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.

 

The Flaw In Your Logic Regarding Homosexuality

page: 13
19
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by yourignoranceisbliss

Originally posted by HairlessApe
I'm writing this short-but-sweet thread in reaction to a comment made by another ATS'er on the thread titled "Why being Gay IS a Natural thing"

The comment was this:




Rape, murder, theft, cannibalism--all naturally occurring also.


Now, as someone who's mental faculties run at acceptable levels, I simply laughed this off at first. Surely the average person couldn't hold such a blatantly bigoted and underthought position on the subject. But then I got to thinking - what if someone else sees this foolishness and begins to think it's a legitimate claim?

I'm sure, if confronted, this ATSer, as well as ANY person who thinks in such a logically-flawed manner would argue something along the lines of "I wasn't saying homosexuality is comparable to murder, rape, or cannibalism. I was just saying they're both naturally occuring." But clearly they ARE drawing that ridiculous comparison. If they weren't, they would have no reason to say something so incredibly inflammatory.

In short, I only need ONE sentence to defeat your logic. But for comedic value, I'll add a second.

"Heterosexuality is naturally occuring - just like rape, murder, theft, and cannibalism. I'm not saying heterosexuality and these atrocious acts which don't involve two consenting adults are comparable, I'm just comparing them for absolutely no reason."

Think before you speak... Or write, for that matter.



I find it absolutely incredible that I have posts deleted for arguing the illogical nature of homosexuality's claim that they are "born this way", while Moderators allow a clearly liberal-pushed agenda like this thread to go ahead and condescend anyone who does not agree with them.

At what point does the attempt to stay politically correct, turn into censorship, bias, and oppression of opinion, the very things the Moderators here believe they are defending homosexuals from?

Disturbing trend ATS Mods. I hope the Admins are taking note, unless they are in fact the ones promoting this ideology of squashing dissent in the name of Gay Rights, the question of which now becomes "what rights are they really missing now?".

It's no longer a mission for gay rights, but a quest to impress upon us that homosexuality is a normalcy.

Will we now no longer be able to express our opinions that heterosexuality is normal? How far reaching has the censorship gone here?
edit on 2-7-2013 by yourignoranceisbliss because: (no reason given)


My posts were the first in the thread to be removed by mods. And most people here seem to agree with you. My guess is they delete your posts because they're inflammatory and rude.

Before freaking out about liberal agendas, maybe you should read the thread.

I've never met a single member of the LGBT community who argued that heterosexuality isn't normal. And only a complete loon would try to make that arguement. But the fact is - they both exist abundantly throughout the animal kingdom. They are both natural and the only way you're going to argue that is by insinuating that what animals in the wild do isn't natural.

"Normal" is a subjective term.
edit on 2-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorChaos
I find it hilarious that practically every thread on this site eventually has to devolve into Christian bashing.

No, hilarious isn't the right term; it's quite pathetic, to be honest.


There was... What, maybe one comment on this thread which was "Christian Bashing?"

Christians bash gays all the time, I think you should probably expect it when coming into this kind of thread. And even if you're a Christian and are perfectly accepting of gays, you're still part of an organization which actively tries to belittle them. You can be Islamic and respect women, too. But Islam as a whole is still responsible for oppressing women, and therefore if you're part of the religion you must accept partial responsibility for your peers.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok.

Yip It is ridiculous, so why is a super moderator adding to it?
You feed the monster it gets bigger, the thread came from an OP first claim was animals hump and based on animals humping it follows that man's homosexuality is natural. The next thread by this OP was just on a comment from the thread as some member countered the OP by using his same lack of logic and reasoning but he found it offensive. Clearly the OP is upset.

Moderation means moderation.
Why tell us of another person's(your brothers) sexual preferences you say
"Nothing MADE him that way."
"Nothing INFLUENCED him"
So you come on the thread as a moderator to claim that your homosexual brother was not effected by nurture and life experiences that influence most human beings.
Maybe you should've let him speak of his experience that he alone was a homosexual baby and as a baby ( toddler and child) was not nurtured or influenced by anything or anyone.









edit on 2-7-2013 by BDBinc because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2013 by BDBinc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by BDBinc
 


Yes. Some children are LGBT the moment they begin having sexual thoughts.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by BDBinc

Originally posted by Gazrok.

Yip It is ridiculous, so why is a super moderator adding to it?
You feed the monster it gets bigger, the thread came from an OP first claim was animals hump and based on animals humping it follows that man's homosexuality is natural. The next thread by this OP was just on a comment from the thread as some member countered the OP by using his same lack of logic and reasoning but he found it offensive. Clearly the OP is upset.

Moderation means moderation.
Why tell us of another person's(your brothers) sexual preferences you say
"Nothing MADE him that way."
"Nothing INFLUENCED him"
So you come on the thread as a moderator to claim that your homosexual brother was not effected by nurture and life experiences that influence most human beings.
Maybe you should've let him speak of his experience that he alone was a homosexual baby and as a baby ( toddler and child) was not nurtured or influenced by anything or anyone.

edit on 2-7-2013 by BDBinc because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2013 by BDBinc because: (no reason given)
You're mistaken here. Gazrok is a moderator, but he is participating in this thread as a poster, so his status as a mod has absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

A nice deflection, though.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by BDBinc

Originally posted by Gazrok.

