PDA

View Full Version : What are your views on Homosexualism?


Oblisk
01-02-2007, 12:03 PM
I would like to start another thread regarding arguments against homosexualism, but not masturbation/onan.

Points of interest:

Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?

Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?

Etc.

| I, CWAS
01-02-2007, 12:20 PM
It should be noted that I have no desire to regulate the lives of consenting adults who are not initiating aggression against another person.

My first question: what is homosexualism? Are we speaking of homosexual sexual intercourse? Or homosexual love? What if two men/women love each other but sexual attraction is opposite?

› Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?

No

› Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

Yes, depending on what community we are talking about. A conservative religious community will be affected far more than a liberal or sexually/romantically liberated community (i.e. Rurual Alberta or The rural american south vs San Franciso or Toronto)

› Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

It depends. Homosexual men are first and foremost men, hence they are more promiscuous, as the only thing preventing heterosexual men from being the same way are male-female cultural memes.

› Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

I'm against all violence that is not in response to an imminent threat. I oppose the initiation of force.

› Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?

I believe homosexuality and heterosexuality can both be eliminated by genetic and/or psychobiological engineering in the future.

Hrolf Kraki
01-02-2007, 02:55 PM
I would like to start another thread regarding arguments against homosexualism, but not masturbation/onan.

Points of interest:

Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?
No.

Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?
Yes.

Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?
Yes.

Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?
WTF?!? No, I'm not a psycho.

Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?
Finish the question. Will be? Should be?

I really don't care what people prefer when it comes to sexual orientation. I just don't want to hear about it and have homosexuality glorified all over the media like it's the new cool thing to do.

Zrinski
01-02-2007, 02:57 PM
› Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?

No.

› Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

Yes.

› Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

Yes, most definately.

› Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

Yes. I am actually againt any needless violence. Unless it's self-defense of course or part of some sport/discipline.

› Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?

I believe they will be able to erradicate it but I am not sure it will be erradicated.

MrAngry
01-02-2007, 03:07 PM
I would like to start another thread regarding arguments against homosexualism, but not masturbation/onan.

Points of interest:
[QUOTE=Oblisk]
Do you believe homosexuality diminishes mental and physical capabilities?


No more so then hetrosexuality. why should it?


Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

Absolutely not, homosexuality has existed as long as mankind has and the human race is still going strong.


Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

Nope


Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?


I'm against violence full stop, there are one or two exceptions I'd make on the forum though! ;)


Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?

It has been outlawed in the past and it survives today, this isnt a disease or a condition it is the way a person is.

The only espect of homosexuality I object to is the over the top display of "gay pride" and the over top camp way some of the guys dress.

Hermetic
01-02-2007, 03:44 PM
Homosexuality is natural fact of reality that is found all thought nature and is neither good nor evil just a natural occurrence and it is humans that place a moral judgement onto it. In some cultures and times it is accepted and other it is not. Could just be because everything seems to have a opposite in the universe that hetero would also have homo.

I think it is genetic and as such mother nature has a way of making such corrections, they do not breed so they do not pass the genes on. And pushing them back into the closet could increase the number of homosexuals in the long run because they will take cover wives and have kids. Where letting them live open and normal will decrease their population.

I also find the radical homosexual haters really do have closet fag issues themselves. And radical homosexuals who engage in a never ending war on hetero society are mental.

Worker&Parasite
01-02-2007, 03:57 PM
Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?

This is a loaded question if I've ever seen one. There really is no room for debate, homosexuality does not effect the mental or physical state of a human being. Or at least, to date there are no visible, or empirical indications of such an effect. To assert otherwise is baseless.

In fact, to back my point up further, it is widely accepted that
Aids spreads more readily by heterosexual intercourse (http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1996/03.07/ThaiAIDSVirusMa.html) (another source) (http://dsp-psd.communication.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/bp411-e.htm). No need to eradicate the hetros, or fight promiscuity, the simple solution is to wear a condom.



Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

No, but homophobia is. Ones sexuality is a personal practice, between two, three or however many consenting individuals, there is absolutely no detrimental effect on a human society.

Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

I do however support violent action against millitant homophobes.

Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?


Not sure what the question here is. Whether it is "should" or "will" the answer is no. You cannot physically eradicate a sexuality. It's simply not possible. Because homosexuality is not passed on, even killing the homosexual population would not secure a heterosexual next generation in the future. It's a naturally occurring phenomenon.

MrAngry
01-02-2007, 03:57 PM
I also find the radical homosexual haters really do have closet fag issues themselves. And radical homosexuals who engage in a never ending war on hetero society are mental.



Could one transpose homsexual with race?

Hermetic
01-02-2007, 04:01 PM
If they want too, but does not equal it being true in reality, they could also transpose it to anything else they had a agenda of dumping on.

Could one transpose homsexual with race?

Arminius
01-02-2007, 05:04 PM
› Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?

No.

› Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

No, as long as it isn't the norm. Then there is a question about reproduction and the birth rate.

› Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

No, same as above.

› Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

Neither (don't have a position)... I don't care about them as long as they don't push their odd culture on me, in which case I would be for violence.

› Do you believe homosexuality [will] be erradicated in the future?

Not completely, as long as there are humans, as we know it. Even then it would be hard unless it is a nonsexual or asexual future species.

Dr. Gutberlet
01-02-2007, 05:25 PM
I believe that homosexuality is a genetic abnormality. I also think that homosexuality will be eradicated via in utero testing and genetic cures. Homos don't want to hear that, but it will come to pass. For now I advocate quarantine and prejudicial laws to tame the scourge. Any propsective parent who can get such tests in the future, yet still wants a gay baby should be imprisoned.

Starr
01-02-2007, 09:36 PM
[QUOTE=Oblisk]

Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities

I am not sure exactly what you mean by this question, but a lot of studies have shown that the brain of a male homosexual is more similar to the female brain, than what you see with the brain of a straight male. Many homosexual men also seem to be lacking a sort of masculine quality you might see with other males.

Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

If homosexuality is promoted as just another alternative "equal" lifestyle that should be celebrated, rather then something that is said to be, what it is, which is an abnormality in the larger society that needs to be kept in the privacy of the bedroom, than yes.

Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

They have a much higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS, but if they are gay rather than bisexual, they will keep it among themselves. There is also the likely possible link between homosexuality and pedophilia.

Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

against.

Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?

It is a good possibility. Example:

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18538&highlight=sheep

Nyx
01-02-2007, 11:49 PM
How do I feel about homosexuality? The same way I feel about all non-procreative sex; it is a misuse of the sex organs, which are intended for the perpetuation of life. There is nothing uniquely immoral about homosexuality.

Sean
01-03-2007, 12:09 AM
› Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?

No, in fact the contrary may be true; it may be found along side people who are highly creative.

› Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

Maybe, since the fact that most homosexuals would rather be promiscuous than settle down and have a family, and this type of behavior could be detrimental to a society's need to increase its population. But most heterosexuals are like that today as well. Homosexuality in and of itself isn't a problem, but rather certain types of behavior which, admittedly, are often found alongside it.

› Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

What I said for the previous question applies for this as well.

› Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

I am against it.

› Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?

Can it be? It may be possible via genetic engineering. Should it be? I'm not sure why it should be. If I were a homosexual, and I were asked if it would be better to be heterosexual, I would ask what the problem is. To say that homosexuality is worse is to do so from a standpoint which assumes that heterosexuality is superior. But what is so great about heterosexuality other than the fact that is predominates in our current society? If it were the other way around, would homosexuals persecute heterosexuals?

Vasily Zaitsev
01-03-2007, 06:22 AM
I am absolutely opposed to homosexual identity politics infecting the public sphere.

However, I view the state attempting to prevent private expressions of homosexual lust to be a waste of resources.

Helios Panoptes
01-03-2007, 06:36 AM
Do you believe homosexualism diminishes mental and physical capabilities?

I have seen no evidence to that effect, so no.

Do you believe it is ultimately harmful to a community?

Probably, because it is likely to cause social clashes which destabilize solidarity and it provides few or no benefits. It is not what I would consider a severe impediment, however.

Same as above, but do you believe it's harmful, as a human civilization?

Same as above.

Are you for or against violence against homosexuals?

I am against it.

Do you believe homosexuality be erradicated in the future?

Do I believe that it can be? I don't know, but I suppose it's possible, at least for males. It may not be possible for females because I have read that sexual orientation is more muddled for that gender. That is, self-identified straight and gay females are capable of being aroused by either sex, but men tend to be aroused by one gender or the other. Pre-emptively, yes, I read this from a reliable source; no, I do not have a link. I believe it was an article on sciencedaily. I will search for it, but I can't promise anything.

Do I believe that it should be? Yes, it is a minor nuisance.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
01-03-2007, 06:45 AM
Homosexuals (people who engage in homosexual acts) make a choice to engage in that behavior and should be treated like the sexual degenerates they are.

I don't care what runs through people's mind as long as it doesn't translate to physical action.

Helios Panoptes
01-03-2007, 06:57 AM
This is a loaded question if I've ever seen one.

Then you have never seen one(a loaded question).

Helios Panoptes
01-03-2007, 07:31 AM
Study Suggests Difference Between Female And Male Sexuality

Science Daily — EVANSTON, Ill. --- Three decades of research on men's sexual arousal show patterns that clearly track sexual orientation -- gay men overwhelmingly become sexually aroused by images of men and heterosexual men by images of women. In other words, men's sexual arousal patterns seem obvious.

But a new Northwestern University study boosts the relatively limited research on women's sexuality with a surprisingly different finding regarding women's sexual arousal.

In contrast to men, both heterosexual and lesbian women tend to become sexually aroused by both male and female erotica, and, thus, have a bisexual arousal pattern.

"These findings likely represent a fundamental difference between men's and women's brains and have important implications for understanding how sexual orientation development differs between men and women," said J. Michael Bailey, professor and chair of psychology at Northwestern and senior researcher of the study "A Sex Difference in the Specificity of Sexual Arousal." The study is forthcoming in the journal Psychological Science.

Bailey's main research focus has been on the genetics and environment of sexual orientation, and he is one of the principal investigators of a widely cited study that concludes that genes influence male homosexuality.

As in many areas of sexuality, research on women's sexual arousal patterns has lagged far behind men's, but the scant research on the subject does hint that, compared with men, women's sexual arousal patterns may be less tightly connected to their sexual orientation.

The Northwestern study strongly suggests this is true. The Northwestern researchers measured the psychological and physiological sexual arousal in homosexual and heterosexual men and women as they watched erotic films. There were three types of erotic films: those featuring only men, those featuring only women and those featuring male and female couples. As with previous research, the researchers found that men responded consistent with their sexual orientations. In contrast, both homosexual and heterosexual women showed a bisexual pattern of psychological as well as genital arousal. That is, heterosexual women were just as sexually aroused by watching female stimuli as by watching male stimuli, even though they prefer having sex with men rather than women.

"In fact, the large majority of women in contemporary Western societies have sex exclusively with men," said Meredith Chivers, a Ph.D. candidate in clinical psychology at Northwestern University, a psychology intern at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and the study's first author. "But I have long suspected that women's sexuality is very different from men's, and this study scientifically demonstrates one way this is so."

The study's results mesh with current research showing that women's sexuality demonstrates increased flexibility relative to men in other areas besides sexual orientation, according to Chivers.

"Taken together, these results suggest that women's sexuality differs from men and emphasize the need for researchers to develop a model of the development and organization of female sexuality independent from models of male sexuality," she said.

The study's four authors include Bailey and three graduate students in Northwestern's psychology department, Chivers, Gerulf Rieger and Elizabeth Latty.

"Since most women seem capable of sexual arousal to both sexes, why do they choose one or the other?" Bailey asked. "Probably for reasons other than sexual arousal."

Sexual arousal is the emotional and physical response to sexual stimuli, including erotica or actual people. It has been known since the early 1960s that homosexual and heterosexual men respond in specific but opposite ways to sexual stimuli depicting men and women. Films provoke the greatest sexual response, and films of men having sex with men or of women having sex with women provoke the largest differences between homosexual and heterosexual men. That is because the same-sex films offer clear-cut results, whereas watching heterosexual sex could be exciting to both homosexual and heterosexual men, but for different reasons.

Typically, men experience genital arousal and psychological sexual arousal when they watch films depicting their preferred sex, but not when they watch films depicting the other sex. Men's specific pattern of sexual arousal is such a reliable fact that genital arousal can be used to assess men's sexual preferences. Even gay men who deny their own homosexuality will become more sexually aroused by male sexual stimuli than by female stimuli.

"The fact that women's sexual arousal patterns are not all predicted by their sexual orientations suggests that men's and women's minds and brains are very different," Bailey said.

To rule out the possibility that the differences between men's and women's genital sexual arousal patterns might be due to the different ways that genital arousal is measured in men and women, the Northwestern researchers identified a subset of subjects: postoperative transsexuals who began life as men but had surgery to construct artificial vaginas.

In a sense, those transsexuals have the brains of men but the genitals of women. Their psychological and genital arousal patterns matched those of men -- those who like men were more aroused by male stimuli and those who like women were more aroused by the female stimuli -- even though their genital arousal was measured in the same way women's was.

"This shows that the sex difference that we found is real and almost certainly due to a sex difference in the brain," said Bailey.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/06/030613075252.htm

Leshrac
01-03-2007, 10:37 AM
Homosexuals (people who engage in homosexual acts) make a choice to engage in that behavior and should be treated like the sexual degenerates they are.


Wrong. A few people i know are in fact "gay", both females and males.

The 'truly gay' male subjects are repulsed by even the idea of going on with a female. This applies to most gay males i talked to.

Female subjects tend to be more so-and-so about it. While a few are repulsed by the idea, most wouldn't be against the idea of mating with a male to have a baby.

Bisexuals are, for the overwhelming majority, people that have the same degree of attraction to both sexes.

Homosexuality is a natural fact. People that 'are offended' or state 'it's against nature' should open a fucking biology book.

Helios Panoptes
01-03-2007, 10:46 AM
Bisexuals are, for the overwhelming majority, people that have the same degree of attraction to both sexes.

I believe that male bisexuality is more myth than reality.

Dr. Gutberlet
01-03-2007, 02:28 PM
Science will eradicate gays:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-210-2524408-523,00.html

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
01-03-2007, 09:19 PM
Leshrac...
I believe you misunderstood my post.

The point is people may not choose what they THINK, but they choose what they DO. And homosexuals who actually practice most certainly choose to practice.

Starr
01-03-2007, 11:24 PM
I believe that male bisexuality is more myth than reality.


And female bisexuality is a trend.

Winston
01-03-2007, 11:32 PM
Leshrac...
I believe you misunderstood my post.

The point is people may not choose what they THINK, but they choose what they DO. And homosexuals who actually practice most certainly choose to practice.

Could you choose not to have sex with women? I know I couldn't, and for that reason I can't be very hard on queers.

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
01-04-2007, 12:20 AM
I actually do that. I have a very anti-social personality and am conservative sexually. I stay away from women, because I know they have the potential to screw with my life.

Helios Panoptes
01-04-2007, 02:19 AM
And female bisexuality is a trend.

It both is a trend and is not...

The latent capacity for bisexual behavior is normal in women, but its manifestation is a trend.

Starr
01-04-2007, 02:27 AM
The latent capacity for bisexual behavior is normal in women

I do not believe this is true. I think a lot of men want it to be true. The article you posted really only proves that women can become aroused by viewing sexual acts that involve women. It could be just the acts themselves that are able to stimulate them or even them thinking about themselves in the role of that woman, it doesn't mean that needed sexual attraction to women is present.

Helios Panoptes
01-04-2007, 02:42 AM
I do not believe this is true. I think a lot of men want it to be true.

It makes no difference to me either way. I am disinterested in the subject. If anyone wants it to have a particular truth value, I'd wager that you want it to be false more than I want it to be true.

The article you posted really only proves that women can become aroused by viewing sexual acts that involve women. It could be just the acts themselves that are able to stimulate them or even them thinking about themselves in the role of that woman, it doesn't mean that needed sexual attraction to women is present.

It doesn't matter if they get aroused because they are attracted to the women or not. It wouldn't matter if women were such that they were capable of becoming aroused by any sexual imagery. The point was that women have a latent capacity for bisexual behavior, which is absent in men. This stands unrefuted.

Saas
01-04-2007, 02:29 PM
It both is a trend and is not...

The latent capacity for bisexual behavior is normal in women, but its manifestation is a trend.There is abundant evidence of female bisexual behavior in earlier societies. Its existence is hardly new.

Helios Panoptes
01-04-2007, 08:54 PM
There is abundant evidence of female bisexual behavior in earlier societies. Its existence is hardly new.

Thankfully, I didn't say it was new.

Saas
01-07-2007, 08:02 PM
Thankfully, I didn't say it was new.On second look, I can see this is true.

Still, Starr would probably be surprised at some of the evidence.