View Poll Results: Homosexuality - your opinion?

Voters
132. You may not vote on this poll
  • Sick, a disease, not normal.

    54 40.91%
  • As long as they stay away from me, it's ok

    37 28.03%
  • We should tolerate it.

    41 31.06%
Page 32 of 55 FirstFirst ... 22272829303132333435363742 ... LastLast
Results 311 to 320 of 547

Thread: Homosexuality

  1. #311
    Member
    SubGnostic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    Monday, August 25th, 2008 @ 07:35 PM
    Location
    Kymenlaakso
    Gender
    Family
    Platonic love
    Religion
    Transhumanism
    Posts
    353
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    You seem to assume that animals and children can give informed consent. Unlike the tripe that NAMBLA and others forward children cannot give full consent. Without consent it is abuse/rape. Pedophilia is a term that is used as an excuse for all kinds of nastiness and has nothing to do with love.

    I never understood why people think that homosexuality is equivalent to rape, child abuse and bestiality. I can understand that it disturbs or disgusts some but the reaction is not that of a logical actor.
    di·ag·no·sis Audio Help (dī'əg-nō'sĭs) Pronunciation Key
    n. pl. di·ag·no·ses (-sēz)

    1. Medicine
    1. The act or process of identifying or determining the nature and cause of a disease or injury through evaluation of patient history, examination, and review of laboratory data.
    2. The opinion derived from such an evaluation.
    The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (F65.4) defines pedophilia as "a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age."[1]

    The APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition, Text Revision gives the following as its "Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia":[29][30]

    * A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger);
    * B. The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty;
    * C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.
    * Specify if: Limited to incest
    * Specify type: Exclusive Type (attracted only to children) Nonexclusive Type

    Neither the ICD or the APA diagnostic criteria require actual sexual activity with a pre-pubescent youths. The diagnosis can therefore be made based on the presence of fantasies or sexual urges alone, provided the subject meets the remaining criteria. "For individuals in late adolescence with pedophilia, no precise age difference is specified, and clinical judgment must be used" (p. 527 DSM).[30]

    Nepiophilia, also called infantophilia, is used to refer to a sexual preference for toddlers and infants (usually ages 0–3).[31]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Diagnosis

    The established view in the field of psychology is that zoophilia is a mental disorder.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestial...s_on_zoophilia

    Pedophilia and zoophilia are recognized as psychological disorders...so why not homosexuality? They are all sexual deviations. The only major difference between these sexual preferences is that homosexuals can actualize themselves and their urges within the confines of law.

  2. #312
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 15th, 2008 @ 11:19 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    212
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    A matter of relativity

    Is homosexuality abnormal?

    The entire purpose of sexual attraction is the promotion of intercourse between a female and male of the species in order that genetic information may be recombined, and offspring may be produced as a result of the union. So in this aspect, homosexuality is abnormal because it contravenes the design of sex.

    Is homosexuality immoral?

    The answer to this question is entirely dependent upon individual, or cultural values and view points. A better question would be: is homosexuality harmful to homosexuals or to the societies in which these homosexual reside.

    To me, it is a matter of relativity and priorities. I am personally more concerned with the rape of the American consumer by a banking system licensed by the government to engage in an out of control parasitic usury which has caused real hardship for millions of individuals and families. And I think most people are also more concerned with the 66 dollars charged to their bank accounts because their chequing account had a .22 cent negative balance than they are about the gender of the person their neighbour down the street is kissing. Gays can be ignored. Financial hardship or Poverty cannot. Priorities and relativity. I understand that other people have different views on the subject and I respect their rights to hold these views as I'd hope they'd respect my right to hold mine.

    Is homosexuality a sin?

    When people stop picking and choosing what religious proscriptions to which they will adhere and which they will ignore, I'll get back to you. When shrimp is no longer on the Western Menu, and children may be legally stoned for disrespecting their parents; I'll be the first to start waving the Bible at the homosexual community.

    Gays spread AIDS.

    Actually, an entire continent (Africa) is dying from HIV. Is the entire population of Africa homosexual? As I do not engage in recreational sexual intimacy with other men, gay or otherwise, nor with promiscuous women; I am not particularly concerned with who has or doesn't have HIV.

    Are gays of any consequence to the big picture. European racial survival?

