39
   

Is homosexuality a bad thing?

 
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2010 01:17 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Tell that to the millions who do not have enough to eat every day.


So how must of your income are you spending to feed these poor people?

Why do I assume zero for some reason?
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2010 01:36 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
BillRM, Clue: when anything increases from 6.1 to 7.3, it's an increase


True, unless you are talking about govt spending.
Or, if a repub pres says he is going to cut the RATE of growth for Social Security, then it gets called a cut in SS by the dems, even though SS still went up.

So, a reduction in the rate of growth can still be a decrease, depending on who is doing the defining of terms.

Now, back to your own arguments.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2010 02:02 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Tell that to the millions who do not have enough to eat every day.


Second comment other then you likely being a hypocrite there is plenty of food in the world to feed everyone.

The only reason that some people are not getting enough have to do with human evilness such as using food as a tool of war or for other politics reasons.

0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2010 02:05 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Tell that to the millions who do not have enough to eat every day.


So how must of your income are you spending to feed these poor people?

Why do I assume zero for some reason?
Because you are a moron who assumes things he couldn't possibly know.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Sep, 2010 05:07 pm
It seems the Senate today refused to approve the legislation that would have outlawed "don't ask, don't tell."

We have a bunch of dummies in congress, and we vote them in!
RexRed
 
  2  
Reply Wed 22 Sep, 2010 07:11 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

It seems the Senate today refused to approve the legislation that would have outlawed "don't ask, don't tell."

We have a bunch of dummies in congress, and we vote them in!


Yes... and they can be easily voted out too... I will NEVER vote for a republican again. They are a stone wall against gays and therefore my enemies. Who hates gays??????? Well..... it is now obvious.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Sep, 2010 10:59 pm
@RexRed,
You do realize that some dems, including Harry Reid, also voted against the legislation.
It wasnt just the repubs that voted no.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39286687/ns/politics-capitol_hill/
William
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 06:49 am
@moogly bear,
moogly bear wrote:

I don't think so, but I'm never really understood why people hate it so much, so I'm wondering if anyone can justify their opinions through logic.


Bad thing? Might I suggest just masturbate rather than seek a rationalization to explain the most non-life behavior that has ever plagued human kind. You can get a grip and enjoy yourself to your hearts content until we can come to a consensus as to why.

William
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 06:55 am
@William,
if everybody only masturbated, in about a hundred years the world would be a perfect place
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 08:44 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

You do realize that some dems, including Harry Reid, also voted against the legislation.
It wasnt just the repubs that voted no.

It's true that some Democrats voted against the measure, but Harry Reid, who supported the bill, voted against it purely as a procedural matter. Under senate rules, a senator can only move to reconsider a bill if he or she voted against it the first time around. So, although Reid changed his vote when it was clear that it wouldn't gain enough votes for passage, that doesn't mean he changed his mind.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 10:25 am
@djjd62,
Quote:
if everybody only masturbated, in about a hundred years the world would be a perfect place


House cats would be highly annoy as they would need to go back to working for a living instead of laying by the windows and watching the world go by.

And this is after spending thousands of years into turning us into useful slaves to their whims.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  2  
Reply Fri 24 Sep, 2010 10:37 am
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

You do realize that some dems, including Harry Reid, also voted against the legislation.
It wasnt just the repubs that voted no.

It's true that some Democrats voted against the measure, but Harry Reid, who supported the bill, voted against it purely as a procedural matter. Under senate rules, a senator can only move to reconsider a bill if he or she voted against it the first time around. So, although Reid changed his vote when it was clear that it wouldn't gain enough votes for passage, that doesn't mean he changed his mind.


Thank you for the clarification on that. It was the republicans en masse who filibustered the bill in the first place. So I will filibuster the republicans when i vote next time. I wish I knew ahead of time all of the candidates in Maine on the ballot and their party. Sometimes in the voting booth their party is not always listed so I go by which name I like better. I hate myself when i guess at an election candidate. The dems need a virulent issue to get our base to get out and vote this time around. To me it is worth it to try and knock the tea party out of the water. They are a bunch of freaks. I can take freaks only so much and I have known my share of freaks and nothing compares to these. I am sure the tea party will not be listed on the ballot. Rand Paul (and a few others) defined the tea party for me and that was all i needed to reject the party outright. I like Ron Paul but his son seems very different is this the same impression you all get? Is Rand Paul on the level and is Ron Paul on the level too? I was really beginning to respect Ron Paul until his son came into the picture now I have my doubts again.

