...the PRACTICE of same-sex sexual activity merits unanimous condemnation,and schools should teach children that it can never be justified.The trumped-up excuse of "being gay" should not be validated by our educational system.Those afflicted by same-sex sexual attraction need help,but sympathy toward them becomes harmful to them if ever extended to attempts to gratify their attractions.We don't encourage alcoholics to get drunk,nor is it "bigotry" to insist that they stay sober!
42 comments
"the PRACTICE of same-sex sexual activity merits unanimous condemnation"
No, it doesn't, actually. Homophobia, on the other hand...
"We don't encourage alcoholics to get drunk,nor is it "bigotry" to insist that they stay sober!"
Sure, but most people who drink aren't aloholics, and most gays aren't addicted to sex.
It is an insult to God to engage in same-sex sexual activity outside of certain special holy circumstances. Circumstances that God clearly intended homosexuality to be reserved for, to be used only as a sort of emergency Christian ceremony in lieu of the usual easily enacted Christian celebrations such as persecution, bullying and misogyny.
Therefore, it is incumbent on schools to teach that homosexuality is only for Godly use where certain special circumstances may arise, eg. a celibate male priesthood, such as in the Catholic Church, or in countries with huge prison populations full of male Christian criminals, such as in America. In these special circumstances only does God approve the use of the Sacred Sodomy Rituals.
Unanimous condemnation? You mean you and that mouse in your pocket?
Bad analogy time: Being an alcoholic is actually bad for one's health, being gay isn't.
Humiliation never, EVER helped an alcoholic stay sober, and humiliation never made a gay person straight. All humiliation does is provide a cheap thrill for sadistic bullies like yourself and the rest of NOM.
...the PRACTICE of fundametalist religious activity merits unanimous condemnation, and schools should teach children that it can never be justified. The trumped-up excuse of "being born-again" should not be validated by our educational system. Those afflicted by fundamentalist religious beliefs need help, but sympathy toward them becomes harmful to them if ever extended to attempts to gratify their delusions. We don't encourage alcoholics to get drunk, nor is it "bigotry" to insist that they stay sober!
Fixed it for you, oh so gloriously.
*source* http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/facts_mental_health.HTML
In 1973, the weight of empirical data, coupled with changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Some psychiatrists who fiercely opposed their action subsequently circulated a petition calling for a vote on the issue by the Association's membership. That vote was held in 1974, and the Board's decision was ratified.
Oh goody, yet another fundie who's obssessed with gay sex.
You know, Louis E., if you weren't constantly thinking about what gay people do in bed, them existing while homosexual would have absolutely no impact on your life whatsoever.
"the PRACTICE of same-sex sexual activity merits unanimous condemnation"
Why?
"We don't encourage alcoholics to get drunk,nor is it "bigotry" to insist that they stay sober!"
The question is one of harm. We don't encourage alcoholics to get squiffy because its harmful. We don't care about homosexuality because it isn't.
Comparing gays to alcoholics is a false analogy, and you should be smart enough to know that. Homosexual sex doesn't really harm anybody, unless and STD is transferred, and that happens with heterosexual sex too. The only thing that needs to be condemned is vile bigotry from the likes of you, who can't just live and let live.
From the same person:
As a non-religious heterosexual who would never marry in any state (including my own) that has replaced bona fide marriage with something same-sex couples are eligible for,I regret that opposite-sex couples are not moving their weddings to other jurisdictions where it is still possible to be legally husband and wife rather than Partner One and Partner Two or Spouse A and Spouse B.It is not individual marriages that SSM destroys,but the essence of marriage itself.
So he admits that SSM doesn't ruin people's marriages, it just ruins his preconceived notions of marriage, and the purely imaginary essence it has. He also apparently loves the titles 'husband and wife' so much that it's the only reason why SSM is horrible, despite the fact that they're both still SPOUSE A and SPOUSE B.
Long story short, he's pissy over a little title change, finds change scarey, and hates it. That's why he wants to deny people equal rights.
It's a false analogy. Quite a few people kill others by driving while drunk, but very few do so by driving while screwing, and of those, a minuscule number have been driving while screwing someone of the same sex.
I am about to say something you will hear very few straight men say. (Let me qualify that: very few men of any sexual persuasion will say what I'm about to say, but my experience is hetero so work with me here...)
I don't like blow jobs.
There. I said it. I don't like to receive them. I don't like to watch them in my porn. (The way the girls have to stretch out their cheeks to do it, does absolutely nothing for me... I think the girls are much more attractive when performing other sexual acts...)
Now that that's out of the way, here's something you'll never hear me say in any seriousness: Let's ban blow jobs. No one should ever give a blow job, receive a blow job, or learn how to do it.
You know why you'll never hear me say it? Because I don't want to ban them. Just because they're not for me, that doesn't mean they're not for anyone else. Some people like receiving them, others like giving them. Some people like watching them. That's fine. Just don't include me in any of those groups.
See what I did there? I took a consensual sex act that I don't like, and basically said, "No thanks!" for myself but left the door open for someone else to do it if they so choose and would like it.
Is that really so difficult?
Keep out of schools. They should be taught to respect others even if they are different rather than being taught to be ignorant, bigoted, and hateful, like you, Louie. Grow up and grow a pair.
we also don't bully drunks into committing suicide or prevent them from drinking
btw, homosexuality is not an affliction, disease, disability, or anything to be ashamed of
What business is it of yours, who someone else is attracted to?
You can't "help" gayness anymore than you can "help" tallness.
There are numerous examples of people who have been "helped", but the only result is that they live unhappy lives of denial, and many, many commit suicide.
An alcoholic is a danger to himself and to the surroundings; that's why we encourage them to stay sober. A homosexual poses no threat to anyone. Being attracted to guys is no more dangerous than being attracted to blonds or big boobs.
Annnnnnd why is that? Explain /why/, rationally, my sexing up another girl would be worthy of condemnation. Please note that I said /rationally/ -- the laws of Bronze Age nomads are completely out of context and are therefore invalid.
Translation: Explain why it is that girl on girl is TEH EBIL, and don't say 'Because God said so.'
Drunks are dangerous. Gay people, not really. Bigotry can, however, be dangerous.
So take your irrational inane bigotry and stick it!
Also, Nom om om om om.
"We don't encourage alcoholics to get drunk,nor is it "bigotry" to insist that they stay sober!
Except that after a night of non-stop gay sex, people usually don't get into their cars and have an automobile accident because they're gay-sexed out of their minds. You see where this analogy of yours breaks down, right? No?
Carry on, then.
There is indeed such a thing as sex addiction and it is a far more serious matter than most would realize but whether you're shacking up with members of the same or opposite sex is ultimately as irrelevant as your ill-conceived analogy.
Being gay is about as valid an 'excuse' for being horny and/or genuinely infatuated with another person as being straight is. Are you saying Nature and Man are not as God intended, that he screwed up His pet project and is therefore fallible?
"...the PRACTICE of having black skin merits unanimous condemnation,and schools should teach children that it can never be justified.The trumped-up excuse of "being black" should not be validated by our educational system.Those afflicted by black skin need help,but sympathy toward them becomes harmful to them if ever extended to attempts to gratify their attractions. We don't encourage alcoholics to get drunk,nor is it "bigotry" to insist that they stay sober!"
The funny thing is, while we may not encourage alcoholics to get drunk, they are perfectly entitled to get as pissed up wasted as they want at any time. It is perfectly legal for them to go, buy alcohol and get drunk. Similarly, I have seen people pressure others into drinking and getting drunk. On the other hand I have never seen a gay guy trying to get someone strait to have gay sex with them.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.