Printable View
I've been thinking a lot, over the past few minutes, about homosexuality and all that it entails and provokes.
The most interesting aspect of it all seems to be homophobia. What provokes it? Is it at all rational or only emotional?
This is what I would like to discuss with you, dear fellow forumer, because I'm bored and have nothing better to do. ;) :D
What's your attitude to gays, and homosexuality in general? More interestingly, why do you think you have this attitude?
Last time we had a thread discussing homosexuality it brought to the attention how backward some parts of the world are from the input here. It was even suggested it was attention seeking and that people chose to do it. Probably asking for a flashpoint opening this discussion again.
Myself and my friends are XXX. Those people over there are different because of YYYY. Kill them.
Sums up a good deal of human history.
Homosexuality is not the same difference as fans of different football clubs or political sights. It is antinatural sickness, degeneracy. No different than pedofilia, necrofilia, family-filia etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Which is part of the problem. People like yourself who have views which are completely incorrect. Even if you were to characterise being gay as a 'sickness', then it can't be compared to the likes of peadofilia, as that causes genuine harm to innocent individuals. Whereas being gay does nothing of the the sort.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
(BTW normally if you came out with such things you'd get an instant and permanent ban; however it's relevant to the debate at hand in this case, I would ask those who may be offended by comments in this thread to show tolerance to opposing viewpoints, even if distasteful)
I'd like to focus on the word 'antinatural'.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
I believe there are over 1500 animal species that have been observed with homosexual behaviour. Are they also 'antinatural'?
If so, what is 'natural', i.e. 'of nature'?
Mark you know when the term homofobia was invented? When the homos began posing with it and aggressively spreading their views over the world, attacking everyone who disagrees with them! When they started making parades in big cities and started making political pressure from very high levels on countries who didnt allow them (let alone marriages and child adoption)! When they started paying celebrities to defend their views in public and movie producers to promote them. When they started sponsoring schools and kindergardens to explain it to fragile little kids as something equal to normal and modern! There was homosexuality all the time, it is mentioned even in the jewish bible and ancient greek myths, but there's not written anything about homofobia because there were not parades and massive propaganda.Quote:
Whereas being gay does nothing of the the sort.
And this years tolerance award goes to...Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
No seriously. Be careful where you let something like that fall out of your skull, because it makes you look like a bit of a tool. Homosexuality is not a sickness. It is also not comparable to pedophilia or necrophilia, which are classified paraphilia, which homosexuality isn't. It is also not degenerative, as it is as old a humanity itself.
No your finest hour, there... ;)
I'm not going to get wound up by Slowsons comments however backward and disgusting I think they are. I think it's frightening we still have views like this and no wonder we have so many hate crimes. I think I've found a use for my ignore list after quite a while.
You would be surprised how common SlowSon's view is in post-communist Europe. (I'm willing to bet a princely sum that he's an Easty, based on his comments..)Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
But let's not ignore, eh? ;) Let's try to help. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
First of all I'd like to clarify that I'm not homophobic... though I know saying that immediately makes it suspicious!Quote:
Originally Posted by EuroTroll
However, though I disagree massively with it being like pedophilia as that causes direct harm and has a victim, I sort of see Slowson's view.If homosexuality is acceptable, why is incest so frowned upon, and necrophilia? Surely a man and a woman is the 'normal' scheme of things, so why is a brother and sister in a relationship so disgusting and frowned upon, yet 2 unrelated men is acceptable?
As for EuroTroll's, point using natural is dangerous - you get mutations which cause weird effects in all species, but doesn't mean they're stereotypically natural. Also in many animal kingdoms incest is prevalent, so saying it's ok because it's ok in nature is not correct.
Therefore despite believing everyone is able to do what they like and that homosexuality is not 'evil', I do certainly sometimes wonder why it is so widely accepted nowadays when other things are so unacceptable.
You are missing the point by a millenium! It may be un-natural to some, and that is fine, but equally, it is as natural as day and night to others. Consent is a major issue that sets aside your point about paedophilia, necrophilia etc........ from homosexuality.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
Well, for one, it messes up the gene pool and can lead to some serious birth defects. This of course is where we appear to differ in genetic compatability - as far as reproduction goes - to the animal kingdom.....Quote:
Originally Posted by pettersolberg29
I don't think there is ever going to be a danger that our entire species is suddenly going to turn homosexual so I don't see why reproduction has to come into things in debates like this. Not everybody enters a relationship with the intent to reproduce of course. There are many heterosexual couples who have long relationships and decide not to have children. We don't seem to have prejudices against such individuals because people think they are wasting their abilities to have children but choose not to. Homosexuality is not a choice but a genetic fault, if that can be said, not meaning its wrong. We can't help who we are attracted to and as long as it is between two consenting adults, it can't be compared to the other awful things listed in this thread IMO. I don't see why we can't be tolerant of others even if they don't meet our own selfish expectations and I certainly don't think Children need to be shielded from such people. Its about educating those who are naive to such instances and lack of education is always going to breed intolerance. Not everybody is the same and homosexuality does no harm to anybody.
I'm not saying it's ok because it's ok in nature. I'm saying that you can't say it's not ok because it's 'antinatural', or alien to nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by pettersolberg29
To me, homosexuality and homosexual acts need no justification. Consenting adults can do what they like, so long as there are no victims to their actions.
