Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:People like you disgust me far more than any gay man ever could. Your statement of gays wanting to turn Singapore into 'Singaypore' is a sensationalist exaggeration as they merely want equal rights and not to be shunned by bigots like you.
Your suggestion that gay propaganda causes people to be gay is completely unfounded as homosexuality isn't something you can be convinced to practice, it's decided at birth and there is a lot of scientific evidence to support that. Furthermore, since when has rape automatically entailed homosexuality? There is just as much, if not more heterosexual abuse. Does that mean that heterosexual influences in society are causing rape? No more than homosexual 'propaganda' does.
The real problem lies not with homosexuals but with intolerant bastards like you.
The TS had already graciously withdrawn from hijacking the threat and yet here you homosexuals still persists, with total disregard to others, as is probably your militancy style i suppose.
Scientific evidence? or Scientific theories?
There is a difference, you know., unless you are unaware of what are facts, and looking at the manner of your post, it would not be a far off judgement of it.
Answer me, er..no, i should not call you an intolerant bastard or an anti family bigot.
Dont need to sink to your level. Just answer me, simply, - is the sexual intercourse conducted between 2 of similar genders, regardless of forced or mutual consent, known as homosexual conduct?
Spare me your vulgarities. It's water off my back.
Originally posted by angel7030:NUS
we create Gays
Rofl
Originally posted by da-vid:I don't see how homosexuality negatively affects society or straight people. Why do straight people have to discriminate against homosexuals in order for them to live their lives?
Homophobia is similar to racism in the 20th century, particularly with White/Black people in the US. There were seperate drinking fountains, Black people were forced to sit in the back of the bus, etc. Eventually, racism became considered politically incorrect, but more importantly, morally wrong. However, many less-developed societies still hold these prejudices, whether it may be against a certain race or a certain group of people.
Also, from your previous post, I interpreted it to say that homosexuality is genetic, since you were talking about evolution and natural selection. Personally, I don't know what causes homosexuality, but I don't think it's a choice, much like how straight people don't choose to be attracted to the opposite sex.
I had sought to avoid such topics, but i guess one can't hide from it, more so with so much ignorance being trump up, churning my stomach to the depths!
You had desecrated and profaned nobles ideals by aligning your filthy lifestyle choice with it. I will attempt forwith to be as gracious as possible, since it is what I would have expect others to do similarly so.
Liberty for womanhood and enfranchisement from slavery are noble aims that perpetrate humanity and the human race. Your fight has nothing noble and will only doom mankind with your lifestyle choice.
As with parellalisms, you and many others foolishly chosed nobles ones, which are far from the ideals of which your group set to achieve. Allow me to show you a parallelsim that is more closer to your lifestyle choice.
Smoking had been with us for ages. No one knew of its bad effects, but with the advance of science, we realized it this century and had sought to eradicate it. It causes cancer later in one's life and as well as the financial savings for medical cure, not to mention the unnecessary loss of one precious life to societies.
But did we ban smoking? No, we didnt, because many are stuck on this habit. Societies understood the hazards of smoking as well as the difficulty to cure it, thus it needs time to fully eradicate smoking.
As such, smokers still had the right to smoke, but only in specific areas. And they must not influence others to join them in their LIFESTYLE choice, espacially the young. Is this an infringement to their rights? Should smokers form a lobby and demand they be allowed to smoke as they please, or others to be tolerant of them, or let them influence the young to join their crusade to continue to smoke, knowing full well it is a destructive habit to oneself and society?
While homosexuality will not cause cancer, it does even worse - destroy the family, societies and civilisation.
But you homosexuals, have a right to exist as humans, just don't attempt to promote your 'values' to others, and stay away from decent families, the way smokers do.
Another foolish and absurb concept to support the homosexual way of life as correct is to compare themselves to celibate monks and priests.
Their understanding of economics is sorely limited, but cannot be blamed for not everyone is educated on that subject. However, simple logic will dictate their theory invalidated because a society can only support x numbers of monks/priests.
So in the event if everyone or half becomes monks/priests - who will work the fields and manage trade? Such an economic order do not exists and have never before in the history of mankind. Simply because even our cavemen ancestors understood such concepts.
But can half the world be made up of heterosexuals and homosexuals? Most definately in this liberat day and age, because sexual conduct do not inhibits work performances. The dammage will only come later, when heterosexuals adults die out, their children will end up supporting half the society's population made of old and aged homosexuals.
Worse if the entire society becomes homosexual. The end cannot be too far away. Think, my fellow human, whom I still respect as a human, before you press your lifestyle choice upon us all and espacially insidiously, to our naive and innocent children .
