For the homosexuals:

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Nikolai


While Christian countries have a history of discrimination of homosexuals, homosexuality are not a capital offence. In Islamic countries otoh, it is.

Not any more because we are more tolerant democracies, and dare I say it, more enlightened on the whole than to purely follow the doctrine of religion.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Nikolai
While Christian countries have a history of discrimination of homosexuals, homosexuality are not a capital offence. In Islamic countries otoh, it is.

Though it has been in the past. I think the primary lesson is that the "Islamic countries" need to get secularized.

[Ben Kenobi]

Not any more because we are more tolerant democracies, and dare I say it, more enlightened on the whole than to purely follow the doctrine of religion.

So if the Christian nations were to return to the old days we would have public executions of gay men and women out in the streets?

I'm sorry, the point I am trying to make is that Christianity has different beliefs on freedom to worship and all these curious 'liberal' ideas which were not present when all the nations were still under the draught of religion.

I think one of the reasons we have such strong democracies in the west is because of Christianity.

[Provost Harrison]

Nothing to do with the renaissance or enlightenment or the centuries of social, economic and technological development then?

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Though it has been in the past. I think the primary lesson is that the "Islamic countries" need to get secularized.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I think one of the reasons we have such strong democracies in the west is because of Christianity.

Sorry! The administrator has specified that users can only post one message every 30 seconds.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Cort Haus




Sorry! The administrator has specified that users can only post one message every 30 seconds.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

I think one of the reasons we have such strong democracies in the west is because of Christianity.

That post is funny, because religious-right Christians in United States have an agenda where they would like to increase government regulation and oppression of such private behavior as sexual acts between consenting adults. Their agenda is that of creating a theocratic, authoritarian government; not a democracy.

[Kuciwalker]

That made no sense. None of the things you mentioned are antidemocratic.

[SlowwHand]

Democrats are paranoids that want massive governments to keep watch on each other.

[SlowwHand]

I'm not even going ot get into a debate on the viewpoints an avowed Lincoln worshiper/Democrat advocate must have with such terrible mental and emotional struggle.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
That made no sense. None of the things you mentioned are antidemocratic.

There is nothing anti-democratic about a government that can invade your privacy on whim?

[Kuciwalker]

No.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by LordShiva
What was Ben's point with those three posts of his?

Partly a dig at me, I suspect (if I'm not being too immodest).

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Could you stop shining with self importance?

Are you on medication ?

If not, could you possibly be less patronising ?

Unless you're working on some kind of 'tu quoque' post-modern ironic critique, I'm finding your lecturing of me on my supposed superiority complex and patronising attitude quite ironic in itself.

Did you teach your Bubbeh to suck eggs too ?

It only makes you appear like you have less to back your words with.

Imagine my hurt at such a perceptive criticism. I may cry.

So EoN is evil. Let's throw rocks at him.

I don't need :

rocks

to

to back my words

thanks.

The gay intifada relies on irony, sarcasm and withering put downs.

They last longer, and get turned into questions on Hollywood in Trivial Pursuit, Oscar Wilde plays and films about Truman Capote.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that the fact that most advanced species on earth procreate using sexual contact between a male and a female, is merely an artificial norm, and not at all part of a biological evolutionary process.

Your ignorance is your problem- not thus far mine.

Which reproductive 'heterosexual' technique should be the paradigm or norm ?

Heterosexuals have harems of females for a single male- as do elephant seals and other mammals.

Some heterosexuals pair for life- as do some birds and mammals.

Some heterosexuals are promiscuous or 'unfaithful'- as are chimpanzees, monkeys, birds, et cetera.

Again, you're confusing the purely biological aspect of reproducing with artificially engendered 'norms' of behaviour in society.

It may shock you to discover that many gay men and lesbians can and do reproduce.

I was referring to the 30-40s in germany, and the 40s - 70s in Arabic countries, where Jews were persecuted, disowned of their property and often killed.

Yes, and I was referring to the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

Only in 1967 was homosexuality no longer deemed to be automatically 'illegal' in parts of the United Kingdom.

Even after the 1967 Act of Parliament, gay men were still not allowed to serve in the armed forces or Merchant Navy, and the Act did not apply to Scotland or Northern Ireland or the Isle of Man.

It was great growing up to feel that we weren't quite as equal as some of our fellow citizens.

And gender is not?

You're confusing gender and sexuality. Two different things.