Incest. Now that's an interesting point, actually. Should we accept an adult brother and sister having recreational sex? Perhaps we should. After all, they are free consenting adults, and noone gets hurt.
As henners88 says, this point is irrelevant. There is no need for them to reproduce, that can still be seen as 'wrong' or illegal because there is then a risk of harm to any children. Also, like gay couples they could adopt or have IVF with another's sperm - why is this more wrong than homosexuals doing the same? The act itself is no better or worse than homosexuality in my view - both are not 'the norm', and neither cause direct harm beyond offence to others. And offence is only taken not given so that shoudn't be an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I'm not condoning incest, nor am I saying homosexuality is wrong - but it's interesting that these differences arise.
Okay, that is a fair enough point and one I agree with.Quote:
Originally Posted by EuroTroll
As are the other two actually! If people are consenting (and of an age where decisions are rational!) and no harm comes to anyone then why are the two viewed differently?
So you plead for tolerance to different ones, but when one refuses to agree with the mainstream homosexualism propaganda he is satanized and ridiculed. Hypocritical isn't it :dozey:
I take issue IMHO with the idea of IVF in same sex couples, as I would with siblings wanting to have children together. Homosexuals cannot naturally have children, and so why should nature be overriden?Quote:
Originally Posted by pettersolberg29
Because we can I suppose?
And do we then allow siblings to bear children, and the birth defects that are known can arise to occur?
Because to deny them the right to do so is inherently unfair. While I appreciate your very tolerant comments further up this thread, what are you afraid of in this particular instance? We've been over this before, I know, but I resent the notion that I would automatically be an unsuitable person in your eyes to become a parent merely on grounds of my sexuality.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I think he is beyond help.Quote:
Originally Posted by EuroTroll
I am not afraid anything, I just hold that view.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
You cannot rightly say that those who are intollerant of intollerance are themselves intollerent! (if you see what I mean!!)
No tolerance for intolerance! :devil:Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
You never know!Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Were you able, as a couple, to have children naturally, my view of course would be different. You may then turn out to be an awful parent - who knows?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
The woman who suffers cancer and ends up with a hysterectomy cannot have children. That is not fair either.
Many areas of life we as a race have looked at and deemed unfair - famine, flood etc. SO we dam rivers, irrigate, send ££gazillions to prolongue life.
As a result we have a vastly overpopulated planet that before long, will choke under the strain. All because it wasn't fair......
I don't expect you to agree, and shan't lose any sleep over that.
So long as you understand I am not singling you out....
I didn't think you were. Needless to say, I have no time for your view at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Exactly. This is an opinion heard often these days, and it's utter nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
You could say the same about heterosexual couple who for some reason could not have children. They cannot have children naturally, so should they be denied the right too? I don't see the gender of the couple makes a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Not sure what to make of the sibling thing, we all know there are reasons why that is not a good concept and I can't relate it to homosexuality at all.
In all though a refreshing thread, I've been to a fair few events and generally I would think motorsport tends to be a mainly heterosexual male pursuit (looking at me making assumptions there!) and it is good to see most here are willing to discuss their thoughts and are generally tolerant live and let live people.
I always think of homophobia as the phobia part. People who have nothing to fear have no phobia. It's a concept worth exploring.
You mean that homophobic people may have a deep hidden homosexual tendancy that scares them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sprocket
Not in all instances, but this is far from unknown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
Certainly not unknown. Particularly those that are very vocally homophobic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
But there could be more to it, that is one possibility.
There are others, such as threats to one owns moral concepts, religious concepts, own view on social structure and family values, it could run very deeply in some individuals and be complex.
The point really is phobia is fear of something that is not actually a threat...
:rotflmao:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
The Chit-chat section of this forum is really amazing, you can meet so different species here :D Sorry that Rally Mexico is getting underway and gotta leave you, but for tomorrow I have an idea for a new topic, something like this:
"I am a proud necrofile! I harm nobody so if you critise me you are a rotten xenofob! Try to abuse me or even call me not normal and I will moan to the admin of the forum and the international human rights watch! In a few months I and my fellows will organize parades on the streets of some of Europe's biggest cities! ...."
What is it about gay people that so scares you?Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
I have two boys and hope neither of them turn out to be gay.. not because I have anything against gay people but because (in the West coast of Scotland) I'd imagine life would become very difficult for them.
Maybe my perception needs updated but I think a lot of parents would feel that way and its probably a reflection on the lack of tolerance in society... well, in this particular area at least.
Because it is possible for a gay man or woman to have to desire to father/mother a child regardless of their sexual orientation. I have a gay friend who would love to be a father but his partner isn't paternal at all. Discussing this with him opened my eyes to things. He may fancy men but the father instinct is still in his genetics. If a child has the opportunity to be brought up by two loving parents regardless of their gender I will always support it. I don't agree it puts a child at risk or always encourages bullying later on.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I don't believe you should hope they turn out any particular way, so long as they are good people. You won't be able to change them if they are gay, either. How will attitudes ever change unless people face up to those doling out the abuse?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
I know that and it wouldn't change my love for them... but naturally I don't want them to experience difficult lives, that's all.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
So, if one of them told you they were gay, what would you do?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
You harm nobody?? What about the corpse of the deceased who is no longer able to give his consent to your sexual initiative?Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
Yeah. Go ahead and start that thread. ;)