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.

 

Why The Unfair & Unbalanced Political Correctness Regarding Homosexuality?

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Say if I, for some reason, disapprove of any and all people who sleep in the nude, because I think it is "disgusting" or something like that, should all of those people who sleep in the buff be shunned, made to feel like dirty outcasts, should they immediately stop sleeping in the nude because I don't think it's right? You know, they'll raise children, and they may "brainwash" those children into thinking sleeping in the nude is a-ok, and THEN, those naughty children may come in contact with my pure, angelic offspring who know to wear pajamas when they nap, and their naughty naked napping propaganda may corrupt my little ones!

Therefore, all who sleep in the nude should not be able to raise children. They shouldn't vote either.. you know, they'll vote for politicians who may push for the acceptance of sleeping in the nude! Destroying the very values our country was founded on! You know, because I think it's dirty.. Think of the sheets!

What people do in the privacy of their own home is their own business. I'm sure there are plenty of things Heterosexuals do in the privacy of their own home that many, many others would consider degenerate. And I am another completely straight person, who finds "gay sex" very unattractive, but I believe homosexuals should be able to "pursue happiness" in their own way.




posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brood
Anyways, just a logical hiccup here I'm sure.


I think I'm in love... But, alas...

Great post!


reply to post by Syyth007
 


Ugh! The Nudies! I think I'll start an anti-Nudie thread. They're always pushing the Nudie agenda!


GREAT POSTS!



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If it was like not liking sweet potatoes, I could understand that. I mean I don't like sweet potatoes, but I don't think people should stop growing them, advertising them, selling them or eating them. And I don't think they should keep their love of sweet potatoes to themselves... I don't think sweet potatoes should be displayed in the dark corner at the store or be treated any differently than the other vegetables. It doesn't affect me, so shy should I care? I don't. I even buy and handle and cook them, because my husband likes them.


I agree with your sentiments, and ideally everyone would view sexualities and sexual activities between consenting adults in the same way as they would view different kinds of food.

However, I think that this analogy is slightly off the mark, because it is ignoring what an important factor sex and sexuality is amongst humans and human society, as a whole.

We wouldn't be around today if our ancestors over the last few million years weren't constantly preoccupied with sex.



Whether we like it or not, someone's sexuality changes the whole dynamic of our interactions with that person and our general attitudes towards them, in a way that their culinary tastes don't.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I want to understand. I see something that puzzles me in a lot of people and I an curious and want to know... I have a curious mind. But every time I ask, I can't get to the bottom of it.


Couldn't you take exactly the same comment as you have posted above, and apply it to someone's reasons for wanting to discuss homosexuality ?


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Well, just to let you know, when I'm watching a show and I see two men start to have sex, I'm not crazy about it. It makes me kind of ill. Is that the kind of 'disagreement' you mean? I mean, I disagree with certain people, too, but I don't think they should have fewer rights or 'keep their life to themselves' and I don't think that the fact that they have CHOSEN their lifestyle means that they should not enjoy the same rights and privileges the rest of us have. Yeah, I disagree with what they're doing, but what's it to me? See what I mean?


I'm not attempting to justify the views of people who are anti-homosexual/homophobes.

I am just surmising some reasons that may explain some people's views.

From my personal observations, I believe that the majority of antipathy towards gay people comes down to repulsion at the sexual acts between gay men ( although the same people who hold these views don't seem to mind sexual acts between lesbians
).


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I find the act of two men having sex repulsive. I can't watch it. Fortunately, I don't have to. And neither does anyone else. And still, I am a passionate pro-equal-rights advocate. How do we explain this? It's NONE of my business what they do in their bedroom and if I can't stop thinking about it then that says something about me. See where I'm going with this? They're people and deserve the same protection under the law as any other citizen in this country. It doesn't matter if they've chosen their sexuality or were born into it. They're PEOPLE.


I completely agree with you.

