I don't agree with homosexuality

• abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-05 05:23

  Quote from Kazuni;175970:

  No, you said you opposed them earlier.
  
  That's why I called you homophobic.

  
  
  Look you are not getting my view.
  
  "The problem with debating about homosexuality is that people isolate themselves with their views. Homosexuals think that anyone who opposes homosexuality is a homophobic, but that is not true, there are people like me who are moderates, but oppose homosexuality."
  
  You can't call me homophobic because the way you chose that I am one has problems. It makes no room for moderates.
  :/ do i have to draw a picture of what i mean? Don't you know what xy graph also called cartesian coordinate system is? The way one's view in homosexuality should be evaluated should be through a coordinate system not a black or white system.
  
  I will repeat, my tolerance (x-value in a graph) for homosexuality is positive meaning I tolerate homosexuals. And my support (y-value in a graph) for homosexuality is negative meaning I don't support it much (you could say oppose, but it means the same).
  
  
  Others got what I said, why can't you? Do I really have to draw a picture? QQ
  
  
  

  Quote from Chiri;175978:

  Why do people feel so strongly against two grown consenting adults devoted to spending their lives together?
  Why does it make them so uncomfortable?

  
  
  You guys are not getting the complex view i have about homosexuality. I'm NOT some average random dood who hate homosexuality. I have some supports and I have some disapproval. Your prejudices against people who don't fully support homosexuality is really getting annoying. You guys are the exact type of people that I am concerned about. You guys are the ones who persecute people who don't agree with your definition of homosexuality. Too bad, I have different way of defining it.
  
  Two guys sleeping together does not make me wanna go ruin their lives, but i don't approve of it. However, do those two guys give a damn? No.
  
  If you don't understand, then don't just try to assume that I am some kind of homophobic extremist, just ask me to explain in easier terms because I know my ideas are new to this world and not everyone could grasp it at first sight. However, that does not give you the right to assume.
• Kazuni wrote on 2010-10-05 05:25

  Quote from abc33kr;175980:

  Look you are not getting my view.
  
  "The problem with debating about homosexuality is that people isolate themselves with their views. Homosexuals think that anyone who opposes homosexuality is a homophobic, but that is not true, there are people like me who are moderates, but oppose homosexuality."
  
  You can't call me homophobic because the way you chose that I am one has problems. It makes no room for moderates.
  :/ do i have to draw a picture of what i mean? Don't you know what xy graph also called cartesian coordinate system is? The way one's view in homosexuality should be evaluated should be through a coordinate system not a black or white system.
  
  I will repeat, my tolerance (x-value in a graph) for homosexuality is positive meaning I tolerate homosexuals. And my support (y-value in a graph) for homosexuality is negative meaning I don't support it much (you could say oppose, but it means the same).
  
  
  Others got what I said, why can't you? Do I really have to draw a picture? QQ

  
  
  No. You said you're "moderate", and you also said "oppose". They're two parts of a spectrum, you can't have both.
  
  You can't be okay with homosexuality and be against it at the same time.
  
  Either choose your words better or don't blame it on me not understanding.
• Chiri wrote on 2010-10-05 05:31
  You can oppose homosexuality without being a homophobe.
  You cannot be moderate if you oppose homosexuality.
  
  
  Edit:
  The standard moderate position in relation to gay rights has been pro-civil rights, without really putting much focus on sexuality. It takes the position of, how do we make things equal for all people while keeping a balance between the extremes? So civil unions enter into play.
• abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-05 05:50
  Okay, let's say there are two gay couples kissing each other at a park
  
  A homophobic would call the police (-10,-10)
  A person with 0 tolerance would shoot them (-10,?)
  A person who oppose homosexuality fully would go over to the couples and preach about how wrong it is (0,-10)
  
  Me, the moderate guy, would just leave them be and think it was a weird experience seeing gay couples and then move on with my life. (10,-4)
  
  Those examples were simple enough. If you can't leave me alone with my views after reading that, then something is wrong with you and you are exactly like a homophobic person except just against me.
• Cryosite wrote on 2010-10-05 06:36
  You are a homophobe because you oppose something that should be of no concern to you whatsoever. Do you plot your views about black/white couples on a graph? Or the marriages between people of differing religions or cultures?
  
