Homophobia

[PrincessHades]

You're operating under the assumption that this is a dichotomy.

I'm saying the idea that homosexuality is biologically determined is somewhat debunked as many findings now show that it's just as much nurture as it is nature.
Most of this nurture happens in the womb, not outside of it.

Have you noticed how homosexuals tend to be more attracted to gender nonconformists? Gay men usually like effeminate guys, and lesbians like each other masculine, often bearing androgynous hairstyles. This is because the underlying attraction towards the opposite gender is still present, but something during childhood has inverted their conscious preferences.

I think there is a spiritual (ESP) element to sexuality too.

 

[CiG]

What's more important is that sexuality tends to be more flexible among women, whereas men rarely experiment with homosexual acts. The "college lesbian phase" is a stereotype for good reason.

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

my problem with homophobia is the Christians who say "Gay people are going to Hell"
without religion, homophobia doesn't make sense
if 2 guys/girls are noticeably a gay couple, or a single person is making it noticeable that they are gay, how the hell does it affect a straight person??
it doesn't
without the Father of Jesus telling you that being gay is wrong, then being gay is just a part of someone's personality, and definitely not something that should be problematic for straight people

 

[Zonfar]

I don't care what you are, if you are playing tonsil hockey in a public place or around me, that is gross. I have a friend who does this with his new girlfriend when they come over. Wayyy too much public displays of affection (PDA) for my personal taste. Guess who doesn't come over to my place to hang out anymore!

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

I don't care what you are, if you are playing tonsil hockey in a public place or around me, that is gross. I have a friend who does this with his new girlfriend when they come over. Wayyy too much public displays of affection (PDA) for my personal taste. Guess who doesn't come over to my place to hang out anymore!

yeah, i get you
but it shouldn't be more gross if it's 2 guys or 2 girls

 

[Zonfar]

yeah, i get you
but it shouldn't be more gross if it's 2 guys or 2 girls

You're right. It shouldn't be more gross. Unfortunately, we've grown as a society to say that being gay is a bad thing (religious zealots have "helped" this stigma grow).

I don't care what gender you're are attracted to. I would just appreciate it if you didn't flail your sexuality about in public whether you're straight or gay.

A problem in my eyes from things such as gay parades is they run around flailing dildos around, and being overly sexually and gross. This does not help the cause because to anyone who is already "afraid" of any gay people running around acting like children and acting generally gross, it only instills that "they are right". I would love to see gay parades be shown and done in more respectful ways that aren't gross. Show that we are all just people that want love, and showing the overly public displays of affection is not required.

 

[CiG]

If PDA bothers you this much the problem probably lies with you, not the PDA itself. I get it, people doing that shit right in front of you is annoying, borish and lacking in decorum, but you want gay pride parades to tone it down? That's pretty ridiculous.

 

[Zonfar]

If PDA bothers you this much the problem probably lies with you, not the PDA itself. I get it, people doing that shit right in front of you is annoying, borish and lacking in decorum, but you want gay pride parades to tone it down? That's pretty ridiculous.

It may be ridiculous to you, and that's ok. I don't see whats wrong with me saying that it would be nice for gay parades to be more respectable to potentially attract more people to it. Would I ever go to a ANY parade (gay or not) where there was a guarantee displays of where it was overly sexualized? No, I wouldn't. Fine, it's my problem, but if the whole point is to attract more people and to bring awareness that being gay is ok in a positive light, shouldn't we want to do it in a way that... positively attracts more people? I know I'm not alone on the subject, and obviously there are people who disagree and think the opposite. I'm not gonna stomp my feet and say it has to be my way. Just giving my 2 cents on what I believe to be a more positive way to publicly display messages. Again, this is not a gay or straight problem, be too overly public with displays of affection (whether you're gay or straight), and you've lost my and a lot of other peoples attention. I'm not gonna say you can't do it, but I will leave, others will leave, and respect will have been lost.

 

[CiG]

I'd never go to a gay pride parade either, but thousands of spectators do so I guess their attempts to attract inter-community attention has been working for years.

 

[Zonfar]

I'd never go to a gay pride parade either, but thousands of spectators do so I guess their attempts to attract inter-community attention has been working for years.

Just because something has been working, doesn't mean we can't look for new ways to make them even better!

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

You're right. It shouldn't be more gross. Unfortunately, we've grown as a society to say that being gay is a bad thing (religious zealots have "helped" this stigma grow).

I don't care what gender you're are attracted to. I would just appreciate it if you didn't flail your sexuality about in public whether you're straight or gay.

