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.

 

Whats with all the Homophobia?

page: 6
9
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Is it homophobia...like a FEAR of gay people? OR is it, and this is my vote, that people just don't agree with it because it simply makes no sense?

MAN and WOMAN = CHILD aka NEW LIFE aka KEEP THE HUMAN RACE GOING

MAN and MAN = Two guys who love each other, but cannot have kids, hence human race stops.

WOMAN and WOMAN = Two women who love each other, but cannot have kids, hence human race stops.

So what is the truth here? People don't agree with gay behavior because it just doesn't add up. No matter if you agree with being created by GOD, evolving from ape's, or were genetically made by ET....bottom line is...only a MAN and WOMAN were meant to be together in the natural way of LIFE.




posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 


Procreation is not the end all, be all of human existence. Nobody is going to get pregnant surfing the internet, so by your logic the internet is pointless.

I for one think gay people have a place in our evolution. Although gay people cannot reproduce by having sex with someone of the same gender, a population with gay people in it is more evolutionarily fit then a population without gay people.

Long ago, cave men would go out to hunt leaving the cave women behind. A cave men did not want to leave his women left unprotected, but he also could not trust another cave man to watch the women. He also got headaches from hearing his cave woman say "does this fur make my butt look to big."

The problem was solved when the first gay cave men came onto the scene. The caveman could now go out and hunt while having his woman protected, and not worry about some other cave man making a move on his woman. The gay cave man helped the cave woman pick out a fur that looked fierce on her, and hence the cave woman no longer asked the cave man about her furs.

[edit on 4-1-2010 by hotpinkurinalmint]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Just a question first:
What "Homophobia" on ATS are you talking about? I haven't seen it. But, I would like to see it if it exists in here. Depending on the topic, and the action of the "Homophobe" in question, I would probably jump in, and argue with the attacker. As some people may have seen in some of my posts, I am very intolerant of "bullying" in general.

On the other hand, I have to admit that I do have some issues with certain Gay agendas.

I believe that Gays should have a right to live their lives however they wish, as long as it does not spill over into the lives of others.

I think they should receive all the respect that any other human being deserves, as long as they aren't acting in any way that would negate that right to respect.

For instance, I believe that being Gay is a sexual preference. An attraction-type, coupled with a preference for specific sexual acts.

This should not give them access to the same rights as a married man and woman. ESPECIALLY if it, in any way, is taking from, disrespecting infringing on the perceived rights of legal married men and women.

And, I am not stating this because of any religious or moral reasons alone.

Marriage is a very complex, and ancient practice that is the accumulation of thousands of years of necessity, practice and formation. The reasons for, and needs that are addressed by marriage, cross all boundaries of religious, legal, moral, natural and monetary values.

Then, there ARE the issues about families and tradition.

At no point in human history has "the family" been in so much trouble. Broken families everywhere. Children missing the protection and guidance of a "whole family". It is now "cool" for kids to be disrespectful, jaded and lost.

Is it a coincidence that each new generation seems to be more troubled, less grounded and lacking more of a moral direction than the last?

Come on. Be honest.

The last families and parents that are clinging to the lost traditions of marriage and family are now under fire because of their discomfort and alarm at the onslaught of Gay agendas. This is just one more angle of attack that families are facing today.

Maybe they don't want their tax dollars to go to the support of a gay marriage. Maybe they don't want their children to have such easy exposure to that lifestyle. Maybe people want LESS confusion in the lives and minds of their kids. Maybe they don't want their kindergartners coming home with fliers on the "Lesbian Lifestyle".

I don't know. I don't have the answers. I do know that adults should be able to live their lives as they wish, as long as they are not causing problems for anybody else.

And, I also know that there are a lot of "Traditional Values" and practices that have been in place for a very long time. And, not all of them were in place due to close-mindedness, or negative reasons.

A lot of things are considered "Traditional" because they have been in place for a long time, AFTER an equally long process of "trial and error".

And, I do not think that "change" has been very friendly to us in the last 100 years.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Procreation is not the end all, be all of human existence.


Really..lol...ummm..soooo...to NOT procreate means human life will somehow continue?


Nobody is going to get pregnant surfing the internet, so by your logic the internet is pointless.


I have NO IDEA where your going with this? What does the internet have to do with only a man and woman can produce life??????

As for the rest of your post..I must say that was funny. Not making fun of you..just sitting here using my imagination to see the example you gave...very interesting...