Without wishing to be too graphic, it's not sex between gay men that I find a little disgusting, it's any sexual activity that involves the, shall we say, ''back entrance'' that I'm really not particularly enamoured with.

Like I said earlier:

Nobody is forcing me to participate in any sexual act that I dislike, and there's no reason why I need to even think about it.

Consequently, I neither partake in nor think about any activity that makes me feel a little queasy !


It's of absolutely no concern to me if other consenting adults choose to take part in activities that I find personally distasteful.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And here are my questions to you (and to the OP if he's brave enough to enter a mature discussion about it)...

If you find homosexuality unacceptable to your personal taste, so what?
Does that mean that they should NOT have the same treatment under secular law that everyone else does?
And does whether or not they CHOSE their sexuality matter?
Why?

Let's take another segment of society so we can compare:

Do you find obese women unacceptable to your personal taste?
Does that mean that they should NOT have the same treatment under secular law that everyone else does?
And does whether or not they CHOSE to be fat matter?
Why?


Those questions are irrelevant to me, as I am not concerned whether someone is homosexual or not.

I'm also not bothered whether someone holds anti-homosexual thoughts. Someone's personal beliefs are as inconsequential to me as their sexual preferences are.

I believe in equal rights. I get irritated when the concept of equal rights gets broken down into racial rights, gender rights, gay rights etc.

We should be striving towards equality for all, and not be getting caught up with any individual sub-category's cause.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brood
And your thinking stems from what evidence and research? Sounds pretty preconclusive. Is it just ad hominem?


My thinking stems from logic, personal observations, and an understanding of human nature.

I have no doubts that some gay men in a laddish, macho environment become overtly anti-homosexual in an attempt to disguise their true sexuality.

This is an internet message board, though.

Do you really think that anti-homosexual feelings aren't largely borne out of ignorance, intolerance and fear ?
Surely you don't believe that every homophobe is a ''closet case'' ?


The reason that these ''accusations'' are usually an ad hominem, is because the person making the claim doesn't genuinely believe that the person is a ''closet case'', instead they are attempting to ridicule their opponent by making an unverifiable and unfalsifiable claim.


Originally posted by Brood
No, they believe everything George Bush says because the idiot box told them to.


I think you're missing the point ( or perhaps you are reinforcing it ).

Are people who dislike Islam, secretly Muslim ?
Or are they just intolerant, ignorant and fearful of something that is different ?

I'd suggest the latter.

Now why would you think that someone who is anti-homosexual is a ''closet case'', rather than just being ignorant and fearful of people who are different ?


I object to this ad hominem, purely from a debating point of view.


Originally posted by Brood
Anyways, lets me get your statement straight (awful pun intended)...


Pun appreciated. But in the same vein, I don't know where you got the idea that I was objecting to having homosexual sex shoved down my throat...



Originally posted by Brood
You think we should take it easy on anti-homosexuals and homophobes because they are human beings and should be respected regardless of what choices or tendencies they have that negatively impact other people's lives against their will?


Please quote any comments where I said or implied this.


Originally posted by Brood
And what about the people that are human beings and should be respected regardless of what choices or tendencies they have that don't negatively impact other people's lives against their will?


Please quote any comments where I have suggested that someone shouldn't be treated with respect because of any natural tendencies that they may have.


Originally posted by Brood
They should be subject to badgering from the former because the former were "born that way
(born uneducated)"?


Please quote any comment where I implied that anybody ''should be subject to badgering'' from anybody else.


Originally posted by Brood
No. anti-homosexuality, homophobia -- these are not conditions that cannot be changed. They are children of ignorance. Saying "I don't agree with 'the gays' because of their agenda" is like saying "I don't agree with Asians because Yoko Ono wears weird glasses".


Please quote any comment where I said ''I don't agree with 'the gays'''.

Or are you just paraphrasing through prejudice ?