  That you actively think about other people's relationships, seek solutions to some sort of problem, and actually worry about the health of the population of humanity based on your views makes you very clearly homophobic.
  
  It's pretty simple. Black, white, shades of gray. Black/bad side of the scale is people actively seeking to end homosexiality and/or harm homosexuals (violently or nonviolently). The misunderstanding here is... the white/good side of the scale is not being homosexual. That's not even part of the scale. The good side of the scale is accepting other human beings, and not giving a **** about their personal lives.
  
  A homophobe is anything but the white.
  
  You're welcome to your opinion. But until such time as the idea of needing to grow more tolerant, or even being focused on or caring about homosexuals or trying to change other people is gone from your opinion, then your opinion is a a homophobic one. It may not be as bad as the guy in your example that preaches to the couple on the park bench of goes around shooting fags, but you're still part of the problem of unwarranted discrimination. We like shades of gray better than black, but we're trying for white.
• abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-05 06:42
  Read the entire thread completely. Kazuni and Chiri were saying that i was homophobic because they didn't understand me and apparently you are one of them.
• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2010-10-05 06:55
  You are not a homophobe if you can imagine it.
  

  [Image: http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Inception-Poster.jpg]
• Cryosite wrote on 2010-10-05 07:04

  Quote from abc33kr;176021:

  Read the entire thread completely. Kazuni and Chiri were saying that i was homophobic because they didn't understand me and apparently you are one of them.

  
  
  I did read it.
  
  The only lack of understanding here is you and your inability to recognize that fact.
• Hiccup wrote on 2010-10-05 07:08
  Ok my turn since I'm gay and all.
  
  

  Quote from abc33kr;175980:

  
  Look you are not getting my view.
  
  "The problem with debating about homosexuality is that people isolate themselves with their views. Homosexuals think that anyone who opposes homosexuality is a homophobic, but that is not true, there are people like me who are moderates, but oppose homosexuality."
  
  You can't call me homophobic because the way you chose that I am one has problems. It makes no room for moderates.
  :/ do i have to draw a picture of what i mean? Don't you know what xy graph also called cartesian coordinate system is? The way one's view in homosexuality should be evaluated should be through a coordinate system not a black or white system.
  
  I will repeat, my tolerance (x-value in a graph) for homosexuality is positive meaning I tolerate homosexuals. And my support (y-value in a graph) for homosexuality is negative meaning I don't support it much (you could say oppose, but it means the same).

  
  As to why you are forcing yourself into tolerating homosexuals is confusing (at the least). When you have to force yourself to get over something (essentially toleration) it's never a good thing because honestly you are against what you are making yourself tolerate. You tolerating is just you following with society which is going pro-gay. (You can correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just stating how it looks). I'm homosexual and do not believe that people are either Homosexual OR Homophobic. It's been proven many times though that the biggest homophobes are indeed homosexual themselves, could this be your case maybe. Am I saying your a homophobe well its not clear cut. You have yet to clearly define what you support about homosexuals. And for the record you did say "you oppose homosexuality". That last sentence clearly says so. Whether that was your intention or not remains to be seen.
  
  
  

  Quote from abc33kr;175980:

  
  You guys are not getting the complex view i have about homosexuality. I'm NOT some average random dood who hate homosexuality. I have some supports and I have some disapproval. Your prejudices against people who don't fully support homosexuality is really getting annoying. You guys are the exact type of people that I am concerned about. You guys are the ones who persecute people who don't agree with your definition of homosexuality. Too bad, I have different way of defining it.
  
  Two guys sleeping together does not make me wanna go ruin their lives, but i don't approve of it. However, do those two guys give a damn? No.

  
  But why does the private life of consenting adults bother you? What specifically bothers you about homosexuals. I get that you don't like how we go about (for lack of a better word) promoting our views and such. But is it the fact that people of the same sex actually having deep feelings for each other make you uncomfortable? That's normal because it's still a relatively new concept.
  
  You have homophobic views which is why people are responding to you in that manner.
  
  I don't get what your trying to say because its not clear enough. I've read the whole thread and I'm still like "wuuuuh......." You need to clearly state whats wrong with homosexuals (in your honest opinion) and why, and what you support and why. Then the others and I will probably understand what your trying to get across. Cause right now its not working.
  
