| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Gay Rights | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 25 2005, 11:20 PM (696 Views) | |
| cookie | Jun 25 2005, 11:20 PM Post #1 |
|
Newbie
|
I still just don't get it, why, in this day and age, do so many people still oppose gay rights? Frankly, I just don't care if someone wants to be gay it doesn't affect me. So why are there still people against it? Can someone explain?
|
![]() |
|
| Amanda | Jun 25 2005, 11:54 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Senior Carp
|
|
|
[size=5] We should tolerate eccentricity in others, almost to the point of lunacy, provided no one else is harmed.[/size] "Daily Telegraph", London July 27 2005 | |
![]() |
|
| jon-nyc | Jun 26 2005, 01:07 AM Post #3 |
|
Cheers
|
Welcome to the forum, Cookie. I agree with your sentiments. Freud's theory was that many heterosexuals repress homosexual tendencies, some much more strongly than others. Homophobia is the name for what Freud saw as heterosexuals' "vigorous counter-attitudes" to homosexuality. There have actually been empirical studies to back this up, where, among heterosexual men, a positive correlation was show to exist between a negative attitude against gays and the feeling of significant sexual arousal to homoerotic stimuli. Of course, if you actually talk to a homophobe, you'll get an entirely different answer. Firstly, they'll euphemize their homophobia, describing it more as 'discomfort' than 'fear'. Secondly, its common for them to deny it outright, claiming to have nothing against gays, but simply to be against 'special protections' for them (such as the right to enjoy equal benefits in society). Some of course will blame god. As much as they want to appreciate and accept homosexuals, they are simply unable to because of god. They say god thinks homosexuality, like the eating of shellfish, is abominable. Kind of like a generation ago when they claimed that, as much as they'd like to see desegregation and the mixing of the races, THEY JUST CANT. Its just not what god had in mind. Or (if like me you're a hostory buff) you'll remember its like the argument that was made against equal rights for women. We'd LOVE to do that, they said, but god's against it. I know some of this may seem outlandish, but if you stick around and return to this thread, you might just see a demonstration. |
| In my defense, I was left unsupervised. | |
![]() |
|
| Mark | Jun 26 2005, 05:20 AM Post #4 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
|
|
___.___ (_]===* o 0 When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells | |
![]() |
|
| plays88keys | Jun 26 2005, 05:44 AM Post #5 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
|
| You can never get enough of what you don't need to make you happy. | |
![]() |
|
| TomK | Jun 26 2005, 05:59 AM Post #6 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Gay rights: For me, they can "do" whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes. I also think they should be able to make contracts with one another for the disposal of goods after death, insurance benefits, etc. Actually, those kinds of contracts also should be available to people with non-sexual relations, too. I don't believe in "gay marriage" though. Anything that disintegrates the one man one woman raising children paradigm is problematical for me. |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jun 26 2005, 06:07 AM Post #7 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
But homosexual couples raise children with or without "marriage", Tom. They do it when they are allowed to adopt. They do it when they have children through in vitro fertilization with sperm donors or with surrogates. They do it when they have heterosexual sex to impregnate themselves. They do it when they have kids before they realize that they what they really want is a homosexual relationship. So, I think the issue of gay marriage has to be separated from raising kids, since that happens anyway. As for gay marriage, if everyone were where you are in terms of contract rights, and if tax laws were adjusted similarly, I have a hard time seeing what all the fuss is about. If you're willing to give homosexual couples legal rights that are equivalent to marriage, then why do homosexuals care whether it's described as "marriage" or not? For that matter, why do heterosexuals care? At that point, it's not substance, it's just cosmetics. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| TomK | Jun 26 2005, 06:58 AM Post #8 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Quirt, When I was a hot shot NYC management consultant I would have less of an an argument for the sanctity of marriage than I have now owning a factory. In the upper strata of society--people could get away with a lot more flexibility in marriage laws than they do at the lower end. I've seen the lack of family structure DISTROY an entire generation of black men. It's horrific. I don't want any lessening or elution of the marriage laws. As a matter of fact, if it were up to me--I'd make divorce a lot more difficulty to get. While I once may have been a marriage traditionalist because of religious reasons--I am now firmly convinced of the sancitity of marriage for practical reasons. I sincerely feel for kenny and other gays that want to be "just like us." But in the end--they aren't. Gays should think about making some traditions of their own--they need to have their own Kwansaaization.
