It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Accepting homosexuality in our communities. ( POll )

page: 9
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:31 AM
reply to post by Sigismundus

Uhh... Yeah they problably are homophobic just like me because of the bad experiences with them... They are homophobic due to the severity the find in homosexuals, they find it disgusting and in-human, like a bunch of animals.... Humans got a mind for a reason, to be able to comprehend and make the right decisions, not wrong, not disgusting and lifeless decisions that are selfish and see themselves as normal. It disgusts me when I see two men kissing to see how far we got, but how in-human and uncivilised we got living in a civilized community... Irratifies me with this orientation that should have never taken place, actually making us think that being gay is ok? Thats just gratifyingly wrong and an act of no justice to humanity...

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:27 AM

Originally posted by Daniyal
reply to post by Sigismundus

They are homophobic due to the severity the find in homosexuals, they find it disgusting and in-human, like a bunch of animals.... Humans got a mind for a reason, to be able to comprehend and make the right decisions

see the funny thing about this, is that you say people should think and comprehend things around them and be sensible...and yet there isn't one rational argument in here illustrating the disgusting and in-humane nature of homosexuality outside of ridiculous links to pedophila and studies that are funded by conservative and fundamentalist think tanks. Quoting the bible is not rational thinking.

Saying homosexuality is wrong because it's icky isn't a rational argument. It's a laughable argument that makes me think you're more #ed up than any gay person you believe to be mentally disturbed.

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:35 AM
I think in the real world there is no such thing as gay rights. If you do not want to have hetero sex with females as a male, you can become a target for government and police.

Often the only reason police stop harressing males is if they are having sex with females. So what happens if your not interested in females, the police keep targeting you. Even if you have committed no crime, once they go after your life, and your not interested in females, they will wreck you forever.

I have seen this in life, as long as you are straight male you can do what you want, but if not you become a target for the mob. Especially if things are made up about you and your not interested in females, often the males only way to live his life is something he has no interest in, and society still goes after him.

There is no such thing really as gay rights.

The government does believe being gay is a choice, they really do.

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:15 AM
reply to post by Itachimaru

I understand where you coming from and I agree.
I am not convinced that it is set yet.

I am now. I was wrong.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by Sinter Klaas]

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:20 AM
reply to post by toochaos4u

That is actually a sad thing. I hope the people in Finland are more tolerant for you and your family.
If I may ask ? Where do you live now ?

I wish you the best of luck.

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:20 AM
who cares if a man is bttfkn another man?

we are a "species"...just like the bees and the trees and the fish in the ocean.

guess what it takes for our "species" to continue and evolve.......

more of our species.......

if you take a hundred gay men and put them on an island in the pacific ocean and come back in 200 years, what do you have?

a fkn can't procreate......

if you take a hundred gay women and put them on an island in the pacific and come back in 200 years what do you have?

a wonderful civilization................

think about it....


posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:24 AM
reply to post by andy1033


Where do you come from that they treat people that bad ?

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:26 AM
reply to post by theonlyrusty

You are talking about pregnant gay woman.

Or are they more like frogs and change sex to virtalise each other ?

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:31 AM
reply to post by ModernAcademia

I don't really understand your answer.

Did you mean to say that you only think gay people should not be allowed to adopt ?If so. What about gay woman getting pregnant.

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:48 AM
it's a proven fact sinster.......

been done in the past and will be done again...

we, as men, are as worthless as our sperm...women don't like it, it messes up the sheets and causes a "wet spot" after the greatest feeling in the world and is is obviously hard to get out of red dresses. I think it is a joke that was sent from god that we have to "work" so hard to please a woman...there is a message in there somewhere and I think it is called happiness....e.g. stimulation...pleasure....cli.........oh never mind...I know you understand that part..........

women are the reason men are here....think about a woman figures in her brain what she wants to come out of her vagina, it creates a certain kind of "plasm" that ejects later that projects her desire.

"a mothers love" has more meaning than most know..

hate your husband and have bad sex....guess what the child comes into life with.........

2+2 equals.............

well, that depends upon what the word "equals" means..........quote by

I have to quit typing now cause it has been almost 2 minutes since I have thought about having sex with a WOMAN and that is what the scientists tell me is the appropriate amount of time I can go before it becomes a problem....Look what happened to tiger woods thinking about putting all that time....his body told him he needed to procreate and do it on a massive scale...

would you like to see the text messages that me and tiger had back and forth?.............IAROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!

women rule and that is the ticket. get used to it.......not only do they "pull the strings"....they are the ones that "have" the strings........

go out and look at "every" woman (jennifer aniston and the big fat chick at chic ful layed) as the same thing..........they are YOUR reason for being here.

hell, if ya feel so good by that point, just impregnate them and we will star and flag you for keeping the species going...........

good luck to you ....get the number 1 at'll save ya .13


posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 11:08 AM
reply to post by theonlyrusty

I would like to see that proof and i Jennifer Aniston needs to be virtalised I'll be the first one to volunteer

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 03:16 PM
reply to post by theonlyrusty

Actually... If you take a army of homosexuals no matter what the size on to an island for 200 hundred years, you will find nothing... they'll all be dead cause they wont be able to reproduce... Thus restating my argument of how homosexuality is a threat to humanity... OUR race people....

