Heartland

DeWinter wrote:Belief systems always are relative things. How do you decide which ones the right one?

Evidence.

The god-botherers don't have any. But that's for a different thread.

King of Byblos wrote:as long as we only have fluffy queers in spangly clothes we dont have to think about buggery

Very concisely put.

The same goes for "lipstick lesbians" - don't know how comfortable our media and culture are with real gay people yet.... just a couple of token cliches.

when you live as near to manchester's "gay village" as we do, you pretty soon realise the "fluffy queer in spangly clothes" cliche is something of the norm

markfiend wrote: Evidence.

The god-botherers don't have any. But that's for a different thread.

The LGBT community has no "evidence" that their sexual preference isn't a lifestyle choice. The "gay gene" turned out to be a bust, no sociological or psychological profile has shown consistent results either. They believe, however it is just the way they are, and they cannot change it, nor would wish to. I'm bisexual, can I prove that I don't just live this way because it gives me that sexy, slightly decadent vibe I like to give out so much? Nope.

A "god-botherer" will tell you that they know God exists, and they will give you what to them is proof, but to you won't be.

So there you have one belief against another, with no evidence for either. When they collide, who gets to arbitrate between, and what grounds can anyone assume the authority to do so?

Whether homosexuality is or is not a lifestyle does not matter, since it harms no one - no one except those choosing to indulge in it, if the Abrahamic god is real; which I doubt. Government has no right in imposing on what people do consensually behind closed doors, and I’m disgusted that four people voted for the third option. Impeding on people’s private sexual affairs is inhumane, unjust, and unnecessary.

What about what they do openly? Being gay is just as much about feelings as heterosexuality. I know plenty of people who don't care about gays but are disgusted at the sight of seeing two men kiss out in the open like straight couples can be seen doing all over the place. Strangely enough, they have no gripes when two women do the same, I wonder why...

DeWinter wrote:The LGBT community has no "evidence" that their sexual preference isn't a lifestyle choice. The "gay gene" turned out to be a bust, no sociological or psychological profile has shown consistent results either. They believe, however it is just the way they are, and they cannot change it, nor would wish to. I'm bisexual, can I prove that I don't just live this way because it gives me that sexy, slightly decadent vibe I like to give out so much? Nope.

So? It shouldn't be an issue. I don't particularly care one way or another whether sexuality is a "choice" or not. It's irrelevant to the issue at hand. Even were it to be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that sexuality is a choice I would disagree (quite profoundly) with discrimination on the grounds of sexuality.

DeWinter wrote:A "god-botherer" will tell you that they know God exists, and they will give you what to them is proof, but to you won't be.

Proof is for alcohol and mathematics. I didn't say proof, I said evidence. You know, like the stuff they bring up in courts. And no, "I get a warm fuzzy feeling" doesn't count.

DeWinter wrote:So there you have one belief against another, with no evidence for either. When they collide, who gets to arbitrate between, and what grounds can anyone assume the authority to do so?

That's not quite the case. Should I have to prove that the tooth fairy doesn't exist? They're the ones making a claim (and quite frequently standing in the street exhorting others to believe that claim) without giving any reason to accept that claim.

Ahráyeph wrote:What about what they do openly? Being gay is just as much about feelings as heterosexuality. I know plenty of people who don't care about gays but are disgusted at the sight of seeing two men kiss out in the open like straight couples can be seen doing all over the place. Strangely enough, they have no gripes when two women do the same, I wonder why...

I don't care if they make out in public either. Although, to be truthful, the sight of anyone kissing in public, be them gay or straight, makes me feel somewhat awkward.

Ahráyeph wrote:What about what they do openly? Being gay is just as much about feelings as heterosexuality. I know plenty of people who don't care about gays but are disgusted at the sight of seeing two men kiss out in the open like straight couples can be seen doing all over the place. Strangely enough, they have no gripes when two women do the same, I wonder why...

That's a major annoyment, people claiming to be liberal and getting disgusted at the sight of guys kissing. I'd go as far as to assume that the majority of heterosexual males cringe by the sheer thought of it. Must be a case of NIMBY, right Markfiend? I'm personally very happy to live in an environment where they can do so whenever they please.

Heterosexual couples on the other hand should better keep it to themselves at least when I'm around and have no boyfriend at hand.

NIMBY indeed.

I do find public snogging slightly... tacky is probably the best word, but the gender and/or orientation of the people involved has no bearing on it.

Oh geez Mr. fiend ~ so you never have a quickie in public places then, the sneaky kind, just for the fun of it?

MadameButterfly wrote:Oh geez Mr. fiend ~ so you never have a quickie in public places then, the sneaky kind, just for the fun of it?

Welllllll

I did only say "slightly"

markfiend wrote:

MadameButterfly wrote:Oh geez Mr. fiend ~ so you never have a quickie in public places then, the sneaky kind, just for the fun of it?