Originally posted by Brood
Asking "Why do you care?" is NOT ad hominem


Please quote any comment where I implied that asking ''why do you care ?'' was an ad hominem.


Originally posted by Brood
Anyways, just a logical hiccup here I'm sure.


The only ''logical hiccup'' is your ability to lie and make up comments and viewpoints that were never made.

Your subsequent hysterical rantings can't be classified as illogical, but borderline psychotic.


Originally posted by Brood
Nothing to cover up. People can just simply be this illogically inclined to support standpoints that have been informed they were wrong thousands of times... yet they zealously regurgitate it over and over and over again.


What are you babbling about ?

Do you actually understand what you're trying to say ?

Subjective viewpoints can not be ''logical'' or ''illogical'', because they are... er... subjective.

Nobody can be ''wrong'' or ''right''.


Seriously. Get a grip, man.





edit on 22-11-2010 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
I agree with your sentiments, and ideally everyone would view sexualities and sexual activities between consenting adults in the same way as they would view different kinds of food.

However, I think that this analogy is slightly off the mark, because it is ignoring what an important factor sex and sexuality is amongst humans and human society, as a whole.


I don't see why the importance of sex (in some people's lives) would make any difference. My sexuality doesn't impact you at all. Does it? YOUR sex life is important to you, but is mine? I hope not.



Whether we like it or not, someone's sexuality changes the whole dynamic of our interactions with that person and our general attitudes towards them, in a way that their culinary tastes don't.


Speak for yourself. My attitudes don't change according to someone's sexuality. Not do my interactions.



Couldn't you take exactly the same comment as you have posted above, and apply it to someone's reasons for wanting to discuss homosexuality ?


Yes, absolutely! If I had known that's what the OP was trying to do, I would have HAPPILY obliged. I actually like talking about it.




We should be striving towards equality for all, and not be getting caught up with any individual sub-category's cause.


Agreed completely!


Too bad the OP disappeared. We're having a good, mature discussion, which is what he said he wanted. Oh, well, nice talking with you, Sherlock.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I don't see why the importance of sex (in some people's lives) would make any difference. My sexuality doesn't impact you at all. Does it? YOUR sex life is important to you, but is mine? I hope not.


Someone else's sexuality becomes a relevant factor when you have any kind of a relationship with them.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Speak for yourself. My attitudes don't change according to someone's sexuality. Not do my interactions.


Are you absolutely sure about that ?

When I meet a man, my interactions with him are platonic. If I find out that he's gay, then that opens up the possibility that he might fancy me.
The dynamic of our acquaintance suddenly changes.

If I find out that an attractive woman is a lesbian, then that makes her out of bounds, and alters the interactions that I would have with her.

A lot of conversation between males is filled with heterosexual banter and throwaway comments about sex.
These comments usually cease when you are in the company of a gay man, as it may make him feel uncomfortable ( especially if he's not ''out'' ).

Those are just some ways that interactions change according to someone's sexuality.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Someone else's sexuality becomes a relevant factor when you have any kind of a relationship with them.


Again, please speak for yourself. My friendships with gay people are no different than my friendships with straight people. I don't know why you think this is an issue. How is a friend who's gay different than a friend who's straight? I'm not understanding this.



When I meet a man, my interactions with him are platonic. If I find out that he's gay, then that opens up the possibility that he might fancy me.
The dynamic of our acquaintance suddenly changes.

If I find out that an attractive woman is a lesbian, then that makes her out of bounds, and alters the interactions that I would have with her.


I see. At least you're speaking for yourself. Appreciate it.
I'm married, so my relationships with other people don't change because I discover their sexuality. If they fancy me, I'm still straight and married, so it's not an option. And they know that.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Do you really think that anti-homosexual feelings aren't largely borne out of ignorance, intolerance and fear ?
Surely you don't believe that every homophobe is a ''closet case'' ?