Yip It is ridiculous, so why is a super moderator adding to it?
You feed the monster it gets bigger, the thread came from an OP first claim was animals hump and based on animals humping it follows that man's homosexuality is natural. The next thread by this OP was just on a comment from the thread as some member countered the OP by using his same lack of logic and reasoning but he found it offensive. Clearly the OP is upset.

Moderation means moderation.
Why tell us of another person's(your brothers) sexual preferences you say
"Nothing MADE him that way."
"Nothing INFLUENCED him"
So you come on the thread as a moderator to claim that your homosexual brother was not effected by nurture and life experiences that influence most human beings.
Maybe you should've let him speak of his experience that he alone was a homosexual baby and as a baby ( toddler and child) was not nurtured or influenced by anything or anyone.

edit on 2-7-2013 by BDBinc because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2013 by BDBinc because: (no reason given)
You're mistaken here. Gazrok is a moderator, but he is participating in this thread as a poster, so his status as a mod has absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

A nice deflection, though.


I personally thought it was a piss-poor deflection that lacks a coherent point or arguement.
But I'm pretty sure you were being sarcastic anyways.




posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BDBinc
 



have you not seen the posts in all these threads from people stating that they KNEW from an EARLY age that they were DIFFERENT, some knew they were attracted to the same sex, some knew they were different but figured it out when they reached puberty.....are you calling them liars? well you are by your statements...


edit on 2-7-2013 by research100 because: indented



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by research100
reply to post by BDBinc
 



have you not seen the posts in all these threads from people stating that they KNEW from an EARLY age that they were DIFFERENT, some knew they were attracted to the same sex, some knew they were different but figured it out when they reached puberty.....are you calling them liars? well you are by your statements...


edit on 2-7-2013 by research100 because: indented


Don't take it personally, research. Those are simply the words of someone who's never taken the time to truly consider things and look at the evidence.

Having an opinion despite being ignorant about the subject is part of the human condition. Albeit an unfortunate condition.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by research100
PHEDOPHILES have a sexual preference for CHILDREN, you are missing the POINT...GAYS are ADULTS who are attracted to other ADULTS of the same sex...get a clue.. the 2 are 2 totally different things


edit on 2-7-2013 by research100 because: (no reason given)


I dont know what a phedophile is. But yes a paedophile has a sexual preference for children.. so you agree with me.

I didnt realise gays only became gay the day they reached the age of consent for whichever country they live in.

In the context of sexual preference of an adult human being they are exactly the same thing....
heterosexuality, homosexuality, paedophilia, bestiality they all come under the context of sexual preference.
As long as people want to have sex with animals its their sexual preference, if people want to have sex with kids its their sexual preference, if they want to have sex with the opposite sex its SEXUAL PREFERENCE, and if they do you see a pattern here?

so please in your own words..."get a clue"
and explain what point im missing.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   
so I made a spelling error.... and.that was the most important first thing you had to say about my post!!!!!!
edit on 2-7-2013 by research100 because: added a word



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 






Whilst I do like to see people enjoying themselves and flirting in a light manner ... I too feel

uncomfortable when any couple, whatever sexual orientation they are behave

in a blatantly overtly sexual manner in public .... my thoughts are 'get a room for god's sake.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by research100
 


Excellent research100, you are right again mate.. I totally also find offensive how these absurd people keep comparing healthy, adult, gay community people to twisted pedophile assaulters . The gay community has nothing to do with pedophiles!!


Also, a very good point that many individuals do make these obscene comments at length about the gay community as though it was responsible for the moral woes of the u.s.a. That is absurd as well. The "abomination" is the log size "splinter and thorn" in the eyes of the gay bashers, scorners and mockers. I agree with you 100% that moderators should remove comments that are thus blatantly derogatory to the gay community and it's members.

edit on 2-7-2013 by tony9802 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2013 by tony9802 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by eletheia
reply to post by AQuestion
 


Whilst I do like to see people enjoying themselves and flirting in a light manner ... I too feel

uncomfortable when any couple, whatever sexual orientation they are behave

in a blatantly overtly sexual manner in public .... my thoughts are 'get a room for god's sake.


This is probably the most valid argument I've seen thus far. I agree with you - people should keep their intimacy to themselves. However, if a straight couple has the right to display affection in public then a gay couple should have the same right.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by tony9802
reply to post by research100
 


Excellent, you are right again mate.. I totally also find offensive how these absurd people keep comparing healthy, adult, gay community people to twisted pedophile assaulters . The gay community has nothing to do with the pedophiles!!