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   
I'm a married family man with a daughter and another baby on the way and "the gay agenda" doesnt seem to affect me or my family. I just don't see how gay people wanting to get married affects straight couples? We are still a very young family (my wife and I are in our 20s) but I honestly can't think of a single time anything gay people do has ever affected our family life.


[edit on 4-1-2010 by jeasahtheseer]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by rcwj1975
 


With all due respect, procreation is important. However, there are many meaningful things in life that have little or nothing to do with procreation. Just because something will not lead to procreation, it does not mean it must be discarded.

Similarly, people or lifestyles that do not procreate can also be valuable and should not be discarded. Following your logic, it seems that all post-menopausal woman are useless and should not have romantic relationships. In fact, they should be done away with like gay people because they are no longer reproducing.

This result is of course, absurd. Post-menopausal women, gay people, and many others can contribute to society and make it stronger.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


No my logic is NOT what you assume. My logic is gay people can't produce life, so other than loving someone of the same sex, what is the point? Is that the only point for them..maybe it is. I don't know..all I DO know is men were created with this thing called the penis...women were created with a thing called a vagina. Oddly enough these 2 things fit together NATURALLY. So that tells me this is what LIFE wanted for us to do...find love, reproduce and pass on those emotions to our offspring. Two men can't do this, and two women cannot do this naturally...thats MY logic...has nothing to do with what your saying...not even sure why your putting in women who are older going through menapause..or however you ladies spell it...



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeasahtheseer
reply to post by LASTofTheV8s
 


I'm a married family man with a daughter and another baby on the way and "the gay agenda" doesnt seem to affect me or my family. I just don't see how gay people wanting to get married affects straight couples? We are still a very young family (my wife and I are in our 20s) but I honestly can't think of a single time anything gay people do has ever affected our family life.

[edit on 4-1-2010 by jeasahtheseer]

Personally, I am kind of "on the fence" about it myself. There are a few things that worry me, but I am not decided.

I was mostly pointing out the arguments that exist, and the fact that there are people out there that have been effected, do feel threatened, or wish to raise their children without the establishment of, and exposure to the Gay lifestyle and Gay Marriage.

If the views of these people are not based in hate, do have some merit, and have been rooted in society for a very long time, is it really "right" to ignore them, and THEIR right to live in an environment they are used to? Is it "right" to force this change, just because a minority group that is based on sexual preference, wants to have access to financial and legal status that has been SPECIFICALLY molded to the make-up of "Traditional Families"?

Maybe some other kind of considerations could be put in place. Some new type of recognition and status. But, to decide that Gay Marriage is the same as Traditional Marriage, and that Traditional Views, Values and Concerns are supposed to be ignored, just seems flat out wrong.

Just like the fact that there are certain practices and actions that one Race may do, believing them to be harmless, but would make people from another Race uncomfortable, concerned or just plain upset.

And, trust me, I am ANYTHING but a "Traditional" guy.

I am just calling it as I see it, and trying to be logical and fair.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by LASTofTheV8s
 


I completely understand what you mean and where you are coming from, to be honest man. I was just saying that up to this point in my wife and I and daughters young lives we havent experienced anything involving gay people that has directly affected our lives.

Peace

[edit on 4-1-2010 by jeasahtheseer]



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeasahtheseer
reply to post by LASTofTheV8s
 


I completely understand what you mean and where you are coming from, to be honest man. I was just saying that up to this point in my wife and I and daughters young lives we havent experienced anything involving gay people that has directly affected our lives.

Peace

[edit on 4-1-2010 by jeasahtheseer]
It's funny. So often, people from two opposing sides will not look for a third solution.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by LASTofTheV8s
 


One thing that Anti-gay rights seem to distort is that there is some sort of "homosexual agenda" or that all gay people are degenerate perverts trying to recruit your children. The fact of the matter is most gay people are pretty boring. I have a couple gay relatives, and when they come to visit they do not do anything crazy like perform S&M in front of children or tongue kiss at the dinner table.