Um when did I ever say I thought that? I just said that constantly bringing it up and talking about the same thing over and over again and continue to get defensive when the question is all of the sudden on your own sexual desires rather than someone else's. Rather, it's "off-topic" when the sexual desires discussed become about the anti-homosexual/homophobe. I'm supposed to ignore this for what.... PC!?
. It's the PC agenda!
.


The reason that these ''accusations'' are usually an ad hominem, is because the person making the claim doesn't genuinely believe that the person is a ''closet case'', instead they are attempting to ridicule their opponent by making an unverifiable and unfalsifiable claim.


I understand what you're saying; people like to throw out the "No, you!" card all of the time. But I'm not about to believe that someone who is so militantly defensive about their sexual desires -- internet forum or not -- has nothing to hide about them. I also fail to see any other reason for someone to argue that homosexuality is a choice unless they feel like they chose to be heterosexual by suppressing some of their own homosexual desires. Perhaps you could provide some other possible motive?



I think you're missing the point ( or perhaps you are reinforcing it ).

Are people who dislike Islam, secretly Muslim ?
Or are they just intolerant, ignorant and fearful of something that is different ?


Yes, and there would be no motivation to have such fear and ignorance if it hadn't been played up so much in the media to support military propaganda. I think you're missing my point, people don't just militantly do things out of ignorance and fear for kicks. There's usually a hidden motive somewhere.

But I guess it's just ad hominem because that's the label you like?




Please quote any comments where I said or implied this.


Click your menu and go to view posts in thread. Writing off this suppression as natural, reoccurring behavior that people are prone to doing -- seemed like you were supporting it to me...



Originally posted by Brood
No. anti-homosexuality, homophobia -- these are not conditions that cannot be changed. They are children of ignorance. Saying "I don't agree with 'the gays' because of their agenda" is like saying "I don't agree with Asians because Yoko Ono wears weird glasses".


Please quote any comment where I said ''I don't agree with 'the gays'''.


And where did I say that you did? Put this sextion back in context and read it again then tell me what in God's name it has to do with you



Or are you just paraphrasing through prejudice ?


If there's one thing people know about me, it's that I'm an uber-prejudiced hate machine
.


Originally posted by Brood
Asking "Why do you care?" is NOT ad hominem


Please quote any comment where I implied that asking ''why do you care ?'' was an ad hominem.

Again, not talking about you. Talking about the OP.


Originally posted by Brood
Anyways, just a logical hiccup here I'm sure.


The only ''logical hiccup'' is your ability to lie and make up comments and viewpoints that were never made.

Or maybe it's your inability to disect other people's writing before going off on tangents..


Your subsequent hysterical rantings can't be classified as illogical, but borderline psychotic.


Likewise...



Originally posted by Brood
Nothing to cover up. People can just simply be this illogically inclined to support standpoints that have been informed they were wrong thousands of times... yet they zealously regurgitate it over and over and over again.


What are you babbling about ?

Do you actually understand what you're trying to say ?


And since you don't understand it I guess it's ad hominem, too?
. Or maybe just psychotic.


Subjective viewpoints can not be ''logical'' or ''illogical'', because they are... er... subjective.

Nobody can be ''wrong'' or ''right''.


The problem exists in acknowledging something as subjective when there is a solid factual centerpoint that the entire side that has a lifetime of experience with it will support, while the others just seek to reserve an opinion against it for whatever "ad hominem" argument they have to bring to the table.


Seriously. Get a grip, man.


I'm not the one getting emotional here
.

edit on 23-11-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Wow, we still can't stay on topic I see
Well maybe I should make another thread then...
Oh but then people will say "OMG ANOTHER ONE"
and then the thread will get derailed again, then i'll have to make another one again
why because some people are obsessed with this topic?
No because some people try too hard to derail a thread, that's why.

It's you guys who create this cyclical never ending one. vs. the other

The first post on this page someone gave an example of people sleeping in the nude
I guarantee you one thing, nobody in that thread would say "why do you care how people sleep"
Or if someone makes a thread regarding nude beaches, no one will say "why do you care how people relax or swim?"

