms and AIDS so they can stick their moral noses in the air).

On the other hand, lesbians have the lowest rate of sexually transmitted AIDS, easily kicking heterosexual butt.

quote:Originally posted by Beta69:

AIDS Only in the US. If we saw a world graph you would find heterosexual women as half of all AIDS cases. (you can thank christians (mainly catholics) for slowing down the small amount of protection the oppressed women might get by spreading lies about condoms and AIDS so they can stick their moral noses in the air).

On the other hand, lesbians have the lowest rate of sexually transmitted AIDS, easily kicking heterosexual butt.

It's physically harder for one woman to infect another.

quote:Originally posted by Beta69:

AIDS Only in the US.

Thing is, only 5-7% of the US population fits in that male-to-male sex category (that means both homo and bi sexuals). So you've got <7% of the population constituting 60% of it's AIDS infections.

Yep, there is definitely a danger and many groups are working on lowering that. There is a number of factors for the higher rate, many shared by heterosexuals, however the transmission rate for male homosexuals is higher than heterosexuals. You could consider it slightly balanced by the fact that accidental pregnancy is 0%.

Homosexual guys could cut their percentage down alot by:

>Cutting down on the one night stands (most gay men have alot of one night stands and infrequent sex partners).

>Using protection (again, most don't because there's no risk of pregnancy, so they think "why bother?").

>Cut down on anal. Semen has all the viral properties that blood carries and the cell wall of the large intestines is only 1 cell layer thick. Handjobs and oral are virtually risk free in comparison.

If they had the self-control to be a little more monogamous, wear a rubber, and cut down on the buttsex, they'd be much better off.

Then again, if they had that kind of self-control, they'd probably subdue their homosexual desires for the irrationality they propose and get on with their lives.

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

If they had the self-control to be a little more monogamous, wear a rubber, and cut down on the buttsex, they'd be much better off.

Same goes for a large portion of heterosexuals.

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

Then again, if they had that kind of self-control, they'd probably subdue their homosexual desires for the irrationality they propose and get on with their lives.

Same goes for a large portion of heterosexuals (just replace homosexual with hetero).

Although maybe not the case here I'm always amazed when I run into people that seem to view all homosexuals as immoral devients and that if only the were hetero everything would be better but forget that Vegas wasn't built as a gay-resort, and neither are the courts in the bible belt, or the priest's 'back room.'

quote:Originally posted by Beta69:

Although maybe not the case here I'm always amazed when I run into people that seem to view all homosexuals as immoral devients and that if only the were hetero everything would be better but forget that Vegas wasn't built as a gay-resort, and neither are the courts in the bible belt, or the priest's 'back room.'

Haha. The thing is, alot of straight people really find gay sex either weird or gross (or both). It's hard to categorize something 'weird' or 'gross' as 'acceptable', if you know what I mean. So some throw it into the 'immoral' category.

Others just do so because they think God is going to set the country ablaze if too many homos are on the loose (like 'Repent America').

Hmmmm, that site is sort of like a more tactful and apologetic version of http://www.godhatesfags.com

from RationaleBasisFinal0405.pdf



This is so fucking stupid. I don't know why anyone would include this in a research paper when it clearly is not research:

quote:Virtually no one teaches children that loving marital sexual behavior is sinful, leading to an eternity in Hell.

quote:

5. In homes headed by homosexuals, children experience the stress and associated harm of the stigma of having a homosexual foster parent instead of a mother and father. Homosexual couples are stigmatized for being more transient and for being abnormal. They do not attract the same level of social support and the same degree of extended family support as married couples do. Foster children in particular have the need to experience a more relaxed, enjoyable family life that is not possible when the stigma of homosexual behavior is such a predominant fact of life.



There's a stigma regarding mental health in America. Why shouldn't we take children out of homes where parents have depression?

quote:Originally posted by hyroglyphx:



There has... But you will just discredit it no matter what it says.

h ttp://www. narth.com/ docs/RationaleBasisFinal0405.pdf (http: //www.nart h.com/docs /Rationale BasisFinal 0405.pdf)

http:/ /www.famil yaction.or g/PDFs/h-parenting.pdf (http: //www.fami lyaction.o rg/PDFs/h- parenting. pdf)



Family action is an obvious christian conservative group that makes no attempt to do a psychological study.