  

  Quote from abc33kr;175993:

  Okay, let's say there are two gay couples kissing each other at a park
  
  A homophobic would call the police (-10,-10)
  A person with 0 tolerance would shoot them (-10,?)
  A person who oppose homosexuality fully would go over to the couples and preach about how wrong it is (0,-10)
  
  Me, the moderate guy, would just leave them be and think it was a weird experience seeing gay couples and then move on with my life. (10,-4)

  
  You scenarios are completely ridiculous. That would never happen (guys kissing in the park yes but not calling the police). Most would be like you and leave them alone. Some might say a few derogatory words, but most likely at most one would just make a face and walk away.
  
  

  Quote from abc33kr;175921:

  I admit that my last few paragraphs about how homos damage humanity is a bit hitlerish.
  
  I just read your's and Chiri's posts and this is my answer: Ok so homosexuality is like other unique sexual preferences like bdsm, maid, etc EXCEPT homosexuality is not chosen consciously. But to an outsider, I don't see a difference because of the angle I'm viewing from (and it works the other way, homosexuals would think that heterosexuals are just unique sexual preference).
  *bunch of metaphors*
  Just like how most people don't like guro hentai, I don't like yaoi. But it is not like I'm scared of homosexuals from raping me, I am not a homophobic. Even if wikipedia defines me as that, then too bad, that definition is too broad, it needs to become more clear.
  
  ^bleh bunch of mess (i can't rly think this late at night) so basically me opposing homosexuality is because it is not my cup of tea, but it isn't as if I want to destroy it so homosexuals don't lose anything from me not supporting it.
  
  Btw I think I should have clarified that I think about homosexuality in two parts (one is tolerance and the other is if it is my cup of tea or not). My other point in writing this thread other than telling my view is complaining about how people think about homosexuality; they think it is either black or white. Well I really don't like how it is that way, I feel my view cannot be shown as either homophobic or homosexual. My view is far more complex than that, it needs two scales so it looks like a xy graph.

  
  Homosexuality is not a unique sexual preference. Everything you listed are indeed sexual preferences but those were ACQUIRED sexual preferences (which they all are anyway). Homosexuality in particular is something anybody is naturally born with. We think it is normal for us to have deeper feelings for members of the same sex and not the opposite sex (or even feelings for both) because that is laid deep within our foundations. Did we have a choice? No, we never had the choice. Did you have a choice to just like the opposite sex? No, you never had that choice. The only difference is that my innate feelings towards the opposite sex turned out different then yours, and vice versa. That's what most homophobes and people who don't understand homosexuality realize; we never had the choice between liking the opposite sex or liking the same sex. Our genetic makeup decided that for us. Now is that wrong? No. Does it hurt others? No. It only hurts others when they invade on my private life and think they actually have a say in what I should be doing. (This is a very bad topic because you can bring up things that I'm against and just call me a hypocrite)
  
  You are too judgmental and biased even though you say your view is completely new and can only be understood when looked at from several different angles. I'm just going to point out what is picked up from what you say. You generalize homosexuals into beliefs of maybe a few homosexuals but certainly not all. Saying
  

  "The problem with debating about homosexuality is that people isolate themselves with their views. Homosexuals think that anyone who opposes homosexuality is a homophobic, but that is not true, there are people like me who are moderates, but oppose homosexuality."
  

  
  (Being a moderate is not new btw) is generalizing homosexuals off of those you've seen debate this topic in prior events.
  
  
  The problem here is that you should not care about others private lives. It causes too many people harm (including yourself). When one believes they have the power to control a persons private life (ie not being ok with homosexuality) is a crystal clear invasion on that persons constitutional rights. I'm not gonna get into it because it's pretty obvious. The world is too judgmental on people's private lives and therefore standards have been created throughout society and over time. In doing so when those standards become ancient history and are eventually replaced by new ones society tends to have issues with that. 1) It is a change from the norm and 2) Not everybody embraces change with open arms. I'm not against you not being ok with how I live my life since you don't directly stop me from achieving the basic rights you already have. I am against your views as to why your not ok with it. Just like your against me making sweet love to another man. So think about it that way.
  