No, only this topic does every try to make it taboo with "why do you care" or "what's it to you"
every thread on this topic is flooded with such responses, nobody on a given side of the fence is able to just talk about it and I believe this is very proprietary to this topic alone

and then people will say well what do you expect when people keep talking about it
well... of course they do, some of you never let the conversation go anywhere... what do you expect?
For the topic to magically close itself?



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Wow, we still can't stay on topic I see


I thought we were doing pretty good!




The first post on this page someone gave an example of people sleeping in the nude
I guarantee you one thing, nobody in that thread would say "why do you care how people sleep"
Or if someone makes a thread regarding nude beaches, no one will say "why do you care how people relax or swim?"


If someone made a thread AGAINST sleeping in the nude or nude beaches, complete with moral judgments, then you bet your bottom people would ask, "Why do you care"? Yes they would.

And before you say that your threads aren't "against" homosexuality. yes, they are! I've read them. You try to appear to be open-minded about it, but your feelings are clear. And there's nothing wrong with that. But if you start a thread against something that people see as perfectly natural and innocent, you're going to get some pretty pointed posts in reply.



nobody on a given side of the fence is able to just talk about it and I believe this is very proprietary to this topic alone


I object! Sherlock Holmes and I were having a lovely and mature discussion. Why you think it's off topic, I have no idea.



some of you never let the conversation go anywhere...


Hold on there, College. Individual posters on this board have no power to "not let it go anywhere". The conversation is free to go where it wants and where you steer it, but you cannot fully control it.

You ask a question, but it's a faulty question. You seem to have the idea that speaking about homosexuality is somehow taboo. And you ask us why that is.... Well, it isn't! How are we supposed to answer that? There are literally hundreds of threads on ATS about various aspects of homosexuality! Where do you get the idea that that's taboo?

I still don't even know what you're really trying to find out. You tell me to read the OP again, which I have done 10 times and I have answered the best I can and you accuse me of being off-topic? Hello!?
edit on 11/23/2010 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If someone made a thread AGAINST sleeping in the nude or nude beaches, complete with moral judgments, then you bet your bottom people would ask, "Why do you care"? Yes they would.

No they wouldn't, make a thread in a few weeks and check for yourself
Secondly i've read enough social issues threads and saw nothing of the sort


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And before you say that your threads aren't "against" homosexuality. yes, they are! I've read them. You try to appear to be open-minded about it, but your feelings are clear. And there's nothing wrong with that.

Tell me exactly how you are not Ass-U-Meing?
How they appear to you is nothing but perception on a topic where you do not agree with me on
That's all that it is
Are you saying it's impossible for someone like me to exist? Someone who is not religious but is strongly against 3rd trimester abortion?
Or someone who is an agnostic, believes in freedom for ALL, but would like to discuss social issues without being pulled into the quick sand of political correctness?


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But if you start a thread against something that people see as perfectly natural and innocent, you're going to get some pretty pointed posts in reply.

Those pointed posts are nothing but ad hominems and derailings
Nothing spectacular about those posts i'm sorry


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I object! Sherlock Holmes and I were having a lovely and mature discussion. Why you think it's off topic, I have no idea.

You weren't the only one resonding to him my friend
And initially in the beggining of the thread you were trying to derail it
Since then you are not I do agree on that


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Hold on there, College. Individual posters on this board have no power to "not let it go anywhere". The conversation is free to go where it wants and where you steer it, but you cannot fully control it.

I've seen too many threads that flowed easily and everyone stayed on topic to agree with you there


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You ask a question, but it's a faulty question. You seem to have the idea that speaking about homosexuality is somehow taboo.