Where in the hell do these crazy politicians come from?
north
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 09:15 pm
@RexRed,
RexRed wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

You do realize that some dems, including Harry Reid, also voted against the legislation.
It wasnt just the repubs that voted no.

It's true that some Democrats voted against the measure, but Harry Reid, who supported the bill, voted against it purely as a procedural matter. Under senate rules, a senator can only move to reconsider a bill if he or she voted against it the first time around. So, although Reid changed his vote when it was clear that it wouldn't gain enough votes for passage, that doesn't mean he changed his mind.


Thank you for the clarification on that. It was the republicans en masse who filibustered the bill in the first place. So I will filibuster the republicans when i vote next time. I wish I knew ahead of time all of the candidates in Maine on the ballot and their party. Sometimes in the voting booth their party is not always listed so I go by which name I like better. I hate myself when i guess at an election candidate. The dems need a virulent issue to get our base to get out and vote this time around. To me it is worth it to try and knock the tea party out of the water. They are a bunch of freaks. I can take freaks only so much and I have known my share of freaks and nothing compares to these. I am sure the tea party will not be listed on the ballot. Rand Paul (and a few others) defined the tea party for me and that was all i needed to reject the party outright. I like Ron Paul but his son seems very different is this the same impression you all get? Is Rand Paul on the level and is Ron Paul on the level too? I was really beginning to respect Ron Paul until his son came into the picture now I have my doubts again.


Quote:
Where in the hell do these crazy politicians come from?


freedom of thought and speech

its up to Americans to see the underlying damage these kind of groups can do to your overall psyche

0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 09:49 pm
Overall, is homosexuality a bad thing?

Just like a gun... it can protect or it can kill, it all depends on whose hands it is used in and what is the purpose. Homosexuality in marriage is protective and can be a good nurturing thing but homosexuality unbridled and promiscuous is a rampant killer and needs restrictions and laws placed upon it to protect the innocent.

There are people who spread disease out of some sort of thrill and that is not only part of homosexuality but homosexuality is a vehicle used for this type of sick and abhorrent behavior. Just as heterosexuality can be used as a vehicle for disease also. All I can say is... know who your friends and partner is/are and know their sexual status and their behaviors. If you go playing with guns someone's gonna get hurt.

Is sex a bad thing? Same answer, know you partner and never take someone's word for granted put them to the test (STD test that is) and make them prove that they are in it for love and not for the simple thrill of multiple sexual experiences. Sex these days should never be taken out of the context of love. Dating for a year before sex is not so bad a thing if you figure how good the sex will be (gay or straight) once love has been established.
north
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Sep, 2010 09:59 pm
@RexRed,
RexRed wrote:

Overall, is homosexuality a bad thing?

Just like a gun... it can protect or it can kill, it all depends on whose hands it is used in and what is the purpose. Homosexuality in marriage is protective and can be a good nurturing thing but homosexuality unbridled and promiscuous is a rampant killer and needs restrictions and laws placed upon it to protect the innocent.

There are people who spread disease out of some sort of thrill and that is not only part of homosexuality but homosexuality is a vehicle used for this type of sick and abhorrent behavior. Just as heterosexuality can be used as a vehicle for disease also. All I can say is... know who your friends and partner is/are and know their sexual status and their behaviors. If you go playing with guns someone's gonna get hurt.

Is sex a bad thing? Same answer, know you partner and never take someone's word for granted put them to the test (STD test that is) and make them prove that they are in it for love and not for the simple thrill of multiple sexual experiences. Sex these days should never be taken out of the context of love. Dating for a year before sex is not so bad a thing if you figure how good the sex will be (gay or straight) once love has been established.


homosexuality is just a fact of life really

its only a bad thing when that community try to force it upon others
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 01:37 am
@north,
north wrote:

RexRed wrote:

Overall, is homosexuality a bad thing?

