Pray Away. (the gay)

[Sand Dancer]

You need to start showing some insight, and stop just asking simple questions as though there is no significance as to what is being said.
The destruction of character and dignity.

There is no such thing as a confident thief or adulterer, for they do not even trust themselves - they've impugned their own integrity.
I've never met a promiscuous man or woman that I would regard as a gentleman or a lady - it doesn't exist.
In general, there is a crassness, vulgarity or bimboish demeanor that appears to be elicited from certain kinds of acts, this is where the expression, for example, 'talks like a truck driver/tradesman' comes from. Certain types of character are associated with their practices. Truck driving is not sinful, but it attracts the uneducated, just like the trades (which i did for decades) .

In general, one's sexual practices says a lot about their moral fiber, and invariably, their character.

Being promiscuous can be dangerous, but this is not inherent in gay people. Excuse me, but my brother was a truck driver and he has a BA in Marketing and is a very intelligent and moral person. Wow...

 

[DNB]

Behavior is voluntary, impulses may or may not be, but sexual orientation is not an impulse. Just sayin'...

Sexual orientation is, in many ways, an impulse. Lots of people have fetishes, fantasies, experiments, etc... that change in time, both more liberally or conservatively. You're failing to see both the capricious and corrigible aspect of many of our sexual desires - what one fancied at one point in their lives, for a variety of different reasons, does not always remain as such.
That's just a microcosm of the bigger attraction i.e. male or female. Yes, this type of over-arching compulsion is more innate, but then, again, so is so many other characteristics about ourselves that need to be curbed. The obvious ones are aggression and hate (in all of us), but there's also pride, selfishness, licentiousness and lust.

 

[DNB]

Being promiscuous can be dangerous, but this is not inherent in gay people. Excuse me, but my brother was a truck driver and he has a BA in Marketing and is a very intelligent and moral person. Wow...

I never came up with the cliché, wow?

 

[Mock Turtle]

People need to be restrained when it comes to actions that fall so close to hedonism. Over-eating (even temporal), over leisure, tv marathons, sex etc.. are all very enticing to over indulge. So, we must be careful as to what we justify as acceptable, permissible or non-consequential. There is a very fine line between beneficial and detrimental sometimes, that the lines often get crossed unwittingly, or apathetically.
We all must put the reigns on ourselves and make sure that what we approve of, is in fact benign and edifying. I think that the path is extremely straight and narrow as to what is prudent and respectful, in things pertaining to sex - for the smallest mistake, can have life changing repercussions..

And this has actually what to do with sexual orientation? I think this is the issue that myself and others will be pointing out. I, and perhaps others, just don't believe you have ever looked seriously into this issue - particularly with an open mind - so as discuss the issue sensibly, particularly when so often we do get the religious perspective to back one up. As so often happens, and usually from one of the major monotheistic religions.

As I said earlier, I would not have seen myself defending areas that impacted me personally apart from the fact that I do try to be honest and impartial when dealing with most things. I was sexually abused by an older boy when younger, and which did cause some very negative effects for me. Fortunately I managed to get over this and I also managed to get over any negative attitudes I might have had towards homosexuals. He was more of the type to do whatever he wanted - boy or girl - so that's where I placed him - in the non-thinking and non-caring category, regardless of whether he was or wasn't a homosexual.

What I believe and know about sexual orientation came from proper evidence (and not just human) rather than from experiences or narrow perspectives usually coming from culture, lack of knowledge, or old texts. And which is an approach I usually take, given that there may be plenty of good in such old texts but this is balanced by a lot of nonsense. This area is one of them. And it is still causing harm.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Sexual orientation is, in many ways, an impulse. Lots of people have fetishes, fantasies, experiments, etc... that change in time, both more liberally or conservatively. You're failing to see both the capricious and corrigible aspect of many of our sexual desires - what one fancied at one point in their lives, for a variety of different reasons, does not always remain as such.
That's just a microcosm of the bigger attraction i.e. male or female. Yes, this type of over-arching compulsion is more innate, but then, again, so is so many other characteristics about ourselves that need to be curbed. The obvious ones are aggression and hate (in all of us), but there's also pride, selfishness, licentiousness and lust.

Festishes, etc have nothing to do with one's natural sexual orientation though.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I never came up with the cliché, wow?

Yes, but you don't have to post as though you do.

 

[DNB]

And this has actually what to do with sexual orientation? I think this is the issue that myself and others will be pointing out. I, and perhaps others, just don't believe you have ever looked seriously into this issue - particularly with an open mind - so as discuss the issue sensibly, particularly when so often we do get the religious perspective to back one up. As so often happens, and usually from one of the major monotheistic religions.

