Should Homosexuals Recieve A Tax Deduction?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Wiglaf


To most people, sex with another guy is considered as disgusting as it gets.

Billions of women and millions of men would disagree. Perhaps you're just going by your own success rate?

Homosexuals do not reproduce.

Oscar Wilde did.

[-=Vagrant=-]

Originally posted by MrFun



The ignorance and hatred from Wiggy, SociableMartian, and Boddington are becoming too much for even me to handle. I need to put them on the Ignore feature.

What does anyone else think -- is it better to put them on ignore now??

I won't put them on ignore, because I enjoy their obvious lack of intelligence combined with strong opinions without any reasoning.
Of course they will disagree with this, but they always do. Unfortunately they have the right to be ingorant. If some one doesn't counter their bullspit, some one might think that they have a point. Stupidity spreads like a disease.
P.S. Mr Fun what happened to Tom of Finland?:

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Flag waving is just sooooooooo last autumn.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by -=Vagrant=-

P.S. Mr Fun what happened to Tom of Finland?:

I decided to show my support for Israel in the wake of the frequent and higher number of suicide bombings. I will display their flag as my avatar for a week or so.

Then I will go back to my traditional avatar.

[SociableMartian]

Originally posted by Guynemer
I give that login another two days, tops.

Ha, I've done nothing wrong and I'm not a DL. If you can prove me wrong then I'll leave but I passed Ecthelion's 3 hour mark, I'll be here a lot longer than 2 days

[Clear Skies]

Originally posted by Wiglaf


To most people, sex with another guy is considered as disgusting as it gets.

Do we get one of your celebrated Fox links to prove this one?

[Logical Realist]

Wiglaf after reading these posts it is clear to me that you haven't the slightest inkling of how evolution works or relates to politics and morality.

First off, the Darwinian process has almost nothing in common with it. Darwin even said that natural selection and evolution do not constitute some sort of supernatural moral order, so scratch that little unwarranted leap.

Also, though, even if we were going by a completely Darwinian pov, you're wrong.Reasons?

1) There is no end directed "purpose" in the Darwinian sense. The closest you can come to "purpose" is "Utility Function", organisms don't evolve to do anything except help with the survival of and spread: genes. They don't do this because some higher moral order demands that they do but because the ones that do spread genes, just happen to stay around. And even if this counted as a "purpose" it doesn't stand to reason, even given that weird definition, that purpose= "reproduction" but instead DNA survival, of which, reporduction is only a key element...sometimes.

For example with ants,wasps,termite etc....the sterile workers are unable to reproduce, hence in your view they are "malfunctions" and "failures". But not in the "view" of what is truly selected by Darwinian evolution...the gene. Despite the fact that the workers do not reporduce they do help preserve the genes they carry in themeselves and latter reproduced by the queen. From an individual point of view, this makes no sense, since the workers seem to be getting the short end of the deal. But from the viewpoint of the genes, it makes perfect sense, as their non-mating helps the genes live on anyways(through the queen and latter colonies).

So sometimes an organism can thus still follow their Darwinian purpose without necessarily reproducing and you are wrong to say that "reproduction" is the purpose of life according to evolutionary theory.

2) Even if that is true, that homosexuality is a dead end on the Darwinian process, (and you seem to say this, yet deny it at the same time by saying it's continuing and "spreading", meaning it must be having some sort of success) so what? The process is not the "goal" of the organism necessarily nor should it be the organisms standard of good. Organisms, do not intentionally go out to spread their genes, they goout to satisfy their desires.Their desires just so happen to be very conductive to gene spreading and preserving.

This means that we, as organisms, don't necessarily have to give two cents about preserving genes, since the act of "preserving genes" might not necessarily factor into our value system. All that factors in is the instincts that were unintentionally(from the organisms pov) good at spreading genes. This hence makes your leap from "evolution" to "human standards and political policy" again unwarranted.

3) Even if our reproduction was the highest good derived from Darwin's principles.....why the hell would we want to give gays a tax cut?

That would only either A) Cost us(straight people like me) money or B) Make us have less money for government programs that could benefit us. Why would we want to give money to non-competitors, to make them fitter opponents?

If you were going to use misinformation, I'd expect you to at least be consistent in applying your principles.

[Wiglaf]

There is NO justice in comparing homosexuals and bisexuals to pedophiles and murderers.

Umm..nobody did. His point was that anyone can be happy with his behavior, but that definitely doesn't make it right...

They were loaded with offensive, ignorant remarks

Oh christ...Believe me - whenever you call me or SM or anyone here a homophobe, you obviously don't know what you're saying. A real homophobe would've done faaar worse. There would be no debate. Trust me, I've seen some real hate out there.

If you really - honestly - believe I'm a homophobe, I don't know what to tell you. Crawl out from under that rock, or something. This is an ultra-civil conversation that has not once resulted in threats or name calling (***, queer, etc) until of course you go and yell "gay hater" at the top of your lungs.