|
![]() |
|
| apple | Jun 26 2005, 07:03 AM Post #9 |
|
one of the angels
|
it's the most concrete institution to make sure people live up to their responsibilities..... |
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jun 26 2005, 08:00 AM Post #10 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I think it is plain old "us vs. them" ism. Everyone wants a better life than the next guy. It's competition. We are wired to function in a world of limited resources. The animals most successful at this have sent their DNA into the future. In this case it is not competition for food or territory. It is social position and the benefits this affords. Of course humans are too clever to just tell the truth about stuff like this. So they make up exclusionary systems like religions, morals, marriage etc. This is very groovy for the majority. They make themselves the good people. Which, by default, makes gays bad. The majority is happy as they maintain the status quo. It is not surprising they are oblivious to the truth. They have been taught otherwise since birth, by others who have been taught otherwise since birth. I have been forced to figure this out because I am gay and for some reason had the gall to try to be happy. BTW cookie, if you are an actual new person with 3 posts and not a sock puppet I'll tell you that I am a 48 year old gay man. |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jun 26 2005, 08:03 AM Post #11 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Other than the reference regarding the *common good* I pretty much agree with the Bishop of Calgary's stand on this issue: Bishop Henry - Pastoral Letter to be Released January 15-16, 2005 However, as the next link will show, tolerance among the Canadian Left does not extend to organized religion, Catholicism in particular: Complaints before Alberta Human Rights Commission concerning Bishop Henry's pastoral letter Now, despite the Government of Canada's repeated statements that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right of religious institutions to choose not to perform "same sex marriages ", I suspect that Bill C-38- which incidently will go to vote next week- is but the first step in taking away the right of all religious rites of marriage to create marriage as an exclusively secular institution. All the same IMO the joke however is on them (the Government and the activists)-marriage is something much less than matrimony which can exist only and exclusively between a man and woman. |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 26 2005, 09:54 AM Post #12 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Someone out there (Frank?) should do a Mendelian projection to show how quickly homosexuals would take their "gene" out of the gene pool if allowed to marry freely and they did not reproduce. Maybe the best way to eradicate homosexuality is to allow it to growbe expressed unfettered -- with serious penalties for activites between adults (over 18) and youth. A modest proposal... You are right, Quirt, that homosexuals do impregnate themselves -- this is a gross act against the child that in justice a child has the right to know his or her parent. But then again, children are commodified in these sorts of situations. Jon -- homophobe is a term of bogus science. Freud projected the Oedipus complex because when he was a teen his dad remarried to a hot little fraulein in her 20s. Siggy was a psycho-sexual basket case -- like Kinsey -- and their arguments don't carry much weight for me. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jun 26 2005, 09:57 AM Post #13 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Gay babies come from straight sex. It's natural. |
![]() |
|
| apple | Jun 26 2005, 10:00 AM Post #14 |
|
one of the angels
|
that is a great line |
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 26 2005, 10:03 AM Post #15 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
So there is no "gay gene"? I thought that was your guys' whole argument. Nature or nurture, which is it? In my opinion, no such thing as a "gay baby" -- they are presexual. It has a lot to do with environment, self imaging issues, experiences of first sex awareness, etc. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| apple | Jun 26 2005, 10:05 AM Post #16 |
|
one of the angels
|
hello ivory.... the fact that homosexuality occurs and doesn't for the most part reproduce is enough study for those with both common and studied sense. You assume the 'gene' would be passed directly onto the offspring.. How did the gays come about anyway..? Wonder if the trait skips a generation or is recessive or many other possible scenarios.. |
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 26 2005, 10:18 AM Post #17 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Could be, or it could be that the previously furtive nature of homosexuality allowed the gene to continue under the radar. If so, then it might soon be bred out of the race. That said, I don't buy the idea of a gay gene -- the Mendelian analysis is more of a thought exercise. Frank was supposed to bring his research to the table on this question, which I am still eagerly awating. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| apple | Jun 26 2005, 10:36 AM Post #18 |
|
one of the angels
|
i suppose time will tell |
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jun 26 2005, 10:58 AM Post #19 |
|
I love these threads! ...but for now, I'll keep my mouth shut. TomK basically said what I would have said. Do what you want in the privacy of your home, I don't care. And give rights, such as living wills, (NOT tax breaks), hospital visitation rights, etc to your closest friends and family...whether you are sexually active with them or not, who cares. But when you use the rationale that "I was born this way, I can't help who I am, I can't help who I'm attracted to, I'm not hurting anyone", you must then extend such acceptance to others who claim the same rational, such as polygamists, incest practitioners, having sex in public, walking around naked, bestiality, and MANY others that can logically claim the same rationale. Perhaps those other issues will not be legal right away, but personally...each person MUST allow those actions if they allow the gay action that uses the exact same reasoning; all so that one would not be found guilty of a hypocritical and selectively discriminatory stance...not to mention integrity. There are other sociological and religious arguments, but that's all I'm saying for now. Looks like I didn't keep my mouth shut. ![]()
|
![]() |
|
| Mikhailoh | Jun 26 2005, 02:03 PM Post #20 |
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
|
OH.. so NOW you're going to discriminate against bestiality TOO?!?! I told my love when I read this 'Ewe will not believe this!! That 89th is a baaaahhhhhhhd man!" |
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball | |
![]() |
|
| Fizzygirl | Jun 26 2005, 02:20 PM Post #21 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
If people could focus on being kind, loving and compassionate human beings instead of someone's sexual preference, this world would be a much better place. I don't get it.
|
|
Cats are intended to teach us that not everything in nature has a purpose. ~ Garrison Keillor My latest videos. | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jun 26 2005, 02:48 PM Post #22 |
|
:lol: *snort snort* :lol:
|
![]() |
|
| dolmansaxlil | Jun 26 2005, 02:50 PM Post #23 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
That makes two of us. |
|
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson My Flickr Photostream | |
![]() |
|
| dolmansaxlil | Jun 26 2005, 02:52 PM Post #24 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I fail to see how allowing gays to marry at all changes what straight relationships are like. Besides, since gays are allowed to have/raise/adopt children, wouldn't it make sense to allow them to provide the same sort of stability you claim marriage provides? |
|
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson My Flickr Photostream | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jun 26 2005, 03:13 PM Post #25 |
|
Dol, not if one disagrees with the adoption scenario as well. Allowing gays to marry, you do realize, validates their rationale of "being born that way" right? And then if someone uses the EXACT same reasoning, we must allow them to get the same rights. It's better to draw the line with marriage somewhere, and I think it should be one man-one woman. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







I love these threads! 


4:58 PM Jul 10