The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Started by Slash_KMC3,287 pages
Slash_KMC Retired Helper
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
No it is not gene related. That is like saying people who have a sexual attraction to children is gene related. Because, according to child molesters, they can't help but to have sexual attraction to young kids. The only reason why gays are not excepted,and gays are, is because most children are not old enough to make decisions for themselves.

I must have been misinformed then, I apologize. But yes, the reason why molesters are not allowed is the same why gay people aren't allowed to rape other gay people.

There is just no way you can compare gay sex to pedophilia. It has nothing to do with morals. Gay sex is the same as straight sex, sex with children is a whole different area.

Darth Sexy Restricted

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
I must have been misinformed then, I apologize. But yes, the reason why molesters are not allowed is the same why gay people aren't allowed to rape other gay people.

There is just no way you can compare gay sex to pedophilia. It has nothing to do with morals.

Homosexuality has nothing to do with morals? I disagree. Everything else, have fun with Sidious.

Lord Lucien Lets all love Lain

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Homosexuality has nothing to do with morals? I disagree.
I-I'm sorry... what?

Red Nemesis The Blind Critic

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
I am a strong believer in nature vs. nurture. I believe that in the wrong kind of environment, yes. You play with dolls long enough. You do ballet, etc. But I also think that genetics HAS to play some sort of role in this. Again, I'm not sure as studies have thus far been largely inconclusive.

*shudder*
This is quite possibly the most terrible thing I read all day, and I read I know Why the Caged Bird Sings during Spanish class. That book is F'd up,
Spoiler:
she gets raped
yet this comment made me cringe more. I bet that ballet dancers get more than KMC does combined (excluding Blax). "Effeminate" activities =/= teh gay. Heck, I searched for a link between cross-gender activities and gender confusion (Google) but couldn't find anything.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Inborn trait? Please prove that.

Well, an 'inborn trait' might be the wrong word. Homosexuality is not a choice, so I guess I defaulted it to genetics.

The way I see it, there are 2 options:
inherent (genetics)
of one's own volition (choice)

Now, I can't remember choosing to be heterosexual, nor could I choose to be gay. It just isn't an option. (I mean, eww.) In my case studies (talks with gay people) they have the same problem- they couldn't chose to be strait if they wanted to. Our brains are simply wired differently than theirs are. (Assuming you aren't... you know. Moving on.)

Originally posted by Darth Sexy

Oppression? I highly call them not being allowed to marry because of thousands of years behind the concept of marriage, oppression.

Well, marriage wasn't always one to one (polygamy/the female equivalent) and I don't think that religions can be forced to marry gays. The government, however, simply can not discriminate against them because of sexual preference, which is something over which they have no more control than Blax does (over his race. Or I do over my race. I think you get the point.)
Originally posted by Darth Sexy

And you're fond of this liberal mentality. If we DONT tell people what to do, people will do whatever they want. IF we DONT tell people what to do, right and wrong, good and evil will cease to exist, because people will say "who are you to...". I am almost positive you don't believe in organized religion.

I get so sick of the expression 'whatever they want'. Of course people will do what they want. They already do. The word 'whatever', however, implies that it will be trivial or mischevious. Why do you assume that peoples' natural inclinations are bad? 'Whatever' I want doesn't include raping old ladies or robbing banks. How about you?

Good and evil already don't exist, philosophically speaking.

Weren't you here for MC and my hate fest on organized religion? I could rant about that for a while... That seems like a bad idea though.

EDIT: Tonight has reminded me why S666 is on ignore...[/edit]

Final Blaxican Restricted

I would like to note that I am, in fact, heterosexual.

Like, completely. 😐

Just sayin'.

Red Nemesis The Blind Critic
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Homosexuality has nothing to do with morals? I disagree. Everything else, have fun with Sidious.

Well, it isn't a choice. Unless you feel that you could choose to be gay?

Edit: Nor is homosexuality immoral, unless you abide by (is it Leviticus) the letter of a very old book that most people ignore anyway. If you want homosexuality to be immoral ("And thou shall not lie with a man as you lie with a woman"... or something) then you must also obey the other rules in leviticus. Care to stone your daughter? No? Then in that case, upon which criteria are you selecting the words of Yahwe that you'd like to follow?

SIDIOUS 66 Senior Member

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

I'm just giving you shit. It happens on these boards. As Gideon might say, "..." well damn. I don't know what Gideon would say. He told me not to take little jabs at people too seriously, so I don't.

