Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
*rolls eyes* OF COURSE homosexuals understand that. I have yet to meet a homosexual who isn't perfectly happy that 95% of the population is heterosexual.I want to know homosexuals understand that there are people who are heterosexual who can't help but be heterosexual.
Just like they can't help but be homosexual.
I suspect that many African Americans reject this comparison for the same reason that many non-African Americans reject the comparison, quite simply, it is inconvenient. When you really are committed to villifying homosexuals, it doesn't help matters to have people pointing out the logical flaws of your position.Perhaps I am naive I was hoping for a discussion on the article and on the possible reasons why the majority of African Americans reject the comparison that homosexual rights advocates make.
I really didn't want to discuss the morality, rightness or wrongness of homosexuality. It seems there are numerous threads that already debate those issues.
The onus is on you, since you're the one making the positive claim "homosexual marriage threatens my rights". Thats what you said, and thats clearly what you believe, therefore it is up to you to explain how you came to that conclusion.
Thats nice you arent afraid to answer my questions but you didnt answer my question : What rights of yours are threatened by equality?
I wonder how he thinks this conversion will take place. The orbiting homotron4000 gay ray?*rolls eyes* OF COURSE homosexuals understand that. I have yet to meet a homosexual who isn't perfectly happy that 95% of the population is heterosexual.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present the root cause of Inviolable's concern over homosexuality, he fundamentally believes that homosexuals want to "convert" him and other heterosexuals.
Ahh! I see the angle now, it feels as if it took a comity to finally find one.
There are laws that govern what one person does to another and when a persons actions can be reasonably held in question those laws can be referred to as rights.
I want to be assured that homosexuals understand that there are people who can't help be anything but heterosexual. If they can't do this then their state of mind can be held in question.
Can anyone finally answer "any" of the questions I've been asking. At least try to address one of the post I've made with a simple reply that doesn't seem back handed. Or is this a dodge game until someone stumps me?
I think you have your answer AdamI suspect that many African Americans reject this comparison for the same reason that many non-African Americans reject the comparison, quite simply, it is inconvenient. When you really are committed to villifying homosexuals, it doesn't help matters to have people pointing out the logical flaws of your position.
I suspect that many African Americans reject this comparison for the same reason that many non-African Americans reject the comparison, quite simply, it is inconvenient. When you really are committed to villifying homosexuals, it doesn't help matters to have people pointing out the logical flaws of your position.
I wonder how he thinks this conversion will take place. The orbiting homotron4000 gay ray?
Still havn't answer my question : What rights of yours are threatened by equality?Ahh! I see the angle now, it feels as if it took a comity to finally find one.
There are laws that govern what one person does to another and when a persons actions can be reasonably held in question those laws can be referred to as rights.
I want to be assured that homosexuals understand that there are people who can't help be anything but heterosexual. If they can't do this then their state of mind can be held in question.
Can anyone finally answer "any" of the questions I've been asking. At least try to address one of the post I've made with a simple reply that doesn't seem back handed. Or is this a dodge game until someone stumps me?
Why are so many Christians committed to vilifying this minority?But why would African Americans be committed to vilifying homosexual? That is the part I don't understand.
ConvenienceIf the connection is as clear as some claim why would the most discriminated against minority in our history not recognize it?
For the same reasons that most people who are interested in villifying homosexuals are committed to doing so.But why would African Americans be committed to vilifying homosexual? That is the part I don't understand. If the connection is as clear as some claim why would the most discriminated against minority in our history not recognize it?
I mean at first glance the comparison made sense to me, it seemed logical. That's why I am surprised that it is widely rejected in the African American community.
I don't think its anythign to do with African Americans being African Americans, I think it has far more to do with the facts that the bulk of African Americans belong to more fundamentalist churches...
It's been one so far, right up to this point as a matter of fact and now that it seems as if you have me cornered, well, those people who once didn't want to respond, now are.Its not a dodge game. Your demands are unreasonable.
No, as a matter of fact I don't. I'd like homosexuals to be honest, I'd like top see them stop with the blame game and for once try and figure out the problems people are having with them. Other then saying, anyone who doesn't agree with them is prejudice or homophobic.You want to deny an entire group of people equality because of a fear that any or all of them might not respect your rights...
what is this, 2 wrongs make a right?
I've answered this question and several just like it, I've replied to and acknowledged several comments just like the one you've asked above.But even if your demand was reasonable, you seem to be applying it unevenly. I assume you are happy for black people to have the same rights as you. Where is the evidence that black people know you can't help being white? Are you a supporter of women's equality? Where is the evidence that women know you can't help being male?
Nope, I want to deny them basic rights because that's the issue they constantly dodge. Which puts their motives in question.There is not a skerric of evidence to suggest that even a minority of homosexuals think that heterosexuals should be homosexual, or that they fail to grasp that heterosexuality is not a matter of choice, and yet you want to deny them basic rights because they "might" not understand this?
