What do you think of this? | |||
| This is ridiculous, it's 2012! | 73 | 25.26% | |
| Backwards and ignorant | 64 | 22.15% | |
| This makes me sick | 24 | 8.30% | |
| I support this | 84 | 29.07% | |
| This poll is slightly biased | 26 | 9.00% | |
| I'd go gay for Andrespetmonkey | 18 | 6.23% | |
| Total: | 289 | ||
I voted I'd go gay for andrespetmonkey.
Look, people are free to do whatever the hell they want. But, ... when it comes to public morals, as part of a democracy, everyone is to be taken into account. Period.
"it's not morals either, it's a fact of life"
homosexuality being ok or not IS morals...whats wrong with you?
"If you don't want your kids learning about it, take your kids out of that class"
that would be a valid argument if i was part of a tiny minority...besides most parents obviously want to teach their own morals
*you didnt give me anything to reply to in your other post being that it was based on false assumptions lol
RolStoppable said:
1) and 2) So gay sex is just as right as heterosexual sex as long as it happens within the confines of marriage. This leads me to believe that you are a religious person which is perfectly fine. Now whether or not you personally find the idea of two men having sex with each other disgusting doesn't matter. Tolerance means to be accepting of others and as long as they aren't harming anyone with their actions, they should be allowed to do it. Gay men shouldn't need to justify that they like to sleep with other men, just like you shouldn't have to justify that you find women attractive. For a second, imagine how insulting it would be if your sexual preference was likened to bestiality. I am not all too familiar with the bible, but there should be something written in it along the lines of "don't treat others in a way you don't want to be treated in yourself". |
i guess all my posts have gone right passed you, i have stated many times, i feel all human beings should be have sex with which whatever gender they want regardless of my personal believes that it should only be between a married man and woman
| appolose said: I don't believe it's altogether fair to demonize a person for espousing a viewpoint (Thesis statement!); indeed, the whole democratic process is built upon the idea that people have individual minds, and individual minds can come to different conclusions. Take, for example, my own support of anti-abortion law. I hold to it because I am convinced that a fetus is a human being, and, as such, is entitled to all the rights of any other human being. And I am convinced of this fetus=human position because I have searched for differences between pre and post birth states, and those that I've found do not add up to, in my mind, such a difference that the fetus is anything but human. The whole process is honest: I have told myself no lies. What more could I do but commit myself to anti-abortionism? I've only got my own brain, and it told me my thinking was sound. Now, being, anti-abortion I may be tempted to think anyone who is pro-abortion to be a supporter of murder. For, in my mind, pro-abortion means the death of a human, for a fetus is human. Such a death would be murder to me. So shouldn't I conclude that a pro-abortionist is a murderer? Not at all. He has a different mind than me; mightn't his thought process have differed as well? Perhaps he, after an honest examination, did find differences between the pre and post birth stages such that they , in his mind, added up to make a non-human/human distinction. His support of pro-abortionism is only consistent with his thought process. Would I be able to tell, simply from his espousal of that position, whether or not he is being consistent? Certainly not. Shall I, then, condemn him for the process of reasoning he used to reach his conclusion, assuming he did use one? Even less so. What other conclusion was he suppose to have reached if his mind pointed only to that one? My only recourse is to grant him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he did indeed go about it the same way I did. I could not possibly criticize him for that while performing it myself. Now, one might argue that there are viewpoints that no one could possibly hold to honestly, things so clearly wrong that to hold to them would contradict an immutable principle. Of course, how could you know what basic principle set that person holds to without asking? Indeed, many religions have wildly varying principles. Perhaps, by implication, some of those principles force this person to conclude upon the particular viewpoint which he upholds. Which, again, is the same method you would use in order to honestly conclude upon something. |
I forgot to mention; I was addressing the usage of "homophobe."
Okami
To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made. I won't open my unworthy mouth.
"Each side has an opinion, at the end of the day though, one option helps kids, the other doesn't. You can't argue that, can you?"
Easily. It doesn't help kids to teach them that something is ok when it's wrong. How do i know it's wrong? I'll give the same answer you gave for bestiality...common sense.
I'm out. Nice talking to you bestialphobes.
RolStoppable said:
Sorry, but your actions contradict this post. If what you just said were true, you would have never gotten into the silly argument that involved incest and bestiality. |
no they dont, its consistant. my argument has been about whats wrong or right. not what is permissable or allowed to happen.
| room414 said: I'll give the same answer you gave for bestiality...common sense. I'm out. Nice talking to you bestialphobes. |
I thought I covered this a page or two ago.
Love and tolerate.
| room414 said: "it's not morals either, it's a fact of life" homosexuality being ok or not IS morals...whats wrong with you? "If you don't want your kids learning about it, take your kids out of that class" that would be a valid argument if i was part of a tiny minority...besides most parents obviously want to teach their own morals *you didnt give me anything to reply to in your other post being that it was based on false assumptions lol |
You have every right to pass on your morals, but YOUR morals should not impede the education of others, majority or not. If the majority wants to hold schools accountable for the sex education of their children then the schools should be liable for the education of homosexual sex. If the majority has a problem with this then they should remove sex education from school and teach their children on their own. Else it is out of their hands.
| room414 said: "Each side has an opinion, at the end of the day though, one option helps kids, the other doesn't. You can't argue that, can you?" Easily. It doesn't help kids to teach them that something is ok when it's wrong. How do i know it's wrong? I'll give the same answer you gave for bestiality...common sense. I'm out. Nice talking to you bestialphobes. |
Santorum is that you?
Your "morals" lack any rational or scientific truth behind them, therefore they are wrong. You are entitled to have them, of course.
pwin´ every other villain since 1994
| room414 said: "Each side has an opinion, at the end of the day though, one option helps kids, the other doesn't. You can't argue that, can you?" Easily. It doesn't help kids to teach them that something is ok when it's wrong. How do i know it's wrong? I'll give the same answer you gave for bestiality...common sense. I'm out. Nice talking to you bestialphobes. |
It's not wrong, it's just a fact of life and something natural.
Common sense doesn't cut it here either, I suggest you stay out of these threads in the future!
I see you still ignored the question I posed earlier, I guess you think it's ok for gay kids to comit suicide as long as your child doesn't learn about homosexuality.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