As I said earlier, I would not have seen myself defending areas that impacted me personally apart from the fact that I do try to be honest and impartial when dealing with most things. I was sexually abused by an older boy when younger, and which did cause some very negative effects for me. Fortunately I managed to get over this and I also managed to get over any negative attitudes I might have had towards homosexuals. He was more of the type to do whatever he wanted - boy or girl - so that's where I placed him - in the non-thinking and non-caring category, regardless of whether he was or wasn't a homosexual.

What I believe and know about sexual orientation came from proper evidence (and not just human) rather than from experiences or narrow perspectives usually coming from culture, lack of knowledge, or old texts. And which is an approach I usually take, given that there may be plenty of good in such old texts but this is balanced by a lot of nonsense. This area is one of them. And it is still causing harm.

Sorry, you're sounding way too repetitive without either addressing or listening to a thing that is being said from the contrarian viewpoint.
You are the one that has to stop appealing to emotions on this issue, and start weighing the empirical evidence. You're trying to sound compassionate without actually considering how harmful certain behaviours are.

Anatomically speaking, we have an aberration - this is the first clue of a substantial degree.
Behaviour - was it not predominantly the homosexuality community that introduced cross-dressing, adrogyny, transvestite, genitalia transformation, etc...? What an irony, they claim that it's ok for a man to be with a man, and yet they must either act or dress like a woman in order to do so - do you see the hypocrisy and deranged rationale?
I don't care about stats as far as the previous argument goes, you get the point.

For the last time, no one has brought up religion yet (quite playing that card, it shows your lack of reasonability)??? ...but, I will, I've heard enough shallow rhetoric from the atheist standpoint, failing to see the peculiar and conflicted behaviour of their acts. Don't talk about orientation until you understand the full gamut of the influences that play upon people's judgments - but you seem to lack this wisdom, not comprehending what my former post was about.

Just admit it, life is sustained and glorified by a heterosexual couple in love, with the ability to miraculously procreate. And that there is nothing impressive or exemplary watching grown men dress and act like women. (i don't care whether this pertains to the majority or not, it is prevalent enough to cause reason for suspicion and denunciation)

 

[DNB]

Festishes, etc have nothing to do with one's natural sexual orientation though.

Of course it does, an inclination is an inclination - half the fetishes out there are repulsive to many, revealing that one's perception of healthy and enjoyable, is antagonistic to another's. Meaning, we don't just accept as normal or innocuous just because another person think's that it is, for whatever reason.

 

[DNB]

Yes, but you don't have to post as though you do.

For cryin' out loud, the point was how people's continuous activities, define their character. What they approve of or indulge in, in general, says a lot about their personality.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Sorry, you're sounding way too repetitive without either addressing or listening to a thing that is being said from the contrarian viewpoint.
You are the one that has to stop appealing to emotions on this issue, and start weighing the empirical evidence. You're trying to sound compassionate without actually considering how harmful certain behaviours are.

Anatomically speaking, we have an aberration - this is the first clue of a substantial degree.
Behaviour - was it not predominantly the homosexuality community that introduced cross-dressing, adrogyny, transvestite, genitalia transformation, etc...? What an irony, they claim that it's ok for a man to be with a man, and yet they must either act or dress like a woman in order to do so - do you see the hypocrisy and deranged rationale?
I don't care about stats as far as the previous argument goes, you get the point.

For the last time, no one has brought up religion yet (quite playing that card, it shows your lack of reasonability)??? ...but, I will, I've heard enough shallow rhetoric from the atheist standpoint, failing to see the peculiar and conflicted behaviour of their acts. Don't talk about orientation until you understand the full gamut of the influences that play upon people's judgments - but you seem to lack this wisdom, not comprehending what my former post was about.

Just admit it, life is sustained and glorified by a heterosexual couple in love, with the ability to miraculously procreate. And that there is nothing impressive or exemplary watching grown men dress and act like women. (i don't care whether this pertains to the majority or not, it is prevalent enough to cause reason for suspicion and denunciation)

Sorry, you are going into the - why should I bother bin. You won't apparently look at any science to see why plain old male/female sexual orientation is just not good enough to describe reality. I don't bother particularly with people like you who have such views just as I don't with those regarding evolution who dismiss such or anything else that they believe which tends to contradict the best evidence we have. What you see is your problem. What others do is not your problem - unless it apparently affects your sensibilities. Well, really tough. Why not just get educated (*).

And mostly it is down to religious beliefs (if not culture or inability to reason properly) that people believe such nonsense, so don't expect to get away with that complaint.

