Why is homosexuality "wrong"

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
Just because you don't believe it doesn't make it any less valid. You may not believe that there are numbers, but there are. You might believe that there are numbers, but that 2+2=5. You would be wrong. I "comprende", but I think that you are wrong.

I also think that just about everyone who claims to be a Christian today is really a disgrace to true Christians, myself included. But God is merciful, no?

It's just buggered-up neurochemistry that makes you think it is all so real, re: my Nietzsche quote. Things that seem real are only given that feeling by the brain. Sometimes things get a little messed up, especially when certain areas are a little overstimulated...

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by loinburger
(Well, maybe Gianfez, but he doesn't count.)

Ahhhh....that's who Fez is!

All becomes clear!

[Dimorier Maximus]

Originally posted by Asher

It certainly does when you're debating something. When you're arguing with someone who doesn't share the same faith as you, using an argument based on your faith goes nowhere and you might as well just stay out of the whole thing.

I know you are right about that.

You might believe that homosexuality is a sin, and you would be wrong.

See why it's stupid to have baseless arguments?

What is an argument with a base? I think everything is baseless. You really can't prove anything. That is why I argue no matter what is said. Because no amount of evidence can prove or disprove anything.

If God was merciful why would he create people such as yourself?

Just to screw with you on earth so that your punishment isn't as harsh in the afterlife.

[Dimorier Maximus]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison

It's just buggered-up neurochemistry that makes you think it is all so real, re: my Nietzsche quote. Things that seem real are only given that feeling by the brain. Sometimes things get a little messed up, especially when certain areas are a little overstimulated...

Yes, but who or what caused that chemistry, Prov? Oh, that's right, you think it just happened --- Ocham's Razor. You worship Ocham's Razor.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
What is an argument with a base? I think everything is baseless. You really can't prove anything. That is why I argue no matter what is said. Because no amount of evidence can prove or disprove anything.

Well, that's not entirely true, but in spirit I guess it is.

Which is why you should take the approach of letting people do whatever they want behind closed doors, and it's not consensual, and passing laws to prohibit this based on nothing but your own personal beliefs is overstepping your boundaries.

Nobody is hurt by it, yet you still insist on making it legal to ban it because YOU don't want to do it.

See, my argument has a basis of that of tolerance. It can't be something that can be proven, but it is pretty obvious that if everyone was tolerant the whole world would be a better place.

Yours is based on your own personal faith, oblivious to the fact that not everyone has the same faith and moral code, and not everyone wants to be forced to live under yours.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
Yes, but who or what caused that chemistry, Prov? Oh, that's right, you think it just happened --- Ocham's Razor. You worship Ocham's Razor.

And who created God to create the world? Oh, that's right, he just EXISTS IN ANOTHER DIMENSION. Let's not get into that.

And I see you live your life according to Pascal's Wager anyway.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by moominparatrooper

What I object to are PDIs (indecency, if you please): serious petting, nudity, gross sexual innuendo and french kissin' - again regardless of what kind of couple we're talking about. And homos win that contest hands down, almost entirely due to the the parades.

I disagree, and here's why: All three of the above behaviors I have seen manifested in the heterosexual community far more than the gay community. Hell, I see hetero couples french kissing all the time, whether it be in the park, on the subway, at the movies, etc. You're caught up with the parades as the standard of gay behavior, and they simply aren't. And keep in mind we're not just talking about a minority behavior, we're talking about a minority of a minority here. Despite your blanket (and fallacious) assertion, even overall participation in the parades is by a minority of gays, not a majority.

I mean public events staged by acknowledged representatives of a group with massive participation of said group and without serious dissent within said group. Gay parades fit this bill - whereas the KKK, for instance, does not even come close to represent all whites as a group in this respect.

So your logic is that if, within the realm of those public events, that unsanctioned acts of which you disapprove take place (and in fact actions that are explicitly disapproved of by the organizers), then it's still rational to judge the entire group based upon that?

The rather inept exemples you brought up (Jerry et al) fail to impress for the same reason.

I dunno, the more I read your writings, the more appropro I believe the association is.

Then you'll just have to make peace with the thought that people will inevitably draw conclusions about all of those participating in these events from what they see.

What most people see are the most extreme images broadcast by sensationalist media or given by antigays with agendas. Anyone who has attended a parade can't tell me honestly that even more than 2% of the participants engaged in the PDIs you described above. Most are dressed in shorts and t-shirts and marching behind banners (or in their Police/Fireman/EMT uniforms). You're drawing the conclusions wrong, which you keep admitting and then blithely not recognizing is wrong conclusion. It's baffling.