    When I see two men walking down the street holding hands, my only thoughts are: that looks strange, and that doesn't look like much fun. However, I am more effected by the sight of a healthy young German woman walking down the street holding hands with a Nigerian or Somali man, because I realise within 9 months, there exists a very real possibility that woman will be pushing a pram containing a mulatto baby down that very street; one less beautiful, angelic Northern European child, and one more nail in the coffin of my race.

    Two gay men can bugger each other 6 ways to Sunday, and they aren't going to be making any babies; gay, black, Eurasian or otherwise. Unless of course, the Max Planck institute comes up with something.

    I can tolerate gays at a distance. I cannot tolerate the institutionalised miscegenation which can only result in the death of my people.

    For me it's all a matter of relativity.

    .Scear

  3. #313
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009 @ 03:34 AM
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Gender
    Posts
    2,606
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ladybright View Post
    You seem to assume that animals and children can give informed consent.
    Where did I say anything to make you believe that?

  4. #314
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Online
    Wednesday, February 11th, 2009 @ 03:07 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,132
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SubGnostic View Post
    Public opinion has shifted away from societal views bailing from the verities and practicalities of nature since the 60's. This process has been furthered by left-wing academics and ideological clerics by vilification and is an expression of a value system of an emotive rather than rational basis. It would be foolish to examine any pragmatic approaches towards extensive eugenics within a framework of modern societies and their values, because any sentiment of concern for the quality of human genepools is a taboo and expressing them makes you an Evil Person™. For me, the case of handing over voluntarily the formation of the genetic composition of an individual, let alone a population, to the blind randomness of gamete formation presents an ethical and moral dilemma.
    Well, first of all the public opinion is seldom a very good indicator of what is moral or ethical. Especially since it can be quite easily manipulated these days. And whatever any ivory tower left-wing pseudointellectuals have to say on the matter I don't have much time or patience for.



    And why not? The progressiveness of modern civilization even bestows a sense of high self-esteem for degenerates by polished semantics - they are "special". And yet the very nature of an "advanced civilization" will be the demise of it.
    That's a view that many people seem to share: that modern secular societies will inevitably self-destruct. I'm sure there's a point worth being taken into consideration in the argument. However, I'm not sure what a better alternative would be. After all, eugenics is by definition about advancing, not about regressing.

    So you deem the well-being of a populace to be of importance? How is it that this sentiment doesn't encompass the genetic health or aptitude of the populace? Consciously letting dysgenic processes gain momentum and being happy about it isn't concordant with concerns for the well-being of your native population.
    You are letting your obvious dislike of homosexuals cloud your judgment. I really would not consider the continued existence of homosexuals in the population a dysgenic process (unless their numbers suddenly began to increase dramatically, which I can't see happening outside of some SF scenarios). Besides it's precisely that type of attitudes that give people who advocate eugenics their bad rep in the first place.

    You also need to make up your mind on whether you believe homosexuality is a mental disorder or a genetic aberration. Because if it is the former, trying to root it out by messing with the genepool would be futile -- worse than futile actually. And if it is the latter, no amount of psychotherapy will "cure" people of it. Although I guess some type of non-voluntary medication or even neurosurgery might do the trick, if you'd be willing to go down that road.

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    How do you feel about bestiality and pedofilia?
    I feel that they are quite unrelated topics to the one at hand, ones that nevertheless often seem to be dragged out of the closet into the discussion by some militant homophobes.

  5. #315
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, July 28th, 2011 @ 06:35 AM
    Ethnicity
    Scottish (basically)
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Location
    Victoria
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,493
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Boche
    This Articles backs it up that Homosexuality is a Mental Difference and not just a Invidual Preference.
    It's a difference in degrees of twistedness and evil. Homosexuals simply have an unusually evil desire in them, they're addicted to it. It's a spiritual difference, although it may well result in physical differences.

    Some of them seem to have it from an early age, while some "turn" to it later. It's just like any other perversion. Some serial murderers have had a perverse tendency to bloodthirstyness from an early age, but others only become like that later.

    Many are so far gone that their preference is entirely for their own gender, while some are more "bi-sexual", and still others only have "temptations", and are a bit inclined that way, but more straight.

    Bestiality is still more evil, even more unnatural.

    People yield to smaller temptations, and become progressively worse, doing things they wouldn't have thought themselves capable of. I recently read of a psychologist (familiar with sadists) who said that it's as if sadist murderers have a "black hole" (like the black holes in space) inside them that has to be filled (i.e. satisfied) by evil acts. Every sadistic act seemingly gives temporary satisfaction, but in fact makes the hole even bigger, hence they need an even more horrible act to satisfy them next time.