Also, a very good point that many individuals do make these obscene comments at length about the gay community as though it was responsible for the moral woes of the u.s.a. That is absurd as well. The "abomination" is the log size "splinter and thorn" in the eyes of the gay bashers, scorners and mockers. I agree with you 100% that moderators should remove comments that are thus blatantly derogatory to the gay community and it's members.


edit on 2-7-2013 by tony9802 because: (no reason given)


I actually think it's rather telling when someone makes the statement...
"If a couple is allowed to be homosexual, then we also need to allow beastiality and pedophilia."
What kind of sane person would say something like that?
Perhaps a sane person who's considered either of the above.


edit on 2-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by ProfessorChaos
I find it hilarious that practically every thread on this site eventually has to devolve into Christian bashing.

No, hilarious isn't the right term; it's quite pathetic, to be honest.


There was... What, maybe one comment on this thread which was "Christian Bashing?"

Christians bash gays all the time, I think you should probably expect it when coming into this kind of thread. And even if you're a Christian and are perfectly accepting of gays, you're still part of an organization which actively tries to belittle them. You can be Islamic and respect women, too. But Islam as a whole is still responsible for oppressing women, and therefore if you're part of the religion you must accept partial responsibility for your peers.


You just made an extremely generalizing and incorrect comment. Being a Christian by no means enters you into any 'organization' whatsoever. That is a flat-out ignorant thing to say.

You need to stop painting with such a broad brush if you want others to do the same for you.

***EDIT*** By the way, whether or not this particular thread had devolved to bashing or not, my statement regarding this site and a great many of the threads that it contains, is true.
edit on 7/2/2013 by ProfessorChaos because: added content



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
In Europe, same sex attraction and intimate expression is much more widely seen and accepted.
Strange how in the U.S.A. is has to be such a problem. Even heterosexual men embrace and kiss each other, and people think nothing of it.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfessorChaos

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by ProfessorChaos
I find it hilarious that practically every thread on this site eventually has to devolve into Christian bashing.

No, hilarious isn't the right term; it's quite pathetic, to be honest.


There was... What, maybe one comment on this thread which was "Christian Bashing?"

Christians bash gays all the time, I think you should probably expect it when coming into this kind of thread. And even if you're a Christian and are perfectly accepting of gays, you're still part of an organization which actively tries to belittle them. You can be Islamic and respect women, too. But Islam as a whole is still responsible for oppressing women, and therefore if you're part of the religion you must accept partial responsibility for your peers.


You just made an extremely generalizing and incorrect comment. Being a Christian by no means enters you into any 'organization' whatsoever. That is a flat-out ignorant thing to say.

You need to stop painting with such a broad brush if you want others to do the same for you.


If the paritioners give tithe, they support whatever bigotry their respective church accepts.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not true. Just because you put a blindfold on while being an accessory to a crime doesn't mean you're no longer an accessory to the crime.

I.E.: If you're a Catholic you have three choices...

1. Accept the fact that the organization you give money to uses that money to send missionaries to Africa, who then tell their paritioners who have AIDs that they don't need condoms because god will protect them. (This happens very frequently)

2. Leave the Church, even if you're still a believer, because the Church leaders are obviously corrupt and immoral.

3. Live in denial about it - or remain purposely ignorant to it.

Sure, a handful of churches are completely tolerant, but the majority are not.

Furthermore; The fact that people disagree with what you stand for does not mean they're bashing or oppressing you. They have the right to disagree with you.
edit on 2-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
The moderator should have known better and no baby is homosexual so no one is born homosexual.
No human being is immune from influences, most people cannot remember every experience since birth to even make such claims.
Just because a poster used the same lack of logic and reasoning there was no need to keep on with the same errors.
It is a just sexual preference (that you form a separate community on) is that like polygamy & other abnormal sexual preferences. A sexual preference community, LBGT, that have separated themselves from others telling everyone we are different from you. .

Just because animals hump it does not follow from this that homosexuality is natural for man.



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 





You must know something that I am unaware of ?
I wasn't aware there was a law

against gay's displaying affection ... But like I said blatant overtly sexual behaviour by

any couple of whatever sexual orientation in public is plain rude and offensive



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by tony9802
 


Also,

Heterosexuality: attraction to opposite sex.
Homosexuality: attraction to same sex.

Pedophilia: Criminal behavior against non consenting minors. Not about mutual sexual preference!
Bestiality: attraction to animals?


You keep proposing that all of these sexual expressions are somehow the same thing when they entirely certainly are not. The last two are about monsters. Pedophiles are criminals period. Nothing to do with healthy adult sexuality. Bestiality, while I personally never touch the subject, bestiality is probably a last resort action by some people who either cannot find someone to love and mate with, or they are bored with standard sexual expression towards other human beings, and thereby chose to entertain animals.

Next thing you know there will be "digitality" or" robo-sex" where human beings are entirely replaced as sexual participant and instead we have people simulating sexual expression with machines.

Are you going to entertain that as a "sexual preference" option as well?
This is totally foolish. The point is though, that it would be great if you would stop associating homosexuality with criminal deviant behavior such as paedophilia and even bestiality. I'm not sure that the latter is actually even legal either. It's offensive, and it indicates that you are unable to associate homosexuality with healthy adult consensual sexual conduct and behavior.




edit on 2-7-2013 by tony9802 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join