* As to such, you might like to start with the question - where exactly do you get your beliefs and/or prejudices? Are these from education or learning, or from your culture, or from anywhere which might give a slant to evidence that shouldn't be there, for example - like what you choose to imbibe as information. Like defaults. What is it that makes one become discriminatory or judgmental towards others? Because it appears so is not a good enough answer. Perhaps you have issues yourself so as to react negatively to some particular thing. If so then best to recognise such. And religion is often the cause of much of this.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Anatomically speaking, we have an aberration - this is the first clue of a substantial degree.
Behaviour - was it not predominantly the homosexuality community that introduced cross-dressing, adrogyny, transvestite, genitalia transformation, etc...? What an irony, they claim that it's ok for a man to be with a man, and yet they must either act or dress like a woman in order to do so - do you see the hypocrisy and deranged rationale?

You are making a huge mistake, confusing homosexuality with transexuality. The are not the same thing at all.

A trans woman (man to woman) who is attracted to men is considered straight, not gay.

 

[danieldemol]

Sexual orientation is, in many ways, an impulse. Lots of people have fetishes, fantasies, experiments, etc... that change in time, both more liberally or conservatively. You're failing to see both the capricious and corrigible aspect of many of our sexual desires - what one fancied at one point in their lives, for a variety of different reasons, does not always remain as such.
That's just a microcosm of the bigger attraction i.e. male or female. Yes, this type of over-arching compulsion is more innate, but then, again, so is so many other characteristics about ourselves that need to be curbed. The obvious ones are aggression and hate (in all of us), but there's also pride, selfishness, licentiousness and lust.

Well the opposite of pride is having the humility to acknowledge that there is nothing inherently immoral in homosexuality, and the opposite of selfishness is being selfless enough to permit the same kind of love between men that you desire to have between yourself and a woman.

In my opinion.

 

[Meow Mix]

Sexual orientation is, in many ways, an impulse. Lots of people have fetishes, fantasies, experiments, etc... that change in time, both more liberally or conservatively. You're failing to see both the capricious and corrigible aspect of many of our sexual desires - what one fancied at one point in their lives, for a variety of different reasons, does not always remain as such.
That's just a microcosm of the bigger attraction i.e. male or female. Yes, this type of over-arching compulsion is more innate, but then, again, so is so many other characteristics about ourselves that need to be curbed. The obvious ones are aggression and hate (in all of us), but there's also pride, selfishness, licentiousness and lust.

Human sexuality and romanticism is complicated. Homosexuality isn’t just about sexual attraction to many people, but also about romantic attraction. Romantic attraction isn’t necessarily sexual.

There are asexual people that feel a romantic attraction to the same sex for instance: they may never have sex, but flesh out a full romantic relationship with a partner.

If I may use myself as an example (certainly not for the asexual part, though), I have grown very close to the amazing men in my life: they are my brothers, my chosen family. But I have never felt a romantic attraction to them.

I have, however, felt a romantic attraction to a woman I really wasn’t physically attracted to. Sex was not high on my list of things I wanted to do with her, but holding her hand and hearing her secrets and telling her mine was.

Just saying. Homosexuality isn’t just about sex (at least for many, I can’t speak for everybody because again, people are complex and diverse).

There is a je ne sais quoi that makes us feel about other people. The sex is incidental.

 

[Vinayaka]

Human sexuality and romanticism is complicated. Homosexuality isn’t just about sexual attraction to many people, but also about romantic attraction. Romantic attraction isn’t necessarily sexual.

There are asexual people that feel a romantic attraction to the same sex for instance: they may never have sex, but flesh out a full romantic relationship with a partner.

If I may use myself as an example (certainly not for the asexual part, though), I have grown very close to the amazing men in my life: they are my brothers, my chosen family. But I have never felt a romantic attraction to them.

I have, however, felt a romantic attraction to a woman I really wasn’t physically attracted to. Sex was not high on my list of things I wanted to do with her, but holding her hand and hearing her secrets and telling her mine was.

Just saying. Homosexuality isn’t just about sex (at least for many, I can’t speak for everybody because again, people are complex and diverse).

There is a je ne sais quoi that makes us feel about other people. The sex is incidental.

Fancy that, eh? Relationships aren't just about sex, sex, and more sex.

 

[DNB]

Sorry, you are going into the - why should I bother bin. You won't apparently look at any science to see why plain old male/female sexual orientation is just not good enough to describe reality. I don't bother particularly with people like you who have such views just as I don't with those regarding evolution who dismiss such or anything else that they believe which tends to contradict the best evidence we have. What you see is your problem. What others do is not your problem - unless it apparently affects your sensibilities. Well, really tough. Why not just get educated (*).

