MERGED--> He became straight + I despise...

[anitram]

Amen to that. It's sad that I guess I can't disagree with homosexuallity without being a terrible, homophobic bigoted person.

What is there to disagree with? Do you disagree with me being a woman? Or yolland being Jewish? Or Michael Jordan being black?

 

[Irvine511]

Amen to that. It's sad that I guess I can't disagree with homosexuallity without being a terrible, homophobic bigoted person.

do you disagree with left-handed people? could they be made to write with their right hands?

i am a homosexual person. i am attracted to members of my gender. that is a fact. it's really not one you can agree with or disagree with.

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

The argument that homosexuality is genetic is highly debateable.

Many people think otherwise and those black, red, yellow or jewish purple ppl who were once gay by choice and then chose to leave the gay lifestyle would find some of the viewpoints expressed here offensive.

Best,

dbs

A person can choose to not partake in a certain lifestyle but that does not change who they are. Using your example, a homosexual can choose not to lead a "gay lifestyle" and still be very much homosexual.

 

[2861U2]

It's sad you think there is anything to disagree with.

But that's my opinion, and I would never like being called homophobic. I think some people are forgetting the meaning of the word "homophobic" and are using it too often. To me, someone who is homophobic absolutely hates gay people, wishes harm upon them (and often carry it out themselves) and judges that person based solely on their sexual orientation. I am not one of those people, and I wouldnt like to be labeled as a homophobe. Like I said, I disagree with homosexuality, but I would like it if I wasnt equated with the people I have described, people who are truly, radically homophobic.

 

[Irvine511]

The argument that homosexuality is genetic is highly debateable.

Many people think otherwise and those black, red, yellow or jewish purple ppl who were once gay by choice and then chose to leave the gay lifestyle would find some of the viewpoints expressed here offensive.

Best,

dbs

but being Jewish is surely a choice. as is being a Mormon. if there's one thing we can choose, it's our religion.

no?

the argument that homosexuality is *solely* genetic is debatable, but the understanding that homosexuality is in large part due to genetics is quite broadly accepted.

far more than the "overbearing mother/distant father" psychobabble that Christofascists pull out of their always heterosexual asses.

 

[Irvine511]

A person can choose to not partake in a certain lifestyle but that does not change who they are. Using your example, a homosexual can choose not to lead a "gay lifestyle" and still be very much homosexual.

what's a "gay lifestyle"?

 

[deep]

I just don't understand why it is acceptable for somebody to come on here and say that it is immoral for a man to be gay, when we would not allow ANYONE to make similar pronouncements about race, etc.

You don't understand?


Mixed race marriage is legal.

Mixed faith marriage is legal.

There are many laws that protect from discrimination for race, religion, national origin. These same laws do not include sexual orientation.




For you race and "gay" should be treated the same. It is not the law.

Perhaps it should the "Law of Interference"?

I sure hope not.

I don't want my pretend world to not reflect the things in "Real World" that I think should be changed.

Do you still believe that both parties are equally "useless".

 

[Irvine511]

But that's my opinion, and I would never like being called homophobic. I think some people are forgetting the meaning of the word "homophobic" and are using it too often. To me, someone who is homophobic absolutely hates gay people, wishes harm upon them (and often carry it out themselves) and judges that person based solely on their sexual orientation. I am not one of those people, and I wouldnt like to be labeled as a homophobe. Like I said, I disagree with homosexuality, but I would like it if I wasnt equated with the people I have described, people who are truly, radically homophobic.

if you "disagree" with homosexuality, then you are exhibiting a strong degree of homophobia. you might find gays witty or funny or entertaining and you might appreciate how well they've designed the clothes your wearing, produced the music you listen to, or the television you watch, but to say that you "disagree" with a fundamental part of their being -- a part as every bit as fundamental as your (i'm assuming) heterosexualitly is to you -- then you are being homophobic.

is it not anti-Semetic to say, "yeah, i have no problem with Jews, love the food and the humor, i just think they're all screwed when they die if their temple-buildling skills aren't up to snuff."

 

[anitram]

There are many laws that protect from discrimination for race, religion, national origin. These same laws do not include sexual orientation.

They do where I live.

So it is not my "pretend world" as you put it - it is reality.

 

[joyfulgirl]

But that's my opinion, and I would never like being called homophobic.

Then I suggest you challenge your opinion and question the source of it.

 

[martha]

Amen to that. It's sad that I guess I can't disagree with homosexuallity without being a terrible, homophobic bigoted person.

If you were to disagree with being black, you'd be a racist.

Poor persecuted homophobes.


And this thread is still open.

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

what's a "gay lifestyle"?

I was using the example dbs gave us. I would assume the lifestyle he is speaking of is one where a person dates/marries / has loving, caring relationships with another person of his/her own gender.

