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.

 

Homosexuality...What's wrong with it?

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by jedimiller
 


penguins do it...
other animals do it
in fact, many species have instances of homosexuality, so it couldn't be anything but natural

...and many unnatural things are good. every tool we use is unnatural...yet they aren't bad because of that

but i guess my reply here doesn't matter, as you've admittedly put me on your ignore list calling me "ignorant"




posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I don't have first hand experience with this sorry. But your body will treat anal sex as it would a virus or disease and it's my understanding it's simply not good for the body. It is also the most harmful sex easier to spread STDs and non STDs. I suppose I should provide a link I just can't remember where exactly I heared this info and I realy don't want to google it.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by jedimiller
 


penguins do it...
other animals do it
in fact, many species have instances of homosexuality, so it couldn't be anything but natural

...and many unnatural things are good. every tool we use is unnatural...yet they aren't bad because of that

but i guess my reply here doesn't matter, as you've admittedly put me on your ignore list calling me "ignorant"



Madnessinmysoul,

I see you do this type of thing over and over and over ad naseum.

Do you genuinely think about both what you are saying and conversely not saying or do you just go through life emoting and justify thinking by the emotional goal desired??

Notice what is being said in your post.


penguins do it...
other animals do it
in fact, many species have instances of homosexuality, so it couldn't be anything but natural


Translation provided here...

Men are no better than animals...to be base and sexual like animals is a standard to be emulated..why....its natural. The epitome of our humainty is to be sexual..just like most of the animals out here.

Take a good look at the Boob tube ...it is called that for a good reason MIMS. Look at the baseness being pandered on it and ask yourself if what you see on the "BOOB " tube is not a reflection of your statement about men being natural ...just like the animals out here in the world. You know..what I mean MIMS..."Wildlife!!!"

Does not the BOOB tube and other media ...mostly sell us the tools for becomeing "Wildlife" under the guise that we will be better peoples if we purchase this stuff?? You realize ..correct....that they are using science and scientific methods to sell this stuff...correct???

Are any of you people out here thinking yet??

Dont get me wrong here..I am not against stuff per se..but against people not thinking about the nature of a thing. Emotions often work contrary to good thinking.

Men are not to be animals nor describe themselves in the terms of being like or similar to other animals...the term for this kind of thinking and analysis is "BASE." We are not to be base. This applies homo as well as hetero.

Once again..people are so much more than mere sexuality. So why the rush to define ones self in terms of our sexuality or sexual orientation..hetero or homo..talk about stupid.

Now we have the textbook example of being compared to the rest of the animal kingdom. Wow!!! Must be public education standards.


...and many unnatural things are good. every tool we use is unnatural...yet they aren't bad because of that


Real genuine thinking does not come naturally to people whose lives are in a quest for constant emotional satisfaction and justification..often at the expense of others. Thinking/musing takes work. Many of us avoid thinking for a lifetime..and substitute Amusements instead...for the quality of life.

A- without Muse-Thinking...without thinking..amuse or amusement

In like manner ..Athiest.. A-without Theos-god Athiest ..without god.

Etymology.the study and breakdown of words is a intresting dicipline once you get rid of alot of the Amusements.

Amusement is something used to replace thinking in our social structure. To prevent thinking and substitute emoting instead.

Amusement is the new religion. One can see it all over the "BOOB" Tube under the guise of emotional justification.

Work is not unnatural..and the thinking which accomodates work is also not unnatural. It does however require work and effort. Dicipline..

Sexuality requires none of these. Homo or hetero.

We are not as humans to compare ourselves to wild animals as justification for anything. We are not to be ignorant of the world around us but we are not to compare ourselves to wildlife in behavior. To do so declares to the world that we are indeed wildlife and can do no better.

Do you see the next generations becomeing more like emotional train wreck wildlife daily or more like thinking diciplined humans??
Is emotional trainwreck wildlife and all the accessories for this becoming merchandizable and profitable?? In otherwords is this phenomonon becoming the new religious paradim to be followed and emulated...gloried in??
Think seriously and hard on this one. Inspect the fruit and learn to become a fruit inspector.

Be very careful of those who would compare the greatness and patterns of humans to feral animals. This should immediately raise the warning signs and perk up ones radar and other senses.

Is this Science???...is this the new religion..the religious paradim to be followed and emulated in the future by logic and reason??

Bewarned here. Beware.

Orangetom



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


B***S***

Sexuality is our most base instinct and cannot be 'thought out'. Can you explain 'why' you are attracted to women? Did you think about it? Can you reason yourself out of it? Can you say 'Today, I'm attracted to men!' ?