I would have thought that my education and edification would be a very good reason for gay people to answer slightly uncomfortable questions, if that means I'll understand them better.

I think you overestimate your importance in the general scheme of things.

You know very well that this thread was not labeled "******s and ****s - come clean", .

And what do you think the thread's title and questions were like for gay and lesbian posters ?

but used mostly non-offending language

Exactly who made you the judge of how offensive the thread is to gays and lesbians ?

Heterosexuals don't need a reason to explain themselves too much, since they're following what has been common for most advanced species on earth.

Are you a qualified biologist ? If not, then I suggest you do some research on the existence of homosexuality amongst primates and non-primate species.

As one well-known homo put it:

Birds do it, bees do it
Even educated fleas do it

Overegging the pudding with the fleas, perhaps, but you get the drift.

Maybe if you would (explain), people would understand you more and hate you less. As simple as that.

Right. A calm rational explanation will undo centuries of hate and bigotry inculcated by the irrational and ignorant, the detestation enshrined in 'holy' scriptures or government edicts, cherry-picked for convenience.

I can't help thinking that antisemites would be so less prejudiced if only Jews had sat down and had a quiet chat about with them about the basis of their prejudice....

You're being all politically correct, instead of practical.

If that is what you think, then that is what people like you think.

Your answering of weird questions will only promote tolerance.

And the sun will rise in the west and up will be down and Muslims and Jews will settle their differences like good Christians.

Excuse me, I've spotted some pie in the sky...

The practical situation is that most heteros have no idea what is it like to be gay

That's easy- just get people to ask them ad nauseam questions about what it's like to be heterosexual.

Then discriminate against them on the grounds of their supposedly 'abnormal' sexuality, make spurious links between heterosexuality and various illnesses, and have groups of young gays and lesbians single out heterosexuals at random and beat and kill them.

That'll do for a start.

Well then take control of yourself and try to see my intent, instead of attacking me.

Who's zooming who ? Shall I remind YOU of YOUR first remarks to me in this thread ?

molly, as all-knowing as you appear/pretend to be, your posts are atrocious to read...

b) really annoying condescending attitude.

i think that lots of points have been made recently about civil discussion.

While you aren't as coarse as EoN (implying you're an idiot) some of your posts were the more annoying read.

Well thanks, Netiquette Nanny. If that's an example of how not to be patronising and condescending, then you seriously need to work on your English comprehension skills.

Funny how you blame me of being over sensitive and then go on to make a scene about a small remark I made about your posting style.

Funny how you have a short and selective memory. It must be a help in discussions like this- that, and placing other people's quotes out of sequence.

I'm not 'making a scene'- perhaps you imagine gays do that sort of thing habitually.

I'm just having a little fun at your expense, is all.

If you continue acting like a pompous jerk, no one will stop you.

Whilst I appreciate your passinng on advice which by now I feel you must have heard with some frequency, it's really not necessary.

The most I can do is repeat why I think your attitude sucks.

So no falafels then ?

You this does not, however, entitle you to be utterly dismissive of anything anyone posts, which you happen to hold an opinion about.

So what is the entitlement necessary ? A Sirotnikov level of omniscience ?

Because it shows people that gay people are normal, and that they are not 'freaks' but rather a very prevalent minority

How odd, that the same person can also come out with this bit of misunderstanding:

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that the fact that most advanced species on earth procreate using sexual contact between a male and a female, is merely an artificial norm,

That's folks for you.

Are you defensive because of anti-gay media in muslim countries?

Yes, I'm constantly worried about the bad press we get in Saudi Arabia.

I think that you are wrong to relate to the issue in the same way that you would have 20 years ago.

I think you are wrong to think this, because I'm not doing so.

And being asked about your sexuality, and having a chance to explain that, is IMO actually a good thing.

Depends on the question, the way it's framed, the context, the questioner's intent...

Obviously you have a disposition to be aggressive about it, but you should rethink that.

That's your erroneous perception.

Whether it has or not, it certainly more difficult to be gay, than to be straight

And not because of any 'natural' inherent defect or deficiency.

And in any case, it shouldn't matter whether it is a defect or not.

No it shouldn't. But it does.

You're implying that if you're called a defect then you are then put in second class category

That would seem to be the experience of people judged to have mental or physical disabilities.

I think it is certainly not the prevalent attitude these days.

You should travel- broadens the mind.