    I think he's correct, but I would add that I think this "black hole" is in everybody, but much bigger in some than others, i.e. some are much more evil than others. The temptation to do something evil comes; they yield to it, and in doing so become more evil, which in turn means they are susceptible to an even worse temptation.

    Let me just define things here. God is the essence of goodness/holiness; evil is anything contrary to this. So, what I've said above is in this context.

    Quote Originally Posted by ladybright
    You seem to assume that animals and children can give informed consent. Unlike the tripe that NAMBLA and others forward children cannot give full consent. Without consent it is abuse/rape. Pedophilia is a term that is used as an excuse for all kinds of nastiness and has nothing to do with love.
    Aren't we talking about the urge itself? In both cases there is a perverse urge. You say paedophilia has nothing to do with love, but I think you'll find if paedophiles could satisfy their urges on someone who willingly complied, they would feel exactly the same way about it as homosexuals. The reason homosexuals don't usually have to go out and abuse people in order to satisfy themselves is that they can generally find a likeminded person.
    Mind you, some of them do commit attacks, but generally on easier targets, boys rather than men, but in such cases they are usually referred to as "paedophiles". I'd have to say I think trying to distinguish these perversions from each other is rather futile; they are simply sexual perversions, and in many cases someone will have a tendency to various forms of it.

    In fact I tend to think the paedophile urge (in a man at least) is if anything less depraved than the homosexual one (because children are more like women than adult men are), especially if the individual is only attracted to children of the opposite sex, although the younger they are, the worse it is. To be attracted to adult men is a kind of full 180 degree turn (or should I say, "twist"), if you know what I mean.

  6. #316
    Senior Member
    BeornWulfWer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, February 8th, 2019 @ 10:19 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt
    Ancestry
    West Country Zider 'ead.
    Subrace
    Brünn/Keltic-Nordic
    Country
    England England
    State
    Wessex Wessex
    Location
    Brycзstow,Sumorsǣte
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Family
    Engaged
    Occupation
    Slinger
    Politics
    Uncer Dæg Willa Becuman
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    1,144
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Homosexuality is not natural and is not progressive towards the survival of the human race.

    It is natures way of siphoning off the excess waste.
    "The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent."

    _________________

  7. #317
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009 @ 03:34 AM
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Gender
    Posts
    2,606
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ladybright View Post
    This has nothing to do with the topic but someone always brings it up. Homosexuality is a naturally occurring situation with humans and other animals. It has nothing to with pedophilia or bestiality and bringing it up just clouds the issue.
    It is very related to the topic. There have been restrictions placed on sexual behavior since the beginning of recorded history and the same argument from "love" that was used against laws banning interracial marriage is now being used to promote homosexual marriage, underage marriage, and animal marriage.

    It does not cloud the issue at all as the issues are intertwined. I believe that should we allow homosexual marriage because of "love" we might soon allow for other forms of perversion to use the same argument and it does not follow that because homosexuality is a "naturally occuring situation" it is good. There are many naturally-occuring things that are neither good nor useful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Death and the Sun
    I feel that they are quite unrelated topics to the one at hand, ones that nevertheless often seem to be dragged out of the closet into the discussion by some militant homophobes.
    I assure you they are related and you can take your name-calling elsewhere as I hope the Althing will allow no more of it. eyes:
    Quote Originally Posted by Death and the Sun
    Preferably one where one form of sexuality is not promoted over all the others, but one where people are simply left alone to live their own lives as they wish.
    It was a friend who once told me that libertarianism was a guise for perversion. It seems as though he may have been right.

    I believe that one form of sexuality should be promoted over all others and that people should not be left alone to live as they wish should they wish to do wrong. You believe that gay sex, child sex, and animal sex are unrelated subjects to one another, but the manner in which their proponents defend them is usually based upon the use of single word. The word "love" can elicit very strong emotions. I can not help but be disgusted that the love a man has for a woman and a woman has for a man is being compared to the perversive "love" a man feels for another man. One need not look much further to find the similarly disgusting comparison of heterosexual love to "love" between an adult and a child and "love" a man and an animal. I believe that "love" as I regard it can not exist between two members of the same sex, or between a man and an animal, or between an adult and a child, or between two members of different races and I am sad that such a beautiful word could be perverted to suit the vicious needs of an immoral person. I would rather it was stricken from our language and never spoken again than to watch it be reduced to a connotation not so dissimilar to that of lust.