No! Sexuality is our basest animal instinct and we can't change that no matter how much we pray or reason.

We are animals. We're thinking animals, but animals none the less.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I think homosexuality is perfectly okay, as long, just like any other belief, you do not push it on others, it makes alot of people uncomfortable when you make passes at them and they are not gay, You do not need to flaunt it either, straight people typically do not flaunt their sex lives unless its in front of very close friends that joke around like that. Gay parades are okay though, because you are doing a form of protest and celebration



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   
No Rasosabi420..not quite. I stated in many of my posts that it is not that we dont have sex or sexuality..but that we do not define who and what we are by our sexuality or sexual orientation.

As to liking women..I dont have a problem turning a woman down simply by thinking about it. In otherwords..I have not always operated on the very basest of instincts. Many humans have done this very thing and chosen by reason and logic not to become animals and as base....nor glory in it. The comparison to animals ..does not work with many humans..it looks good on paper and in the laboratorys...ie..science ...but it is not applicable across the board as many are wont to do in posts on this topic. Nor is this comparison to animals good justification to many of us for conduct to become wildlife.

However..I will readily admit that another forty years of television/movie education and this thought process may be very difficult to find anywhere.

THanks,
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by 23Eulogy23
I think homosexuality is perfectly okay, as long, just like any other belief, you do not push it on others,
F'nar!



To quote a song this old queen I used to know sang "I don't care what the neighbours say,they're all lesbians anyway"



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999

No Rasosabi420..not quite. I stated in many of my posts that it is not that we dont have sex or sexuality..but that we do not define who and what we are by our sexuality or sexual orientation.

As to liking women..I dont have a problem turning a woman down simply by thinking about it. In otherwords..I have not always operated on the very basest of instincts. Many humans have done this very thing and chosen by reason and logic not to become animals and as base....nor glory in it. The comparison to animals ..does not work with many humans..it looks good on paper and in the laboratorys...ie..science ...but it is not applicable across the board as many are wont to do in posts on this topic. Nor is this comparison to animals good justification to many of us for conduct to become wildlife.

However..I will readily admit that another forty years of television/movie education and this thought process may be very difficult to find anywhere.

THanks,
Orangetom


Rasobasi420:
"Sexuality is our most base instinct and cannot be 'thought out'. Can you explain 'why' you are attracted to women? Did you think about it? Can you reason yourself out of it? Can you say 'Today, I'm attracted to men!' ?"

I think you avoided all of his questions, you can't choose who to love and be attracted to, but you can avoid it and not act on it, which is what you are talking about, "I can turn a woman down", it's not animalistic to love, i think humans and very few other animals are capable of love. So could you choose to have sex with someone of the same sex? Of course, Could you choose to fall in love with a person of the same sex? not quite, it's just something that happens.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 09:41 AM
link   
and FYI,I tried the straight thing. It doesn't work (litterally)



posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uniceft17

I think you avoided all of his questions, you can't choose who to love and be attracted to, but you can avoid it and not act on it, which is what you are talking about, "I can turn a woman down", it's not animalistic to love, i think humans and very few other animals are capable of love. So could you choose to have sex with someone of the same sex? Of course, Could you choose to fall in love with a person of the same sex? not quite, it's just something that happens.


Lets try this again.

There are two positions being promoted here.

Position one is that we are sexual and sexuality is all and the most important facet of who and what we are. Sexuality just leaves us helpless trembling jellyfish before anything else and trumps even good reason and logic. We are to define ourselves mostly by our sexuality and sexual orientation. We must automatically, by default, recognize this pattern and cede/yeild to it before anything else. We are no better than the animals in this. As a matter of fact...science justifys this type of behavior and justifys it above anything else.

That is position one.


Position two...we are not our sexuality and people by nature are so much more than mere sexuality and sexual orientation.
People are not to conduct themselves as do wild animals..nor promote such behavior.
People do not define themselves by thier sexuality or sexual orientation but by thier occupations, their lineage, or some great work they have done and left to posterity.
Their sexuality or sexual orientation is not a measure of thier identity or greatness or claim to fame.
As a matter of record...these people in position number two think it is a very strange phenomonon to see people attempting to define themselves by thier sexuality or sexual orientation. They think there is something very wrong with people like this ..both homo and hetero.
These people in position two see that this strangeness is a very marketable and profitable phenomonon used to take advantage of a very ignorant unthinking but highly emotional populace.

