Homosexuality in Australia (3 Viewers)

[lordarthurxoxo]

My view of homosexuality is that it is a desire for the same sex. I'm emphatic on the desire element as sexuality, in some respects - operates on each individuals tastes, preferences and desires.

Having said that, how is it possible that we can condemn another individuals taste if it's clearly subjective?

Therefore, to homosexuality in Australia - MA says 'Let them enjoy cake!'



EDIT: Sorry, early morning postage errors =/

 

[Xayma]

Umm homosexuality is a desire for the opposite sex?

What do you mean by desire? Desire to be the opposite sex? In which case wouldn't you have everybody going for more manly gay people?

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Homosexuality rocks!...for the people involved, I suppose. I don't see any reason to chop off some of their enjoyment of life, to appease a few religious zealots who see fit to force their own ideas onto people who might not share their ideas. Marriage is between a man and a woman? At the moment it is, but it's quite foolish for anyone to assume that somehow, in some way, marriage will become a cheap prostitute after gays are allowed to marry one another. In some ways though, I suppose it's already a cheap prostitute, and the belief that this could cheapen it even more are certainly valid, if not (I believe) a little foolish. Once more though, who really cares?

 

[MaNiElla]

Everything except filthy asians.

*shakes fist

No one is as filthy as you......

 

[brows]

I dont have a problem with it. I am straight but i have known some homosexuals who love their partner so much that i honestly now believe that they should be able to get married.

 

[S1M0]

Ridiculous poll options. People who claim they "strongly" or "somewhat" support homosexuality are fools. It's a simple question. You're either okay with it, or you're not. There's no extreme, and there's no real middle-ground.

I understand that religion means some people do not agree with homosexuality, but that's only one portion of who they are as people. Sexuality does not solely define who someone is, and to like or dislike someone based purely on that factor is incredibly ignorant. I mean, surely religion also dictates to hate the "sin", not the person? Surely religions such as Christianity are based on love, not hate?

I know there are many Christians who AREN'T the self-righteous homophobes that some people and medias portray them to be. I have a friend who has grown up in a very strong and devout Christian family, and who has a gay uncle. Obviously her family do not like the fact that he's gay, because according to the Bible it's a sin and what have you, but that doesn't stop them from loving and supporting him. He has been with his "life partner" for going on 20 years now, and my friend insists they're one of the most functional and in-love couples she's ever known.

It's just a shame that there are those fucking religious nutters who want to judge and discriminate people because they're not the ideal human their God had in mind. They make up a small minority, but that still doesn't change the fact they seem to represent the "stereotypical" Christian.

As for gay marriage, no one has the right to take that away from someone. Not you, not I, not the government. I find it disgusting that gay marriage has been banned. What do we think we're trying to accomplish here? I mean, what's next, are we going to ban the Chines from tying the knot with whites because mixed races "aren't natural"?

People suck.

Hey, just need to clarify, you're a lesbian yourself right?

And anyway, from personal experience, i've found homosexuals, both guys and girls, to be real backstabbing, gossiping, untrustworthy guys. There's quite a few gays at my school, and you can't trust a single one of them. Thats just from my experience, unfortunately it does shape a negative view of homosexuals.

Suprisingly, a lot of them are racist. You've got one guy whose always racist towards a few black guys at my school (as in teasing them, saying they're black, acting all cold on them). It pisses me off, and i wonder why we should bother to accept them if these people aren't accepting of minority groups themselves. Out of around 7 gays in my year, and approx 20 in my school, only 1 i've seen is an actual decent guy.

 

[S1M0]

You know what, how about we just scrap all intercourse without the actual intents and purposes of procreation.

Teenage pregnancy will drop off, STI's will drop off. We can just sit in the dark during the day and listen to sine waves. Then at night we can move our hands in circular motions, expressing our joy at the concepts.

And all is right with the world.

Good idea. Too bad most people have no control over they're...um..."natural urges"

 

[Stott Despoja]

Hey, just need to clarify, you're a lesbian yourself right?

In what way is that relevant, S1M0?

And anyway, from personal experience, i've found homosexuals, both guys and girls, to be real backstabbing, gossiping, untrustworthy guys. There's quite a few gays at my school, and you can't trust a single one of them. Thats just from my experience, unfortunately it does shape a negative view of homosexuals.

Suprisingly, a lot of them are racist. You've got one guy whose always racist towards a few black guys at my school (as in teasing them, saying they're black, acting all cold on them). It pisses me off, and i wonder why we should bother to accept them if these people aren't accepting of minority groups themselves. Out of around 7 gays in my year, and approx 20 in my school, only 1 i've seen is an actual decent guy.

Surely I'm not alone in doubting the validity of the above tripe? I hope not, anyway.

S1M0, whether or not the people in question are actually gay, the fact of the matter is that you shouldn't take an individual's personality to be representative of an entire group, especially when that group, like any other, is quite diverse and hardly marked by a particular type of personality.

Good idea. Too bad most people have no control over they're...um..."natural urges"

Satire, S1M0.

 

[cowface]

And anyway, from personal experience, i've found homosexuals, both guys and girls, to be real backstabbing, gossiping, untrustworthy guys. Thats just from my experience, unfortunately it does shape a negative view of homosexuals.

Guys who like dick must be a backstabbers. If you look middle eastern, you're a terrorist. In my experience anyway.