Grow up. If you think any negative discussion about homosexuality is homophobic behavior, you obviously don't know what a homophobe is. And quite frankly you're starting to get on my nerves with that "stop hurting my feelings" crap that has no basis. Again - grow some balls. It'll help you a LOT when someone "picks on you" IRL.

Giancarlo essentially called me gay three times in this thread. Did I constantly break down, MrFun? Even if I went out of my way to make overly offensive remarks, you should just a) ignore me b) report me c) shrug it off. Simple as that.

(and you seem to say this, yet deny it at the same time by saying it's continuing and "spreading", meaning it must be having some sort of success)

Lots of negative traits spread...

why the hell would we want to give gays a tax cut?

This thread has always assumed that the obese deserve one as well.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Umm..nobody did. His point was that anyone can be happy with his behavior, but that definitely doesn't make it right...

Oh christ...Believe me - whenever you call me or SM or anyone here a homophobe, you obviously don't know what you're saying. A real homophobe would've done faaar worse. There would be no debate. Trust me, I've seen some real hate out there.

If you really - honestly - believe I'm a homophobe, I don't know what to tell you. Crawl out from under that rock, or something. This is an ultra-civil conversation that has not once resulted in threats or name calling (***, queer, etc) until of course you go and yell "gay hater" at the top of your lungs.

Grow up. If you think any negative discussion about homosexuality is homophobic behavior, you obviously don't know what a homophobe is. And quite frankly you're starting to get on my nerves with that "stop hurting my feelings" crap that has no basis. Again - grow some balls. It'll help you a LOT when someone "picks on you" IRL.

Giancarlo essentially called me gay three times in this thread. Did I constantly break down, MrFun? Even if I went out of my way to make overly offensive remarks, you should just a) ignore me b) report me c) shrug it off. Simple as that.

Lots of negative traits spread...

This thread has always assumed that the obese deserve one as well.

Wiggy, you just do not know how the real world works --- you constantly deny the legitimacy of love between people just because they are of the same gender.

You're an ultra-conservative. So that means you're an extremist. Any extremist on any end of the spectrum will express hatred towards a certain group of people. So you're hate-filled and ignorant rantings make much more sense on why you're ranting like that.

You're arguing this way about homosexuals and yet claim not to hate homosexuals.

And let me tell you something else -- I definitely know what a homophobic is. You can definitely be homophobic without being violent, and still be hateful.

That's like a white person arguing for segregation or a law against interracial marriages, and saying that he is NOT a racist.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by MrFun


Wiggy, you just do not know how the real world works --- you constantly deny the legitimacy of love between people just because they are of the same gender.

You know I get the impression Wiglaf never really had someone he loved... he never experienced that with all of his so called girlfriends, that is if he ever had any.

You're an ultra-conservative. So that means you're an extremist. Any extremist on any end of the spectrum will express hatred towards a certain group of people. So you're hate-filled and ignorant rantings make much more sense on why you're ranting like that.

Wait a minute... don't misuse the word conservative, because I am conservative (infact I am far-right in economic views). Wiggy is best to be called a fascist.

And let me tell you something else -- I definitely know what a homophobic is. You can definitely be homophobic without being violent, and still be hateful.

Wiggy fits that.

You see wiggy, even I, someone with far right-wing economic and center-right wing social views, disprove of your hatred. Even people on the right-wing side, don't approve of how you treat gays verbally.

[Wiglaf]

That's like a white person arguing for segregation or a law against interracial marriages, and saying that he is NOT a racist.

No it's not. Unless you consider homosexuality to be a positive trait for the species, regardless of how it reduces your will to reproduce, I'm simply stating the truth and presenting an obvious (perhaps too obvious) yet new point of view. If you happen to consider homosexuality positive, then I'm just mistaken..but I sure as hell would like to know how it could ever be positive. Hate never enters the equation either way, buddy. Loosen up/grow them balls. It'll help a LLOOOOTTTT later.

So you're hate-filled and ignorant rantings make much more sense on why you're ranting like that.

Alright, whatever. Keep on sounding the "Everbody hates me cause I'm gay" horn. I no longer give a crap as it has no meaning. For the record though, if someone ever really does go after you IRL, God help you.

[Wiglaf]

You're arguing this way about homosexuals and yet claim not to hate homosexuals.

I most certainly am disgusted by their behavior. But that's got nothing to do with hate.

Again, I hope you're never actually introduced to someone who really does hate homosexuals...

[MrFun]

I'm hoping that I can discipline myself in having this be my last post on this thread.

For the last time --- you do not have to be violent to hate homosexuals. I understand the psychology of homophobia and hatred -- you do not seem to understand.

Wiggy, you can continue using your rantings to try to dehumanize homosexuals and to legitimize discrimination against us, but I am thankful you won't get very far with your ignorant, hate-motivated rantings.

I am hopefully done with this pathetic thread now.

[Wiglaf]

So you can't give me a reason why homosexuality is a positive trait? What a shame.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
So you can't give me a reason why homosexuality is a positive trait? What a shame.

Who gives you a right to judge others?