You don't think that someone trying to change who you are should be noticed?And lastly, even if every single homosexual person really honestly did think that heterosexuals had something wrong with them, even if every single homosexual wanted to convert the entire heterosexual community... even if, I STILL don't see why denying them access to equal rights is necesary or warranted.
Wrong,Still havn't answer my question : What rights of yours are threatened by equality?
Perhaps I am naive I was hoping for a discussion on the article and on the possible reasons why the majority of African Americans reject the comparison that homosexual rights advocates make.
I really didn't want to discuss the morality, rightness or wrongness of homosexuality. It seems there are numerous threads that already debate those issues.
What is questionable about wanting equality?No, as a matter of fact I don't. I'd like homosexuals to be honest, I'd like top see them stop with the blame game and for once try and figure out the problems people are having with them. Other then saying, anyone who doesn't agree with them is prejudice or homophobic.
In all honesty, that's the only thing I have for being against giving homosexuals their rights. Their actions in this regard make their motives look questionable.
Why do you insist on answering questions with questions?I've answered this question and several just like it, I've replied to and acknowledged several comments just like the one you've asked above.
In this thread
So before I answer, let me ask you a question.
Why haven't you looked for the post I made that addresses the above statement?
Why do I have to keep repeating everything I say?
Homosexuality is within the range of normal human behaviour.Nope, I want to deny them basic rights because that's the issue they constantly dodge. Which puts their motives in question.
You can say things like, "they're happy just to let heterosexuals be who they are" which is fine and something I could very possibly agree with.
But when I say, it's odd behavior or not normal. I get into a 50 page debate with several homosexuals on why homosexuality is normal.
You can be happy with who you are and still suffer injustice. I assume the suffragettes were happy with who they were, they still wanted the vote.Well, if they're happy being who they are, why even care?
Of course it should be noticed. But that wasn't the question, the question was why is their wanting to change anyone grounds for denying them basic rights?You don't think that someone trying to change who you are should be noticed?
I don't see where I've made it a point to show where it's odd to want equality.What is questionable about wanting equality?Why do you insist on answering questions with questions?Homosexuality is within the range of normal human behaviour.
Same old argument that will go in a single direction.Yes, its a minority of people who are homosexual, but that doesn't make it "odd", any more than beiung left handed is "odd".
You said you want to deny them basic rights because of the issue they constantly dodge. For my benefit, could you please explicitly tell me what this issue is, because I don't see any issue being dodged here. I realise you may think you have already explained it, but I must have missed it. So please, for me, explain in basic terms what it is you think homosexuals are dodging, and I will do my best to answer your questions as they relate.You can be happy with who you are and still suffer injustice. I assume the suffragettes were happy with who they were, they still wanted the vote.Of course it should be noticed. But that wasn't the question, the question was why is their wanting to change anyone grounds for denying them basic rights?
I see it through rationality.(and I'm yet to see any evidence at all, any where, that even a minority of homosexuals want to "change" anyone to homosexuality)
I don't see where I've made it a point to show where it's odd to want equality.
I've made it a point<staff edit>.
Same old argument that will go in a single direction.
This is the first response.
My point was this.
If you want to admit it or not, the "ACTS" just the act of homosexuality, appears to be an irrational thing.
Despite anything the APA says.
There can be no logic behind it, at all. The only way we can view it is through emotional rationality. <staff edit>
<staff edit>
How do we know what normal is?
We justify it by examining our own emotions and morals based on what we see as rational.
I see it through rationality.
How do you think they should go about seeking equality then?I don't see where I've made it a point to show where it's odd to want equality.
I've made it a point to show where homosexuals are going about getting their equality in an odd way over an odd behavior.
To you, quite possibly. But do not make the mistake of projecting your subjective opinion onto the population in general.If you want to admit it or not, the "ACTS" just the act of homosexuality, appears to be an irrational thing.
Slippery slope? Really? *sigh* OK, as I'm sure I've told you before, and if not me, many others have... the difference with homosexuality, yes, it is a minority behaviour, but unlike beastiality, incest, paedophilia, and the usual charges thrown out at this point of the conversation, homosexuality occurs with the adult consent of all involved, whereas the other examples do not. So you can slippery slope all you like, but I will go out and say that NO activity, minority or not, "odd" or not, that goes on with the consent of all major parties and doesn't harm anyone else, should be permitted. I defy you to find one that should not be.Everyone with a behavior that is irrational will want to be justified as normal. Which is where things like people with a position that incest is O.K.
Um, no... that way you get a completely subjective view of "normal". Normality is determined purely by prevalence and patternation.How do we know what normal is?
We justify it by examining our own emotions and morals based on what we see as rational.
Then please, explain your "rational" view that clearly shows homosexuals as wanting to change or convert otherwise heterosexual people into homosexuals?I see it through rationality.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?