Weird Question

[ethana512]

This may be kind of a dumb question but anyway...

Do you think if everybody was treated equal and there wasn't homophobia there would be a lot more gay people or at least bi?

[mollyjellybelly]

Maybe not gay. I think we've gotten a lot past that. But bi, probably. I think a lotta people are curious about bi. Personally, I think all girls are inherently bi but some won't or haven't admitted it yet. Gives us an option with no guys around. Having said that, I haven't actually taken that step yet but I'm ready. I think. Just haven't gotten in a situation yet to take the plunge.

[Typhlosion]

Would there? Is environment a factor in sexuality, and how much of it is a factor?

There at least would be an increase of people who report themselves of different sexualities, given the need to hide is no longer there. And if, arguably, sexuality is not only determined by genetics, then most probably more people may tend to non-heterossexuality.

[riverboy]

I think so. Things would be more open

[Karkat]

There at least would be an increase of people who report themselves of different sexualities, given the need to hide is no longer there. And if, arguably, sexuality is not only determined by genetics, then most probably more people may tend to non-heterossexuality.

Exactly this. I feel like there are a lot of closeted gays (and so on)/those who are in denial as it is, it's just that there's so much odd reception, and people are misinformed, or keep away due to stigma.

If everyone was actually treated equally, and society didn't have such a thing for extreme conformism and so on, questions like this probably wouldn't even arise.

[Luminous]

Teen Sexuality and Gender :arrow: Ramblings of the Wise
This fits a bit better here.

[Gigablue]

There would be more people openly gay or bisexual, but probably not an increase in the true incidence of either. Sexuality seems to be determined mostly, if not entirely, by genetics and hormone levels. Homophobia doesn't change a person's sexual orientation, rather, it changes whether or not they are open about it.

[ethana512]

There would be more people openly gay or bisexual, but probably not an increase in the true incidence of either. Sexuality seems to be determined mostly, if not entirely, by genetics and hormone levels. Homophobia doesn't change a person's sexual orientation, rather, it changes whether or not they are open about it.

Yeah but do you think maybe more people would be curious and experiment to try the other way?

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

No. There would probably be the same proportion of straight to non straights, however, the difference would come in how many people are open and out about such matters. There are probably a lot more gays that we're not counting, because we see them as self hating extremely closeted gays, bis and whatever, else that disguise themselves as straight.

[JamesSuperBoy]

I think people may be more open for sure but being gay or bi is not at all affected by how others may see it.

[Zachary G]

I think so. Things would be more open

to keep it simple, i agree with this. if we didnt have to societal hangups that we have today, i think more and more people would be more open and secure in their sexuality

[riverboy]

I think so. Things would be more open

Plus I think people be more relaxed and not worried what other people think or would do.

[Miserabilia]

Yes, I definetly think so. I think there are a so many closeted people, whether they are bi or gay or bicurious, or simply open minded. I mean, I don't think more people would actualy be gay/bi/curious/open but I think it'd turn out that a much larger percentage of people actualy is bi than we think.

[Abyssal Echo]

Would there? Is environment a factor in sexuality, and how much of it is a factor?

There at least would be an increase of people who report themselves of different sexualities, given the need to hide is no longer there. And if, arguably, sexuality is not only determined by genetics, then most probably more people may tend to non-heterossexuality.

I agree with Alex. I don't think there would be more Gay or Bi people...there would be more people open about their sexuality.

[Babs]

There's still the same amount of gay/bi people, they're just closeted.
If there was no homophobia, I'm sure the vast majority of people would be out of the closet. I know I would be.

[Gamma Male]

No.

There would be an increase of people who are out.

[darthearth]

There would be more people openly gay or bisexual, but probably not an increase in the true incidence of either. Sexuality seems to be determined mostly, if not entirely, by genetics and hormone levels. Homophobia doesn't change a person's sexual orientation, rather, it changes whether or not they are open about it.

We actually agree on something :metal:. But further, I think if you link sexuality to actual behavior, it would definitely increase the behavior. Heterosexuality is very accepted, but that's not going to make me experiment with girls, but I would be able to hook up with guys a lot easier.