A problem in my eyes from things such as gay parades is they run around flailing dildos around, and being overly sexually and gross. This does not help the cause because to anyone who is already "afraid" of any gay people running around acting like children and acting generally gross, it only instills that "they are right". I would love to see gay parades be shown and done in more respectful ways that aren't gross. Show that we are all just people that want love, and showing the overly public displays of affection is not required.

It may be ridiculous to you, and that's ok. I don't see whats wrong with me saying that it would be nice for gay parades to be more respectable to potentially attract more people to it. Would I ever go to a ANY parade (gay or not) where there was a guarantee displays of where it was overly sexualized? No, I wouldn't. Fine, it's my problem, but if the whole point is to attract more people and to bring awareness that being gay is ok in a positive light, shouldn't we want to do it in a way that... positively attracts more people? I know I'm not alone on the subject, and obviously there are people who disagree and think the opposite. I'm not gonna stomp my feet and say it has to be my way. Just giving my 2 cents on what I believe to be a more positive way to publicly display messages. Again, this is not a gay or straight problem, be too overly public with displays of affection (whether you're gay or straight), and you've lost my and a lot of other peoples attention. I'm not gonna say you can't do it, but I will leave, others will leave, and respect will have been lost.

there are gay-pride parades that are way more sexualized than others
there are some that are more respectful, it just depends which one you're going to
the one in Dallas, Texas, for example is the horribly gross and hyper-sexualized thing you're bitching about
but then, the one in the near-to-Dallas city called Fort Worth is labeling itself as "family-friendly"
people from all over the country go to the one in Dallas, but people from outside of The Metroplex don't even know the name "Fort Worth"
so what you're describing and bitching about is a real thing
but there are also "respectful" gay-pride parades, you just have to look for them

 

[axelthefox]

why can't the rest of the world think like this?

Now if we could tell those who use the bible to justify their bias against LGBT people.

I'm bisexual and a crossdresser.

Bigots use the bible to justify their bias.

The same bible also says that people can't eat fat Lev 3:17, can't eat pork Lev 11:7-8, can't eat shrimp or anything lacking fins or scales Deuteronomy 14:9-10, planting two different crops side by side Lev 19:19, wearing clothes made of mixed fabrics lev 19:19, cutting the hair on the sides of your head or clipping the edges of your beard Lev 19:27, tattoos Lev 19:28, can't work on the sabbath Exodus 35:2, can't eat anything mixing meat and dairy Exodus 23:19

The point is: No one follows biblical laws to the letter, Christian or Jew. If a Christian going to cherry pick the biblical laws they want to follow and ignore the laws they don't, then why not ignore the laws that depict people of a certain sexual orientation or gender identity as being worthy of condemnation? Justifying a personal bias on an ancient biblical law when they blatantly ignore other ancient biblical laws doesn't seem like something Jesus would do.

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

Now if we could tell those who use the bible to justify their bias against LGBT people.

I'm bisexual and a crossdresser.

Bigots use the bible to justify their bias.

The same bible also says that people can't eat fat Lev 3:17, can't eat pork Lev 11:7-8, can't eat shrimp or anything lacking fins or scales Deuteronomy 14:9-10, planting two different crops side by side Lev 19:19, wearing clothes made of mixed fabrics lev 19:19, cutting the hair on the sides of your head or clipping the edges of your beard Lev 19:27, tattoos Lev 19:28, can't work on the sabbath Exodus 35:2, can't eat anything mixing meat and dairy Exodus 23:19

The point is: No one follows biblical laws to the letter, Christian or Jew. If a Christian going to cherry pick the biblical laws they want to follow and ignore the laws they don't, then why not ignore the laws that depict people of a certain sexual orientation or gender identity as being worthy of condemnation? Justifying a personal bias on an ancient biblical law when they blatantly ignore other ancient biblical laws doesn't seem like something Jesus would do.

if you read Leviticus chapter 18 straight-through without stopping, it becomes pretty obvious that
the rule "a man shall not lie with another man as he would lie with a woman" is a rule that is horribly mistranslated
it should read "a man shall not lie-down with another man while having sex with a woman"

this isn't a rule prohibiting man-on-man sex,
its a rule against the situation of a pregnant woman not knowing who knocked her up
this rule is necessary for the creation of Patriarchal society
its this rule that made Sara give her slave to Abraham as a concubine
it's this rule that King David is violating when he has sex with Bathsheba

also
its pretty clear that David and Jonathan were a gay couple which everyone seems to ignore

 

[FEZZILLA]

Now if we could tell those who use the bible to justify their bias against LGBT people.

I'm bisexual and a crossdresser.

Bigots use the bible to justify their bias.