While it is true there are a few gay people that may be into some crazy perverted stuff, there are some straight people out there that are into some crazy perverted stuff too. If anything, there is a "heterosexual agenda" to turn gay people straight. It is virtually unheard of for anybody to be pressured into being gay, yet there are plenty of societal pressures compelling gay people to act straight. Families disown gay relatives, gay people face workplace discrimination, and there are even camps which claim to convert gays into straights.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 09:58 PM
link   
There is a prejudice surrounding homosexuality that is more pervasive than any other. Racism and sexism, in my opinion, is easy to defeat, because any logical thinking human being will eventually come to the conclusion that a person can't help what race or what sex they are. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is at a certain level a choice. No, homosexuals can't help who they're attracted to. But they can control whether or not they act on it. The Church, at least today's Church, really doesn't have a problem with homosexuals. They have a problem with the act of homosexuality. And since the act itself has been so historically frowned upon and considered taboo, it's just not able to get the support it needs.

Now, I do think society is light years better than it used to be in regards to homosexuality. Unfortunately, the AIDS epidemic, due to prejudices and outright ignorance, wrongly encouraged homophobia.

Essentially, I believe it comes down to the philosophical question of what the purpose of sex is. Is it love or procreation? Or is it both? Of those three possibilities, only one allows for homosexuality. The odds, therefore, are against homosexuals from the very beginning.

In a perfect world, this wouldn't be an issue. But, as we see on ATS daily, we are far from living in a perfect world. But it is what it is. And, for better or for worse, that's what it is.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 10:05 PM
link   
As a group of select humans homosexuals cannot reproduce.
How do they then continue thier legacy, their group?
They recruit, plain and simple.

If thy take a very deep honest reflection of their dilemna, the only choice they have is to recruit.

Lots of children question sexuality in general and their own sexuality in particular.

I myself have been at that point in life. During the period when my morals and values were not firmly tested and certain.

So "educating" children before their values and morals are formulated tested and certain is absolutely the wrong time to introduce this kind if intrusive and invasive educatin. It is not genuinely for education it is for recruitment.



posted on Jan, 4 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


Homosexuality can be caused by recessive genes. People can still be straight if they are carrying recessive "gay" genes. They can produce a gay child if they give the child two sets of recessive gay genes.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


I think the jury may still be out on whether or not the *gay gene* really exists.

Obviously you haven't heard about this yet, but according to this very interesting article there were three different studies done at different times that helped support the theory regarding the existence of a possible *gay gene*.

According to the author of the article, taking a closer look the methods used by the researchers in all of the studies calls the results into question.

This fact was acknowledged by the director of the first study, and the director of the second study. The third study's results could not be replicated by anyone other than the original researcher.

There were some other arguments made by the author of the article indicating that there may have been enough problems with the protocol of the studies to make the end results inconclusive.

Like everything else, information can be taken and skewed to fit the end result that is being looked for.

During my research on this subject, I found a quote in an article on this subject, written by a man who stated he was definitely on the far side of Albert Kinsey's sexual orientation scale, exclusively gay.

He said:



In poll after poll, of the one third of Americans who believe homosexuality is socially influenced, in other words "a choice," about 70 percent think being gay is "not acceptable." But for those who believe it is biologically mandated, the statistic reverses, and four out of five Americans find gayness "acceptable."


If the above is true, after all the page 1 fanfare that would have accompanied the announcement of the possible discovery of a *gay* gene, no one would be in any hurry to announce that the information used to come to that conclusion, was flawed.

And that's because, as the above poll information shows, not being able to help being gay, because of biology, garners more sympathy for the gay community, and is less threatening.

It makes the gay civil rights movement more comparable to the African American civil rights movement, since they can't help being that way, and can't change, (according to the *gay gene* theory) any more than a person can change their race.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
reply to post by LASTofTheV8s
 


One thing that Anti-gay rights seem to distort is that there is some sort of "homosexual agenda" or that all gay people are degenerate perverts trying to recruit your children. The fact of the matter is most gay people are pretty boring. I have a couple gay relatives, and when they come to visit they do not do anything crazy like perform S&M in front of children or tongue kiss at the dinner table.

While it is true there are a few gay people that may be into some crazy perverted stuff, there are some straight people out there that are into some crazy perverted stuff too. If anything, there is a "heterosexual agenda" to turn gay people straight. It is virtually unheard of for anybody to be pressured into being gay, yet there are plenty of societal pressures compelling gay people to act straight. Families disown gay relatives, gay people face workplace discrimination, and there are even camps which claim to convert gays into straights.
I agree with you one hundred percent!
The problem is, that the Gay Community also has it's share of politicians, malcontents, angry personalities, militants, etc. These individuals do their very best to make sure that the Gay Community is scared, angry, hostile and feels a need for change. Even if there is no need for change.