Narth makes a fuckload of of assertions but doesn't substantiate their claims.



[This message has been edited by Fundokiller (edited 04-13-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Fundokiller:

Family action is an obvious christian conservative group that makes no attempt to do a psychological study.

Narth makes a fuckload of of assertions but doesn't substantiate their claims.



The funny part is that Narth admits that homosexuals have mental health issues because of harassment and anti-gay violence.

I was noticing that, it seems every excerpt you post concludes Homosexuality is dangerous because of the anti-gay crowd. Quite ironic. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

quote:Originally posted by IanBoyd3:

Funny thing is, I used to think when I was a kid that we were passed bigotry. I knew it was something that dumbasses did back in the day, but I assumed if I understood it when I was 3, the rest of the world should fucking well get it too.

As I grew up, I remember being constantly amazed with the stupidity and hate of adults around me. It was painful to learn how stupid people are, even 'educated' adults. I was sorely disappointed as I got out into the world and realized that people really are dumb as hell.

What's even scarier, is that not all of them know how stupid they are. Many consider themselves intelligent and correct. Not only that, but a few of them actually are relatively intelligent, yet incredibly self deceived.

Maybe the world should be run by a child. Gay bigotry would be gone if parents weren't dumb enough to teach it to their kids. It's exactly how racism spreads.

It just completely blows me away that bigots don't see the connection between themselves and slaveowners, white supremecists, and other bastards of the past. Un-fucking-believable.

you remind me of me.

as a cath-oh-lick i am disgusted.



True catholics (to me and every priest i have talked to) are open towards others. even if you dont follow our/my beliefs you are still allright.

quote:Originally posted by Nagasaki911:

True catholics (to me and every priest i have talked to) are open towards others.

Especially children.

quote:Originally posted by Adrenochrome:

Originally posted by Nagasaki911:

True catholics (to me and every priest i have talked to) are open towards others.

Especially children.

I've noticed there are certain people on here who devalue the opinions of youth by calling them squirts and kidiots. It's really a fucked up thing to do.

Once again I am astounded by hyroglphx.

You make a claim that pride is wrong yet you would set yourself above homosexuals? Is that not pride. You claim to know better than us .. Is that not pride?

I would link this more to the hate of paedophiles rather than homosexuals. There is a differance ,so far almost every "extreme" christian on here seems to have been hurt emotionalyll or physically in the past. Its not god you need but a psychiatrist.. in any event ,if God helps you with your life then fine . But you have no right to Judge another human being ,god is the creator of life and he alone is the Judge of us all ,I would have thought you would have realized that ....

This idea that people choose to be gay is baffling. Nobody decides to be discriminated against. When gay people say they wish they were straight, what do you think this implies? And saying that a gay relationship is not based on love is ridiculous. How many mature adults do you know who want to get married just to make a statement?

Leviticus says many other things you should probably not advocate either, such as the rule of executing kids who disobey their parents. We certainly don't apply THAT rule to our society. The personified universe (God) sure hates gays though, so that must stand.

[This message has been edited by smallpox champion (edited 04-13-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by JesuitArtiste:

You make a claim that pride is wrong yet you would set yourself above homosexuals?

I haven't set myself up above the homosexual. I'm a sinner too. I'm just pointing out the sin. The only difference is that I don't want to make excuses for my past sin.

Is that not pride. You claim to know better than us .. Is that not pride?

Recognizing sin is not pride.

I would link this more to the hate of paedophiles rather than homosexuals.

I don't hate anyone, including pedophiles and homosexuals. I abhor the sin and so does God.

There is a differance ,so far almost every "extreme" christian on here seems to have been hurt emotionalyll or physically in the past.