Just like a gun... it can protect or it can kill, it all depends on whose hands it is used in and what is the purpose. Homosexuality in marriage is protective and can be a good nurturing thing but homosexuality unbridled and promiscuous is a rampant killer and needs restrictions and laws placed upon it to protect the innocent.

There are people who spread disease out of some sort of thrill and that is not only part of homosexuality but homosexuality is a vehicle used for this type of sick and abhorrent behavior. Just as heterosexuality can be used as a vehicle for disease also. All I can say is... know who your friends and partner is/are and know their sexual status and their behaviors. If you go playing with guns someone's gonna get hurt.

Is sex a bad thing? Same answer, know you partner and never take someone's word for granted put them to the test (STD test that is) and make them prove that they are in it for love and not for the simple thrill of multiple sexual experiences. Sex these days should never be taken out of the context of love. Dating for a year before sex is not so bad a thing if you figure how good the sex will be (gay or straight) once love has been established.


homosexuality is just a fact of life really

its only a bad thing when that community try to force it upon others


Any community that tries to force either heterosexuality or homosexuality on people is equally as wrong. THOUGH... I see more straights trying to force heterosexuality on homosexuals than the other way around. This is about gays being liberated... I don't see straights complaining about not having basic sexual freedom... Just because gays want to be liberated does not mean they are forcing anything.
0 Replies
 
William
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 07:52 am
RexRed wrote:

Overall, is homosexuality a bad thing?

Just like a gun... it can protect or it can kill, it all depends on whose hands it is used in and what is the purpose. Homosexuality in marriage is protective and can be a good nurturing thing but homosexuality unbridled and promiscuous is a rampant killer and needs restrictions and laws placed upon it to protect the innocent.


Using protective, nurturing and marriage is subtle Rex and you are trying to say it’s okay for homosexual men to rear children. Sorry, I must and most emphatically disagree. I may be wrong in assuming this and if I am I apologize. You language here can be interpreted as such though. No child should be in that environment no matter how protective, nurturing those two men think they can be. Never!!!

It’s the word “sexual” itself when no child, especially a very young child, should even be acquainted with the word. Sex has become to be extremely selfish and self gratification is it’s foundation. The reasons and excuses have always been the same using such subtly to say love is all that matters is and always has be a crock. That’s the kind of crap NAMBLA uses to bring young boys into their fold.

Yes one man, a very good man, can do a lot for the estranged boy who has never known a father, but not a “homosexual” man.

It seems young boys reared by women can be targets today. Without good male role models in their lives does cause problems for that boy and they can be open season for any such male like them who never had such a firm, guiding, loving hand as a father would have that creates an escalation that personifies from child to adult and the cycle just gets worse and worse.

Two men having sex? Damn, what the hell is that? That can only come from a child starving for the love of a father they never had. Yes, that can happen in heterosexual relationships as well too. People today do get married for so many wrong reasons and yes it is the child who suffers, but I can assure you homosexuality are not a solution. I am not sure there is one. Until we fully understand the universal paradigm of man and woman and their relationship everybody is screwed.

RexRed wrote:
There are people who spread disease out of some sort of thrill and that is not only part of homosexuality but homosexuality is a vehicle used for this type of sick and abhorrent behavior. Just as heterosexuality can be used as a vehicle for disease also. All I can say is... know who your friends and partner is/are and know their sexual status and their behaviors. If you go playing with guns someone's gonna get hurt.


You said a lot here Rex, please allow me to parse it a little.

RexRed wrote:
“Spreading a disease out of some sort thrill....”?


Do you have any reliable stats that can offer just how many do that intentionally? Yes, when self gratification only is the goal no matter where and with who or what, disease can rear is ugly head. Rampant promiscuity among homosexuals is no secret. Any man anytime and any place seems to be the norm. Yes, there can be exceptions and if you know of any please offer them.

RexRed wrote:
“......and that is not only part of homosexuality but homosexuality is a vehicle used for this type of sick and abhorrent behavior”.


