Bastard homophobes (1 Viewer)

[taco man]

Those in control of religion have typically been those who are conservative and dont like anything radical, and like any belief, you can always shape it to suit urself. This stereotype of religion being anti-homosexual is not always reflective of the beliefs and wat a religion stands, but rather the religion moulded to suit the needs of those in control. But it is because of this reason that nowadays religions such as christinanity must rid of their leader's consrvative stands on issues such as homosexuality, or else the role of religion will fade into insignificance for quite a number of people in contemporary society.

 

[Estel]

These children have no parents!

That's why we let male/female couples adopt them.

Breaking up puts stress on children, insecurity and either: deprives them of a parent, or deprives them of stability.
Don't tell me divorce is good for a child.

In your hypothetical, I would rule against the homo, all other things equal. Murder > Homosexuality in the heirarchy, obviously.

 

[ur_inner_child]

Vahl, like it or not, it's fact that children without male role models suffer.

I wouldn't particularly agree with that. I have a fair amount of friends without fathers and they, as well as I, think they're fine.

Some are better off without their fathers too....

Anyway, why is the father more important for children than a mother again?

lol.

Here we go

 

[Vahl]

Look, if I had my way, people would wait before marrying and be more careful to ensure they met the right person, thus reducing the chance for divorce. I wish people would make more informed decisions about sex. I wish people would be tolerant and not be abusive. I'd rather parents not die when they're children are young....

why make a problem when it's bad enough?
There's no need to knowingly marry into an abusive family. There's no need to deliberately die when your child is young.
We can't control lots of things, but for gays, we have the choice, the ability to prevent the problem. There's no need to give gays the right to adopt children.

Marriage is an outdated and repugnant institution that represents nothing other than long term prostitution and unhappiness. There a few happy older couples who are married. Children deserve better than to grow up in dysfunctional families, which can severely limit their development potential. Rather we should take the view that it is up to society as a collective to raise our young together.. Biological parents can still play a major role but not the only one. If we adopted a social attitude of freer sex and we could have children without responsibilities (eg Pubescent boys could mate with mature women etc), and place the emphasis on the collective, we should raise better adjusted, happier children and have a more cohesive and accepting society.

There is every reason to give gays the right to adopt children. Gay people make as good parents as do straight people, have stable relationships etc. Besides, there is no grounds for any discrimination in a society against innocent individuals and it is not the place of a social majority to restrict the rights of a minority. That is, laws should only be created to protect society(from invasion etc) but NEVER, EVER to discriminate against other members of the union.

 

[Estel]

"a previous study suggested children of gay parents were more likely to consider homosexual relationships, this study was unable to provide such information because so few teens reported same-sex attractions and romances"

One study isn't enough to convince me.

 

[Xayma]

But if you have two couples in all aspects couple A beats couple B (financial security etc) since as far as teenagers are concerned at least (that is to the study level) the sexuality of either couple does not matter couple A should get it no matter what. It doesnt matter if they are a lesbian couple and couble B is a straight couple or the other way round.

The only issue would be placing a homophobic child with homosexual parents.

Break up?? Just because a couple isnt married doesn't mean they will break up.

 

[Estel]

Marriage is an outdated and repugnant institution

I'll talk about this one tomorrow... I find that an absolutely ridiculous assertion. I suppose lets all do group sex every day in the town centre... eh, while we're at it, let's have sex with animals...

All aboard Nihilism Express... who needs any social institutions, they're all human constructs anyway.

pfft

I'd love to talk more, but it's bed time. I shall return tomorrow, and then it's daggers.

 

[Vahl]

Vahl, like it or not, it's fact that children without male role models suffer.
[\QUOTE]

In our society it is preferable to not have male role models.
I don't want to be like my own father, - weak, bigoted, greedy and cruel.
But other male role models are also undesirable - footballers etc. As well as the lewd degradation of women in heterosexual male culture. - No thanks.

 

[Vahl]

I suppose lets all do group sex every day in the town centre... eh, while we're at it, let's have sex with animals...

Woof, Woof
Got to go for a few minutes - put down a fire!

 

[Vahl]

Vahl3: The breast feeding thing can be argued, that is where a child gets immunity boosters, alot of fat and other nutrients.

Sure, this is true. But there are always alternatives that may be just as valuble. The point in question, however, through inference is that all children deserve to grow up with their biological parents in a heterosexual relationship. This is no right(except in the US). Children deserve to be loved and looked after, allowed to grow etc. This is the most important issue, not the gender of the parents.(As homosexuality is a full, legitimate gender)

 

[Vangineer]

im homophobic and im proud of it

 

[Vahl]

im homophobic and im proud of it

Why?
What do you gain from being homophobic, apart from alienating yourself, becoming less in touch with your own sexual identity through expressing fear of a sexually related topic?

 

[Xayma]

Sure, this is true. But there are always alternatives that may be just as valuble. The point in question, however, through inference is that all children deserve to grow up with their biological parents in a heterosexual relationship. This is no right(except in the US). Children deserve to be loved and looked after, allowed to grow etc. This is the most important issue, not the gender of the parents.(As homosexuality is a full, legitimate gender)

Umm the gender of the parents is a transsexual thing.

Gender does not denote orientation.

 

[Vahl]

Those in control of religion have typically been those who are conservative and dont like anything radical, and like any belief, you can always shape it to suit urself. This stereotype of religion being anti-homosexual is not always reflective of the beliefs and wat a religion stands, but rather the religion moulded to suit the needs of those in control. But it is because of this reason that nowadays religions such as christinanity must rid of their leader's consrvative stands on issues such as homosexuality, or else the role of religion will fade into insignificance for quite a number of people in contemporary society.

It is not religion itself which is bad, no. However established religions represent the established authority and social attitudes of the times. Such organisations are therefore resistant to change because change threatens their position is society. Therefore religions strike out at feminists and homosexual activists as being 'evil' etc in fear. Thus the established authority is conservative, satisfied with the safety of the familiar, but blind to the negatives of the existing system. So you can see that it is not the leaders of the churches, but the churches themselves that have set themselves on a path to insignificance.

I do not abide any religion. Religion is merely the interpretation of spiritual experiences and as such by definition can not offer any hope of salvation etc due to the separation of perception from fact, the passage of time and changing depictions and meanings (nonsence of taking literally the word of the Bible that was compiled more than 300 years after christ by Roman Emperor Constantine trying to unidy The Empire, translated many times etc not to mention differences in meaning of words and word placement etc.)

 

[Vahl]

Umm the gender of the parents is a transsexual thing.

Gender does not denote orientation.

I do not believe in 'orientation' as it implies choice and thereby the ability for change. Thus setting the gay rights movement back and encouraging radical christians and psychologists/psychiatrists who believe that they can 're educate confused people' etc.

Identifying homosexuality as a separate gender is fair. A gay man likes having sex with other men as a man, not having sex with men as a woman. Therefore a seperate gender of homosexuality is perfectly reasonable and would boost the gay rights cause.

 

[Jonathan A]

I wonder if Brodgen is going to have a whinge over this?

You seem not to know so much about Brogden...

 

[Vahl]

You seem not to know so much about Brogden...

Too true, he winges about everything.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

im homophobic and im proud of it

Really? That's odd. I'm not proud of my flaws.

 

[ur_inner_child]

homophobia is a fear.

being proud about fearing something...

hmmmm

 

[untying_average]

im homophobic and im proud of it

In a lot of ways, the current controversy over orientation is reminiscent of the African-American fight for rights in the 50’s.
It is with the same scorn and disgust that we look back on somebody from that era saying “I’m racist and proud of it,” that people in fifty years will think of comments like that.