I'm assuming that you consider me to be an 'extreme' Christian, whatever that is. What constitutes an 'extreme' Christian? And I wouldn't say that I've been more traumatized physically or emotionally more than anyone else. But if you must know, sometimes it takes being brought to the brink when we meet God. Its in the comfort zone that we don't listen, or care to listen. But in those deep moments of despair, that is when man cries out to God. And we whether we want to believe it or not, we all have had those momoents in our lives. And if you haven't yet, it wil come one day. At some point in your life you will have to experience the worst day of your life. Not every day can be peaches and cream.

Its not god you need but a psychiatrist..

All a psychiatrist can do is put a band aid on an amputee victim. They don't solve problems, they bury them by numbing the mind through medication. Now, there are a number of decent psychologists. Many of them mean well and I commend them for it. But I've worked closely with so many to know that one, they have deep psychological trauma themselves, and two, after awihle they no longer see people, they only see patients who need to be subdued.

in any event ,if God helps you with your life then fine . But you have no right to Judge another human being ,god is the creator of life and he alone is the Judge of us all ,I would have thought you would have realized that ....

Amen to that... I'm not the judge, I'm just the stenographer.

You guys are acting like I'm foaming at the mouth or something. We're just having a discussion. I can't stop a homosexual to do whatever he/she is going to do. They can do whatever they want. You too can do whatever you want. Nothing is stopping you from going out and murdering someone. However, hopefully you recognize that though you have the power to do that, it has long-term effects. I'm just pointing out that though you can engage in a homosexual act, it might not be in your best interests. They can have their opinion and I can have mine. God says no to homosexuality and I'm simply relaying that message. If you don't believe it, then don't. That is entirely up to you.

quote:Originally posted by hyroglyphx:

Amen to that... I'm not the judge, I'm just the stenographer.

You guys are acting like I'm foaming at the mouth or something. We're just having a discussion. I can't stop a homosexual to do whatever he/she is going to do. They can do whatever they want. You too can do whatever you want. Nothing is stopping you from going out and murdering someone. However, hopefully you recognize that though you have the power to do that, it has long-term effects. I'm just pointing out that though you can engage in a homosexual act, it might not be in your best interests. They can have their opinion and I can have mine. God says no to homosexuality and I'm simply relaying that message. If you don't believe it, then don't. That is entirely up to you.



We don't believe it because you haven't substantiated that homosexuals are inherently immoral.

Even in the most liberal sense in order for what you're saying to be true all homosexuals would have to be immoral. No study you post will ever come close to 100% as far as chemical dependence and depression.

quote:Originally posted by Atomical:

We don't believe it because you haven't substantiated that homosexuals are inherently immoral.

Everyone is inherently immoral... It takes work to do the right thing. Doing the wrong thing is always easier.

Even in the most liberal sense in order for what you're saying to be true all homosexuals would have to be immoral. No study you post will ever come close to 100% as far as chemical dependence and depression.

No study has ever verified that homosexuality is a legitimate anything. It may be something as ambiguous as what determines why someone likes basketball, and someone else enjoys chess. But One thing we can conclude is that it is abnormal. And before you flame me, consider what the word actually means. It means that it isn't nearly as prevelant as homosexuality. Its out of the norm. In any case, many theories spawned out of an interest to ascertain what it all means. Some studies have been performed on the hypothalamus, the region thought to control sexual desire. Dr. Simon LeVay, a neuroscientist, was determined to find out how much truth there was about homosexuality. In other words: Nature or nurture? He researched the brains of 41 human cadavers, 19 of them were homosexual males. He reported that almost all of the 19 homosexual men had some abnormalities in the hypothalamus. LeVay reported that the hypothalamus in the gay men were roughly half the size of their heterosexual counterparts. Naturally, a moment of opportunity was seized by the homosexual community, as irrefutable proof that they were born that way. A problem occurred, however, as valid questions were raised. A John Hopkins psychologist posed the question: 'How did they get that way? Was it due to underdevelopment? If so, was it prenatal, neonatal, during childhood, or puberty?' Nobody seemed to know. Another anamole not previously considered by LeVay was that all 19 men had died of AIDS. This was never introduced as a possible contributing factor on his dissertation. As well, there was no way to no way to determine the sexual activity of the heterosexual men in the experiment. Lastly, Dr. LeVay, himself, is a homosexual who admitted that his study was "not entirely a dispassionate scientific endeavor." Clearly, his motives were suspect in the overall integrity of his research. Nonetheless, from this initial study, many others were conducted, by some distinguished medical institutions that yielded negative results. The research that followed came up inconclusive or condemning altogether, to the contrary findings of LeVay. In lieu, another study was performed, this time to see if homosexuality was genetic. I remember alot of fanfare was posted by all the big name journals. Plastered on the front-page articles, we read about the ‘gay gene.’ Again, the vast preponderance of medical evidence was resoundingly negative, and remains the same to this very day. Clearly that's the case, otherwise we'd never hear the end of it. It seems then, that homosexuality is neither inherited, nor the result of some glandular disturbance or a genetic disruption. It seems obvious to me that it is a psychological issue. But again, one thing we can conclude, homosexuality is an abnormality, whether you want to view it as being problematic, or perfectly natural, it is abnormal. This doesn't even take into consideration the physical aberrancy.

