...blood...boiling.....angry......

[Marko]

I belive that abortion is murder (I don't know if I would ever do it - say to my girlfriend to do it that is, but if my baby gets aborted I'll think that I was a part of a murder), I think that homosexuality is "wrong", or at least unnatural, but I don't condemnm gay people - just guys stay away from me I don't like it.

But this Hellhouse is STUPID STUPID and EVIL.

I'm chatolic and I hate when church tries to scare the belivesrs. I don't want to belive in and worship an angry god who only waits to pusih you! God is mercifull, and heaven in reward - all he can do is not give you a reward...
Hellhouse is doing a great thing for the devil - he comes in many shapes, and I think that this could be one...

[DrTeeth]

I could see why people would think homosexuality is wrong for religious reasons or just because they think it's disgusting. But I never understood the "It's not natural"-argument. What is natural? Is flying a plane natural? Is having a debate through the internet natural?

We human beings have evolved up to that point that most of out actions could be considered as "not natural" if you compare them to the actions of other species (although homosecuality does occur in the animal kingdom).

One could even argue; "Hey, humans are part of nature and some humans are homosexual. So homosexuality must be a part of nature."

[DrTeeth]

Oh, and this Hell House thing is ofcourse rediculous although I agree with them on the drinking/driving part.

[melon]

I agree with Marko on one point: I believe that abortion is murder as well, and, regarding the hell house, that was probably the least inflammatory condemnation of them all, with the least amount of stereotypes. However, that was the isolated incident in that disastrous "Hell House."

But, regarding the "natural" vs. "unnatural" argument, I think humans need to reevaluate what is "natural." For instance, in nature, sexuality is incredibly diverse. Not only are there XY females (Jamie Lee Curtis, for instance, is one), not only are there the intersexed (a.k.a., pseudohermaphrodism), and not only does homosexuality naturally and regularly occur in the animal kingdom. All of these are "nature"; none of these occurances can be forced upon people, nor can people be "cured" of it, but that those who have been called to be these in birth live completely normal and productive lives. In fact, the only trouble they may encounter is ridicule from those who have arbitarily labelled them "unnatural."

I think what people fail to understand is that sexuality is an incredibly complex part of our genetics that not even scientists can fully understand. For instance, there is all this controversy over a "gay gene," but no one has found the "straight gene" either. And what we do know regarding sexuality in-utero is that it is a very chaotic process, requiring several genes, not to mention several hormones. You must realize that every fetus develops both female and male reproductive tracts, and one missing gene or one missing hormone, and that human idea of what is "natural" is gone. I encourage everyone to pick up a college-level introductory genetics book. It's quite enlightening, to say the least.

That, however, doesn't mean that these people are "unnatural," nor should we judge them for what is an act of God. I think God's idea of "natural" is different, as evidenced by His design of nature, and it is our challenge to think beyond what humans have constrained God to be.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time

[Marko]

Sory I have to draw back that "unnatural" thing I said. I have nothing against gays, but I fell "fisicly sick" on the thought about it, but on the other hand (and here I'm a big hipocryt) I love the thought of two gay girls in bed (off course they should be beautifull).

So sory once more, I'm aware of my mistake...

[MysteryGirl]

What a hoot. I clicked on the "No, I don't have the guts" (or whatever) button just to see what it would say. And it leads you to a Teletubbies site. Er...say WHAT?? Is the teletubbies supposed to be hell?? LMAO!

Incidentally, has anyone here read the "Conversations With God" books? I don't totally buy everything it says, but the parts about relationships, and about homosexuals, and etc. really make sense to me. I'm a straight lady, and I have several gay male friends. Just one answer I can't get out of them, though...why do gay man flirt with women???? I mean, WHAT is the POINT??? I mean, I'd rather know up front that a guy is gay, then have a gay man flirt with me...get me "interested" in him...then I find out later that he's gay!

------------------
"You're dangerous...'cause you're honest"

[adam's_mistress]

Originally posted by melon:
A|catura, I only wish you had been here back in November 2000 and February 2001 the last times I fought that battle. An awesome spectacle indeed, but, unfortunately, led to the banning a few overzealous individuals.

Call me mellowed and more restrained, but I'd rather not get into that mess again like I did twice before. It's a complicated religious issue, compounded by several issues of Biblical translation through the centuries, the question of errancy or inerrancy, and also historial and sociological issues. It's surely a mounting task that has no easy way around it.

It is my hope that this thread does not turn into another homosexuality debate, but I admire your initiative, and, if fate determines that this does become another embittered and ugly homosexuality debate, I will enter my input as necessary. However, it is my hope that it never gets to that point. It is my hope that people here will practice sufficient restraint.