[DeadEyes]

Yeah but do you think maybe more people would be curious and experiment to try the other way?

Well, there would be more people who are out for sure, but this is a really good question, there would be more people open to experiment if it were more accepted I believe.

[James Dean]

I sadly can't agree with that. People will just begin to hate on the lgbt people who aren't physically fit. Or the ones who play sports, or the ones who have children. Yeah there's no homophobia and people will naturally accept homosexual and other lgbt lifestyles like straight lifestyles, but there will still be stigmas that even people within the lgbt community are gonna bitch and complain about.

[AussieBoi98]

This may be kind of a dumb question but anyway...

Do you think if everybody was treated equal and there wasn't homophobia there would be a lot more gay people or at least bi?

its not really dumb I'm bi myself and i sort of worked it out when i was 12, I'm 15 now and i only told people when i was 14 but if there was no homophobia i would told people a lot earlier, and yea i do think there would be a lot more because there are a lot of gays/bi's that are to scared to come out because of it.

Yeah but do you think maybe more people would be curious and experiment to try the other way?

yea because some people refuse to even think about it even if they do like other guys because they think its wrong, i know a guy who thought he was gay and hated himself for it and refused to think about it because he thought there was something wrong with it and theirs really not its just normal

Pleasedo not double post. Use the 'edit' button instead. ~Typhlosion

[Hideous]

More people would come out.

[fast8]

I think more would be more open about it for sure

[Typhlosion]

There would be more people openly gay or bisexual, but probably not an increase in the true incidence of either. Sexuality seems to be determined mostly, if not entirely, by genetics and hormone levels. Homophobia doesn't change a person's sexual orientation, rather, it changes whether or not they are open about it.

But isn't hormonal release a reaction to both internal and external factors? If so, maybe a slight increase could happen?

[voodoo doughnut]

what would be really cool is that it wouldn't be an issue. i mean like who keeps track of how many st8 people there are?

[TroyH]

But isn't hormonal release a reaction to both internal and external factors? If so, maybe a slight increase could happen?

Yes, if sexuality has anything to do with hormonal releases. As far as I knew, we still didn't have a good idea as to what determined one's sexuality.

I think that sexuality would become something of a non-issue. At the moment, we only have a few labels for different sexualities. The perception of sexuality would probably be different, and maybe the need for labels would change.

What I'm trying to say seems abstract and I'm having trouble putting it into words... What I'm thinking is radically different than what it's like now. It probably wouldn't be radically different if things changed today. I'm more thinking along the lines of if homophobia had never really developed and sexuality had never been an issue.

[deregisterme]

Here's a link (mods delete if not allowed) of the 79 countries where it's illegal sadly to still be gay. Cyprus was the last European country to remove laws at the start of the year. Even with the laws against stuff like this removed, if it's ingrained in a culture, it would take a long time after a law change to be generally accepted. Countries where civil marriage is now legal may find other countries still with these laws in place just wrong. I do live in hope that these laws will some day be gone, and you can express your feelings without fear is a distant memory. Even in the UK in the 1940s, if you wanted out of national service (and not being drafted to fight in the front line during World War 2), you just turned up for your medical wearing bra and panties. The medical would soon be over (and failed) the moment you were ordered to strip down!

http://76crimes.com/76-countries-where-homosexuality-is-illegal/

[Cangirl]

I think there would be a lot more bi people for sure. At least bi and yeah more gay or lesbian people.

[dakeep18]

i could see that...but honestly i'd still be straight

[Faolan]

I think the number has, and always will be around the same amount. In the future, though, it's possible that more people will be out. I hope that labels and stigmas will disappear and people will just be open to everything.

[CosmicNoodle]

No, that is a stupid question.

Your sexuality IS your sexuality, you can't change it no matter what you do. people wouldn't just go "Ohh, it's more accepted now, I think I'll be gay from now on". You can't just because a specific sexuality simply because you want to. You are your sexuality, weather it's accepted or not.

[Arkansasguy]

This may be kind of a dumb question but anyway...

Do you think if everybody was treated equal and there wasn't homophobia there would be a lot more gay people or at least bi?