One thing is for sure. According to fundamental Christian beliefs, hermaphrodites cannot win in this area.

What? Expain what you mean.

Whether a hermaphrodite shags a guy or girl, it's gay because hermaphrodites have both sex organs.

Guess they'll burn in hell. http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif)

[This message has been edited by Elephantitis Man (edited 04-14-2006).]

Sometimes a hermaphrodite has to make the choice of what sex they want to be if it wasn't decided by their parents. Sometimes the parents even make a mistake and the person grows up feeling very confused since they do not identify with their current gender. Who should they be sexually attracted to?

"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs by men, and there are some eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."

If this is how God views eunuchs, then I think its safe to say that He surely would not condemn Hermaphrodites who were born with this genetic defect.

quote:

And before you flame me, consider what the word actually means. It means that it isn't nearly as prevelant as homosexuality. Its out of the norm. In any case, many theories spawned out of an interest to ascertain what it all means.



What word are you talking about that means "not as prevalent as homosexuality."



quote:Again, the vast preponderance of medical evidence was resoundingly negative, and remains the same to this very day. Clearly that's the case, otherwise we'd never hear the end of it. It seems then, that homosexuality is neither inherited, nor the result of some glandular disturbance or a genetic disruption. It seems obvious to me that it is a psychological issue. But again, one thing we can conclude, homosexuality is an abnormality, whether you want to view it as being problematic, or perfectly natural, it is abnormal. This doesn't even take into consideration the physical aberrancy.



So let me ask you this regarding preponderance, since you seem to know what it means. What percentage of genes have been identified?

I thought that verse was kind of vague. It just said that eunuchs can go to heaven and hermaphrodites can go to heaven if God wants them to.

What I was getting at was that there is not always a clear seperation between male and female. If deep down someone identifies themselves as a female, but are made male through surgery after birth, then how does God see their attraction to the same sex? This is a pretty weird subject.

Also, I'm not saying a gay male sees himself as female.

quote:Originally posted by hyroglyphx:

If this is how God views eunuchs, then I think its safe to say that He surely would not condemn Hermaphrodites who were born with this genetic defect.

And suppose homosexuality could be explained physiologically; perhaps a slightly underdeveloped hypothalamus, imbalance of estrogen/testosterone, or dopamine receptors functioning improperly.

Would they, then, be exempt from the condemnation of God? Where do you draw the line?

edit: and to back up the possibility of it being a physiological abnormality, a little article to chew on (http://tinyurl.com/qwany). http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

[This message has been edited by Elephantitis Man (edited 04-14-2006).]

Thank you, Elephantitis Man. You really cut to the core of things. People have as much say in being gay as being a hermaphrodite.

Isn't that special?

[This message has been edited by smallpox champion (edited 04-14-2006).]

What word are you talking about that means "not as prevalent as homosexuality."

My bad. I meant, 'not as prevalent as heterosexuality.'

So let me ask you this regarding preponderance, since you seem to know what it means. What percentage of genes have been identified?