  
  You do need to be more open minded when reading this cause you do tend to be very close minded when people oppose your views and then you jump on them for being so.
• IceBlade wrote on 2010-10-05 10:44

  Quote from Whyrainfalls;175834:

  Also, love =/= sexual attraction. I love a lot of people, some from school, some from the nation. Some are females and some are males. Does that make me bisexual? Why can't I love everyone?
  
  (And just a note to christians: God is genderless and loves everyone with a love that surpasses gender. Why can't humans love regardless of gender?)

  
  
  

  Quote from Phunkie;175846:

  WHAT A FANTASTIC POINT.
  
  I never saw it this way!!
  
  WOW!!
  
  Mind = blown.
  
  Not even lying.

  
  
  Actually no where in the Bible does it say you're not allowed to love another man or woman. In fact the bible tells you to love everyone as you love yourself. God has nothing against people loving each other and nor should any Christian. But remember Love =/= Intercourse.
  
  In my opinion the reason homosexual intercourse is a sin, is the same as why extramarital intercourse is a sin, because it comes down to being adultery, since you've having intercourse with someone God didn't intend you to. But ether way, both are explicitly prohibited.
  
  Isn't calling abc homophobic the same as calling someone Gay or other insults. I mean it's got a really harsh stigma attached to it and calling someone that would and should be considered a serious insult. Calling someone homophobic is perceived as them being intolerant towards homosexuals, which is not the case here. Even if the dictionary meaning is differs, that's what the perception of most people would be.
  
  I have to disagree, sexual preferences aren't acquired. If you say that then homosexuality must be acquired as well. You don't acquire an infinity for pain or liking lolicon or any of those sexual preference. It's something you discover about yourself, just as homosexuals discover that they find people of the same sex attractive. And if you're going to say that it's more development of your sexuality, then isn't homosexuality the same?
  
  I also don't agree with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean that I'm homophobic and want to oppose or prevent other people from living their lives the way they want to. I want to say I have tolerance for them, but that's not the right word since it's not that I have anything against them. I think acceptance would be a better word. Accepting that people are different and everyone has the right to live their lives like they want to. If I agree with it or not is irrelevant, they're still people who have the right to be happy.
• Falsetto wrote on 2010-10-05 12:07
  I didn't read of the last 6 pages, nor do I have time to; But I will make two points.
  
  In the Bible, two men sharing the same bed within the passages of Leviticus is within the same context of:
  Leviticus 11:10-12: "Everything in the waters that has not fins and scales is an abomination to you." (A.K.A Don't eat Shellfish or your screwed and is considered an abomination.)
  
  This also goes upon the same lines as: "'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." Within Leviticus. Of course if your going to use the Bible as an argument you agree with that. Right?
  
  Now If I am going to assume that you don't then your argument is unfortunately null and void.
  
  Oh also, even if you have another argument outside the bible that discriminates the view of Homosexuality, your argument is still Null and Void. A little thing called Time will always bend towards justice, despite what little playful things go on in your head. But go ahead, debate all you want, your still gonna end with a major fail.
• IceBlade wrote on 2010-10-05 13:41

  Quote from Falsetto;176104:

  I didn't read of the last 6 pages, nor do I have time to; But I will make two points.

  
  
  Firstly it's a good idea to read the OP, before making any posts. An Admin should know better.
  
  

  Quote from Falsetto;176104:

  In the Bible, two men sharing the same bed within the passages of Leviticus is within the same context of:
  Leviticus 11:10-12: "Everything in the waters that has not fins and scales is an abomination to you." (A.K.A Don't eat Shellfish or your screwed and is considered an abomination.)

  
  
  

  Again, God has very good reasons for making a law against eating these kinds of fish. Doctors now know that these kinds of fish and shellfish can have high levels of heavy metals and can have naturally occurring poisons in them. They can be very harmful to humans. However, unclean fish are also an important part of the food supply of the fish and species that we can eat. By eating these prohibited species we help destroy the environment. The unclean fish play a role in helping the environment by eating the dead fish. Other fish without scales assist in cleaning up the bottom of the rivers and lakes.

  
  
  My stepdad for one can't eat Shellfish, so it was good advice. And they didn't have the hospitals and stuff we have now.
  
  

  Quote from Falsetto;176104:

  This also goes upon the same lines as: "'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material." Within Leviticus. Of course if your going to use the Bible as an argument you agree with that. Right?