As social standards become loosened, more people tend to experience illicit attractions. So yes, that would seem to be the likely result of the continued abandonment by society of sexual morality.

[Zachary G]

i think if people were treated equally -- no type of discrimination at all -- i think more people would be more comfortable about themselves to come out and live their lives openly.

[Danny_boi 16]

I'd think most would be bi. I mean even str8 guys have gay moments. And sex is usually a pleasure thing, so people like to experiment. Then I think there would be a spectrum. Like how bi are you? And someone would respond I like girls this percent and guys this percent.

[SethfromMI]

you would have a lot more people who would be open about it if they were truly not treated unfairly for being bi or gay/les

[fairmaiden]

Hmm, well maybe they would be more forthcoming about their sexuality, but I don't think it would 'create' more gay/bi people.

[normalperson]

i'm just gonna vent here:

if homosexuals would quit their whole "oh poor us were being oppressed by everyone" and gay pride parade shit then people who are confused about their sexuality would be less likely to go with the wrong choice. also, people who commit suicide just because other people call them names do not deserve life in the first place. overall just know i'm not prejiduced against gay people but i think that people have the right to approve of it or not without being called a homophobe and being discriminated against.

for those who are offended this is my opinion and i'm not trying to force it on you.

sorry.

[Babs]

i'm just gonna vent here:

if homosexuals would quit their whole "oh poor us were being oppressed by everyone" and gay pride parade shit then people who are confused about their sexuality would be less likely to go with the wrong choice. also, people who commit suicide just because other people call them names do not deserve life in the first place. overall just know i'm not prejiduced against gay people but i think that people have the right to approve of it or not without being called a homophobe and being discriminated against.

for those who are offended this is my opinion and i'm not trying to force it on you.

sorry.

Well, seeing as how gay people are being denied rights, I don't see a problem with them speaking up trying to get then, and with gay pride parades.
But, oh, you want the right to not approve without being called out on being a homophobe and not face nonexistent discrimination. There's no laws in place that says homophobes can't married. And in many, many countries, homophobia isn't punishable by law, like homosexuality is. But somehow homophobes are the ones being discriminated against on a regular basis.

[normalperson]

Well, seeing as how gay people are being denied rights, I don't see a problem with them speaking up trying to get then, and with gay pride parades.
But, oh, you want the right to not approve without being called out on being a homophobe and not face nonexistent discrimination. There's no laws in place that says homophobes can't married. And in many, many countries, homophobia isn't punishable by law, like homosexuality is. But somehow homophobes are the ones being discriminated against on a regular basis.

1. what rights do gay people not have?

2. what country are you in that so grossly discriminates against homosexuals?

3. why do they have gay pride parades in countries that have no restrictions against homosexuality E.G. Canada?

4. here in Canada i) you can be fired for having anti-homosexual views (saying you don't agree with it through facebook, twitter etc.) ii) you cannot ban homosexuals from your store iii) you will most likely be publicly ridiculed if you express your disagreements with homosexuality to most strangers you meet.

5. how is the point "There's no laws in place that says homophobes can't married" even valid?

6. name me some "civilized" countries in which "homophobia isn't punishable by law, like homosexuality is".

7. did you put any thought into this?

8. sorry if i seem rude i don't mean to but stuff like this where people talk about things like they know all when they don't really grinds my gears.

[Babs]

1. what rights do gay people not have?

2. what country are you in that so grossly discriminates against homosexuals?

3. why do they have gay pride parades in countries that have no restrictions against homosexuality E.G. Canada?

4. here in Canada i) you can be fired for having anti-homosexual views (saying you don't agree with it through facebook, twitter etc.) ii) you cannot ban homosexuals from your store iii) you will most likely be publicly ridiculed if you express your disagreements with homosexuality to most strangers you meet.

5. how is the point "There's no laws in place that says homophobes can't married" even valid?

6. name me some "civilized" countries in which "homophobia isn't punishable by law, like homosexuality is".

7. did you put any thought into this?

8. sorry if i seem rude i don't mean to but stuff like this where people talk about things like they know all when they don't really grinds my gears.