Well know i can take a playful jab, i just don't know if you are able to. And i don't want this to end up as a bashing war.

Well, considering that
Your views =/= absolute truth
and that you aren't in a position to dictate what is or is not moral, yes. Yes I am.
Well keep in mind that it works both ways.

1. Homosexuality =/= Pedophilia
2. Having sex with animals or children is not consensual. Children aren't fit to make that decision and for obvious reasons animals are not able to. In both of your examples, real, lasting harm (to bodies or to psyches) is being caused. This harm is not present in a loving (gay) relationship.
I am not arguing why gays are excepted and the others aren't. That is the only reason why it is excepted, is because it is consensual. As i said before, if that is how two grown-ups want to live their lives, well so be it. But you can not say that being gay is completely normal just because they can not help being that way, because child molestor's say they can not help being sexually attracted to children.

I'm saying that we should not deny the right to adopt and cherish a child to a homosexual couple because they are homosexual any more than we should deny a child to a black couple because they are black. Also, pragmatically, there aren't so many people willing to adopt that we can afford to turn down otherwise acceptable candidates. [/B]
How are you making a comparison between black and gays? What is the comparison?

Darth Sexy Restricted

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

*shudder*
This is quite possibly the most terrible thing I read all day, and I read I know Why the Caged Bird Sings during Spanish class. That book is F'd up,

Spoiler:
she gets raped
yet this comment made me cringe more. I bet that ballet dancers get more than KMC does combined (excluding Blax). "Effeminate" activities =/= teh gay. Heck, I searched for a link between cross-gender activities and gender confusion (Google) but couldn't find anything.

1. I've read worse
2. It was an example of environmental factors. I also have met ballet dancers. And 4-5 of them were gay. Point is, it was an example, albeit not the best one. But you still have not shown me conclusive evidence that there's a "gay gene".

Well, an 'inborn trait' might be the wrong word. Homosexuality is not a choice, so I guess I defaulted it to genetics.

Wtf? How do you know? Isn't the definition being attracted to the same sex? This what I'm talking about. Homosexuality is a choice of free will. I hate that "Oh they can't help it nonsense". First you defend them, then you patronize them. Make up your mind.

Now, I can't remember choosing to be heterosexual, nor could I choose to be gay. It just isn't an option. (I mean, eww.) In my case studies (talks with gay people) they have the same problem- they couldn't chose to be strait if they wanted to. Our brains are simply wired differently than theirs are. (Assuming you aren't... you know. Moving on.)

Oh man, you're making them out to be mutants lol. I can't tell if you're defending them anymore or what. You're telling me homosexuals have these wiring problems in the head, or brain damage, or what. I've met gay people, all of whom were happy to have "come out". If you've met a gay person who claims he'd be straight if he could, then I'm not really sure what to call him, other than a self hating homosexual.

Well, marriage wasn't always one to one (polygamy/the female equivalent) and I don't think that religions can be forced to marry gays. The government, however, simply can not discriminate against them because of sexual preference, which is something over which they have no more control than Blax does (over his race. Or I do over [b]my race. I think you get the point.)

After the institution of monotheism, it was male+female. Not to mention, even polygamy is male+female so I'm not sure what point you're making. I think I don't get the point. You're blaming the government for not giving homosexuals the right to marry after millennia of marriage between a man and a woman, because.....They can't help it? lol.

I get so sick of the expression '[b]whatever they want'. Of course people will do what they want. They already do. The word 'whatever', however, implies that it will be trivial or mischevious. Why do you assume that peoples' natural inclinations are bad? 'Whatever' I want doesn't include raping old ladies or robbing banks. How about you?

Oh jesus. Let me guess. People are inherently good? That's hilarious. Which brings me to what I thought you were going to say next.

Good and evil already don't exist, philosophically speaking.

^There we go. This is what I expect next after someone says people are inherently good. If people are inherently good, then there is no evil. If there is no evil, then everything is subjective and anyone can do whatever they want, and justify it by whatever beliefs they have. This kind of thinking leads to the downfall of society. And this kind of thinking is only done by people who dislike organized religion, because it puts a cap on what people can and cannot do. Which is what you are saying next.

Weren't you here for MC and my hate fest on organized religion? I could rant about that for a while... That seems like a bad idea though.

Of course. No religion=no babysitting you=no need to answer for anything you've done bad since you're inherently good=no evil=downfall of society.