This is why I did not bother to answer the questions. There are only two positions here ..one being justified by any reason..mostly boiling down to emotions the other by another tack..and not by emotions.

Which of these two positions makes sense and which of these positions needs the emotional makeover to conceal or hide what they dont want people to be capable of seeing, thinking, or realizing on thier own.

Thanks,
Orangetom



[edit on 25-4-2008 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 02:15 AM
link   
with the religious undertones of this debate aside . . .

the day

a man and a man

or

a woman and a woman

yield a child

will be the day that homosexuality makes sense

until then

it's just silly



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by JPhish
with the religious undertones of this debate aside . . .

the day

a man and a man

or

a woman and a woman

yield a child

will be the day that homosexuality makes sense

until then

it's just silly


That whole statement is silly, so it doesn't make since to be with someone you love? Love isn't silly, it's the most beautiful thing one can have.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 01:24 AM
link   
As far as I am concerned, when it comes to Homosexuality or Heterosexuality. Love is love. Its none of my business what you do in your bedroom, anymore than its my business what my neighbours do. I don't understand why people try to MAKE it their business by calling it wrong and condemning people for the way they live their lives...Fine..You're religion says its wrong? Therefore, you BELIEVE its wrong...and for you, that lifestyle is wrong.... And as you are allowed your belief that Homosexuality is wrong, Everyone else in the world is allowed to belive what they want. But last I checked, none of us were perfect.

I don't condemn my neighbour for driving a Taurus, anymore than they should judge me for driving a Beetle. In the scheme of things, it just doesn't matter. Does the way they live their life, interfere with my ability to live mine? Are they harming me in a physical way? No? Then how is it my business? Am I so pure and holy that I am allowed to Make it my business? No.

We are all human, and I know that I am in NO position to judge anyone on their style of living. I am human and I have my imperfections...Its no ones business if I sleep with guys or with other girls....just as its no ones business what kind of underwear I wear, what sex position I prefer, or what kind of Cereal I eat in the morning...It just doesn't matter. Why should people be concerned with the way other people live their lives? Are their lives just so empty? I think I'd rather just live my own life, then spend time worrying about what other people do in their bedroom.

Love is Love. Between a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, or a man and a man... Who are we, to say what is right and what is wrong for someone else?



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by CA_Orot
 


Neither do I care what peole do in their homes. It is none of my buisness and I dont care to pry into such.

This particuar group...homosexuals....the problem I have with it is that this is their sole identifying moniker. Their sexuality..their sexual orientation. This is very very abnormal.

They want to be recognized..seperate for thier sexual orientation and if not force its acceptability on people...now that is just plain stupid.

As I have stated in previoius posts...here in this thread and others...people are so much more than sexuality. We have to be educated to be so stupid we no longer see the difference. People should not be defined by their sexuality ..ever....homo or hetero....yet this sole group has this single fingerprint as their claim to greatness...no thanks. I am not that dumb.

However..to be fair as I can be ...our whorish politicians dont care one whit...as long as they can corral this identifyable group at election time ..especially on emotional issues for a particular political party. Especially in high electorial vote states. It is the votes which with they are concerned. Couple this or connect the dots to the particular fact that politics and politicians pay for public education.
Little wonder they promote this acceptability in public schools by sexual orientation...they are cultivating the next generation of predictable ,controllable, malliable voters. In short ..politicians are puppet masters grooming the next bunch of voters...they only care about the votes to maintain thier power base. This is called whoredom by peoples who know its fingerprint.

This is a hijacking...CA_Orot...an attempt at hijacking and forcing people by subtilty..to accept a position they dont want. It is guilt conditioning similar to other issues fingerprinted in the same or similar manner.

I dont care what people do in their homes. I do care when nonsense is being promoted publically as acceptable.

We are people...humans...sexuality is not core to whom and what we are such that we needs be defining ourselves and who and what we are by sexuality or sexual orientation..hetero or homo. To do so is just plain stupid..people are so much more than sexuality and sexual orientation.



[edit on 28-4-2008 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Love is such a rare thing, celebrated in word and song throughout man's existance, why is it such a problem when two people who happen to share gender love each other? Shouldn't that be just as celebrated? IMHO, yes.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
This particuar group...homosexuals....the problem I have with it is that this is their sole identifying moniker.

They want to be recognized..seperate for thier sexual orientation and if not force its acceptability on people...now that is just plain stupid.


I disagree. Not ALL Homosexuals want to be recognized for being homosexual. I know people (in professions) who are VERY discrete about their sexuality. (Teachers, Student Union Positions etc..)...It is unfair to link them all into one group and call them one of the same.