Melon

I was a newbie with a different name back during those heated debates. I remember a lot of talk about "have you tasted my Jesus" and some fuckwitted claims that there's supposedly a magic pill that "cures" homosexuality even though she (who was a mod at the time) could provide no rational explanation for it or a link so we could see this for ourselves. It made me want to puke actually, and the abuse directed toward melon was the most disgusting thing I could've ever imagined happening in a U2 forum. But he kept his ground in as civil a manner as he could and for that, I've recognized him as an admirable man with strong convictions at the very least.

Yet very little was done until the damage was alreayd spread. The topics weren't closed, nor were topics and inflammatory posts deleted. Oh no, the damage stacked up for an eternity and it was vile. So vile in fact, that I washed my hands of Interference until now. Unfortunately my friends whom I told to "check out this cool site" were turned off by the hostility, rage, self righteousness, and complete idiocy that made a mockery of the many intelligent people here.

We're not going to always get along. We're not always going to agree. The nature of this forum invites heated debate. But if this thread gets out of hand like it did in November and February I will have lost all hope that many people here can rationally debate in a civil manner.

Not that any of you would bat an eyelash if I left.

[Marko]

One thing that I don't get about hemosexuals is: why are some homosexual men dreesing up and acting a woman so they could attract a gay men? Gay man like men, so why are some of them searching for men that look like women? it's confusing - and this sort of homosexuality is peversion for me - this is certanlly not natural. If you are a gay guy than you should be atracted to a men, and not a woman look a like.
Same goes to lesbians - why do they have masculant pose? Dress like men, have man haircut? Please someone, explain that to me.
I Stand at my point that that kind of homosexualism is totaly twisted and that it has roots in some trauma history or disturbance or something similar... Show me I'm wrong...

[Salome]

Originally posted by adam's_mistress:
We're not going to always get along. We're not always going to agree. The nature of this forum invites heated debate. But if this thread gets out of hand like it did in November and February I will have lost all hope that many people here can rationally debate in a civil manner.

even though I think of this place as one where mods should be very careful before they close / delete threads, we will end threads which end up in insulting people in general and members of this forum in particular

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it

[adam's_mistress]

Originally posted by Salome:
even though I think of this place as one where mods should be very careful before they close / delete threads, we will end threads which end up in insulting people in general and members of this forum in particular

Right on! I have to say that it would definitely be a challange to mod a forum such as this...

[melon]

Originally posted by Marko:
One thing that I don't get about hemosexuals is: why are some homosexual men dreesing up and acting a woman so they could attract a gay men? Gay man like men, so why are some of them searching for men that look like women? it's confusing - and this sort of homosexuality is peversion for me - this is certanlly not natural. If you are a gay guy than you should be atracted to a men, and not a woman look a like.
Same goes to lesbians - why do they have masculant pose? Dress like men, have man haircut? Please someone, explain that to me.
I Stand at my point that that kind of homosexualism is totaly twisted and that it has roots in some trauma history or disturbance or something similar... Show me I'm wrong...

Marko, please don't take this the wrong way, but your perceptions of all homosexuals are riddled with stereotypes. Yes, some homosexual men do act effeminate. However, there are many homosexual men who are as straight-acting as you can imagine. But here's the paradox. If they're straight-acting, how would you know that they were gay or not? And you won't, unless you know them personally. Hence, one is then under the illusion that all gay men act like women. Heck, this is even a conflict amongst the gay community itself. Many of the straight-acting gay men don't find it attractive either, and, you may find this to be interesting, but from my experience, the effeminate gays are not the majority of the gay community, but they are the most visible, and the media has been quick to stereotype all gays as being this way.

This goes the same with lesbians. While there are butch lesbians, there are plenty of lesbians who look just the same as straight women. Once again, unless you know them personally, you would just assume they are straight.

I completely disagree with your stereotypical perceptions of homosexuals, and I'm even more saddened by the fact that you think it's "totally twisted" and "has roots in trauma history or disturbance." The American Psychological Association disproved this long ago in the 1970s, concluding that it is unchangable and that most "trauma" actually is caused by an unsupportive and homophobic environment. From my experience working within the GLBT community, this is always the case.

I've pointed out the troubles in genetic sexuality amongst humans, and I've also pointed out it's regular occurrence in nature. In fact, if you don't believe me on the occurrence of homosexuality in nature, rotten.com has a very flippant photo essay on it, including photos of group sex among same-sex animals. If animals are purely the product of genetics, as they are incapable of human emotion, then how is "homosexualism" rooted in "disturbance"? Just because you are personally disgusted by something, it doesn't mean that it's unnatural, nor does it mean that those who are homosexual are disturbed. The "big bad homosexuals" aren't gonna come out and hurt you.