It’s difficult to understand you here? Are you saying a part of homosexuality intends to infect people with disease, and it is a vehicle that does it? If you would, please, explain it better and thanks.



RexRed wrote:
Is sex a bad thing? Same answer, know you partner and never take someone's word for granted put them to the test (STD test that is) and make them prove that they are in it for love and not for the simple thrill of multiple sexual experiences. Sex these days should never be taken out of the context of love. Dating for a year before sex is not so bad a thing if you figure how good the sex will be (gay or straight) once love has been established.


Rex, there’s a big difference in making love with a woman and have sex with anything else. Yes, that relationship between a man and a woman has not been perfected but there are no alternative solutions that will be good for the child. NONE!!!! Yes, the homosexual would like to use the word love but 95% of the rest of the world will never understand such “love”.

“Gay or straight”? The opposite of straight is bent or crooked, right? Uneven out of balance, too. Gay? Please tell me what is so gay about sodomy? Please, what is the thrill? Titillating the prostate? Perhaps we were never meant to stick anything up there to begin with, huh! It is an evacuation route for bodily waste, isn’t it!? What is so attractive about another man’s asshole? Damn, please someone tell me that; I’m all ears.

I’ve read a lot of the responses and the lame excuses such as to curb population explosion being one of them is equally absurd. We, men, do have opposable thumbs, use them for crying out loud before your deposit your seed into anyone, animal or thing.

William
djjd62
 
  3  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 08:12 am
@William,
wow, just wow

you are one uptight dude

so, every gay male couple that's raising a male child is on;y looking for some kind of incestuous partner? i'm always amazed that such moral folk like you seem to pretend to be, think such perverse thoughts, like those christians who see satanists behind every child disappearance (i've had this explained to me by a christian wackjob)

as for sex, it is what it is, are you stuck in some rut of "missionary sex for procreation only" mindset, never met a women who enjoys giving a blow job or anal sex (if not too bad, i've been lucky enough to know a few)

plus this use of the word "sexual", you seem to forget that straight men are called heterosexual, of course, you probably call them normal, get over it
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 08:49 am
@djjd62,
It seems that William is sharing his opinion that he has constructed from his long life's view point. We all seem to construct absolutes out of things that we can not know completely.

Keep in mind that this was part of william's quote! [I may be wrong in assuming this and if I am I apologize]
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Sep, 2010 08:54 pm
Quote:
RexRed wrote:

Overall, is homosexuality a bad thing?

Just like a gun... it can protect or it can kill, it all depends on whose hands it is used in and what is the purpose. Homosexuality in marriage is protective and can be a good nurturing thing but homosexuality unbridled and promiscuous is a rampant killer and needs restrictions and laws placed upon it to protect the innocent.

Using protective, nurturing and marriage is subtle Rex and you are trying to say it’s okay for homosexual men to rear children. Sorry, I must and most emphatically disagree. I may be wrong in assuming this and if I am I apologize. You language here can be interpreted as such though. No child should be in that environment no matter how protective, nurturing those two men think they can be. Never!!!

It’s the word “sexual” itself when no child, especially a very young child, should even be acquainted with the word. Sex has become to be extremely selfish and self gratification is it’s foundation. The reasons and excuses have always been the same using such subtly to say love is all that matters is and always has be a crock. That’s the kind of crap NAMBLA uses to bring young boys into their fold.

Yes one man, a very good man, can do a lot for the estranged boy who has never known a father, but not a “homosexual” man.

It seems young boys reared by women can be targets today. Without good male role models in their lives does cause problems for that boy and they can be open season for any such male like them who never had such a firm, guiding, loving hand as a father would have that creates an escalation that personifies from child to adult and the cycle just gets worse and worse.

Two men having sex? Damn, what the hell is that? That can only come from a child starving for the love of a father they never had. Yes, that can happen in heterosexual relationships as well too. People today do get married for so many wrong reasons and yes it is the child who suffers, but I can assure you homosexuality are not a solution. I am not sure there is one. Until we fully understand the universal paradigm of man and woman and their relationship everybody is screwed.


agreed
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/04/2020 at 10:43:42