It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rick Perry compares homosexuality to alcoholism

page: 9
22
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: thebtheb
Thankyou, TheBtheB, for reading it and you, too Annee if you did so. I apologize for the “argumentum interruptus” but I was working on fences yesterday and just didn’t feel like re-entering the fray by the time I got back home. You deserve as coherent an argument as I have the ability to give, no?

There was one point in that article that I’ve been tempted to write its author about so he could clarify something. When he was talking about "berdaches" in the Native American frame of reference he said that “if berdaches are a gay minority, then the term “gay” loses all meaning.” I did not fully catch his meaning there. It sounds like an incomplete thought that should have been elaborated on and he may have missed it in his final edit. Dunno.

When the author said there were no discernible homosexuals in the past I’m pretty sure he was playing off the idea of the lack of records due mainly to viewpoints on sexuality back then. It’s obvious that there was tons of homosexual activity going on from time immemorial. While it may have been outlined in the Bible it wasn’t truly defined in the culture of the time. Heck, “buggery” was a very popular past time of the European elite back then and, for all we know, I wouldn’t doubt it still is. It didn’t stand in the way of people marrying and having children back then, however.

As far as bi-sexuality goes this basically describes my uncle who passed away back in ’01. It galls me for those immersed in homosexuality to, basically, claim that ‘if you aren’t one of us you can’t understand us.’ Horsehockey. If you wanted to apply some numbers to him I’d say my uncle was 90% homosexual and 10% hetero. We found photographic evidence of both activities prior to destroying them when we cleaned out his house after his death. People did stupid things with cameras LOOOONG before the digital age! It must have really been interesting working in a photomat back in the day!

My uncle moved to California after serving in the Navy in WWII and I can hardly blame him. The residual “nirvana” (non-pharmaceutical) I experienced out there while visiting him back in the 70’s was still nothing less than intoxicating. I can only imagine what it was like back in the late 40’s. He moved there because he wanted to be whatever he dang well wanted to be and I can, on that level, hardly blame him. While cleaning out his house after he died we found a couple of receipts from the AIDS clinics there in L.A. which meant he certainly had his worries about the choices he made over his lifetime. At least he was responsible enough to want NOT to pass it along if he had it.

That brings me to something I thought I ought to clarify in my previous posts. When I say, and maintain, that homosexuality is a choice I should have made it clear that I don’t perceive it as an EASY one. Very few of the choices we make in life “for the better” are easy choices. As a human male I can certainly verify that monogamy is not an easy choice (and not fully “natural” either) but I know eschewing a “swinging” lifestyle is better in the long run – and certainly better than waking up dead due to an irate spouse!

Anyway, ATSers have little tolerance for long tomes so I’ll shut up and give someone else a turn.




posted on Jun, 18 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Ollie769

As I always say, research your source. This author seriously twisted writings to fit his agenda.

Author of your linked article: David Benkof



In 2003, he announced that for religious reasons he had stopped having sex with men, and that he was shedding the label gay, preferring not to label his sexuality. He has always been a devout Jew, and says that one reason he changed was because "Gay sex is just inconsistent with traditional religious life." To reflect his change in sexual identity, and to honor his late grandfather, Julius Benkof, David Bianco changed his name to David Benkof. He identifies as bisexual, but abstains from having sex with men.

He has since become a strong opponent of same-sex marriage. In response to arguments for gay marriages, he wrote "This reasoning is not only flawed, it insults the millions of Americans whose traditional faiths call on us to defend marriage as a central institution in society defined as a union between a man and a woman."Benkof has made it clear that his objection to same-sex relationships is based in part on his personal religious beliefs, stating, "I happen to believe that God has been clear to the Jewish people that we should be pursuing opposite-sex relationships, and particularly not having intercourse between two males.


en.m.wikipedia.org...



edit on 18-6-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Still though on the choice thing, you say you chose monogamy over swinging. That sounds like something you could still choose. Tell me exactly when you chose not to be gay? Could you choose right now to be gay? Could you have chosen earlier in life? I highly doubt it!



posted on Jun, 18 2014 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: thebtheb
But basically the idea that homosexuality as well as heterosexuality are both created mental constructs is what I've always thought. If people were not born into a society that already has these constructs flung at them from the moment they're born, few would be fully homosexual, and what we'd end up with is a lot more bi people - including by the way, those who classify as straight.