Until a Minority Group becomes a Majority Group, it never sees any reason for change within itself. Every quirk, negative aspect, harmful trait and legitimate stereotype is either considered off-limits to ridicule due to intolerance, or a product of them being harmed and twisted by the Majority.

Only once a group become a Majority, do they have the correct mix of guilt, security, power and bargaining options, for them to actually make some changes, and take account of their actions.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by sezsue
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


I think the jury may still be out on whether or not the *gay gene* really exists.



And this is not helped by the presence of so many people who seem to be uncertain, are dabblers, have mental disorders, or, these days, due to so much unneeded exposure to the lifestyle, young people that are looking into the lifestyle for all the wrong reasons.

Personally, for the most part, as I have stated, I believe it is nothing more than a sexual preference, in terms of acts, fetish, details of attraction, etc.

It should hold no more weight than the sexual habits of a heterosexual.

And, for the record, I would be just as upset if I found out that heteros were handing out leaflets to school children concerning memberships, or ties with groups that celebrate certain types of heterosexual acts.

Or, if my town had a parade for a group of straight people that were celebrating Oral Sex! Or, if men who love morbidly obese women tried to force the understanding and details of their lifestyle on people that want nothing to do with it, and don't feel the need for their children to get educated in the lifestyle.

I can go on and on.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by rcwj1975

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Procreation is not the end all, be all of human existence.


Really..lol...ummm..soooo...to NOT procreate means human life will somehow continue?


Explanation: IMO I believe that hotpinkurinalmint's POV on their use of the word "human" in the term they used in that sentence [RE: "human existence"], may have been from the POV of a single human being! Where as IMO I believe that your POV on their use of the word "human" in the term they used in that sentence [RE: "human existence"], may have been from the POV of the whole of human kind!
:shk:

Personal Disclosure: I as a human being don't have to worry about anybodies life except my own and Human kind can be damned for all I care! Personally I DO care, but I posted the above to make a point OK!

P.S. Sorry to interject, but I can't stand arguments over what I see to be just slightly misconstrued understandings.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   
People still don't get it. Homophobia does not exist because people have a problem accepting that another person has sex with somebody of the same sex. It does not exist because religion says it is evil and should be shunned. It does not exist because those who hate homosexuals are closet homosexuals themselves who cannot face the truth.

Even most people in this thread have come out and stated boldly that they dislike the public exposure and glorification of homosexuality in the media, not people that are gay. If you want to be gay and have sex with another man, have fun and I hope you are happy. If I want my wife to poke me in the neck with an umbrella while I choke myself and sing the Happy Days theme backwards, then I can do that in private. (Purely hypothetical constructs of somebody with a broad imagination, but the point still stands).

Your sexuality does not matter to me unless you make it matter to me. If you parade half-naked waving signs "gay and proud" in the middle of the day when families are around, you are making your sexuality matter. If you push for taxpayers to fund tax benefits for same-sex couples when their relationship cannot produce offspring, you are making your sexuality matter. When you want to change the definition of a word that has existed for centuries because a small amount of the population want you to, your sexuality will matter. If you stimulate sexual acts with another male on an influential channel such as MTV where a large chunk of the audience are children, you are making your sexuality come under scrutiny.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
People still don't get it. Homophobia does not exist because people have a problem accepting that another person has sex with somebody of the same sex. It does not exist because religion says it is evil and should be shunned. It does not exist because those who hate homosexuals are closet homosexuals themselves who cannot face the truth.

Even most people in this thread have come out and stated boldly that they dislike the public exposure and glorification of homosexuality in the media, not people that are gay. If you want to be gay and have sex with another man, have fun and I hope you are happy. If I want my wife to poke me in the neck with an umbrella while I choke myself and sing the Happy Days theme backwards, then I can do that in private. (Purely hypothetical constructs of somebody with a broad imagination, but the point still stands).

Your sexuality does not matter to me unless you make it matter to me. If you parade half-naked waving signs "gay and proud" in the middle of the day when families are around, you are making your sexuality matter. If you push for taxpayers to fund tax benefits for same-sex couples when their relationship cannot produce offspring, you are making your sexuality matter. When you want to change the definition of a word that has existed for centuries because a small amount of the population want you to, your sexuality will matter. If you stimulate sexual acts with another male on an influential channel such as MTV where a large chunk of the audience are children, you are making your sexuality come under scrutiny.
Bingo!
'nuff said.




top topics



 
9
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join