I don't like fundamentalist Christians. That doesn't mean that I think we should suppress them or deny rights to them. Adults should be free to do as they wish, as long as it is consentual and as long as it doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights. As it stands, the only people getting their rights trampled over in this situation are the homosexuals, and that is not right.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time

[melon]

Originally posted by adam's_mistress:
Not that any of you would bat an eyelash if I left.

Aww...I actually thank you for posting. Sometimes this place is incredibly entrenched with the same people making the same arguments, generally scaring away newbies or anyone who is not a regular here.

I must admit that, in first coming here, I was quite shocked at the level of conservatism in this forum, especially since both the politics and religion of U2 are quite liberal in themselves. However, you soon learn that people love U2 for different reasons.

I hope that you still aren't turned off by this forum, and I invite you to continue posting. And if any non-regulars are reading this, I invite you to post as well. That doesn't mean I will always agree with what you write, and do expect that if I do disagree, I will directly and succinctly criticize. It is always my hope that this place can remain civil as a consequence, but some people still lack the effective maturity to handle it in a civil manner, and that is where I find myself the most frustrated in the end.

Luckily, I'm quite pleased at the relative level of civility, but if I do notice it going out of hand, I will not hesitate to demand it's closure myself. Let's say I'm a little more well-connected in this forum than I was the first couple times I fought this debate, and I will no longer be so tolerant of hysteria as I was in the past. I guess I've mellowed more in my old age.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time

[scatteroflight]

I'm not going to get involved in this debate, but I have to say I'm pretty impressed at the overall level of civility here, like Melon mentioned. Some of these threads here have obviously gotten totally nasty and out of control, so this is quite impressive. I'd say either keep up the good work, or end it here before it stops being so relatively pleasant.

By the way, that Hell House thing looks moronic. I'm a Christian but don't believe in hell so I daresay I'm biased...


------------------
The soul needs beauty for a soulmate

[This message has been edited by scatteroflight (edited 10-28-2001).]

[adam's_mistress]

Originally posted by melon:
Aww...I actually thank you for posting. Sometimes this place is incredibly entrenched with the same people making the same arguments, generally scaring away newbies or anyone who is not a regular here.

I must admit that, in first coming here, I was quite shocked at the level of conservatism in this forum, especially since both the politics and religion of U2 are quite liberal in themselves. However, you soon learn that people love U2 for different reasons.

I hope that you still aren't turned off by this forum, and I invite you to continue posting. And if any non-regulars are reading this, I invite you to post as well. That doesn't mean I will always agree with what you write, and do expect that if I do disagree, I will directly and succinctly criticize. It is always my hope that this place can remain civil as a consequence, but some people still lack the effective maturity to handle it in a civil manner, and that is where I find myself the most frustrated in the end.

Luckily, I'm quite pleased at the relative level of civility, but if I do notice it going out of hand, I will not hesitate to demand it's closure myself. Let's say I'm a little more well-connected in this forum than I was the first couple times I fought this debate, and I will no longer be so tolerant of hysteria as I was in the past. I guess I've mellowed more in my old age.

Melon

I don't plan on leaving Interference again My problem was that I let the hostility get to me and rather than be a part of it, I just left. It was infuriating for me to see people post their hearts out and share so much only to get beaten down by the nasty few. It's always been my goal that, no matter what is posted and no matter what it said even if I agree with it or not, there are human beings with feelings behind every monitor. On the same token I feel that when people become embroiled in a debate and horrible words and character slams are exchanged, a lot of that can be chocked up to "social camoflauge." But oooooooo, that social camoflauge can get under my skin sometimes!

But really, compared to my last stay here, I have to add that the level of civility in this thread and most of the others warms me up from the inside. The threads in here are by far the most engaging and thought provoking, and regardless of a person's political stance, I think we all can learn from each other and that's never a bad thing.

One thing's for certain, and it's that we all came here for one reason. That should be the glue that keeps us together when things get heated.

[U2Bama]

Yesterday afternoon, I was driving through a semi-rural area not far from my town. I noticed on a marquee sign in front of a Baptist Church that they are hosting a "Hallelujah House" duting this Halloween season. This is the same event that Peggy Hill (of the Mike Judege-created "KING OF THE HILL" animated series) organized at their church in Arlen, Texas, and it seems like the Hell House they are holding down on the Mississippi Coast.

I went to one of those things with my brother when he was attending a Baptist church and I was about 14 years old. Personally, I felt my comfortable in the settings of the United Methodist Church I attended, where I didn't feel "scared."

~U2Alabama

[Marko]

Originally posted by melon:
Marko, please don't take this the wrong way, but your perceptions of all homosexuals are riddled with stereotypes. Yes, some homosexual men do act effeminate. However, there are many homosexual men who are as straight-acting as you can imagine. But here's the paradox. If they're straight-acting, how would you know that they were gay or not? And you won't, unless you know them personally. Hence, one is then under the illusion that all gay men act like women. Heck, this is even a conflict amongst the gay community itself. Many of the straight-acting gay men don't find it attractive either, and, you may find this to be interesting, but from my experience, the effeminate gays are not the majority of the gay community, but they are the most visible, and the media has been quick to stereotype all gays as being this way.