1. In most places, the right to be married. in many places, it's punishable by law. Take Russia, for example. Or Egypt.
2. I'm not specifically talking about my country.
3. Because although gay marriage and such is legal, there's still a lot of stigma towards homosexuality.
4. You're also quite often publicly ridiculed for being gay. Surprise, surprise! You can also be fired for being gay, and many states in the US allow businesses to refuse service to homosexuals. In 49 states, it's legal to argue that a transgender woman is to blame for her own murder, and yes, transgender people are included in pride parades, so they're worth adding to this post.
5. Making a point that it's stupid to complain about homosexuals wanting to not get discriminated against, whereas you state in the same post that you want people to have the right to be homophobic without being discriminated against. There's very little stigma towards homophobia in the world compared to the amount of stigma towards being homosexual.
6. It doesn't matter if the country is "civilized", it matters that it's happening. Here is a list of countries where being homosexual is illegal, as of October 2014. http://76crimes.com/76-countries-where-homosexuality-is-illegal/
7. I was wondering the same thing when you were whining about homophobic people being labeled as homophobic.
8. Reminds me of a post I just replied to.

[normalperson]

1. In most places, the right to be married. in many places, it's punishable by law. Take Russia, for example. Or Egypt.
2. I'm not specifically talking about my country.
3. Because although gay marriage and such is legal, there's still a lot of stigma towards homosexuality.
4. You're also quite often publicly ridiculed for being gay. Surprise, surprise! You can also be fired for being gay, and many states in the US allow businesses to refuse service to homosexuals. In 49 states, it's legal to argue that a transgender woman is to blame for her own murder, and yes, transgender people are included in pride parades, so they're worth adding to this post.
5. Making a point that it's stupid to complain about homosexuals wanting to not get discriminated against, whereas you state in the same post that you want people to have the right to be homophobic without being discriminated against. There's very little stigma towards homophobia in the world compared to the amount of stigma towards being homosexual.
6. It doesn't matter if the country is "civilized", it matters that it's happening. Here is a list of countries where being homosexual is illegal, as of October 2014. http://76crimes.com/76-countries-where-homosexuality-is-illegal/
7. I was wondering the same thing when you were whining about homophobic people being labeled as homophobic.
8. Reminds me of a post I just replied to.

i like you, you make my blood boil, here we are then:

1. i) marriage is a union between a man and a women that starts a family, sorry you'll probably hate me for this but two homosexuals do not equate to family. ii) this contradicts answer 6. iii) the only thing they can ban effectively is gay sex.

2. well okely dokely then.

3. where? *cough* in canada *cough*

4. i) owners should have the right to ban whoever they don't want in they're business. ii) i'm confused about the whole transgender people thing. iii) gay pride parades are baloney.

5. i)people should have the right to all OPINIONS not all ACTIONS E.G. homosexual "activism rubbish" (am i getting rude?, sorry if i am i'm just getting more into it as i go) ii) not in the "western" countrys is "There's very little stigma towards homophobia in the world compared to the amount of stigma towards being homosexual." true.

6. 79 out of 195?...kinda pokes a hole in what your saying about discrimination all over the world huh.

7. well i) i was venting and mentioned it too as a disclaimer, and ii) i have aspergers syndrome i over-analyze everything.

8. well so far i think i'm winning the debate so i hope you have some good come-backs.

anyways i can't reply again tonight because it's 12:10 where i am so i gotta go to bed but i will try in the morning.

also it's nice to have an arguing partner that makes me... "furious" for lack of better words.

[Vlerchan]

f homosexuals would quit their whole "oh poor us were being oppressed by everyone" ...
A 2008 study of 390 gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) Victorians found that nearly one in seven reported living in fear of homophobic violence. This fear was justified in that nearly 85 per cent of respondents had been subjected to some form of homophobic violence or harassment in their lifetimes and one in two had experienced homophobic harassment or other non-physical abuse in the past two years.

In eighty-five per cent of cases, violence and harassment were preceded or accompanied by homophobic language. Sexual assault was also common, with nearly 5 per cent having been subjected to this form of violence over the last two years.

Among same sex attracted young people, violence and discrimination were also common. A 2010 study of 3134 young Australians found that 61 per cent had suffered verbal abuse because of their sexuality, 18 per cent suffered physical assault and 69 per cent suffered other forms of homophobia such as exclusion rumours and graffiti.

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Gay_and_lesbian_issues_discrimination

I hope you don't mind me using Australian data. It's a first-world country like Canada too.

... and gay pride parade shit ...
People stage gay pride parades in opposition to prevailing social discrimination.

If people didn't make such a huge issue about LGBTs sexuality then it's doubtful that LGBTs would make such a big issue out of it in return.

then people who are confused about their sexuality would be less likely to go with the wrong choice.
People don't choose their sexuality.

also, people who commit suicide just because other people call them names do not deserve life in the first place.
What about endless name-calling accompanied by consistent social exclusion alongside the whole living in constant fear-thing?

overall just know i'm not prejiduced against gay people but i think that people have the right to approve of it or not without being called a homophobe and being discriminated against.
I don't.

[Babs]

i like you, you make my blood boil, here we are then:

1. i) marriage is a union between a man and a women that starts a family, sorry you'll probably hate me for this but two homosexuals do not equate to family. ii) this contradicts answer 6. iii) the only thing they can ban effectively is gay sex.

2. well okely dokely then.

3. where? *cough* in canada *cough*

4. i) owners should have the right to ban whoever they don't want in they're business. ii) i'm confused about the whole transgender people thing. iii) gay pride parades are baloney.

5. i)people should have the right to all OPINIONS not all ACTIONS E.G. homosexual "activism rubbish" (am i getting rude?, sorry if i am i'm just getting more into it as i go) ii) not in the "western" countrys is "There's very little stigma towards homophobia in the world compared to the amount of stigma towards being homosexual." true.

6. 79 out of 195?...kinda pokes a hole in what your saying about discrimination all over the world huh.

7. well i) i was venting and mentioned it too as a disclaimer, and ii) i have aspergers syndrome i over-analyze everything.

8. well so far i think i'm winning the debate so i hope you have some good come-backs.

anyways i can't reply again tonight because it's 12:10 where i am so i gotta go to bed but i will try in the morning.

also it's nice to have an arguing partner that makes me... "furious" for lack of better words.

Based upon this entire post, it's now clear to me that you're a homophobic, transphobic nut.
1. It's not the least bit contradictive. Also, marriage being between a man and a woman is a matter of opinion, and not one that should be thrust upon every human ever.
3. Well, clearly, you.
4. So, perhaps bosses have the right to fire homophobes, if the same logic is applied.
5. People DO have the right to opinions, my point is that they aren't really discriminated against because of them.
6. Perhaps not the majority, but it's still a widespread thing and the fact that it's not the majority of countries doesn't invalidate the issue.
7. Well, the "disclaimer" doesn't stop me from telling you it was a silly post.
8. lmao, that's a bold claim.

[normalperson]

Based upon this entire post, it's now clear to me that you're a homophobic, transphobic nut.
1. It's not the least bit contradictive. Also, marriage being between a man and a woman is a matter of opinion, and not one that should be thrust upon every human ever.
3. Well, clearly, you.
4. So, perhaps bosses have the right to fire homophobes, if the same logic is applied.
5. People DO have the right to opinions, my point is that they aren't really discriminated against because of them.
6. Perhaps not the majority, but it's still a widespread thing and the fact that it's not the majority of countries doesn't invalidate the issue.
7. Well, the "disclaimer" doesn't stop me from telling you it was a silly post.
8. lmao, that's a bold claim.

1. i) it is contradictory because you wrote "In most places, the right to be married." while also showing that only in 79 out of 195 countries homosexual marriage is against the law. ii) marriage being between a man and a women is not a "matter of opinion" it is what marriage was made for and so having two men or two women marry is ruining the sanctity of it. iii) it should not have to be thrust on every human ever, they should just know better.

3. everybody has the right to agree or disagree with something.

4. well if a business owner does not want a homophobe in their store i think they should be allowed as i already stated "i) owners should have the right to ban whoever they don't want in they're business.".

5. "People DO have the right to opinions, my point is that they aren't really discriminated against because of them." is my view too.