I think as a developing child, if one tries to break away from the straight construct, it's so innately ground into us as children that's "one or the other" that the only possibility for someone who ends up different is "all the way to the other side." So ultimately, I see being fully heterosexual OR fully homosexual pretty well just as imbalanced as each other. Few people in Roman times were fully gay, yet there were many acts of homosexuality.


I agree, to a degree -- that most people are born naturally bi-sexual or pansexual. I think humans are communal mammals. That it is the fears and rules of society that have restricted and interfered with natural behavior.

However, I also support the sliding scale. While I think most people do fall into the middle, I think there are those away from center and to the far end of the scale (both sides) that are inherently only attracted to same or opposite sex.






I might even wager that if left to their own naturalness, most people would be more like 75% hetero, 25% homosexual. That's just a guess, I have no actual idea. It is probably true about the sliding scale, that some would be at certain extreme ends. I always imagine myself to have been 80% gay, 20% straight. And I remember being 12, 13, trying to hard to be straight, but it was like being in a boat with no paddles, drifting away from the the shore, the shore being any semblance of heterosexuality I had. "Wait! I cried...lol.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee
Well, Annee, thank you for that reference. I had not looked into Benkof’s background. The only thing I noted was the fact that he appeared to be an observant Jew due to the yarmulke he’s wearing in his picture. I was more concerned with the information he’d provided. I don’t think his wandering from the faith in earlier times makes his reporting of these scholars’ finding any less valid and his turning from homosexuality only reinforces my opinion that it CAN be done IF one finds a good enough reason to do it. If you have no reason to change, if your spiritual life is, essentially, d-e-d, dead, well, then you’re pretty much on your own and one becomes subject to the consequences of every “Thou shalt” and “Thou shalt not” the Bible speaks of.

Not that I think for one minute that you’re cursed or anything like that. My personal view of what our dumbed-down version of ancient writings actually are conflicts so much with what is taught in the churches on such an abysmally superficial level now I haven’t had any desire to support one or any of them for many years now. None of the churches really speak to the basic reasoning behind the prohibitions and encouragements you find in Biblical writings probably due to the fact deeper meaning were only taught to fully mature and demonstrably intelligent individuals that showed an interest in knowing more. (That and it’s bad for business – “butts in the pews”) This is why the Kabbalah was passed on only to those over the age of 40, I believe, and then only to those students that showed enough “spark” to assimilate the information.
What I honestly believe the Bible is is one of several ancient manuscript collections that provide a path for mankind, in general, to raise themselves up from the naked backwardness of Adam to a rational being fully aware of what is right and good and able to put away those things that are harmful. It’s all part of a greater plan for us humans with free will. Now if I’m speaking to an atheist or agnostic this is all just so much bunk but I truly believe that the writers of the ancient texts had a much deeper understanding of human psychology than we give them credit for.

As far as the question goes about whether or not I could choose to be a “swinger” – of course! All I have to do is be willing to deal with the consequences of my decision! Could I be “gay”? Well, as you or someone wrote a few pages back in this thread “sex is sex”. I know you don’t define “gayness” as just sex and it isn’t. There exists an attachment between homosexual men that in “normal” situations is usually reserved for a male-female relationship in which both partners exist in the relationship on generally equal footing but playing different roles. Any male reading this that says they’ve never had a non-biologically related “bosom buddy” they could talk to, tell anything to and experience a deep mutual trust with at some point in their lives past puberty and for whom they would literally die for outside of a foxhole is either a very sad, lonely guy or lying through his teeth. Maybe both. The problem with homosexuality is that there are those that, for whatever and however many reasons either don’t have the natural road blocks set up in that oh-so-complex thing we call a brain and the lip-locking and sexual adventures begin! Please note that I’m talking about male homosexuality here. Lesbianism is a whole different ball of wax.

Personally, I had one date in high school and that’s because I HAD to. I hated dating and preferred to hang out with only a few select friends, most of whom were guys. Perhaps moving 20 times before I was 18 had a little to do with that. I swore I’d never do that with my kids and I haven’t. They both have had a much better “social education” than I ever did and their lives reflect that.