Speaking from my personal experience, I have NEVER met a Homosexual who used FORCE as a means of "separating themselves...so I can't agree or disagree with you about the FORCING people into acceptance.

Should we condemn the Rich for standing out? Should we condemn Blacks for having Black History Week? What about Christians? How about the Menonites? How about we go back to the Womens Sufferage, and condemn THEM for making it possible that I have a right to an education and to Vote? NO. Because THAT is wrong. So how is it ANY less wrong to Condemn Homosexuals for their choice of Lifestyle? When it comes down to it - IT DOESNT MATTER. Does it Affect Your ablility to live a self fulfilling Life?

If you want homosexuals to stop defnining themselves by their sexuality, then force me to stop defining myself as a Woman. Stop the rich from defining themselves as rich. Stop the Emo Kids, and the Gothic Kids, and the Punk Rock Kids with Mohawks. STOP IT ALL. Because Sexuality is just ONE aspect of who we are. If I choose to be defined by the fact that I am a woman, that is MY Choice and it is NOT your right to take it away. You don't have to like it, but frankly, your opinion of me, doesn't add up to one percent in the sceme of things. As long as I am not Harming you, while I am defining myself, I see no problem. And in return my opinion on how you choose to define yourself, shouldn't matter.



This is a hijacking...CA_Orot...an attempt at hijacking and forcing people by subtilty..to accept a position they dont want. It is guilt conditioning similar to other issues fingerprinted in the same or similar manner.


HiJacking? Was it hijacking when The White house finally listened to the Women who wanted to vote? Did we HIJACK our way into being considered eligible Voters? Did the Blacks hijack their way out of Slavery? I don't think so.



I do care when nonsense is being promoted publically as acceptable.


Examples of things that were NOT socially acceptable at one point in the History of People and are now....Accepted.
- It never used to be socially acceptable for Blacks and Whites to sit together.
- It wasn't socially acceptable for Women to Vote. We weren't considered to be important enough to have a choice.

Look how far we've Come...



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


That's complete BS. Gay people's identifying marker is......(drum role please) their identity!!!

Sexuality is not most people's identifying trait, homosexuals included. It's just a part of the whole, just as being an artist, or a construction worker, or a policeman, or fireman, or cowboy or Indian is a part of their identity. As a matter of fact, I defy you to pick out all of the gay people you know. I'm sure you know more than you realize simply because their sexuality is not their identifying trait.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 10:36 AM
link   

We are animals. We're thinking animals, but animals none the less.


and you wonder why the world is so effed up... *shakes head*

will you all ever learn?



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by CA_Orot
 


CA_Orot,

I agree with you in that it is not the identifying marker for all homosexuals. And I too know people who are very discrete about thier sexuality. I give them great credit for this discretion. This is how people should conduct thier affairs..not just sexuality..but other matters too.

Notice the usage of the word used in my post..."Group"..not individuals..I was speaking of the Group..particularly those who are wont to be very vocal about this fingerprint. Not very smart..and this psuedo smartness is contingent on the rest of us not catching on to it. I will admit that the average person is not very smart about this type of thing and in particular The so called Believers. They can be very ignorant about many things....including this topic.

As to the term Force...by this term I mean coercion...as for example on these boards..there is a sense of outrage against those who do not agree with thier position and an attempt to intimidate and shame those who disagree with them. It just does not work with me simply because of the understanding I use in describing my objections to it or to the techniques used by people who attempt to get a free pass to play through on this one.
Oh..I didnt mean to give the impression of force being used as a way of seperating themselves..not at all. I meant force or coercion or coercive techniques to force acceptance...intimidation...on boards like this on people who are just not intrested in it or its acceptance....including the public education system. Perhapsed I should use the term Silence..or intimidate or shame to silence those who don't agree with them.


Should we condemn the Rich for standing out? Should we condemn Blacks for having Black History Week? What about Christians? How about the Menonites? How about we go back to the Womens Sufferage, and condemn THEM for making it possible that I have a right to an education and to Vote? NO. Because THAT is wrong. So how is it ANY less wrong to Condemn Homosexuals for their choice of Lifestyle? When it comes down to it - IT DOESNT MATTER. Does it Affect Your ablility to live a self fulfilling Life?