And mostly it is down to religious beliefs (if not culture or inability to reason properly) that people believe such nonsense, so don't expect to get away with that complaint.

* As to such, you might like to start with the question - where exactly do you get your beliefs and/or prejudices? Are these from education or learning, or from your culture, or from anywhere which might give a slant to evidence that shouldn't be there, for example - like what you choose to imbibe as information. Like defaults. What is it that makes one become discriminatory or judgmental towards others? Because it appears so is not a good enough answer. Perhaps you have issues yourself so as to react negatively to some particular thing. If so then best to recognise such. And religion is often the cause of much of this.

Well, it's like this: you call yourself Mock Turtle, and yet your avatar portrays yourself as a monkey - would you not consider yourself to be conflicted as to what your own species actually is?

 

[DNB]

You are making a huge mistake, confusing homosexuality with transexuality. The are not the same thing at all.

A trans woman (man to woman) who is attracted to men is considered straight, not gay.

Irrespective of semantics or specific traits, I enumerated enough bizarre and contradictory behaviour to make the point - there is a profound confliction and hypocrisy in what the LGBTQ community stands for, and tries to defend.

 

[DNB]

Well the opposite of pride is having the humility to acknowledge that there is nothing inherently immoral in homosexuality, and the opposite of selfishness is being selfless enough to permit the same kind of love between men that you desire to have between yourself and a woman.

In my opinion.

How in the world does pride and humility have anything to do with the assessment of morality?
How the flippin' heck does altruism have anything to do with what one deems right or wrong?

The opposite of foolishness is wisdom, and being wise allows one to perceive the insidious nature of acts that 'appear' to be benign and inconsequential.

 

[DNB]

Human sexuality and romanticism is complicated. Homosexuality isn’t just about sexual attraction to many people, but also about romantic attraction. Romantic attraction isn’t necessarily sexual.

There are asexual people that feel a romantic attraction to the same sex for instance: they may never have sex, but flesh out a full romantic relationship with a partner.

If I may use myself as an example (certainly not for the asexual part, though), I have grown very close to the amazing men in my life: they are my brothers, my chosen family. But I have never felt a romantic attraction to them.

I have, however, felt a romantic attraction to a woman I really wasn’t physically attracted to. Sex was not high on my list of things I wanted to do with her, but holding her hand and hearing her secrets and telling her mine was.

Just saying. Homosexuality isn’t just about sex (at least for many, I can’t speak for everybody because again, people are complex and diverse).

There is a je ne sais quoi that makes us feel about other people. The sex is incidental.

That is wonderful to have a loving relationship between any combination of genders - provided that it remains platonic.
What defines homosexuality more properly, is the aspect of sex and not friendship, that is why the term is derived from the word 'sex' - it refers to one's sexual activities or orientation.
In other words, if a homosexual person never had sex or vocalized their desires, we'd never know whether or not if they were homosexual - you would not be able to classify them at that point.
No one disapproves of an intimate or loving relationship between any other person of any gender, whether male or female - for even married couples allow their spouses to engage affectionately with another, other than their partner. The offense lies when homosexuals practice engaging in sex with the same gender - now they are defying what their anatomy dictates.

 

[danieldemol]

How in the world does pride and humility have anything to do with the assessment of morality?

When we are too proud to admit that our initial ideas on the subject are demonstrably wrong it has a lot to do with it.

How the flippin' heck does altruism have anything to do what one deems right or wrong?

Well you may be rejected or considered outcast by your religious peers and/or family, perhaps even your society if you happen to live in a conservative society, so being selfless allows you to lay aside such selfish considerations and think of having compassion for others - such as those who practice responsible gay relationships.

The opposite of foolishness is wisdom, and being wise allows one to perceive the insidious nature of acts that 'appear' to be benign and inconsequential.

It is pride speaking that calls wisdom foolishness and foolishness wisdom, and pretends that acts that actually are benign and inconsequential are 'insidious' in spite of an utter failure to demonstrate the insidious nature of these things.

There are plenty of gays that are loving, kind, patient, virtuous etc.

Merely being gay/practising gay sex has no effect on a person's character whatsoever.

And if you think it has any other insidious effect it is up to you to demonstrate that to be true, otherwise the likely consequence is that unbiased people will simply see your view that it is insidious as a likely biproduct of your religious indoctrination.

In my opinion.

 

[danieldemol]

The offense lies when homosexuals practice engaging in sex with the same gender - now they are defying what their anatomy dictates.

Anatomies dont dictate anything, you are stringing together words meaninglessly here.

A penis will go into any hole it fits into.

In my opinion.