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.

 

Question to those who say being gay is a choice?

page: 37
22
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 04:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: Annee

Yeah well the state of Mississippi disagrees with you and we're getting along just fine down here.



Who is we?




posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 04:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Me also Miss Cauldicott a young goth trainee teacher. I stood up in reading and declared that I wish to marry her. The whole class laughed.
I still remember the dream I had about her getting married on a trampoline lol.
Whoever said this type of thing isn't normal. ....isn't normal in the head.
edit on 8-3-2015 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 04:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I'm sure none of them anticipated that we would change the definition of marriage.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 04:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Anticipated? Probably not. Would denying them marriage be something they'd agree with if they were alive today? Considering the arguments against same-sex marriage are religious in nature, and they fully supported a 'wall of separation between church and state', I see no reason to think they would side with the religious on a matter concerning the State. Additionally, their thoughts are incapsulated in the very sources the Supreme Court uses to rule gay marriage bans unconstitutional.




posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Considering sodomy was illegal at the time, I'm quite certain they wouldn't have let homosexuals get married.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75
Did you pass over the 'if they were alive today' bit?

Actually some States still have anti-sodomy laws despite the U.S. Supreme Court ruling them unconstitutional. LInk

Not everyone seems to care when things are unconstitutional...



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 05:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

The funny thing is how would they know what they did in bedrooms? Do they have cameras in every bedrooms?

Gay relationships do not necessarily mean "sodomy" sex.

Certainly lesbian relationships do not mean they perform sodomy on each other?



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 05:48 AM
link   
a reply to: ToneDeaf

Out of politeness I will answer your question. Perhaps attraction was the wrong word and by that I certainly did not mean anything sexual. I was drawn to females, that's the only way I can describe it. I was a big reader as a child and spent my time either with my nose in a book or playing out. I was extremely active always out with the kids on my street. My parents were normal working class people, no traumas there!

I tried to share something, in an attempt, to help people understand more behind the story of what makes someone gay (even though it was just one story) but have ended up having it turned around and made to seem dirty.

I would like to say thanks for the comments from Robin and Lucid Lunacy - for a moment I felt like I was going mad. By the way, what age is 2nd grade?

Peace and Love,

Scally



edit on 832015 by Scallywwagg because: Things to add after reading further posts



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Did someone mention Mississippi?

The US State ranked last in so many characteristics ... something to strive for indeed!

Last in:

Median Family Income
Population Percentage completing High School
Visits to the Dentist

Second to Last in:

Personal income
Physical Exercise
Median Value of Owner Occupied Homes

Statemaster.com - Bottom Rankings US


... but hey, they "protected" their Christian population by granting special rights that let them break the law!

They are LAST in education, healthcare and quality of life! 50th out of 50 States!

But Christian cakes are safe! Praise Jesus!




posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: TinkerHaus

I totally agree and those who disagree;

Ha, insecure much?



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: Annee

Mississippi did it right by setting up those protections before legalizing gay marriage. Its a fair compromise. Gays can now get married and Christians don't have to participate. I don't see what's so wrong with that.



No.
Other countries have got it absolutely right, allowing the religious to opt-out of performing same-sex marriages, but not allowing them to discriminate against others in their business, their dealings and their treatment of other people.

No one wants to be married in a bigot church by a bigot priest. That's a fine clause to have as far as LGBT people are concerned. Let the bigots refuse to marry us in their hateful and ignorant cult, we're not lining-up to get in and for every one that refuses to catch up with the 21s century there's another ten venues and twenty men and women ready to facilitate our commitments to each other.

The thing that several states are getting wrong is this attack on the basic right to equality, which directly reaches back to a dark period of American history where the same sickening groups tried to hold on to their racism. It's spiteful, it's petty, and it is most definitely going to bite these states in the butt.

Apple, Microsoft, Google and Facebook team up for same-sex marriage case



A total of 379 firms, ranging from small employers to giant multi-national companies, have signed an employers’ amicus brief, which argues that permitting same-sex marriage is crucial to recognising employees’ rights.


You think these hundreds of companies are going to sit back and do nothing while states pass laws directly allowing companies to discriminate against citizens based solely on whether they're LGBT?

And lets not forget that these new discrimination laws being passed to allow Christians to attack LGBT people will also allow people to be discriminated against for a whole host of other reasons. You don't need to be LGBT to now be discriminated against in these states.

We're about to see things get real nasty in these backward states. They're passing laws basically placing their Christian citizens as a "master race" over others, and I can foresee a hundred examples of all those voted for such laws being actively persecuted using their own laws. There are plenty of Christians in these states on the side of LGBT family and friends, and they now have the legal right to refuse to serve anyone - including those who created and supported such a bigoted law.

Companies will start moving their business out of these states, some will fight it in court, and eventually the Federal Government will strike them all down as being unconstitutional, and those who wasted money on creating them and supporting them will be thrown out of office by the angry public.