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 03:26 PM
Ya know. It's amazing how people get up in arms over a non issue. On the average basis homosexuals don't affect the straights in any significant way.

I'm thinking that the whole gay issue is just a excuse to keep us arguing over something that isn't an issue. So that we keep busy and don't look at the real issues.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 06:44 PM
reply to post by Daniyal

A team of Italian researchers led by Andrea Camperio-Ciani had been working on solving the Darwinian paradox of homosexuality—that is, if being gay is hereditary, and gay people have fewer or no children, homosexuality should have vanished from the gene pool. In 2004, the team studied Italian families and found that the female relatives of gay men were more fertile than average women. After using a series of computer models to analyze that data, the scientists released a study this week saying that homosexuality in men is genetically connected to women who have high fertility. In their model, male homosexuality has to be governed by two genetic loci—particular fixed positions on a chromosome—and at least one locus and maybe both must be on the X chromosome, meaning it’s passed down from mother to child.

Are highly fertile women more likely to have gay sons?

Could be why a great deal of my family on my mother's side are gay men. (more so than usual). The women on that side are highly fertile in that they will have a lot of children unless on some sort of Birth Control. My grandmother for instance had 10 children. Her mother had 8. My cousins limited themselves by birth control except a few that do have large amounts of children.

The island scenario is just silly. One of my lesbian friends wanted a child so she had one of her gay male friends come over and with modern syringes she impregnated herself from his sperm. Procreation can happen without the sex. If the 200 were heterosexual I can guarantee you that some gay kids would pop out every so often even with no knowledge of what we know about gays.

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 06:52 PM
its already known that homosexuality is part enviromental and part genetic.

can it be 'fixed'?... scientifically speaking yes, but it is not a choice. i don't see it as a lifestyle, being the scientific community had to take it out of the books as a disorder only because of the large base of people who had a problem with it. but it is a genetic disorder; animals are meant to reproduce, being that homosexuality disconnects that need, it is a genetic mutation.

we are the only animal that doesn't need to reproduce to not be affected by 'survival of the fittest'...but that doesn't change the fact it isn't "correct".

i can understand why people who be confused about this topic. just remember jesus can't fix them.

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 07:29 PM
Hi Daniyal

I take it English is not your native language--- or are your really that uneducated?

I would normally respond to comments I have made on this threadlet, but yours are so inane and poorly expressed as to be almost laughable--if it weren't so sad.

I imagine you must be very young. Either way, you need to think through your arguments a little before you discuss adult subjects (such as homosexuality) about which (to judge from your jejune postings) you are clearly ill-informed about the facts of the matter.

Either way, if you manage to put two coherent thoughts together and make a sensible point or two, I would be more than happy to discuss this further and in much more detail.

Have you thought about taking a basic (human) sex-education class (and/or a basic English writing class or two) ? It might allow you to see (and actually understand) some of the raw data that scientists have been poring over for more than 100 years on this subject, which has clearly left you befuddled.

Just a thought.

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 07:35 PM
With all respect.....what are all these homo threads doing here at ATS?

Is it something alien maybe?

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 07:49 PM
reply to post by Sigismundus

Hey Mate.

First of all, you should not go off topic by speaking about my English, shows a level of not knowing what to say, so make an excuse that's ill-related to the topic of the subject, am I correct?

Also, my comments are not insane or any of what you stated.

Yes, I am young, 15 years of age, but age does not mean I am uneducated or stupid for that matter... Neither am I a fat troll behind a computer screen if that's what you think.

I am simply stating my opinion and why I think being homosexual is wrong. Also, all you people "for-gays" are saying its a choice, they should have equal right,etc, etc... But what benefits does someone being a homosexual give us? NO we don't increase in pride, we don't give other people a chance to be what they want as they eventually will become a threat and that will be the time when you agree with people like me and others and say "yeah, that guy was right and now it's to late"... You don't want to be a reason that they let in a bull# choice like being homosexual invade our society.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by Daniyal]

posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 08:34 PM

I figured as much - your reasoning (and syntax !) was that of a pubescent pre-adult whose knowledge of the 'real world' (let alone scientific literature) is (shall we say) naturally 'limited'.

Now, I have absolutely nothing against young people discussing grown up topics like homo-sexuality (as a rule) on these threads -- only when pre-adults like yourself try to 'act grown up' and pretend to be able to discuss adult matters that in this stage in your life is way beyond their 'real adults'--but betray your ignorance of the real world (and of human history, too--which, by the way is stuffed to the rafters with hundreds of thousands of homosexual geniuses of both genders who have contrubuted more than their fair share to the advancement of culture on this tiny, insignificant planet of ours).

So....perhaps we should be having a more (shall we say) 'mature discussion', say, in ten years time--when you've had a chance to move away from home and when you've had some higher education (well, we live in hope) and maybe live on your own for a while, and get to know a little about the way real human beings live and interact with each other.

Until then, maybe you should just read through some of the less jejune comments by some of the (shall we say) more mature contributors on this thread - who might even learn something--- besides gaining a little respect for your elders who have seen a little more of the world (and done alot more too !) than you have--a least yet.

You have a few years to catch up until then...

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8   >>

log in