Speaking about homosexuality is not taboo
A large number of posters do try to make it so however
I never said it is taboo, I said too many try to make it taboo


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And you ask us why that is.... Well, it isn't! How are we supposed to answer that? There are literally hundreds of threads on ATS about various aspects of homosexuality! Where do you get the idea that that's taboo?

And until people stay on topic and actually discuss the topic with maturity there will be hundreds more
Instead too many are "Hurry, throw gasoline on the fire to put it out"


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I still don't even know what you're really trying to find out. You tell me to read the OP again, which I have done 10 times and I have answered the best I can and you accuse me of being off-topic? Hello!?

No I said you were off-topic
Now me saying off-topic again is not specifically directed towards you



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   
To be honest, I wonder the same thing. I posted a thread yesterday on an alternative hypothesis on homosexuality www.abovetopsecret.com... in which I merely presented an alternative theory, without judgement or without condemnation nor criticism and received a fair amount of responses such as the OP mentioned, including one from a forum administrator.

I thought my theory worthy of discussion, nothing more, but the politically correct crew pounced on it with vitriol and disdain.

FYI, I am a heterosexual who lives with 2 gay guys and we have a fabulous relationship, so there can be no screams of discrimination etc. All my posts in my thread are judgement free.

Have a look for yourselves and if your care to flag and star and even comment I'll be your friend, ok?

edit on 23-11-2010 by sceptical me because: I do not like being told what to do. So if I must fill this out, this is my response.

edit on 23-11-2010 by sceptical me because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by sceptical me
 


Star man, i'm going to check out that thread

You know it's similar to decriminalization of a certain green product that people smoke
I often say "let's decriminalize it, it's people choice to smoke" and then many respond like:
"Oh you are probably just saying that because you smoke it too"

Exactly same generalization, that does nothing but create frustration with people that only want to discuss a given topic, though that accusation is much less in quantity than in this topic though.

And what do people think?
That our society will be more open to the other side of the fence through frustration on simply wanting to discuss a topic?

I don't get that logic, therefore to me there is no logic in that
logic is not intended perhaps

It's just a tactic, though their intentions may be good their tatics will forever be counter-productive!



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
reply to post by sceptical me
 


Star man, i'm going to check out that thread

You know it's similar to decriminalization of a certain green product that people smoke
I often say "let's decriminalize it, it's people choice to smoke" and then many respond like:
"Oh you are probably just saying that because you smoke it too"

Exactly same generalization, that does nothing but create frustration with people that only want to discuss a given topic, though that accusation is much less in quantity than in this topic though.

And what do people think?
That our society will be more open to the other side of the fence through frustration on simply wanting to discuss a topic?

I don't get that logic, therefore to me there is no logic in that
logic is not intended perhaps

It's just a tactic, though their intentions may be good their tatics will forever be counter-productive!


I understand what you are talking about man, but remember that the green of which you speak has been the target of assassination since the 1930s. Unfortunately the sheep accept what they have been told while viscious drugs such as alcohol, which is far more damaging, have been allowed to remain freely available to the sheep that swallow all that the media and their bosses have been feeding us for decades, nay centuries. It's just that the means of transmission have improved over the centuries so that we are fed a diet of bland political bullsh*t since the electronic age.

But this topic is not about the green, it is about the politically correct attitude that has been rammed down our throats in the last 30 or 40 years. I am not politically correct. I cannot call a spade a long handled earth turning implement. It is a goddamn spade. Who cares if spade can have other connotations? It does not change the fact that the spade is a goddamn spade!



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 07:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Look, This is public forum. If you write a thread, you're going to get ALL sorts of responses. Some will agree with you, some will not. Some will understand your position, some will not. Some will be mature about it, some will not. As long as they comply with the T&C, and stay on topic, they are permitted. That goes for ALL threads on ALL subjects.

Crying about it isn't going to change that. Get a thick skin and either ignore the responses you don't like or enter into a discussion with them. You're coming off (to me) like a big baby, throwing a tantrum because people don't post the way you want them to.