Playing it straight doesn't make a person straight. (that's all I meant. )

 

[Irvine511]

And this thread is still open.

i'm hoping we can get at the root of some of the attitudes.

i'd like to know just how someone "disagrees" with the fact that Memphis and i find each other attractive. what's to disagree with?

there's nothing wrong with me. the only psychological trauma i've suffered at the hands of homosexuality was when i tried to hide from it and ignore it, and the only time i lead an unhealthy "lifestyle" was when i'd try to be straight and go to parties in college and realize that i wasn't so enthusiastic about chasing after girls that i'd proceed to get shit-canned so i wouldn't have to deal with it. sure, i've dated, went to bars, went to clubs, and even had some sex, but in comparison to my straight male counterparts, we're all mostly in the same boat in terms of numbers of sexual partners, though i always seem to come out on top when it comes to safe sex (funny, that). i've smoked some pot, but have never done serious drugs. i'm now in a monogamous relationship that's healthy and happy and both of our families are aware and generally supportive.

i spend most of my week at work, go to the gym, argue in FYM, see movies, travel when i can, read books and listen to music.

this is as gay a lifestyle as any other "lifestyle" lived by a gay person.

where's the disagreement?

is it the whole penis/penis thing?

isn't that just an expression of someone's aesthetic prejudices, as equal in merit to the person who finds the whole black penis/white vagina structure gross?

 

[Irvine511]

Playing it straight doesn't make a person straight. (that's all I meant. )

i hear you -- Diamond, sweetie, can you tell me what a "gay lifestyle" is?

 

[BVS]

But that's my opinion,

And that's all it is.

and I would never like being called homophobic.

And I'm sure there are a lot of racists who wouldn't want to be called a racist.

I think some people are forgetting the meaning of the word "homophobic" and are using it too often. To me, someone who is homophobic absolutely hates gay people, wishes harm upon them (and often carry it out themselves) and judges that person based solely on their sexual orientation. I am not one of those people, and I wouldnt like to be labeled as a homophobe. Like I said, I disagree with homosexuality, but I would like it if I wasnt equated with the people I have described, people who are truly, radically homophobic.

You are judging them, by saying you "disagree". How do you not see that?

 

[phillyfan26]

It is homophobic to say homosexuality is not genetic, because it is completely direspecting them. A complete lack of respect for a person based on those grounds is homophobic.

 

[2861U2]

It is homophobic to say homosexuality is not genetic, because it is completely direspecting them. A complete lack of respect for a person based on those grounds is homophobic.

Wow.

 

[Irvine511]

Wow.

why the face?

you haven't offered anything yet. please, defend your statements.

 

[Irvine511]

why do people make statements they are either unwilling or unable to defend?

seriously.

 

[BVS]

why do people make statements they are either unwilling or unable to defend?

seriously.

They can't?

 

[phillyfan26]

Wow.

Why wow? You have no respect for the fact that homosexuality is a part of who they are. You call it sinful. You claim religion as your reasoning, despite the fact that the Bible never condemned modern homosexuality. You have been misled into bigotry.

 

[A_Wanderer]

why do people make statements they are either unwilling or unable to defend?

seriously.

I think that the contention that homosexuality isn't genetic is defendable based on some lines of evidence, but it would be ignorance to claim that it isn't biologically based.

 

[yolland]

For you race and "gay" should be treated the same. It is not the law.

Perhaps it should the "Law of Interference"?

I sure hope not.

I don't want my pretend world to not reflect the things in "Real World" that I think should be changed.

Yes, this is more or less why threads on this topic are unlikely to get automatically locked, unless they descend into vulgar diatribe, advocation of violence etc. As public opinion polls will attest, this is very much an active and mainstream debate in the US (and some other posters' countries as well), and we should not shrink from it. Had FYM been around in the days when black people couldn't attend school with white people in some states, or when Jews couldn't hold public office in some states, or when women couldn't vote in some states, then I expect debates as to the acceptability and justifiability of such laws--subject to the same qualifications already mentioned--would have taken place in here, as well. The eventual arrival of various statutory or case laws and constitutional amendments may have had the 'Real World' effect of a on what was left of the "Let the laws stand unchanged" side of those arguments, but no one who's studied the history of the processes behind them could say that the debate, struggle, and mass mobilization of support on both sides preceding those outcomes played no role; that those laws and amendments just fell from the sky one day and magically transformed what was once near-universally accepted as "just" across the country into what was near-universally reviled. And debate happens to be all we can meaingfully achieve in this forum.

That's the argument from reason, anyway. The emotional side of it is something else. It's easy for me as a Jew to shrug off the reality that some people believe that means I'm "going to hell" and don't mind telling me so, because I'm not going to lose my job or my home or the thousand-plus legal benefits protecting my status as support for my family over it...or if for some unexpected reason I did, I'd have the law there to back me up. And legal manifestations aside, I'm not going to get cast out of my family, or be afraid to walk down the street holding my partner's hand, or have to resort to regarding most of the country, much of the media, and a zillion-and-one other local social arenas as no-go zones, should I wish to avoid being constantly marinated in a popular belief that what I am is profoundly shameful, contemptible, and vile. Were those things in fact the case, I'd certainly have a hell of a time convincing myself that there are those who openly endorse various parts of the above, yet somehow "don't mean it in a bad way."