As a young person one only has to go on whatever programming has been instilled in them along the way. Only a very, VERY few “old souls” seem to inhabit young bodies where the person can have a clear view of cause and effect consequences of one’s actions at an early age. This is why The Dreaded “Indoctrination” of youth is so important. It’s all most of us have to go on once we start coming in contact with the world. As time goes on – provided one survives a miss-spent youth – there will be time to reflect on the deeper meanings of the rules and regulations that our society has placed upon them and THEN they can decide whether or not to comply.



edit on 19-6-2014 by Ollie769 because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-6-2014 by Ollie769 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ollie769
I don’t think his wandering from the faith in earlier times makes his reporting of these scholars’ finding any less valid and his turning from homosexuality only reinforces my opinion that it CAN be done IF one finds a good enough reason to do it. If you have no reason to change, . . .



But, he didn't change.

Choosing not to act on your inherent orientation is not change.

A heterosexual who chooses to have same sex, does not make him homosexual. Choosing to have same sex when your inherent orientation is heterosexual is committing a homosexual act. That is a choice. Your inherent orientation is not.

Swinging is a lifestyle choice. Inherent sexual orientation is not.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
This whole idea that people are "born that way" has no logic behind it. Ask a 5 year old what it's attracted to, there is no answer. You don't know what you're attracted to until you hit puberty, and probably much later. People aren't born gay or straight, it's a lie.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: simsumre
This whole idea that people are "born that way" has no logic behind it. Ask a 5 year old what it's attracted to, there is no answer. You don't know what you're attracted to until you hit puberty, and probably much later. People aren't born gay or straight, it's a lie.


You probably should have conversations with actual homosexuals.

My understanding is most did know at an early age, even as young as 5.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: simsumre
This whole idea that people are "born that way" has no logic behind it. Ask a 5 year old what it's attracted to, there is no answer. You don't know what you're attracted to until you hit puberty, and probably much later. People aren't born gay or straight, it's a lie.


You probably should have conversations with actual homosexuals.

My understanding is most did know at an early age, even as young as 5.


At 5 years old I was making fun of girls, they had cuties, I hated them. Now I love women. You don't know what you're attracted to at 5 years old, let alone 1 or 2. People aren't born gay, there really is no logical behind that statement. You don't "know", when you're 5 years old, that you're attracted to men. Any gay guy that tells you that is a liar.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: simsumre

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: simsumre
This whole idea that people are "born that way" has no logic behind it. Ask a 5 year old what it's attracted to, there is no answer. You don't know what you're attracted to until you hit puberty, and probably much later. People aren't born gay or straight, it's a lie.


You probably should have conversations with actual homosexuals.

My understanding is most did know at an early age, even as young as 5.


At 5 years old I was making fun of girls, they had cuties, I hated them. Now I love women. You don't know what you're attracted to at 5 years old, let alone 1 or 2. People aren't born gay, there really is no logical behind that statement. You don't "know", when you're 5 years old, that you're attracted to men. Any gay guy that tells you that is a liar.


Says the heterosexual who didn't choose to be heterosexual.

Again, I think you should have some real conversation with a gay guy.



edit on 19-6-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: simsumre

That is just an opinion. There is no factual basis behind it.

I knew I was different when I was 5. I tried to conform(sort of). Certainly not a choice.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: simsumre

That is just an opinion. There is no factual basis behind it.

I knew I was different when I was 5. I tried to conform(sort of). Certainly not a choice.


Come on man, just be honest. You know damn well you weren't attracted to anything at 5. I was 5 man, I know what it's like to be 5. I remember being 5. I wasn't attracted to men (or women) at 5. And neither was anyone else here.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: simsumre

That is just an opinion. There is no factual basis behind it.

I knew I was different when I was 5. I tried to conform(sort of). Certainly not a choice.


My best friend from high school had a son. Even at 4 years old, you could tell this kid was different. He wasn't feminine, he just gave off a different vibe. This was about 40 years ago. It was probably my first recognized experience meeting a gay person. Even though I hadn't had previous experience/knowledge --- I just knew.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   
I hope Rick Perry and his political crowd take a good look at the "crowd" (joke) that showed up in DC for the hyped NOM march for marriage.

They'll probably feel the need for alcohol.



edit on 19-6-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: simsumre

I didn't play in little league.....not really my thing. Most of of besties were girls when I was 5.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Hi Annee,



My best friend from high school had a son. Even at 4 years old, you could tell this kid was different. He wasn't feminine, he just gave off a different vibe. This was about 40 years ago. It was probably my first recognized experience meeting a gay person. Even though I hadn't had previous experience/knowledge --- I just knew.


I get what your saying.