6. most of the countrys that ban homosexuality are "thirdworld" countries who still retain their old views on most subjects.

7. *shrugs* matter of opinion.

8. we'll see about that...

9. just to let you know i don't care if i see two affectionate males in public and i don't mind two men being in a relationship the only two things i draw the line at is i) homosexual intercourse and ii) marriage. (both of which are immoral) although i still think that gay men can live together and what not.

anyways i hope your not getting upset over this because in my mind this is just a... battle of opinions (for lack of a better definition) that i will fight tooth and nail to win. no hard feelings :D

Sidenote: i'm in a rush to leave somewhere so i might of left some things out or what not.

[Vlerchan]

it is contradictory because you wrote "In most places, the right to be married." while also showing that only in 79 out of 195 countries homosexual marriage is against the law.
In 75 of 195 countries being homosexual illegal.

Same-sex marriage is legal in less than 20 countries.

i) homosexual intercourse and ii) marriage
What makes either of these things immoral?

[Babs]

1. i) it is contradictory because you wrote "In most places, the right to be married." while also showing that only in 79 out of 195 countries homosexual marriage is against the law. ii) marriage being between a man and a women is not a "matter of opinion" it is what marriage was made for and so having two men or two women marry is ruining the sanctity of it. iii) it should not have to be thrust on every human ever, they should just know better.

3. everybody has the right to agree or disagree with something.

4. well if a business owner does not want a homophobe in their store i think they should be allowed as i already stated "i) owners should have the right to ban whoever they don't want in they're business.".

5. "People DO have the right to opinions, my point is that they aren't really discriminated against because of them." is my view too.

6. most of the countrys that ban homosexuality are "thirdworld" countries who still retain their old views on most subjects.

7. *shrugs* matter of opinion.

8. we'll see about that...

9. just to let you know i don't care if i see two affectionate males in public and i don't mind two men being in a relationship the only two things i draw the line at is i) homosexual intercourse and ii) marriage. (both of which are immoral) although i still think that gay men can live together and what not.

anyways i hope your not getting upset over this because in my mind this is just a... battle of opinions (for lack of a better definition) that i will fight tooth and nail to win. no hard feelings :D

Sidenote: i'm in a rush to leave somewhere so i might of left some things out or what not.

1. Not being punished for being gay isn't the same as having the right to be married. In many states in the US, you can't be prosecuted for being gay, but you can't legally get married.
Same 'ol "sanctity of marriage" argument. It has no meaning. Two men or two women who love each other getting married doesn't ruin the sanctity of it. Get over it.
3. I never disputed that.
4. I never disputed that either. I don't agree with refusing service based upon sexual orientation, but that's another story.
5. Not according to your first post, in which you were complaining about homophobes receiving "discrimination" for being homophobic.
6. It doesn't matter if they're third-world countries. It's something that's happening, and it's wrong.
9. No one cares what you think about homosexuals. You can hate them all you want, but gay people are, SURPRISE, people and they aren't hurting anybody and deserve equal treatment,

[normalperson]

1. Not being punished for being gay isn't the same as having the right to be married. In many states in the US, you can't be prosecuted for being gay, but you can't legally get married.
Same 'ol "sanctity of marriage" argument. It has no meaning. Two men or two women who love each other getting married doesn't ruin the sanctity of it. Get over it.
3. I never disputed that.
4. I never disputed that either. I don't agree with refusing service based upon sexual orientation, but that's another story.
5. Not according to your first post, in which you were complaining about homophobes receiving "discrimination" for being homophobic.
6. It doesn't matter if they're third-world countries. It's something that's happening, and it's wrong.
9. No one cares what you think about homosexuals. You can hate them all you want, but gay people are, SURPRISE, people and they aren't hurting anybody and deserve equal treatment,

1. i'm sorry for anything i got wrong it's just this whole thing confuses me.

2. since i can see that this issue has been getting you upset and a little... rude (no offense :() i say how about we agree to disagree because i respect your opinion and am not saying mine is right or yours is wrong:). so let's call it a truce and i leave you with some tribute...