Suprisingly, a lot of them are racist. You've got one guy whose always racist towards a few black guys at my school (as in teasing them, saying they're black, acting all cold on them).

Agree. Minorities in this country discriminate against other minorities. Evidently.

Out of around 7 gays in my year, and approx 20 in my school, only 1 i've seen is an actual decent guy.

Out of about 23.7 Arabs in our school I've only met one decent one. Arabs are ghey.

 

[S1M0]

In what way is that relevant, S1M0?



Surely I'm not alone in doubting the validity of the above tripe? I hope not, anyway.

S1M0, whether or not the people in question are actually gay, the fact of the matter is that you shouldn't take an individual's personality to be representative of an entire group, especially when that group, like any other, is quite diverse and hardly marked by a particular type of personality.






Satire, S1M0.

You guys take things too hard.

You ought to learn to lighten up.

 

[ur_inner_child]

Well if you were joking then stop. I won't tolerate it in this forum.

 

[Stott Despoja]

You guys take things too hard.

It's a serious thread and all posts are open to criticism.

You ought to learn to lighten up.

You didn't post in jest, S1M0, so there's no need for any of us to lighten up.

 

[phoebe15]

i think that everyones views on homosexuality simply depends on their past and background, i mean a child that has grown up with two mothers or fathers their whole life in comparison to antoher child who has grown up in a mother father based family is going to have much more exceptance on the issue of homosexuality....... and those against gay marriages usually have no dignified reasons as to why, other than typical baser motives i.e religion, phobia etc..

its not even about marriage its about equality. straight people are allowed to marry why cant homosexuals?

 

[phoebe15]

Guys who like dick must be a backstabbers. If you look middle eastern, you're a terrorist. In my experience anyway.

Agree. Minorities in this country discriminate against other minorities. Evidently.



Out of about 23.7 Arabs in our school I've only met one decent one. Arabs are ghey.

quoting this makes me laugh out loud. i feel very sorry for a mind so closed.

p.s did you know 87.46% of all statistics are useless? that makes 12.54% of what your saying plausible.

 

[bazookajoe]

quoting this makes me laugh out loud. i feel very sorry for a mind so closed.

p.s did you know 87.46% of all statistics are useless? that makes 12.54% of what your saying plausible.

P.S: Did you know he was actually pointing out the flaws in S1MO's argument through imitation?

 

[bshoc]

i think that everyones views on homosexuality simply depends on their past and background, i mean a child that has grown up with two mothers or fathers their whole life in comparison to antoher child who has grown up in a mother father based family is going to have much more exceptance on the issue of homosexuality....... and those against gay marriages usually have no dignified reasons as to why, other than typical baser motives i.e religion, phobia etc..

its not even about marriage its about equality. straight people are allowed to marry why cant homosexuals?

Gays can already marry, under the same rules as everyone else.

The concept of marriage itself isn't going to change because of the gays anymore than the economy is going to change because of the Socialist Alternative.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Gays can already marry, under the same rules as everyone else.

When people say gay marriage they mean a marriage between two people of the same sex. The point of the discussion is to decide whether we want to change the rules...

The concept of marriage itself isn't going to change because of the gays anymore than the economy is going to change because of the Socialist Alternative.

That's ok, we're not out to change any imaginary objective concept of marriage you've invented in your head. This is all about the legal definitions, cultural definitions, which can and history shows will be changed based on changes within our culture.

Your argument here is like someone in the 1800's saying the 'concept of right to vote' isn't going to change just because of women - It did.

 

[bshoc]

That's ok, we're not out to change any imaginary objective concept of marriage you've invented in your head. This is all about the legal definitions, cultural definitions, which can and history shows will be changed based on changes within our culture.

Your argument here is like someone in the 1800's saying the 'concept of right to vote' isn't going to change just because of women - It did.

Voting by the mass populace was and is histrorically speaking a relitively new concept and thus rules for it were and are still being written.

History, modern, classical, and natural are all pretty clear on marriage. Even in societies where homosexuality was somewhat accepted or even promoted, marriage was strictly a man/woman affair, Greece as a good example.

And no, the fact that a Papuan tribe or something allowed some form of union between men is not relevant, unless you want to start preaching for legalized cannibalism ...

 

[kami]

History, modern, classical, and natural are all pretty clear on marriage. Even in societies where homosexuality was somewhat accepted or even promoted, marriage was strictly a man/woman affair, Greece as a good example.

Marriage does and did not exist in natural history, however homosexual mating behaviour does occur - including monogamous same-sex bonds between various species of animal.

Regarding ancient and medieval history, there are plenty of records in non-western cultures of same-sex marriages. A very good example is China, which was a well developed culture ... in fact it was in many ways more developed than anything the west produced at the time.

As far as modern precedents, they are occuring all over the world which it would do you good to note.

And no, the fact that a Papuan tribe or something allowed some form of union between men is not relevant, unless you want to start preaching for legalized cannibalism ...

Cannibalism harms people, same-sex marriage does not. This is why it would be foolish to introduce the former based on tradition but not the latter. However you are the only person arguing for legislation based on tradition bshoc, so I don't understand how the 'cannibalism' argument works unless you're trying to criticise yourself.

 

[withoutaface]

No one is as filthy as you......

Kthx for digging up something I said 18 months ago, then missing the sarcasm that went with it.