Years ago, I dislocated my shoulder, again. My roommate, at the time, offered me a Vicodin, Well, turned out she made a mistake and gave me a Viagra instead! I literally felt my "Chi" energy turn around. It was like it was always moving "clockwise", then suddenly, because of this pill, it turned around and started moving counter clockwise! It affected my breath awareness too. One of the weirdest feelings for me was a sense of animalistic "hairiness".

It would certainly be eye opening if we could walk in another's skin, if only for a few moments!



edit on 19-6-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee



Choosing not to act on your inherent orientation is not change.


Hmm, I think I see what you're attempting to make a point of. I think I made the point a while back that the ATTRACTION to people of the same gender wouldn't go away - as the CEO or COO or whatever of Exodus finally found out. If you still have that attraction but CHOOSE not to act upon it for whatever reason then the CHANGE made is in one's actions, not their orientation. As I said finding a REASON to change one's actions and involvments and TURNING from homosexuality can be done but it will never be an easy road, especially if you've been down it as far as Benkof has as evidenced by the article you referenced.

Remember, maybe you don't, but Paul said in I Corinthians 9:27 (I prefer the Jewish NT by David Stern) "I treat my body hard and make it MY slave so that, after proclaiming The Good News to others, I myself will not be disqualified." There has been lots of speculation about what malady plagued Paul, he never says, but he found his "reason" to change whatever it was that was holding him back from acquiring his goal. Some people's paths are hard, some not so hard. Olympians don't make to the Olympics on their own but they have to do the work to get there.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ollie769
a reply to: Annee



Choosing not to act on your inherent orientation is not change.


Hmm, I think I see what you're attempting to make a point of. I think I made the point a while back that the ATTRACTION to people of the same gender wouldn't go away - as the CEO or COO or whatever of Exodus finally found out. If you still have that attraction but CHOOSE not to act upon it for whatever reason then the CHANGE made is in one's actions, not their orientation.


YES



As I said finding a REASON to change one's actions and involvments and TURNING from homosexuality can be done but it will never be an easy road, especially if you've been down it as far as Benkof has as evidenced by the article you referenced.


Like finding a reason to bleach your skin if you have dark skin? Because Ham was the father of black people and his descendants were cursed to be slaves because of his sin against Noah?




This myth became an authoritative myth because it was rooted in theology, and slave owners used this twisted theology to sustain a perverted sociology. This process is known as sacralization, the development of theological and religious beliefs to serve the interest of a particular ethnic or racial group.

www.epm.org...

edit on 19-6-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Annee, you're reaching just to make an argument. Do you want to declare all homosexuals their own distinct race? Is this where you mind is going?

Life is not and never will be fair and, to be certain, the more crowded the world is either by fact or mere perception the more we all have to make allowances for our fellow ... persons. That is until those allowances become a physical problem or actual danger to the population at large. There are tons of things to be afraid of in this world. I'm more afraid of the rush of mis-informed refugees at our borders that our current administration is trying to use to unhinge the country he and his wife admit they hate with a passion than the chart I'm enclosing with this post but male homosexuality is a significant threat to the public. San Francisco had to basically shut down the Castro district back in, I think, the late 60's or 70's because homosexuality was spreading diseases faster than they could deal with the situation. The fact is this chart hasn't changed other than to show the increase of homosexual transmission of STDs since I first saw it I '04.



This is the danger that MALE homosexuality presents to the general population. If you want to help you need to advocate a monogamous lifestyle to homosexuals you mix with. The full report can be found here. It's also my reasoning for having much less problems with Lesbians than I do with male homosexuals. Because women are more inclined to have a real monogamous relationship as opposed to men of just about ANY stripe they just don't go around spreading diseases - period.

It all goes back to the ability to control one's self but today's world is HELL-bent on promoting the "Do As You Will" philosophy and you are part of that promotion if you don't think more about what you're advocating rather than just doing what "feels" right to you.


edit on 20-6-2014 by Ollie769 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ollie769
a reply to: Annee

Annee, you're reaching just to make an argument. Do you want to declare all homosexuals their own distinct race? Is this where you mind is going?



I'm not even going to go there. It's ridiculous that you're actually going to try to make this about race from what I posted.

The point was the absurdity of trying to bleach your skin because of some religious belief.

The same as forcing one's self to live a heterosexual lifestyle because of religious belief, when your natural orientation is homosexual.

Do you think dark skinned people should bleach their skin because dark skin is a curse from god?


edit on 20-6-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join