  8. #318
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Online
    Wednesday, February 11th, 2009 @ 03:07 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,132
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    I assure you they are related and you can take your name-calling elsewhere as I hope the Althing will allow no more of it. eyes:
    Name-calling? I wasn't talking about you or about any other specific person, mind you. Also, I don't see how calling a militant homophobe a militant homophobe constitutes name-calling. I'm not into euphemisms.


    It was a friend who once told me that libertarianism was a guise for perversion. It seems as though he may have been right.
    I'm not sure how that is related to the current topic, as I am not a libertarian. Nor am I a pervert.

    I believe that one form of sexuality should be promoted over all others and that people should not be left alone to live as they wish should they wish to do wrong.
    Are you really sure you want to advocate some type of outside intervention into the most intimate areas of people's lives? I can't think of a more sure-fire way of making them hate you, and getting rid of you as soon as they can.

    You believe that gay sex, child sex, and animal sex are unrelated subjects to one another, but the manner in which their proponents defend them is usually based upon the use of single word. The word "love" can elicit very strong emotions. I can not help but be disgusted that the love a man has for a woman and a woman has for a man is being compared to the perversive "love" a man feels for another man. One need not look much further to find the similarly disgusting comparison of heterosexual love to "love" between an adult and a child and "love" a man and an animal. I believe that "love" as I regard it can not exist between two members of the same sex, or between a man and an animal, or between an adult and a child, or between two members of different races and I am sad that such a beautiful word could be perverted to suit the vicious needs of an immoral person. I would rather it was stricken from our language and never spoken again than to watch it be reduced to a connotation not so dissimilar to that of lust.
    "Love" is a word that can mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. It belongs in the realm of sonnets and other types of romantic poetry, not in the terminology any social policies should be formulated with.

  9. #319
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009 @ 03:34 AM
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Gender
    Posts
    2,606
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Death and the Sun View Post
    Name-calling? I wasn't talking about you or about any other specific person, mind you. Also, I don't see how calling a militant homophobe a militant homophobe constitutes name-calling. I'm not into euphemisms.
    I misunderstood you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Death and the Sun View Post
    I'm not sure how that is related to the current topic, as I am not a libertarian. Nor am I a pervert.
    Inasmuch as the "keep your laws off of my body" type of people might all hold libertarian views, I believe it is relevant.

    I am unaware of the Litmus required for one to call oneself a "Libertarian" but I believe you espoused a libertarian view. I do not know you well enough to call you a pervert and I apologize if it seemed as though I was.
    Quote Originally Posted by Death and the Sun View Post
    Are you really sure you want to advocate some type of outside intervention into the most intimate areas of people's lives? I can't think of a more sure-fire way of making them hate you, and getting rid of you as soon as they can.
    I believe marriage should be regulated and it does not seem as though the enforcement of sodomy, bestiality, pedofilia, and miscegenation laws have proven to be unpractical. I realize that might be up for debate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Death and the Sun View Post
    "Love" is a word that can mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. It belongs in the realm of sonnets and other types of romantic poetry, not in the terminology any social policies should be formulated with.
    I agree.

    EDIT: I imagine it is very hypocritical for me to voice my dislike of libertarianism and have "Libertarianism" listed in my profile under politics. I suppose I will need to change it. :p

  10. #320
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Saturday, July 4th, 2009 @ 08:41 PM
    Ethnicity
    Icelandic, 1/4 Eng
    Subrace
    Keltic-Nordic
    Gender
    Posts
    504
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    The differences between homo- and heterosexual people are much greater than most people want them to be. In regard to the social aspect of this, I don't find it to be problematic.

Similar Threads

  1. Homosexuality and Christianity...
    By Klegutati in forum Christianity
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: Friday, March 29th, 2019, 02:21 PM
  2. Homosexuality in Germany
    By Gareth Lee Hunter in forum Psychology, Behavior, & Neuroscience
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Saturday, September 29th, 2018, 12:58 PM
  3. The Vikings and Homosexuality
    By svartabrandr in forum Viking Age
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: Monday, June 27th, 2016, 06:43 PM
  4. Homosexuality in Ancient Greece
    By Roderic in forum Ancient
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sunday, September 18th, 2011, 07:47 PM
  5. Homosexuality: It's In Your Genes
    By Tryggvi in forum Medical & Behavioral Genetics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Saturday, March 4th, 2006, 05:11 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •