Total Posts:145|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is anyone who opposes Gay Rights a homophobe?

TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 7:23:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think too often anyone who does not tow the line toward granting gays specific rights, is labeled homophobic or a bigot. I would argue that anti gay does not necessarily equate to homophobia. I welcome the thoughts and opinions of other members and ask that you do so respectfully and with good taste.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:11:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 7:23:37 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
I think too often anyone who does not tow the line toward granting gays specific rights, is labeled homophobic or a bigot. I would argue that anti gay does not necessarily equate to homophobia. I welcome the thoughts and opinions of other members and ask that you do so respectfully and with good taste.

you've already answered your own question.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:38:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

So.. how about showing us some of your argument?
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:58:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:38:55 AM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

So.. how about showing us some of your argument?

You misunderstood,this is not a debate, but a question of opinion.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 11:59:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.

So significant health risks are not enough to warrant opposition?
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:01:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:59:49 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.

So significant health risks are not enough to warrant opposition?

Oh and I suppose we should just excommunicate those with HIV as not fit for love nor relationship? No I don't think you have much in the way of a humane argument there dude.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:03:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".

Does he now? Cause I thought nature said that since the anus is a non-lubricating, non- sexual body part, with the sole purpose of evacuating waste from the body.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:06:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:01:55 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:59:49 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.

So significant health risks are not enough to warrant opposition?

Oh and I suppose we should just excommunicate those with HIV as not fit for love nor relationship? No I don't think you have much in the way of a humane argument there dude.

Thats your argument not mine, I just asked a question, which it would appear you are unwilling to answer because of the implications.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:08:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:06:24 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:01:55 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:59:49 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.

So significant health risks are not enough to warrant opposition?

Oh and I suppose we should just excommunicate those with HIV as not fit for love nor relationship? No I don't think you have much in the way of a humane argument there dude.

Thats your argument not mine, I just asked a question, which it would appear you are unwilling to answer because of the implications.

I answered your question and just furthered its implicit concerns actually. Anyhow, enjoy; I have more intelligent people to be talking to.
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:12:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:03:41 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".

Does he now? Cause I thought nature said that since the anus is a non-lubricating, non- sexual body part, with the sole purpose of evacuating waste from the body.

I think the subsequent health risk is enough to regulate it, although I must admit, I really don't enjoy anal and no gay but so long as the associate risk is manageable, I guest it's the matter of personal privacy. You don't ban beer or donut in the States didn't you? Despite its obvious health issues?

Also, argument is just a word, you ask for an opinion, I thinks it's only fair that you also gave yours in return.
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:13:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:03:41 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".

Does he now? Cause I thought nature said that since the anus is a non-lubricating, non- sexual body part, with the sole purpose of evacuating waste from the body.

Sartre: Existence precedes essence. :)
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:13:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:08:39 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:06:24 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:01:55 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:59:49 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.

So significant health risks are not enough to warrant opposition?

Oh and I suppose we should just excommunicate those with HIV as not fit for love nor relationship? No I don't think you have much in the way of a humane argument there dude.

Thats your argument not mine, I just asked a question, which it would appear you are unwilling to answer because of the implications.

I answered your question and just furthered its implicit concerns actually. Anyhow, enjoy; I have more intelligent people to be talking to.

Thats good your kind ain't welcome here anyhow according to you. I love how you purport to know the level of ones intelligence, sort shows a lack of hmm intelligence?
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:15:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:13:22 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:03:41 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".

Does he now? Cause I thought nature said that since the anus is a non-lubricating, non- sexual body part, with the sole purpose of evacuating waste from the body.

Sartre: Existence precedes essence. :)

Purely out of curiosity, how does that apply here?
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:16:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:13:46 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:08:39 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:06:24 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:01:55 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:59:49 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.

So significant health risks are not enough to warrant opposition?

Oh and I suppose we should just excommunicate those with HIV as not fit for love nor relationship? No I don't think you have much in the way of a humane argument there dude.

Thats your argument not mine, I just asked a question, which it would appear you are unwilling to answer because of the implications.

I answered your question and just furthered its implicit concerns actually. Anyhow, enjoy; I have more intelligent people to be talking to.

Thats good your kind ain't welcome here anyhow according to you. I love how you purport to know the level of ones intelligence, sort shows a lack of hmm intelligence?

Why would that show a lack of intelligence? Heck, measuring individuals' intelligence is a huge part of infrastructure/science. I'm a f*cking asset, lol.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:20:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:12:38 PM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:03:41 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".

Does he now? Cause I thought nature said that since the anus is a non-lubricating, non- sexual body part, with the sole purpose of evacuating waste from the body.

I think the subsequent health risk is enough to regulate it, although I must admit, I really don't enjoy anal and no gay but so long as the associate risk is manageable, I guest it's the matter of personal privacy. You don't ban beer or donut in the States didn't you? Despite its obvious health issues?

Also, argument is just a word, you ask for an opinion, I thinks it's only fair that you also gave yours in return.
I think it is possible to be anti gay rights without having an irrational fear of homosexuals.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:21:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:16:06 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:13:46 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:08:39 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:06:24 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:01:55 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:59:49 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.

So significant health risks are not enough to warrant opposition?

Oh and I suppose we should just excommunicate those with HIV as not fit for love nor relationship? No I don't think you have much in the way of a humane argument there dude.

Thats your argument not mine, I just asked a question, which it would appear you are unwilling to answer because of the implications.

I answered your question and just furthered its implicit concerns actually. Anyhow, enjoy; I have more intelligent people to be talking to.

Thats good your kind ain't welcome here anyhow according to you. I love how you purport to know the level of ones intelligence, sort shows a lack of hmm intelligence?

Why would that show a lack of intelligence? Heck, measuring individuals' intelligence is a huge part of infrastructure/science. I'm a f*cking asset, lol.

MMk.
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:27:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think the subsequent health risk is enough to regulate it, although I must admit, I really don't enjoy anal and no gay but so long as the associate risk is manageable, I guest it's the matter of personal privacy. You don't ban beer or donut in the States didn't you? Despite its obvious health issues?

Also, argument is just a word, you ask for an opinion, I thinks it's only fair that you also gave yours in return.
I think it is possible to be anti gay rights without having an irrational fear of homosexuals.

That's a statement, we want to hear your reasons.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 4:47:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:27:33 PM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
I think the subsequent health risk is enough to regulate it, although I must admit, I really don't enjoy anal and no gay but so long as the associate risk is manageable, I guest it's the matter of personal privacy. You don't ban beer or donut in the States didn't you? Despite its obvious health issues?

Also, argument is just a word, you ask for an opinion, I thinks it's only fair that you also gave yours in return.
I think it is possible to be anti gay rights without having an irrational fear of homosexuals.

That's a statement, we want to hear your reasons.

My reason for what? Thinking that its possible to be anti gay rights without being homophobic? Because I am proof. I do not have any fear at all of homosexuals or anything associated with their sexuality, I simply do not support gay rights.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 8:28:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 4:47:18 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:27:33 PM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
I think the subsequent health risk is enough to regulate it, although I must admit, I really don't enjoy anal and no gay but so long as the associate risk is manageable, I guest it's the matter of personal privacy. You don't ban beer or donut in the States didn't you? Despite its obvious health issues?

Also, argument is just a word, you ask for an opinion, I thinks it's only fair that you also gave yours in return.
I think it is possible to be anti gay rights without having an irrational fear of homosexuals.

That's a statement, we want to hear your reasons.

My reason for what? Thinking that its possible to be anti gay rights without being homophobic? Because I am proof. I do not have any fear at all of homosexuals or anything associated with their sexuality, I simply do not support gay rights.

Prove it by wanking off a man and posting a video of it here.
ConcernedRed
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 10:45:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This question is beyond unintelligent. Opposing something and having an over-the-top fear of it are obviously two very different things.
Quarantining someone with HIV/AIDS is not unreasonable at all. It carries a death sentence and can spread to other people. We quarantine anyone from Ebola patients to kids with chicken pox. Blindly demanding rights for people only creates problems where they shouldn't be. There are sound reasons behind things, and believe it or not, they have nothing to do with someone's personal tastes or beliefs.
It's like when adults come into a room full of first graders and they start screaming for cookies. Why shouldn't they have cookies? Well its because the adults know what's best for the kids and its not time to have cookies. The adults can list a number of reasons why these children shouldn't be allowed to rummage through boxes of cookies, but the only reason the kids have is, "why can't we have one? we should be able to have one!" People that oppose gay rights all across this country have a multitude of sound reasons for their stance. from health, to family, to community, to religious beliefs, to the fact that is unnatural, and, like heroine, cocaine, and meth, if the whole world did it, we would seize to exist. Hell, to the simple desire to not have to tell their children why Mr. Scott and Mr. John are married. "Well sweetie, they went to court and said,"why can't we have cookies? we should get to have cookies!"" Its just too bad we're allowed to be ran by first graders sometimes, and not adults.
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 3:46:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:15:30 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:13:22 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:03:41 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".

Does he now? Cause I thought nature said that since the anus is a non-lubricating, non- sexual body part, with the sole purpose of evacuating waste from the body.

Sartre: Existence precedes essence. :)

Purely out of curiosity, how does that apply here?

The anus exists, and we create its purpose. Whether or not it is best suited for that purpose or some other shouldn't dictate that it could never be used otherwise. Similarly, I could use the mona lisa as my desktop wallpaper, and although that image might be well suited to being appreciated in a gallery, that does not discredit my own use of it. Hence, the anus has no "sole purpose". If someone uses it for something, then that is its purpose.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Zylorarchy
Posts: 209
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 5:00:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 7:23:37 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
I think too often anyone who does not tow the line toward granting gays specific rights, is labeled homophobic or a bigot. I would argue that anti gay does not necessarily equate to homophobia. I welcome the thoughts and opinions of other members and ask that you do so respectfully and with good taste.

If you opposed black people having rights, that would surely be racist would it not? I rest my case.
"I am not intolerant of religion, I am intolerant of intolerance"
"True freedom is not simply left or right. It is the ability to know when a law is needed, but more importantly, know when one is not"
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 8:09:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 3:46:49 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:15:30 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:13:22 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:03:41 PM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:35:26 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:31:16 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:27:07 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 9/9/2014 11:25:56 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:34:35 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I feel like I birthed this thread with my con on abortion stance (funny in a weirdly floating kinda way), and sure, one can be anti-gay rights in a really contrived sense so as not to be homophobic. There are some goodhearted religious simpletons who fit that category for example.

Simpletons? So smart people cant be anti gay rights?

No, not really. I can point out certain things unhealthy about homosexuality, but nothing to warrant real opposition of it.
Interesting, I disagree of course but interesting to see the silly ideas folks have.

"God says we can't let men touch each others butt with their penises".

Does he now? Cause I thought nature said that since the anus is a non-lubricating, non- sexual body part, with the sole purpose of evacuating waste from the body.

Sartre: Existence precedes essence. :)

Purely out of curiosity, how does that apply here?

The anus exists, and we create its purpose. Whether or not it is best suited for that purpose or some other shouldn't dictate that it could never be used otherwise. Similarly, I could use the mona lisa as my desktop wallpaper, and although that image might be well suited to being appreciated in a gallery, that does not discredit my own use of it. Hence, the anus has no "sole purpose". If someone uses it for something, then that is its purpose.

That is literally the stupidest thing I have ever read.
TheMoralCompass2014
Posts: 324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2014 8:10:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/10/2014 5:00:56 AM, Zylorarchy wrote:
At 9/9/2014 7:23:37 AM, TheMoralCompass2014 wrote:
I think too often anyone who does not tow the line toward granting gays specific rights, is labeled homophobic or a bigot. I would argue that anti gay does not necessarily equate to homophobia. I welcome the thoughts and opinions of other members and ask that you do so respectfully and with good taste.

If you opposed black people having rights, that would surely be racist would it not? I rest my case.

Yes it would, homosexuality is not a race, I rest mine as well.