Welllllll

I did only say "slightly"

All right, I do understand although I do enjoy watching people snogging in public as they always seem happy and in love so good for them. If the snogging starts getting out of hand though I would be honest enough to tell them to get a room.

... and use your whip to chase 'em up there, no doubt...

Ahráyeph wrote: Strangely enough, they have no gripes when two women do the same, I wonder why...

Unless their the butch type that you mentioned earlier

I personally am all for ' Gay rights'. They should be treated equally at all levels except for one. Sorry everyone but I am against the idea of gay couples adopting children. (I see a storm on the horizon)

Gollum's Cock wrote:Sorry everyone but I am against the idea of gay couples adopting children. (I see a storm on the horizon)

Just explain why exactly before we start stoning you.

It just does n't seem right. A child needs a mother and a father. I know that most families nowadays miss one of the parents (divorce, single mums, working parents etc) but that does not make it right. One of the major causes of the breakdown of society is due to the lack of a mother or a father.

It also might be a point that God/mother nature never intended two same sex people to have children. Having children is the raison d'etre of the human race or of any animal.

I understand that this will be quite painful to gay people, but that's how I feel.

Gollum's Cock wrote:A child needs a mother and a father.

Says who ? This is a real question, I'm not having a go at you.
What actually makes you think that ?
A child does need a stable environment, and he/she needs people to fulfil different roles. There's the role of the father (strength, authority, blah, blah, blah) and the role of the mother (understanding, warmth, etc.), but I certainly don't think that the people who play these roles have to be genetically different from each other. Genders aren't just biological categories, they're also social and historical constructions.

Adoption should be, and actually is, decided on a case by case basis : should these people be allowed to adopt a child ? Rather than : should certain people or groups be allowed to adopt children ?
You have totally messed up straight families on the one hand, which can have as many children as they want (who'll probably grow up to be totally messed up themselves), and perfectly healthy and well balanced gay couples on the other hand, which are perfectly capable of giving a child a good education, and still don't have the right to adopt children.
How does that make sense ?

It also might be a point that God/mother nature never intended two same sex people to have children.

Let's leave God aside for a minute. As for nature, afaik it doesn't have intentions as it's not a living creature. All I know is that it takes one male and one female to create life.

The only reserve I may have when it comes to adoption by gay couples, is that, in a society where LGBT are heavily discriminated against, I don't want a child to become a target and then a victim just because his/her parents are gay. But it's no reason not to allow gay couple to adopt children.

James Blast wrote:What about us who's orientation is to have a cigarette whilst quaiffing a beer and chatting with our friends?

We really have no options except to stand in the freezing cold as we no longer have a 'section' where we can do 'it'.
What's next, drinking alcohol becomes the new bete noir, so we're all standing outside (with the smokers off to the left, as they've been here a while) so we don't 'infect' anyone 'normal'?

Gay people don't give you lung cancer!

pre~edit:

Brideoffrankenstein wrote:Gay people don't give you lung cancer!

wasn't really my point Libby


I can only speak from personal experience, and on a touchy subject like this, maybe that's not a good thing. Here goes anyway.
My father was killed in a road accident when I was 18 months old, so I was brought up by my Mum, my maternal Grandmother and the lady I loving called Auntie (our upstairs neighbour). All in all my family/role models were female.
I have a few dents round the eges but I don't think I turned out too bad. I'm a heterosexual and proud to say it. If I were homosexual or bi-sexual, I'd be proud to say that too.
It's not what you are, it's who you are.
Live and let live.

I'm also a practicing Roman Catholic, but it's not very cool to say that round here.

thank you
James

I would agree with James there. My parents divorced when I was very small and I have had no contact with my father whatsoever (though I know where to go if I wanted to change this, not to see him is my own choice). My mum has been the only person that has brought me up and I don't feel that I have missed out by not having a male role-model.

My father died when I was twelve, only female familly members being left eccept for me.
And I have, despite that, developed to a (mostly) normal and reasonable person (passed a few tests at least which made me think so).
Next? I´m sure there are some more with similar experiences.
I am sure nobody thinks "I wanna be interesting, let´s try gayness!" or "I love mom, mom loves men=>I love men." (simplyfied.. aye!)
I think your feelings tell you what you like. Very early.

Brideoffrankenstein wrote: Gay people don't give you lung cancer!

OR DO THEY?

boudicca wrote:

Brideoffrankenstein wrote: Gay people don't give you lung cancer!

OR DO THEY?

I suppose it depends on whether or not they smoke in public places.....

Brideoffrankenstein wrote:

boudicca wrote:

Brideoffrankenstein wrote: Gay people don't give you lung cancer!

OR DO THEY?

I suppose it depends on whether or not they smoke in public places.....

Or at home. My neighbour smokes the cheapest meanest kind of stinkweeds, and I have his exhaust gases in my flat. A pain in the arse that is. In a few months, I´ll have to go to a pub to get clean air.