The same bible also says that people can't eat fat Lev 3:17, can't eat pork Lev 11:7-8, can't eat shrimp or anything lacking fins or scales Deuteronomy 14:9-10, planting two different crops side by side Lev 19:19, wearing clothes made of mixed fabrics lev 19:19, cutting the hair on the sides of your head or clipping the edges of your beard Lev 19:27, tattoos Lev 19:28, can't work on the sabbath Exodus 35:2, can't eat anything mixing meat and dairy Exodus 23:19

The point is: No one follows biblical laws to the letter, Christian or Jew. If a Christian going to cherry pick the biblical laws they want to follow and ignore the laws they don't, then why not ignore the laws that depict people of a certain sexual orientation or gender identity as being worthy of condemnation? Justifying a personal bias on an ancient biblical law when they blatantly ignore other ancient biblical laws doesn't seem like something Jesus would do.

Since Jesus is the Messiah there is no need to live by the Old Covenant. Christians live by the New Covenant and homosexuality is still a sin, that, if not repented, will lead to eternal damnation.

 

[Bloopy]

Christians considering homosexuality sinful as a whole may be a very modern thing. Before that, versions of the Bible were all talking about pederasty instead:

Has 'Homosexual' Always Been in the Bible?

The word “arsenokoitai” shows up in two different verses in the bible, but it was not translated to mean “homosexual” until 1946.

the German version says “Man shall not lie with young boys as he does with a woman, for it is an abomination.”

So we went to 1 Corinthians to see how they translated arsenokoitai (original Greek word) and instead of homosexuals it said, “Boy molesters will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

“The first time homosexual appears in a German translation is 1983.” To me that was a little suspect because of what was happening in culture in the 1970s. Also because the Germans were the ones who created the word homosexual in 1862, they had all the history, research, and understanding to change it if they saw fit; however, they did not change it until 1983. If anyone was going to put the word homosexual in the Bible, the Germans should have been the first to do it!

 

[FEZZILLA]

Christians considering homosexuality sinful as a whole may be a very modern thing. Before that, versions of the Bible were all talking about pederasty instead:

Has 'Homosexual' Always Been in the Bible?

Translations have always been updated due to the constant changes in language throughout the centuries. For example, if you read the old English Bibles you may not be able to read them well due to the old spellings, grammar, and word selections. Even the KJV uses words that mean entirely different things today then they did back then. Case and point: the word "unicorn" appears in all old English Bibles. Skeptics have used the unicorn in attempts to drive in their point that the Bible is just a fairytale. However, what unicorn means today and what it meant in the 16th century are two entirely different things. The original Webster's Dictionary is used today as a lexicon for the English of the KJV.

Unicorn
http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Unicorn

There you can see that what unicorn meant back then doesn't mean that today.

Thus, revisions in translations is an ongoing process.

As for homosexual being immoral in the Bible, a good look throughout history makes an easy case for homosexuality being a sin. But even if we ignore all the key verses that use the word homosexual today, there is still the Romans 1:18-32 which speaks about God's wrath in the last days being poured out on evolutionists and the motives that drive their disbelief.

Romans 1:18-32
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1:18-32&version=MEV

Regardless of what translation you use or in what language it provides a description of the act and not just a word. Hence the word homosexuality never appears in this passage and yet what is described is very clearly homosexual.

In the Old Testament, Homosexuals wanted to have sex with angels due to their perverse nature. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of such wickedness.

Back during Obama, I remember how the Supreme Court passed gay marriage. And what do homosexuals do with their newly found right? They use it as an excuse to attack Christians and try to pervert their children.

A Message From the Gay Community" Performed by the San Francisco Gay Men's Chorus


So as you can see, the prophecy in Romans 1:18-32 is proven true through the perverted nature of homosexuals who want to have sex with children and corrupt their nature. And what did Jesus say about all this?

Matthew 18:1-6
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+18:1-6&version=NKJV

So its not homophobia that causes Christians to reject homosexuality. Its nature. Its the nature God created for us to live our happiest and most productive lives. Homosexuality is contrary to human nature. The very act itself mocks God. So homosexuality is a sin that, like all sins, must be repented before entering the kingdom of heaven.

 

[CiG]

Ironic that Fezzilla the faggot is a homophobe.

 

[Bloopy]

The article I linked was way too optimistic, I think.

Embrace the opportunity to live with things that make/made you feel uncomfortable and you might learn something.

 

[FEZZILLA]

The article I linked was way too optimistic, I think.

Embrace the opportunity to live with things that make/made you feel uncomfortable and you might learn something.

Opportunity? There is nothing positive I can learn from homosexuality. I am not open to that. I've already seen enough of it and I'm not impressed.

 

[CiG]

I've already seen enough of it and I'm not impressed.

Dicks weren't big enough for ya?