And given how the high extent these parades represent the gay movement at large, these infavourable impressions will certianly taint the image of all gays.

And how high is that extent, really? You are seeing what you want to see in them, which is that you want to see the "disgusting" things so it reaffirms your beliefs.

Oh, come on. You're already drawing the line somewhere. I bet you don't think a "catholic gay priests who like to fondle little boys" float would make it, no matter how much tolerance you're out to display and no matter how much society regards that as abnormal. And this even if they made nothing more shocking than holding up banners proclaming thier believes.

Sure, because such behavior is ILLEGAL and doesn't involve consenting adults. Or are you are comparing a guy kissing a guy in public to child molesting? Come on, don't be that dense. This is slippery-slope rationalism.

Quite. Now apply your own reasoning above to my argumentation in this thread and see where it leads you.

Here's the big difference, sparky: Mine applies to only one individual, yours is stereotyping a group. See the difference yet?

And you still studiously ignored the fact that much of the lewd behavior you so decry is, itself, not condoned by the parade organizers. What more do you want? Have people with batons beat such folks should they do those things during the parade?

I've already given you a fair rationale of when I think it's not only possible but reasonable to apply stereotypes above. My conditions were a heck more stringent than this floppy ***-fot-tat attempt.

It is not only not fair, it is not rational. A stereotype is a stereotype and is inherently irrational. It is indeed akin to saying all Blacks are bad because I can show you some who are in prison for murder, rape, drug dealing, etc. Your rationale is KKK rationale.

Actually, much as I'm sure this astounds you, I expect everyone to actively denonunce the cranks and extremists in their ranks, not only gays.

Too bad, that's a pretty pathetic way to live...constantly making apologies for people who aren't you. I think herein is a major problem with the moral conservative mindset. Just mind yourself and don't worry about what other folks do. People who judge you on the acts of others aren't wise, and they sure aren't worth your time.

That's your opinion. Out in the big world where you can't attempt to cover up your shortcomings by throwing PC accusations of ignorance and bigotry around, it's a long-established tenet that all communication is happens by the terms set up by the recipient or not at all. However unfair this seems to gay activists and direct marketeers, if you have a message beyond "nya-nya, I can show my pope and you can do nothing about it!" you'll have to dress your message up to suit the audience.

Would that be true if the message was "We shouldn't have to dress/act/be like you to be deserving of the same rights and priviledges?" Regardless, this actually isn't true. I will point you to the Civil Rights movement, Women's suffrage, etc. as examples.

Oh, and the message isn't "nya-nya..." That's just your own stupid interpretation of it based on seeing what you want to see, not really looking. Especially since most parade participants are marching for issues of vital social importance, such as AIDS awareness, ending legal descriminations, etc. And they are all dressed just normally. But you don't care about that so long as you can point your finger at the ones who disgust you and say "See? It's all about that!"

I'm certainly not equating these. The guy walking down 5th Ave. is displaying tastlessness and a monomanical disregard for others, and those marching with him display a severe lack of tact and so much as a shred of clue to what serves their interest

I don't think it will ever be in the best interests of gays to show such hypocrisy as to denounce the guy by saying "you're making us look bad!" That's exactly the kind of thinking the gay rights movement is opposed to, as it has been used to marginalize gays for decades.

So, Boris, you want to shake me up, make me re-evaluate my bigoted ways and make me take gay issues more seriously? Here's a tip: next time you join a parade, make sure it's a parade where you all wear three-piece suits, eat ice-cream, play cool music and have a good time without looking like a bunch of inmates escaped from a 1920s freak show. Honest to god, I'd be more astounded than any amount of butt flaps would ever accomplish.

First, I don't march in parades (which puts me with the majority of gays). Second, you're still making a fallacious argument, and now I have to conclude it's a deliberate lie on your part. You use your stereotype here (which you admit is such) to make a cheap shot point. And it's cheap because, as had said ad infinitum, most participants in the parades are dressed normally and behaving normally. You choose not to see that because you have your own agenda of "righteous indignation" that you just don't want challenged. Well, perhaps you're beyond hope, but I only hope you can wake up and see how silly you're being on this issue.

You either accept people on their individual merits or you don't, and doing the latter is foolish. If you're happy being a fool, that's your choice...

[Christantine The Great]

Originally posted by orange


Laser talking religion...it's meant to be a spectator sport, people. Just sit back and be entertained

I'm pretty sickened by it myself. Enough to block him, infact. May as well post it here since he won't see me at CGN.

EDIT: Nevermind, aparently I can't since he's a mod...I'll just enjoy the show, I suppose.