Songs:

Marty Robbins, Big iron> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=999RqGZatPs

Marty Robbins, Running Gun> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv4jtsoRejg

Marty Robbins, Cowboy In The Continental Suit> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qApbZp64Wb8

Marty Robbins, Song Of The Bandit> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBqtlctPJ9g

Bob Dylan, Shelter From The Storm> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZQR-o4nO1E

Other things:

the statement below is false.
the statement above is true.

"may you find shelter from the storm"-Bob Dylan. ;)

[normalperson]

In 75 of 195 countries being homosexual illegal.

Same-sex marriage is legal in less than 20 countries. Sorry, i got confused :whoops:.


What makes either of these things immoral?

what makes homosexual intercourse immoral is that 1. The you know what is not not supposed to go you know where because butts are for pooping 2. you can't reproduce that way 3. their are no homosexual animals = thats not what nature intended 4. if you just step back and think of it you will realize it (anal sex) is dirty/unhealthy even between a man and a women. (HIV/AIDS did first spread through the gay community)

what makes marriage immoral is that 1. marriage was made for a man and a women (you wouldn't use a watch and some nails if you had a hammer) 2. a family cannot naturally come out of this 3. homosexuals can live together, have a relationship and do the same things (for the most part) as if they were married without getting married so really i think they're doing this just to prove a point just like some of those f*cking retarded feminist's. (i'm not calling gay people f*cking retarded)

[Vlerchan]

1. The you know what is not not supposed to go you know where because butts are for pooping
But the prostate gland exists. Massaging this (allegedly) results in a pleasurable experience.

Says who though anyway?

2. you can't reproduce that way
I have no idea how this makes it immoral.

Do you also consider oral, manual, sex with protection, sex during that unable-to-get-pregnant part of a woman's cycle, sex when one partner is infertile (natural or otherwise), sex between older people, etc. immoral?

3. their are no homosexual animals = thats not what nature intended
This just the other mammals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior#Mammals

I feel I should add that there's no documented cases that I am aware about of other species displaying homophobia.

4. if you just step back and think of it you will realize it (anal sex) is dirty/unhealthy even between a man and a women.
I stepped back and thought about it.

I came to conclusion that if the correct precautions are taken - like with all other sexual acts - then it's perfectly healthy.

---

1. marriage was made for a man and a women.
No. Marriage was made to enable the stable transition of property rights.

It was just previously available to a man and a woman.

2. a family cannot naturally come out of this
Do you also think that infertile/older people shouldn't be allowed to get married?

3. homosexuals can live together, have a relationship and do the same things (for the most part) as if they were married without getting married so really i think they're doing this just to prove a point just like some of those f*cking retarded feminist's. (i'm not calling gay people f*cking retarded)

No. Signing a marriage contract grants you a host of rights and responsibilities. That's a big part of it.

---

I'm trying real hard to resist the temptation to ask what 'fucking retarted' things feminist do that annoy you now. I just don't want to derail this thread.

[normalperson]

But the prostate gland exists. Massaging this (allegedly) results in a pleasurable experience. Yes but that doesn't mean it's supposed to be part of sexual intercourse.

Says who though anyway? nature? what a lot of us do daily?


I have no idea how this makes it immoral. It's because under no circumstances a life can be created (sex's purpose)

Do you also consider oral, manual, sex with protection, sex during that unable-to-get-pregnant part of a woman's cycle, sex when one partner is infertile (natural or otherwise), sex between older people, etc. immoral? I'm talking about homosexuality as a whole not about other things that are literally beyond peoples control. in other words gay people have the choice to have sex (i'm not saying that being gay is a choice) and old people for example do not have a choice to be old or not and the first things you mentioned have a very small chance of getting someone pregnant while homosexual sex does not. also, i'm not really opposed to gay oral or manual sex because i'm not going to tell them not to do what most people do if there's no risk involved.


This just the other mammals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior#Mammals

I feel I should add that there's no documented cases that I am aware about of other species displaying homophobia. 1. it's just that BEHAVIORS animals are not consciously homosexual and it's not the same as with humans as in i) with animals like dogs it is used to show dominance ii) it is used as mutual satisfaction iii) all animals are heterosexual because they will all still have real sex with the opposite gender. 2. animals don't see things the same way we do which i previously mentioned.