Strange type of drama technique you are attempting here. I am also as stated to Rasasobi 420 in this very thread ...not intrested in time warp techniques to justify such behavior....try this thread here in reply to Rasasobi420 thread earlier on this topic. From page 3 of this very thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I dont condem homosexuals as individuals. I happen to know a number of them and I do not condem them in the manner attempted to describe most of us who have objections to this. I will ,however, make my point quite clear to them if they attempt to ask or intimidate me or try drama techniques. I do .however, think it is very stupid to declare oneself by ones sexual orientation..homo or hetero and have clearly stated so .

I happen to have a very minority belief that people are so much more than sexuality and sexual orientation as a mark of who and what they are.

Eh.....this is a very strange statement too..CA_Orot. You have me wondering where from this came.


If you want homosexuals to stop defnining themselves by their sexuality, then force me to stop defining myself as a Woman.


I was not refering to your sex as in male or female. Wow!! I was not even aware that you were even female..and it is not even applicable to this conversation. I was refering to sexualitly and sex in the term or expression of having sex. Not male or female. I dont quite understand your misreading of this concept.
I am happy for you that you might have sexuality or even that you are female..but I am not intrested in either your sexuality or your gender. Understand now? It is not important to me and I dont think that either one should be public record and certainly not boasted about as a mark of excellence nor acceptability. I happen to think that you as a person are so much more than either of these markers. Understand?? I also dont need a trip back to Adam and Eve to know this. Understand again??

Also as stated to Rasasobi420 I am not accountable for all this baggage back to Adam and Eve. This technique as a default many work on many on these boards..but it does not work on me.
I am not a drama queen. Such emotional defaults doe not work on me.

This too is a strange statement too..when seen in the larger context.


You don't have to like it, but frankly, your opinion of me, doesn't add up to one percent in the sceme of things.


YOu do realize of course that this "group"...is also not a majority in this nation. So why all the weight on this issue?? Why all the rightiousness attempted to be established ..to be played through by default techniques.
The numbers game is not the issue here. This is why your statement here is strange. Suggest you think this through if it is on the basis of numbers...ie..percentages.


Because Sexuality is just ONE aspect of who we are.


I cannot debate this point with you here because I agree with it ..it is just One aspect of who we are. Precisely my point. I never stated that we dont have sex or sexuality ..I said and I am saying it is not the entirety of who and what we are.

Problem here..CA_Orot.....this is the entirety of who this "group" of peoples are. Understand now? Not individuals..but the more vocal of them as a "group"..seeking acceptance. It is a Catch 22 once you see it for what it is. I happen to think that they are more than just this. Got it now?? As individuals we are all more than mere sexuality. This means that as a group we are more than mere sexuality too.
Yet this "Group" this one group strangely use this sole fingerprint as a marker of greatness and acceptabilty. Very strange. And the more vocal of them are willing to silence by intimidation and default techniques anyone who does not agree with them in an attempt to play through unchallanged.

What this group and the politicians and public education system, financed by whorish politicians, is trying go get us to do ..is not think this is going on...so that we dont ever see the Catch 22. They are counterfitting. They are of the counterfitter. They are phoneys ..all of them.

I think it is a very strange thing to use sexuality and sexual orientation to label ones self. Anyone ..period. Sexuality and Sexual Orientation is a very sorry and poor marker by which to claim rightiousness and justification....for anyone. You have to be educated in drama techniques to get this naturally stupid and not catch on to it.

Ca-Orot...correct...quite correct..people are so much more than this ONE aspect of who and what we are. Quite correct here.

Thank you CA_Orot for making my point for me!! I was wondering if anyone else would catch on to it.


Rasosabi420,
You stated....


That's complete BS. Gay people's identifying marker is......(drum role please) their identity!!!


Please rethink your statement quoted above in lieu of CA_Orots statement quoted above and my previous posts.

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 5-5-2008 by orangetom1999]



posted on May, 11 2008 @ 02:33 AM
link   
ok so the question was, whats wrong with it?

let me give a good example whats wrong with it.

a man and a man cannot produce offspring...
a woman and a woman cannot produce offspring...

and the same thing applies with the wildlife. you will never get two of the same gender to reproduce.

its obvious that sex was meant to be between male and female.

now as for the love part.... love is a choice no matter how hard or how easy it is to do. its a choice, its not something you cannot control. its that easy.



penguins do it...
other animals do it
in fact, many species have instances of homosexuality, so it couldn't be anything but natural


so since other animals eat other animals, its ok if I kill you and eat you right? I mean other animals would so it should be fine if I do too right?
just because other animals do it, does not make it natural. most animals go crazy when they get arroused so they go around humping anything and everything as their way of relieving themselves (masterbation).

[edit on 11-5-2008 by Methuselah]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join