Originally posted by xtreyier:
I had sought to avoid such topics, but i guess one can't hide from it, more so with so much ignorance being trump up, churning my stomach to the depths!You had desecrated and profaned nobles ideals by aligning your filthy lifestyle choice with it. I will attempt forwith to be as gracious as possible, since it is what I would have expect others to do similarly so.
Liberty for womanhood and enfranchisement from slavery are noble aims that perpetrate humanity and the human race. Your fight has nothing noble and will only doom mankind with your lifestyle choice.
As with parellalisms, you and many others foolishly chosed nobles ones, which are far from the ideals of which your group set to achieve. Allow me to show you a parallelsim that is more closer to your lifestyle choice.
Smoking had been with us for ages. No one knew of its bad effects, but with the advance of science, we realized it this century and had sought to eradicate it. It causes cancer later in one's life and as well as the financial savings for medical cure, not to mention the unnecessary loss of one precious life to societies.
But did we ban smoking? No, we didnt, because many are stuck on this habit. Societies understood the hazards of smoking as well as the difficulty to cure it, thus it needs time to fully eradicate smoking.
As such, smokers still had the right to smoke, but only in specific areas. And they must not influence others to join them in their LIFESTYLE choice, espacially the young. Is this an infringement to their rights? Should smokers form a lobby and demand they be allowed to smoke as they please, or others to be tolerant of them, or let them influence the young to join their crusade to continue to smoke, knowing full well it is a destructive habit to oneself and society?
While homosexuality will not cause cancer, it does even worse - destroy the family, societies and civilisation.
But you homosexuals, have a right to exist as humans, just don't attempt to promote your 'values' to others, and stay away from decent families, the way smokers do.
Another foolish and absurb concept to support the homosexual way of life as correct is to compare themselves to celibate monks and priests.
Their understanding of economics is sorely limited, but cannot be blamed for not everyone is educated on that subject. However, simple logic will dictate their theory invalidated because a society can only support x numbers of monks/priests.
So in the event if everyone or half becomes monks/priests - who will work the fields and manage trade? Such an economic order do not exists and have never before in the history of mankind. Simply because even our cavemen ancestors understood such concepts.
But can half the world be made up of heterosexuals and homosexuals? Most definately in this liberat day and age, because sexual conduct do not inhibits work performances. The dammage will only come later, when heterosexuals adults die out, their children will end up supporting half the society's population made of old and aged homosexuals.
Worse if the entire society becomes homosexual. The end cannot be too far away. Think, my fellow human, whom I still respect as a human, before you press your lifestyle choice upon us all and espacially insidiously, to our naive and innocent children .
Well, if this is what you have to say, it is definitely not worth repeating anywhere else. Your unquestioned assumptions have been shot to bits not just by me but by several others on this forum, yet you continue to harp on them without showing any indication of reflecting on them yourself.
Do you even have gay friends in the first place? Even if you don't, you have probably encountered several closet gays anyway. So why are you not gay yet if you claim homosexuality can be influenced? Why isn't the whole of Sweden or Holland gay for that matter, since they legally recognise homosexual unions? What is your basis for saying even half of such societies turn homosexual?
Nobody is pushing their lifestyle on straight people; as da-vid says, paranoid folks like you are exerting the pressure. The only values that you refuse to accept are inclusiveness, understanding and tolerance.
Originally posted by xtreyier:
I had sought to avoid such topics, but i guess one can't hide from it, more so with so much ignorance being trump up, churning my stomach to the depths!You had desecrated and profaned nobles ideals by aligning your filthy lifestyle choice with it. I will attempt forwith to be as gracious as possible, since it is what I would have expect others to do similarly so.
Liberty for womanhood and enfranchisement from slavery are noble aims that perpetrate humanity and the human race. Your fight has nothing noble and will only doom mankind with your lifestyle choice.
As with parellalisms, you and many others foolishly chosed nobles ones, which are far from the ideals of which your group set to achieve. Allow me to show you a parallelsim that is more closer to your lifestyle choice.
Smoking had been with us for ages. No one knew of its bad effects, but with the advance of science, we realized it this century and had sought to eradicate it. It causes cancer later in one's life and as well as the financial savings for medical cure, not to mention the unnecessary loss of one precious life to societies.
But did we ban smoking? No, we didnt, because many are stuck on this habit. Societies understood the hazards of smoking as well as the difficulty to cure it, thus it needs time to fully eradicate smoking.