Dean Hamer studied forty pairs of gay brothers and found that certain gay males carried an identical version of a small segment of the X chromosome's DNA. Males obviously recieve their X chromosome from their mother. Because the genetic structure of the X chromosome has a high propensity for variablity, a recombinant of the genes on the mother's XX can cause major differences between two brothers genetic structures. Point taken. That is certainly something to consider. The problem is, identical twins, which are essentially carbon copies of one another, often have one gay brother and one straight brother. Why? Aside from this, it only accounts for male homosexuality. So how are their lesbians too, if the Y chromosome is responsible for masculine traits? Research has been done to determine the existence of a lesbian gene too, but of course this completely undermines the original theory. So, if there is some sort of 'gay gene' it is far from being mapped out genetically. Homosexuality being caused by genetic mutation is not an impossibility, however, I feel that it has more to do with psychological factors than anything else. As well, some underdevelopment in the sexual regions of the brain is not an impossibility, however, all the studies have been inconclusive at best. And if you don't believe me, then believe that if it were empirically proven, surely you know that it would be posted on every magazine article there is. Furthermore, this completely detracts from the evolutionary model because homosexuality cannot propagate itself. So, at the base level you are going to have to drop either evolution or homosexuality. The two cannot coexist.

quote:Originally posted by hyroglyphx:

[B.... Furthermore, this completely detracts from the evolutionary model because homosexuality cannot propagate itself. So, at the base level you are going to have to drop either evolution or homosexuality. The two cannot coexist.[/B]

If in fact homosexuality were found to be due to genetics, how would that detract from the evolutionary model? Evolution is based on minute changes in organisms over long periods of time. If the change is detrimental to the health of the organism, it dies and doesn't pass on the change. If the change is neutral or beneficial, the change can pass on to the next generation.

If the cause of the homosexual behavior were genetic( I am not asserting such to be the case), the change would be neutral as far as the survival of the organism (person)in question.He would not die due to the change. And even though he would be predisposed to partner with a member of his own gender, he could pass on his genetic makeup with a member of the opposite sex , as he would not be sterile.

The change would be harmful in the sense that left to his own inclinations, reproduction would not occur.

Evolution is not linear. It doesn't always move in the direction that we consider forward.

Obviously, homosexuality and evolution can coexist.Nothing needs to be dropped.

^

We can also add the possibility of it being passed down genetically by heterosexuals. It could be a recessive condition, or a condition that doesn't always manifests itself as homosexuality.

---

I would also like to add that there is evidence pointing to homosexuality being genetic in the case of other animals besides humans. For example, genetic mutations in flies have resulted in a change in mating behavior. Female flies with this gene shift proceeded to conduct the "mating rituals" of males; seeking to mate with other females. This not only suggests that genetics can play a role in sexual orientation, but also raises the question of why an allegedly omnipotent and omniscient designer would allow such a thing to be possible in the first place.

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

^

We can also add the possibility of it being passed down genetically by heterosexuals. It could be a recessive condition, or a condition that doesn't always manifests itself as homosexuality.

---

I would also like to add that there is evidence pointing to homosexuality being genetic in the case of other animals besides humans. For example, genetic mutations in flies have resulted in a change in mating behavior. Female flies with this gene shift proceeded to conduct the "mating rituals" of males; seeking to mate with other females. This not only suggests that genetics can play a role in sexual orientation, but also raises the question of why an allegedly omnipotent and omniscient designer would allow such a thing to be possible in the first place.



Good point. It also comes back to a point I made earlier that considering God intentionally created us imperfect, which means by definition we have to make mistakes, then how can he blame us for sinning?

If I make computer program incorrectly on purpose, I wouldn't blame it for messing up because I'm not a prick. If I accidentally made it incorrect, I would still not blame it, because it's obviously my fault.

Hyro, Could you post some sort of article with one identical twin being straight and one being gay?

This nature vs nurture debate is interesting.

A quick recap

Hyro: You must explain away gay animals, if you can provide a source of the identical twin analogy that would be really cool.

Don't really like your evolutionary argument, there are plenty of traits that don't directly pass down through bloodlines.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by truckfixr:

If in fact homosexuality were found to be due to genetics, how would that detract from the evolutionary model?