  
  
  

  The Older Testament Law even prohibited mixture. The wearing of a garment of wool and linen was forbidden. Leviticus 19:19: Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. Deuteronomy 22:11: Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together.
  
  Wool mixed with linen will shrink, become disfigured and eventually be worthless.

  
  
  They didn't have all these fancy synthetic fabrics we have today. So it was mostly wool and linen and those two should not be mixed for good reason.
  
  

  Quote from Falsetto;176104:

  Now If I am going to assume that you don't then your argument is unfortunately null and void.

  
  
  Now that I've disproved both your statements your arguments are null and void.
  
  

  Quote from Falsetto;176104:

  Oh also, even if you have another argument outside the bible that discriminates the view of Homosexuality, your argument is still Null and Void. A little thing called Time will always bend towards justice, despite what little playful things go on in your head. But go ahead, debate all you want, your still gonna end with a major fail.

  
  
  You said you didn't read the first 6 pages, but it seems you didn't even read my entire post. I said in the end that even though I might not agree with it, I don't discriminate against homosexual people. That I accept them as human like me that have a right to be happy.
  
  And your comment about Justice, I have to tell you that I think justice ever being served in this world is a little playful thing in your head. There will never be justice in this world, no matter how much we think people are good, they plainly are not. Just today I so a thread here about a Guy trying to do good and donating $50 million to needy Children, just for his widow to use high paid lawyer to take the money from them again.
• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2010-10-05 14:20
  >Implying that the OP is important in a thread against homosexuality.
• Tatsu wrote on 2010-10-05 14:46

  Quote from Bieber;175813:

  It's all based on stereotypes. Weddings are purely about male and females, same with couples. Just like how girls should be skinny, tall, and well endowed.

  
  That's how it is now. Back then short, thin, and modestly chested women were preferred.
  
  

  Quote from Kazuni;175815:

  It's just like how I wear makeup and girly clothes but I can kick and punch well if I want.

  
  Now considering to call you Byakko instead of Nekoko.
  
  Anyway, worst case scenario of homosexuality affecting humanity is slowing our advances. In the end, it's usually one person who thinks of an idea, and grabs a bunch of people to help them work on the idea.
  
  For example, if Isaac Newton didn't write the laws of gravity, somebody eventually would have.
• Falsetto wrote on 2010-10-05 15:00

  Iceblade

  
  
  Oh, you can make such a lame excuse for the bible. I'm sure he was just 'looking' out for us based on those heavy metals by considering it an abomination. Just as well as giving us nifty fashion tips based on the clothing of the past.
  
  Hold on a moment, then why did he warn against orientation of the same gender? It turns out that all these ideas of a warning from 'God' turns out to be all very well out-dated. Just as it seems you have told me. So how on earth could I not disregard them when you told me yourself that we use such fancy fabrics now instead, and suddenly doctors are so aware of a shellfish's acidic nature but we still continue to eat them.
  
  I think you also take my point on justice in too much a direct way. What justice is considered is the progressive path of human nature as time goes on. There will never be true justice, that is always apparent. But it will always bend toward thus, and this has been proven through the years. For something as simple as homosexuality, things will bend with time; regardless of your criticisms.
  
  And no,
  
  

  
  If homosexuality is a common norm, then when straight people break up and the couples could become homosexuals blaming straight relationship rather than the fact that they were not meant for each other. That farther converts more people into homosexuality. Once there are so many more homosexuals, there will be very few people actually reproducing (especially since there are abortions and financial problem with raising a child) and the human population will go down, thus producing less people with ideas that can improve humanity.

  
  
  This IS called discriminating, human population isn't an issue. It never has been, except in the realm that there is far too many people on this earth. Quite the opposite. And what the OP may consider a logical flaw, there is little grounds to base upon that. To find another persons worth less than another's; I find no better description for it.
  
  Anyways, I am terrible at debate, and I do state what I believe I have experienced thoroughly. It is not my intent to undermine you, but I simply believe that regardless of the nature of this topic it still deals with the alienation of homosexual people. This is why I make my points, and do care little for trying to instill false logic in anyone. Perhaps this is why disagreeing with homosexuality making no sense, because it has no logical basis to somebody who 'accepts' the orientation.