As such, smokers still had the right to smoke, but only in specific areas. And they must not influence others to join them in their LIFESTYLE choice, espacially the young. Is this an infringement to their rights? Should smokers form a lobby and demand they be allowed to smoke as they please, or others to be tolerant of them, or let them influence the young to join their crusade to continue to smoke, knowing full well it is a destructive habit to oneself and society?
While homosexuality will not cause cancer, it does even worse - destroy the family, societies and civilisation.
But you homosexuals, have a right to exist as humans, just don't attempt to promote your 'values' to others, and stay away from decent families, the way smokers do.
Another foolish and absurb concept to support the homosexual way of life as correct is to compare themselves to celibate monks and priests.
Their understanding of economics is sorely limited, but cannot be blamed for not everyone is educated on that subject. However, simple logic will dictate their theory invalidated because a society can only support x numbers of monks/priests.
So in the event if everyone or half becomes monks/priests - who will work the fields and manage trade? Such an economic order do not exists and have never before in the history of mankind. Simply because even our cavemen ancestors understood such concepts.
But can half the world be made up of heterosexuals and homosexuals? Most definately in this liberat day and age, because sexual conduct do not inhibits work performances. The dammage will only come later, when heterosexuals adults die out, their children will end up supporting half the society's population made of old and aged homosexuals.
Worse if the entire society becomes homosexual. The end cannot be too far away. Think, my fellow human, whom I still respect as a human, before you press your lifestyle choice upon us all and espacially insidiously, to our naive and innocent children .
Sorry, but I think your analogy sucks. Firstly, are you suggesting we let gay people only be gay in certain areas? Secondly, what's the homosexual equivelant of second-hand smoke? Homosexuality isn't contagious. If you see two guys kissing on the road, it doesn't make you gay. Therefore, your analogy fails.
Being gay isn't a lifestyle, btw. It's a sexual preference. Gay people still live in houses, have jobs, have friends, etc. Gay people don't attempt to convert straight people to homosexuality. All they want is to be treated fairly and be given equal rights. They're not threatening straight people in any way -- can you explain how? How exactly are gay people imposing their so-called "lifestyle" on straight people?
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:Well, if this is what you have to say, it is definitely not worth repeating anywhere else. Your unquestioned assumptions have been shot to bits not just by me but by several others on this forum, yet you continue to harp on them without showing any indication of reflecting on them yourself.
Do you even have gay friends in the first place? Even if you don't, you have probably encountered several closet gays anyway. So why are you not gay yet if you claim homosexuality can be influenced? Why isn't the whole of Sweden or Holland gay for that matter, since they legally recognise homosexual unions? What is your basis for saying even half of such societies turn homosexual?
Nobody is pushing their lifestyle on straight people; as da-vid says, paranoid folks like you are exerting the pressure. The only values that you refuse to accept are inclusiveness, understanding and tolerance.
Kuali, 'shot to bits' and similar vitrol are only words you said so. You can have a million page essay written to support homosexuality, but like smoking, it is destructive to humanity, a fact no one or a million words can deny.
In me, you have the most tolerant, patient and open rational minded person alive. I want very much to believe that we can co-exist, but reason and logic are supreme, which had kept humanity alive. It dictates the danger and extinction homosexuality will bring to mankind, more so in todays more liberal and casual ways.
We can only be tolerant, or at least i will, and i am sure my fellow citizens will do the same, but if your kind attempts to impose your values to us, which is impossible to penetrate, but onto our children, we as a society will have to make representation to our legislative to curtail such activities.
Live and let live. And see the logic and truth why your kind of lifestyle is reprehensible to society. The truth hurts. It always do. Society can help you if you want to change.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Kuali, 'shot to bits' and similar vitrol are only words you said so. You can have a million page essay written to support homosexuality, but like smoking, it is destructive to humanity, a fact no one or a million words can deny.
In me, you have the most tolerant, patient and open rational minded person alive. I want very much to believe that we can co-exist, but reason and logic are supreme, which had kept humanity alive. It dictates the danger and extinction homosexuality will bring to mankind, more so in todays more liberal and casual ways.
We can only be tolerant, or at least i will, and i am sure my fellow citizens will do the same, but if your kind attempts to impose your values to us, which is impossible to penetrate, but onto our children, we as a society will have to make representation to our legislative to curtail such activities.
Live and let live. And see the logic and truth why your kind of lifestyle is reprehensible to society. The truth hurts. It always do. Society can help you if you want to change.
Ultimately, your statements are bombastic but meaningless, and they are not supported by real world observations but a selective and heavily-tinted view of the history of civilisation. No discussion with you will work unless you evaluate your own ideas of "family", "society" and "homosexuality" as a whole. What are you trying to hide?