Truck, I don't believe that homosexuality is due to changes in genetic frequency either. I'm covering all the bases supported by homosexuals. This is something that many of them have claimed. What I mean to say is, the propulsion of evolution revolves around reproduction. As well, evolutionists claim that natural selection is not random, nor is it intentional. Rather, they say that it selects the stronger species. But if we are to look at what homosexuality is, and what the evolutionsry implications are, the two cannot co-exist without both going against their very nature.

1. Members of the same sex cannot mate. Therefore, they have to go against their supposed nature in order to procreate.

2. Secondly, evolving into homosexuals would be devolution, because again, evolution does not exist apart from reproduction. And if you say, "Well, they can procreate with a member of the oppostie sex," then that nullifies being a homosexual and its alleged nature. Furthermore, if natural selection chooses certain characteristics, why would it ever choose that which goes against itself -that which executes itself genetically?

If the cause of the homosexual behavior were genetic( I am not asserting such to be the case), the change would be neutral as far as the survival of the organism (person)in question.He would not die due to the change.

I'm not suggesting that he would die, but his genes would. If the strong desire to procreate in order to pass on their genes is erased, then their genes will die with them. That's totally and completely against evolution.

Evolution is not linear. It doesn't always move in the direction that we consider forward.

Then homosexuals are termed as the weaker form in the natural selection process, not because I said so, but because the implication of such is evident when we compare the paradaigm of evolution and homosexuality.

They don't make sense. The two peices of the puzzle don't fit. And if we were to say that this is natures way of population control, then that would mean homosexuals are the weaker forms as far as it relates to natural selection. This is why I say the two are icompatible.

quote:Originally posted by Fundokiller:

Hyro, Could you post some sort of article with one identical twin being straight and one being gay?

This article defends the notion of homosexuality being innate. Nonetheless, it shows that they exist.

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro05/web3/kgiamanco.html

http://www.logcabin.org/lef/what_makes_people_gay.html

http://cbs2.com/topstories/topstories_story_072091004.html

Hyro: You must explain away gay animals, if you can provide a source of the identical twin analogy that would be really cool.

There is no 'gay' animals. Animals that appear to engage in homosexual activity do so because they are unreasoning. That makes about as much sense as claiming that a dog desires humans because once in awhile it might hump your leg. They do that because they are following their instincts to procreate. If your leg or another male or female dog appears, then they go for it.

Don't really like your evolutionary argument, there are plenty of traits that don't directly pass down through bloodlines.

The point that I've been making is that no one knows for certain why some people enjoy same-sex unions and most everybody else does not. I think another interesting for us to condier is bi-sexuals who have no sexual allegiance to any specific sex. It seems that they just want to get their rocks off. It also doesn't explain why some people have an affinity for children or animals.

Hyro, sorry but I think you really need to get out in the world before you start making more assumptions. How many Bi people do you know? I know a few and I can safely say that for them it isn't about "getting their rocks off" anymore than a normal heterosexual.

I do find it interesting Lesbianism is often more accepted than guys being gay. It also goes way back, from christian writers who complained more about gay men than women to Romans who looked down on gay men but accepted and respected the opinion of oracles (which were often lesbian communes).

quote:Originally posted by hyroglyphx:

The point that I've been making is that no one knows for certain why some people enjoy same-sex unions and most everybody else does not. I think another interesting for us to condier is bi-sexuals who have no sexual allegiance to any specific sex. It seems that they just want to get their rocks off. It also doesn't explain why some people have an affinity for children or animals.

It just seems like it? The genetic mapping is incomplete. How could you possibly have any grasp on whether it is or isn't genetic?

quote:

I think another interesting for us to condier is bi-sexuals who have no sexual allegiance to any specific sex.



That is not entirely true. According to a psychologist I know, bi-sexuals usually swing one way or another.

[This message has been edited by Atomical (edited 04-14-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Beta69:

Hyro, sorry but I think you really need to get out in the world before you start making more assumptions. How many Bi people do you know? I know a few and I can safely say that for them it isn't about "getting their rocks off" anymore than a normal heterosexual.