I'm not saying this to demonize or stigmatize--I belong to a denomination myself which currently allows its clerics the option of denying the blessings of marriage to their gay and lesbian congregants (though campaigning for such in the civil sphere is technically forbidden them), as part of a transitional phase which I'm confident will end, and while I accept that some would deem me a bigot and a homophobe and deeply in the wrong for not having abandoned said community, in the end I don't accept that reasoning. I do understand it emotionally though, because I'd have to be blind and deaf and utterly incapable of moral imagination not to recognize the anguish and suffering that results from such beliefs and practices being writ large and pervasive across the state, church, and fabric of society. And I can hear it in Michael Glatze's writings as well--the self-contempt, self-loathing, self-dread and shame (a very different and altogether less worthy emotion than guilt, which is the awareness of having wronged others) damningly intertwined with all the "joy" and "liberation" and "relief." I don't suppose whatever it is that's happening to him is straightforward or simple on any account, and were it not for the fact that his testimony will be--and was intended to be--exploited to spread this anguish and moral schizophrenia to others, I'd be content to simply write it off as one individual's contestable experience of what self-"healing" consists of.

Nonetheless, the debate will inevitably continue until a political end result emerges, and its aftermath attends to the rest.

 

[martha]

i've smoked some pot, but have never done serious drugs. i'm now in a monogamous relationship that's healthy and happy and both of our families are aware and generally supportive.

i spend most of my week at work, go to the gym, argue in FYM, see movies, travel when i can, read books and listen to music.

:gasp: With a few minor changes, I find I'm leading a gay lifestyle!!

 

[A_Wanderer]

What is there to disagree with? Do you disagree with me being a woman? Or yolland being Jewish? Or Michael Jordan being black?

I don't think it's fair to put religion up there with race and orientation, if a Jewish kid was raised in a completely different environment without any of the cultural connection they wouldn't just invent it. Condemning and arguing against religion is a step aside from race hate and gay bashing. For instance if a Christian takes issue with the "homosexual lifestyle" and miscegenation and cites biblical authority to justify it one could quite rightly attack their beliefs and say that they shouldn't hold them.

 

[Irvine511]

Condemning and arguing against religion is a step aside from race hate and gay bashing.

surely, religion is a choice, though.

but we have laws in place that not only defends the right to choose such a "lifestyle," but actively enables some practicioners of such a "lifestyle" the freedom to express their "lifestyle" prejudices in such a way that it infringes upon the freedom of others, that the freedom of others might actually be viewed as a form of discrimination.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I agree there is more than enough discrimination but the question of their freedom becomes one of speech and property. If it is through public channels (e.g. marraige inequality, lack of government benefits and legal recognition) then it isn't freedom at all, it is state sanctioned bigotry - same goes for supressing support for gay teens etc.. If it is having bigoted counter-protests against a gay parade or not allowing gay kissing in a bar then their freedom of bigotry exists (as a side note there was a case where anti-discrimination law was skirted in victoria to prevent packs of heterosexual of women from going to a particular gay bar, which I agree with).

The thing is that most homophobes are inherently anti-freedom, they may well "disagree with the lifestyle" or "hate the sin" but it doesn't stop there - they have to start using government force against gays.

 

[Irvine511]

(as a side not there was a case where anti-discrimination law was skirted in victoria to prevent packs of heterosexual of women from going to a particular gay bar, which I agree with).

there's a gay club in DC that has a sign out that says something to the effect of, "this is a gay bar run by gay people for gay people and we have the right to refuse anyone for any reason." it's a bit up front, but the intention is to prevent loud, large packs of drunken straight girls, often on bachelorette parties, who treat gay bars like a theme park. one of the ways around this is that they ban anyone from wearing heels with more than 1", which also keeps out the drag queens, and they say it's for safety on the dance floor which is elevated in several places.

i think i support this.

or do i? not sure. i'm not a fan of self-ghettoization, but then i don't like feeling like i'm an exhibit in a petting zoo.

yeah, so, anyway ...

 

[A_Wanderer]

Positive discrimination, like not letting skinheads into a bar.

If the homophobes just self-ghettoised then everything would be sweet.

 

[diamond]

Excellent post yolland.

I think this thread should remain open and that we can discourse civilly among each other.

Some people have Judism and being born a certain race confused.
Some people claim that being gay isn't a choice while some gay people such as Irvine admit that it can partially be.

I interact w many ppl, most are straigtht, a few are gay, I even use to have a transvestite friend who I had coffee w almost every morning before he passed a way suddenly one day. We went to a ball game together and I never judged him for who he was, but I felt he was conflicted inside and he admitted to me he was. He was still my friend however. My point is I don't lay awake at night wondering who is going to Heaven or who isn't. I try and be a good person to all people, and know that we all are not perfect and God knows us better than we know ourselves and will judge us based on the circumstances we found ourselves in, and what we did with those circumstances.

I do know for a good portion of my life I was a hedonistic phalander, hurt many many people and know now that lifestyle would be offensible in the sight of God, and after some spiritual experiences, which are too sacred to discuss in a public fourm, I knew it was time for me make a major change in my own lifestyle.
And I did make those changes and glad I did.

So carry on everybody, but please do civilly.

Thanks,

dbs