I stepped back and thought about it.

I came to conclusion that if the correct precautions are taken - like with all other sexual acts - then it's perfectly healthy. it still is dirty.

---


No. Marriage was made to enable the stable transition of property rights.

It was just previously available to a man and a woman. Look i'm sorry but this whole homosexual marriage thing makes me very uncomfortable because it just flips everything i know over. i'll just agree with the whole homosexual marriage thing because............................................. i'm scared of it.


Do you also think that infertile/older people shouldn't be allowed to get married? as i thought before it only takes a man and a women to have a family although i think you really have me second guessing myself now.


No. Signing a marriage contract grants you a host of rights and responsibilities. That's a big part of it. i'll admit i didn't think that through and i realize that it has a lot to do with medical issues, insurance and a lot of other things, i just think that their should be something separate for gay people to have the same rights as the rest of us.

---

I'm trying real hard to resist the temptation to ask what 'fucking retarted' things feminist do that annoy you now. I just don't want to derail this thread. i'll try to start a new one in the next little while although it might not be tonight ;).

anyways you sure are persuasive, i guess i should heed the advice of a smart man that the times are changing(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7qQ6_RV4VQ) and i shouldn't let myself be left behind.

P.S. if you like Bob Dylan i can direct you to more of his amazing work ;)

[Vlerchan]

Yes but that doesn't mean it's supposed to be part of sexual intercourse.
I have no idea why you think you should be able to dictate what's "right" and "wrong" for people to include in their sex lives.

Regardless by the criteria you provided in the argument I refuted it can be included.

nature?
Nature expressly included a prostate gland in the male anatomy.#

what a lot of us do daily?
Lots of people used to be racist daily. This had no bearing on whether it was right or wrong.

I'm talking about homosexuality as a whole not about other things that are literally beyond peoples control.
People have a choice over whether they want to engage in the stuff I listed.

in other words gay people have the choice to have sex (i'm not saying that being gay is a choice) and old people for example do not have a choice to be old or not ...
Just like gay people do not have a choice to be gay or not, like you just admitted.

... and the first things you mentioned have a very small chance of getting someone pregnant while homosexual sex does not.
If you are doing it right manual and oral sex have no chance of getting you pregnant.

The risk of getting pregnant during the stage of woman's ovulation process where it's impossible to get pregnant is non-existent.

The risk of getting pregnant when you are infertile or your partner is infertile is non-existent.

You can get pregnant whilst using protection. But the chance is minimal.

also, i'm not really opposed to gay oral or manual sex because i'm not going to tell them not to do what most people do if there's no risk involved.
There's no risk involved in anal sex if you are doing it properly.

The criteria for whether sex was moral or immoral was also set at whether it might get you pregnant or not. I've noted you are backtracking here.

it still is dirty.
Do you consider all dirty things immoral?

---

I presume you agree with woman having sex with other woman by the nature of your criticisms by the way.

---

Look i'm sorry but this whole homosexual marriage thing makes me very uncomfortable because it just flips everything i know over.
Same-sex marraige is also legal in Canada.

Depending on where you live it has been all you've known since you were between 2 and 5.

... i just think that their should be something separate for gay people to have the same rights as the rest of us.
But why?

---

[Proper Soundtrack] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u1dUwzngdA)

[Meh Guy]

Idk, maybe. But even in a world with total equality, it would still be considered different. And that's enough to discourage some people from accepting it.

[hannahxo13]

Maybe. I think the same amount of people would have different sexual orientations other than straight, but I think the difference would be that more people would not be afraid to come out. So it's not that more people would be "gay", it's that there would be more people out.

[DoodleSnap]

I don't think that more people would magically become gay or bi, I believe that a majority of the population lay somewhere on a spectrum between straight and gay, and that more acceptance would simply lead to more people exploring and accepting this side to their sexuality.

[CornDaddy]

I think people would just be very open to experimenting or just sleeping with whoever diddlys their dang. Sort of like the hippy movement in the 60s. Tbh I don't even think sexuality labels would even exist. Or at least not at as heavily as they do now.