[Dimorier Maximus]

Originally posted by Asher

Well, that's not entirely true, but in spirit I guess it is.

Which is why you should take the approach of letting people do whatever they want behind closed doors, and it's not consensual, and passing laws to prohibit this based on nothing but your own personal beliefs is overstepping your boundaries.

I guess if people want to kill each other, I shouldn't stop them. I mean, I don't want to kill people, but someone might want to. So I don't want to make them angry. I should give them the pleasure of being able to kill people.

Nobody is hurt by it, yet you still insist on making it legal to ban it because YOU don't want to do it.

No one is really hurt by murder. Everyone dies anyways. What will it matter if they die today, or 50 years from now?

See, my argument has a basis of that of tolerance. It can't be something that can be proven, but it is pretty obvious that if everyone was tolerant the whole world would be a better place.

In the days of Noah, every man did as he pleased (killing, stealing, sodomy), and God became angry with them and sent a flood. Tolerance isn't the new fangled thing it's made out to be. It has been around a looooooonnnnggggg time, and it isn't necessarily a good virtue. It is more based on carelessness and selfishness than anything else. I'm preaching to myself here too.

Yours is based on your own personal faith, oblivious to the fact that not everyone has the same faith and moral code, and not everyone wants to be forced to live under yours.

I know not everyone has the same faith and moral code, but that doesn't stop us from enforcing laws about murder. I'm sure some murderers disagree with those laws, but do we listen to them? No. So why should we listen to homosexuals?

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
Yes, but who or what caused that chemistry, Prov? Oh, that's right, you think it just happened --- Ocham's Razor. You worship Ocham's Razor.

You do the worshipping, not me. I look for rational explanations, and believe me, your religion does not offer it. Why must the 'chemistry' be created? Can you not get your mind around the concept of evolution? Or are you just not willing in case it shows your faith for the sham it is?

My conscience is clear here...I know that my worldview is well thought out and reasoned. Is your house in order?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
I guess if people want to kill each other, I shouldn't stop them. I mean, I don't want to kill people, but someone might want to. So I don't want to make them angry. I should give them the pleasure of being able to kill people.

Horrible example, this infringes on the rights to security of others. Try again.

No one is really hurt by murder. Everyone dies anyways. What will it matter if they die today, or 50 years from now?

Is that really the best you can do? Pathetic...

In the days of Noah, every man did as he pleased (killing, stealing, sodomy), and God became angry with them and sent a flood. Tolerance isn't the new fangled thing it's made out to be. It has been around a looooooonnnnggggg time, and it isn't necessarily a good virtue. It is more based on carelessness and selfishness than anything else. I'm preaching to myself here too.

Tolerance is based on carelessness and selfishness? My God man, has anyone ever threatened to lock you up?

I know not everyone has the same faith and moral code, but that doesn't stop us from enforcing laws about murder. I'm sure some murderers disagree with those laws, but do we listen to them? No. So why should we listen to homosexuals?

Murders infringe on the right to life of others, homosexuals do no such thing.

It should be fairly obvious to even you by now that there's zero logic or reasoning behind your argument, you're going for outrageous comparisons that aren't even close to being applicable -- and that's all you have.

[Provost Harrison]

No one is really hurt by murder. Everyone dies anyways. What will it matter if they die today, or 50 years from now?

Homosexuality involves two consenting people having fun and enjoying each other. Murder is certainly not such a symbiosis, after all, it involves one person taking the life of another, the ultimate violation, against their will. We see where your 'morals' take you...where mhomosexuality is on the same plane as murder For those of us who don't consider there to be a life after death, life becomes all that precious, and can't be just flippantly dismissed like you have just done.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

You know, I'm not bothered in the slightest by any homosexual act. Whatever they happen to put things in really doesn't worry me in the slightest. I feel no distaste.....

...with one sole exception. The thought of another man's scrotum gently rubbing against my own causes me to shudder slightly and make a "Brrrrrr...." noise. I've absolutely no idea why.

Anyway, back to the freakshow. This thread has already added some new names on my arsehole list, so it gets five stars from me.

[Giancarlo]

This is still going on?

Don't you see the bast*rd won't change his mind. He is living three hundred years in the past.

[Dimorier Maximus]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison

You do the worshipping, not me. I look for rational explanations, and believe me, your religion does not offer it. Why must the 'chemistry' be created? Can you not get your mind around the concept of evolution? Or are you just not willing in case it shows your faith for the sham it is?

My conscience is clear here...I know that my worldview is well thought out and reasoned. Is your house in order?

My house isn't in order because I believe that it takes a God to save a man. A man cannot save himself. It's not a sham, it's just the truth.