The Christians have already lost this, they just don't know it yet. The funniest thing about this is that all they're doing is diminishing their own power and influence, and they don't have the support of the public majority. This will erode their power and influence in each of these states, just as the civil rights movement eroded the power and influence of the racists back in the day.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

I had a crush on my 5th grade teacher - Mr Cheatham, he was so handsome! He was my first "male" teacher - and I'd had crushes on boys before that, too. I didn't declare I was going to marry him, but I always felt 'special' that we had the same initials. Heck, I was only nine.

I've had crushes on black boys/men, too - and brown - and I'm a white girl -
who is very glad I never lived in Mississippi - but it's a pretty place in terms of landscape.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

No.

We are a secular government. Separation of church and all that.

It's bad enough the Religious Right keeps trying to run the government.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

The irony here is simply awesome.

Christians, who take everything as a slight and an attack upon them, are more terrified of Muslims and sharia law than they are of gays, and yet, they're actually setting up laws by which Muslims could, should they desire to, implement sharia law in their communities in these backward states.

Awesome or delicious ... I can't decide which.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   
This was in response to someone who believes they could choose to have sex with men, but don't because they love women and want to continue loving women:
--------------
People who absolutely love pizza, but think they might like burgers as well, don't just ignore trying out a burger. They go out and try a burger. They want to know if they'll like it, and realize that just because they love burgers, doesn't mean they would have to stop loving pizza.

If you think you may truly enjoy having sex with a man, even though you currently know you love having sex with women, why don't you go out and explore that thing you may potentially love? Logic says it's because you don't really want to have sex with a man, because you're not attracted to men. That's why you're so content on just sleeping with women.

You could go out and discover what it's like to have sex with a man, but not because being gay or straight is a choice, but because you have free will. You not being gay is the reason you don't take advantage of the free will you have to go sleep with a man. Otherwise, the normal response to the belief you might enjoy having sex with a man, is having sex with a man. Not talking about how you might enjoy having sex with a man, but that you never will because you totally love women.
--------------
That's the way I see it. I've never felt the urge to go have sex with a man. The thought turns me off and doesn't interest or arouse me in the least. The closest I would ever come to "choosing" to be gay, is if I didn't have to have any physical interaction with the man at all. Which to me, probably means it's impossible for me to choose to be gay. I'll happily and easily agree or mention that a man is attractive, or that they would make a good boyfriend to someone. To me, that has nothing to do with your sexual preference, but rather being able to acknowledge whether or not someone is attractive and has good traits.

The idea that people believe gay or straight is a choice, just baffles me. To me, there are only two logical reasons for that. The first, the people saying this are bisexual, and they choose not to give into their desires due to it being largely unaccepted, fearful about how they may be thought of, and/or it's against their religion. The other reason, because they are religious and see being gay as bad, and would never admit (or refuse to believe) that God would create a man that was attracted to another man.

And both of those answers I cannot accept. For the non-religion excuse, don't be afraid of being who you are, you are only making things worse for others and for your true self. (I'm going to preface this next part by saying it's not intended to bring about a religious debate, or question any beliefs. It's meant to show why I cannot accept the reason for why someone would say being gay is a choice. I believe in Christ, myself, but also believe that everyone is loved, and that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. Do not attempt to debate whether or not homosexuality is a sin, or any of my religious beliefs. I know I am ending one sentence with a question mark, but only because it's rhetorical.) For the religious excuse, take a look at all the "bad" things God does every day, with AIDS, wars, poverty and famine. There's the belief that there's a reason for all of those bad things. Do you find it so hard to believe that maybe God, for whatever reason it may be, might also create a man than has no say in whether or not he is attracted to another man?

I really had no intention to make this so long, sorry for anyone reading. The typing just kind of started and wouldn't stop.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Dp
edit on 8-3-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   
I think of this the same way as race, what does it matter? Were all the same species walking around on the same rock at the end of the day, what difference does it make really? I'm heterosexual and always have been but its never crossed my mind to judge those who see things differently, why should I care about who sticks what where between two consenting adults?

Its 2015, surely its time to the leave the whole 'oh noes, the gays are coming to infect us' scenario behind, gay people can't help been attracted to the same sex any more than straight people can help been attracted to the opposite sex. Let it go, there are far more important things to be worried about on Earth than who's sleeping with who.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013

You think these hundreds of companies are going to sit back and do nothing while states pass laws directly allowing companies to discriminate against citizens based solely on whether they're LGBT?


Hooray for fascism!


And lets not forget that these new discrimination laws being passed to allow Christians to attack LGBT people will also allow people to be discriminated against for a whole host of other reasons. You don't need to be LGBT to now be discriminated against in these states.


Yet for some strange reason its not happening. Imagine that.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

That's a logical fallacy. They were alive then and it was illegal. If they were alive today they'd revolt.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Yes the state of Mississippi is fascist If they refuse gay people the right to marry.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join