This goes the same with lesbians. While there are butch lesbians, there are plenty of lesbians who look just the same as straight women. Once again, unless you know them personally, you would just assume they are straight.

I completely disagree with your stereotypical perceptions of homosexuals, and I'm even more saddened by the fact that you think it's "totally twisted" and "has roots in trauma history or disturbance." The American Psychological Association disproved this long ago in the 1970s, concluding that it is unchangable and that most "trauma" actually is caused by an unsupportive and homophobic environment. From my experience working within the GLBT community, this is always the case.

I've pointed out the troubles in genetic sexuality amongst humans, and I've also pointed out it's regular occurrence in nature. In fact, if you don't believe me on the occurrence of homosexuality in nature, rotten.com has a very flippant photo essay on it, including photos of group sex among same-sex animals. If animals are purely the product of genetics, as they are incapable of human emotion, then how is "homosexualism" rooted in "disturbance"? Just because you are personally disgusted by something, it doesn't mean that it's unnatural, nor does it mean that those who are homosexual are disturbed. The "big bad homosexuals" aren't gonna come out and hurt you.

I don't like fundamentalist Christians. That doesn't mean that I think we should suppress them or deny rights to them. Adults should be free to do as they wish, as long as it is consentual and as long as it doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights. As it stands, the only people getting their rights trampled over in this situation are the homosexuals, and that is not right.

Melon

Melon: As I said, I don't understand THOSE homosexuals that act in that way, and I think that THEY ARE twisted. But I appritiate all other "normal" gay people that difer from me or you only by their attraction to same sex. I didn't say that I think all gays are twisted - i used the word THOSE more times, so I think it came to missunderstanding.

------------------
Everyone loves me
everyone thinks that I'm georgeours
they wait for their turn to meet me

[mikal]

WOW! Some of you think this thread is bad? Just think if Gen-Tree was still here.

------------------
"I'm gonna start a day care!"-Bono

[Not George Lucas]

Not only are there XY females (Jamie Lee Curtis, for instance, is one),

Actually, there is no evidence of this at all.

http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/jamie.htm

As for homosexuality being unnatural, that argument doesn't work from any standpoint. First, it's merely a rehash of the naturalistic fallacy. Second, homosexuality does occur in nature.

I was a newbie here when melon did one of his homosexuality debates, and it was hidious. Melon, I disagree with most of what you say, but I have great respect for you based on that discussion.

As for the site itself, I think it's typical. I've seen my share of bad fundy sites, and this is just another one.

-----edit-----

Anyway, it's a lot better than http://www.godhatesfags.com

[This message has been edited by Not George Lucas (edited 11-01-2001).]

[BabyGrace]

Bebe, I agree with your last line perfectly.

I've heard about this thing, and seen it advertised..it's been on the news I believe, and I think what they want is to slam another point of view into people's (specifically teenagers) brains so that they'll start to see things from multiple perspectives, not just the way they're accustomed to. Some of the things they are trying to say aren't wrong, they just are not using tact at all...I'll agree the site is not well written, specifically considering the discrepancy Bebe pointed out concerning the suicidal person.

TO me, the one I found most offensive is that particular 'sin' simply because of the nature of suicide. Yes, it is a selfish act, but no, the people committing it are not selfish..just lost, very lost.

Bebe, I'll say it again, though: You said that so well...The truth WILL sell itself, and unfortunately these people are trying to push it and will probably turn away more people than they manage to engage. I'd be interested in hearing more about it and what your thoughts on it were if you want to post it.

------------------
but for the grace of love I'd will the meaning of heaven from above...

[melon]

Originally posted by Not George Lucas:
Actually, there is no evidence of this at all.

Hmm...well, the response you gave with Snopes wasn't the same condition I was talking about. Intersexuality (XXY and other derivatives) is different than the XY female, which is genetically male in all aspects, but, because all fetuses are inherently female; and, unless certain hormones and all their receptors are present, a male fetus will grow to look like a woman, but, because a uterus and ovaries are not present, there is no chance for reproduction. One may ask, "What about testicles?" They are undescended and usually are destroyed by the body naturally in pre-adolescence. Intersexuality is different in that often you get mixed results. A "boy" starts growing breasts at puberty. A "girl" has a non-functioning "penis." All the more reason that sexuality is complicated!

As for Jamie Lee Curtis, you're right. No one knows for sure, and, considering stigmas about anything sexual that deviates from culturally-constructed "norms" and "nature," she would never admit it anyway. But it shouldn't matter regardless. It's no one's business.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time