If being heterosexual or homosexual is determined by genetics or some glandular disturbance in the formation of the brain, then what causes bi-sexuality? How much 'acceptance' and 'tolerance' are willing to go for and at what cost? At what point are you going to say, "Okay, give me a break." If you accept homosexuality and bi-sexuality as being perfectly legitimate, then what prevents you from saying the same thing for pedophiles, zoophiles, dendrophiliacs, sado-masichists, or necrophilia, as being acceptable behavior? What prevents you from abhoring rape, when I've heard a number of misguided evolutionists say things like, "Well, even though its socially unacceptable, rapists are just following their instincts." What?

So, at what point should society say, "This is too much. We have gotten out of control and have actually bred people to be like this by not speaking out against it."

I do find it interesting Lesbianism is often more accepted than guys being gay. It also goes way back, from christian writers who complained more about gay men than women to Romans who looked down on gay men but accepted and respected the opinion of oracles (which were often lesbian communes).

There is no difference from Lesbianism. Its homosexuality too and i don't make excuses for them either. Once again, if you feel like you're gay, then you are going to do what you want to do. I'm simply reporting that God does not condone it and because He does not condone it, there is no reason to assume that He imparts it. That makes as much sense as why anyone one of us could be in a relationship and still 'feel' attracted to someone else. Does that make us bad? No. Does it make God bad? No. Should we act on these impulses? No. Is acting on these impulses bad? Yes.

quote:If being heterosexual or homosexual is determined by genetics or some glandular disturbance in the formation of the brain, then what causes bi-sexuality?

Don't know, possibly the same thing. Genetics, hormones, etc are not black and white. Especially since if it is purely genetic it's most likely a number of factors and not just a "gay gene." The huge variety of homosexuals out there suggests this is a complex issue.

quote:How much 'acceptance' and 'tolerance' are willing to go for and at what cost?

What do you mean how much and what cost? If they aren't harassing me, and aren't hurting others why should I care what people do in their bedroom or why people gather? Do we really need to inflate our moral ego by playing moral mommy. Hell I'd say that forcing other people into a "christian image" can easily become a sexual fetish of its own. Some anti-gay extremists seem to get pleasure and gratifacation out of the pain of others.

quote:If you accept homosexuality and bi-sexuality as being perfectly legitimate, then what prevents you from saying the same thing for pedophiles, zoophiles, dendrophiliacs, sado-masichists, or necrophilia, as being acceptable behavior?

Careful of the dangerous and muddy slippery slope.

Pedophiles: Children are not consenting adults.

Zoophiles: Animals are not consenting adults.

dendrophiliacs: At around 1,500 google hits, not a very popular fetish, but I don't see anything wrong with it.

sado-masichists: If consenting adults, why not.

necrophilia: The dead are not consenting adults.

quote:So, at what point should society say, "This is too much. We have gotten out of control and have actually bred people to be like this by not speaking out against it."

I agree, we should speak out against the sadism of forcing other people to sexually act just like you.

quote:I'm simply reporting that God does not condone it and because He does not condone it, there is no reason to assume that He imparts it.

I brought up lesbianism because although the bible does speak out against homosexual behavior in general it is a lot harsher towards male homosexuals (same with society in general). If God did see it as equal why is it not treated as such. Could the writers have imparted some of their prejudice into the words?



[This message has been edited by Beta69 (edited 04-14-2006).]

Hyro said:

quote:

[/b]What word are you talking about that means "not as prevalent as homosexuality."[/b]

My bad. I meant, 'not as prevalent as heterosexuality.'



How does the prefix homo mean "not as prevelant?"

It doesn't, however homosexuals are a minority.

So are christians...

When you start considering everything to the most minute detail then everyone's a minority, a minority of one. That is why life rocks, because it isn't "eternal bliss" and because there is variation. The wise man can take a step back, see the positives and learn to love the fact people do what they want, and how the overwhelming majority of the human race (regardless of colour, sexual orientation, nationality, fetish etc etc) have some form of "love" in them for life.

And IanBoyd3 i totally empathise with what you said about growing up, you very much described me.

Fundamentalist religious people just baffel my brains...such a twisted reality is to me absurd.