As far as homosexuality being a 'special topic' that people are trying to shut down to make taboo, perhaps some people are, but some people do that with just about ANY topic. You can deny that if you wish, but you are mistaken. More likely, they just disagree with your stance and you apparently just hate that. Too bad.

You're basically asking why SOME ATS members respond to anti-homosexuality threads in a defensive manner (I think). The truth is that 99% of the threads here will have SOME people replying in agreement and others replying in disagreement. It doesn't mean that anyone is trying to shut down the topic. That's ridiculous.

I would love to have a mature discussion with you, but it seems to be impossible at this point. I have asked you several times to re-phrase your concern so we can start fresh and you refuse, telling me to read a very confusing OP again. I have tried VERY hard to address your concern and you just get nasty with me.

I got nothin' else. I don't need this. There are plenty of other threads about homosexuality I can respond in if I desire. Take care.



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Again, please speak for yourself. My friendships with gay people are no different than my friendships with straight people. I don't know why you think this is an issue. How is a friend who's gay different than a friend who's straight? I'm not understanding this.


No, the bond of friendship doesn't change, it's just the dynamics of that friendship that are different.

Amongst heterosexuals, a male-male friendship is different to a male-female friendship, because in the latter there's the potential for sexual tension and either friend developing feelings that are more than platonic towards the other.

Having a friend that falls for you puts a great strain on the relationship and in the case of a homosexual-heterosexual friendship, any feelings developed are always going to be unrequited.

These are considerations that have to be taken into account, and as we choose friends whose personalities we find attractive and compatible, it's naive to think that there won't be some sexual chemistry in many friendships.

This is what I mean by someone's sexuality Affecting the dynamics of the friendship, in a way that their culinary tastes don't.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If they fancy me, I'm still straight and married, so it's not an option. And they know that.


This scenario doesn't come into play with heterosexual friends of the same gender, so it doesn't need to be taken into consideration.

There is no potential for the friendship to be jeopardised on these grounds, and you do not have to be alert to the possibility of it occurring.

In the case of a heterosexual friend of the opposite gender or a homosexual friend of the same gender, then this is always a possibility, and you have to be aware of this possibility so as to spare their feelings if they do develop unrequited feelings towards you.



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Sorry did you return to your own thread to answer zero of the questions directed at you as usual?

I wonder why you have no credibility in these threads you keep creating..



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   


Or someone who is an agnostic, believes in freedom for ALL, but would like to discuss social issues without being pulled into the quick sand of political correctness?


I'm really sick of you calling everyone PC brainwashees. You're the one refusing to talk about things here, not anyone else.



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by sceptical me
But this topic is not about the green, it is about the politically correct attitude that has been rammed down our throats in the last 30 or 40 years. I am not politically correct. I cannot call a spade a long handled earth turning implement. It is a goddamn spade. Who cares if spade can have other connotations? It does not change the fact that the spade is a goddamn spade!


The people who buy this "PC is the enemy" garbage are just as mentally weak as people who think it does no harm. Like pretty much all problems, the only simplicity found surrounding the subject is in the people that think it can have such black and white solutions as eliminating them entirely.

Unfortunately, the OP is the most politically correct here. Everyone else has engaged in some sort of discussion concerning themselves and their own feelings and desires... except the OP who gets all PC-defensive when it become about his own emotions and desires. And pointing this out to him will quickly get you labeled as a PC brainwashee. Oh, the irony.



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by sceptical me
To be honest, I wonder the same thing. I posted a thread yesterday on an alternative hypothesis on homosexuality www.abovetopsecret.com... in which I merely presented an alternative theory, without judgement or without condemnation nor criticism and received a fair amount of responses such as the OP mentioned, including one from a forum administrator.


I encourage everyone to go to the link in this post and laugh with me at the valid arguments based on hard facts that are now labeled "PC nonsense" by the self-proclaimed "free minds".
edit on 24-11-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join