This is a ridiculous line of thought, one that I despise (not you, your thinking). I do not believe we can survive and grow without religion.

Slash_KMC Retired Helper

Choose to be gay? I couldn't choose to be gay even if I got enough money to spend my life with. And I think they feel the same.

Darth Sexy Restricted

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Well, it isn't a choice. Unless you feel that you could choose to be gay?

Edit: Nor is homosexuality immoral, unless you abide by (is it Leviticus) the letter of a [b]very old book that most people ignore anyway. If you want homosexuality to be immoral ("And thou shall not lie with a man as you lie with a woman"... or something) then you must also obey the other rules in leviticus. Care to stone your daughter? No? Then in that case, upon which criteria are you selecting the words of Yahwe that you'd like to follow? [/B]

Rofl Yea. Most people not being Jews/Christians. Unfortunately there are more Jews/Christians/Muslims then there aren't. A really old book? Lol. That old book got Judaism through 4,000 years. The other rules in Leviticus? You do realize there is the written law and the oral law in Judaism right? You do realize there is commentary, explanations for every event. I don't really know if you're reading the actual Leviticus, or the Christian version of Leviticus.

Publius II Boss

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
No not really.
No shit.

I'm probably going to have to spell that one out for you, too.

Is that an explanation, or is that telling them something they know.
That's all they need to hear; "we're different, but it's okay." Kids are resilient and malleable; they can adapt in ways that older folk can't. The danger comes when people like you try and tell them that their family isn't natural, or that it isn't as good as a straight family. You're the reason that these kids would need an explanation.

No they are humans with mixed up mentalities.
No, moron, they aren't "mixed up." They aren't misguided, they aren't stupid, they aren't perverted; they like people of the same sex. It's how they are.

No i was trying to say that him knowing a perfectly fine person, who was raised in a gay home, does not make it right.
Which is where the Hilton/Hitler comparison would come in. Go read it again, in context.

Well avoid answering the question why don't you?
Your question is stupid. You assume that just because something is "natural" - a term which in your case, is a being used very loosely - it should be perfectly acceptable to everyone, and just because something is "unnatural," it is taboo and should GTFO of existence.

Wow! Still avoiding my points.
Wow! You don't have any.

How are they satanic? Because of their skin color? If you are going to make a comparison at least give a reason.
They are satanic because they are unfamiliar, unnatural, and not what my great-grandparents grew up accepting. So screw them and their rights. That goes for all other people of color, Jews, and women, too.

Darth Sexy Restricted

Ok I'm done for the night. It's time for Roddick and Federer. Please do not all bombard me at once.

Ok nevermind, that's on at 2:30 in the morning so it looks like an all nighter.

SIDIOUS 66 Senior Member

Ok Ignore Sidious please, he's not backing up his stance well.
Can you tell me how you are doing better?

I can't believe you took that seriously.
No i didn't. I know he was not serious. I just want to know the similarities between the two.

Slash_KMC Retired Helper
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66

I am not arguing why gays are excepted and the others aren't. That is the only reason why it is excepted, is because it is consensual. As i said before, if that is how two grown-ups want to live their lives, well so be it. But you can not say that being gay is completely normal just because they can not help being that way, because child molestor's say they can not help being sexually attracted to children.

No one is saying that 'just' because they can't help being that way that it is normal. It is normal because there is nothing wrong with it. The example of the child molester isn't really working, sex with children is Wrong because children aren't ready for it, while sex with adults (gay) isn't wrong as long as both parties want it.

Publius II Boss

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Can you tell me how you are doing better?
He at least follows up on his points and, you know, reads.

No i didn't. I know he was not serious. I just want to know the similarities between the two.
One group was oppressed by a society that denied them basic rights because they were different. Another group is being denied basic rights because they are different.

Yeah, totally different.

Slash_KMC Retired Helper
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
No i didn't. I know he was not serious. I just want to know the similarities between the two.

Alright, it's because in both cases they didn't chose it while it is normal and in both cases they were hated for it though.

EDIT: Damn, I type slow.

Publius II Boss

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
Alright, it's because in both cases they didn't chose it while it is normal and in both cases they were hated for it though.

EDIT: Damn, I type slow.

I'm just lightning fast. But if it makes you feel better, Gideon's much slower than you.

Unless someone mentions "Spader."

Red Nemesis The Blind Critic

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
1. I've read worse
2. It was an example of environmental factors. I also have met ballet dancers. And 4-5 of them were gay. Point is, it was an example, albeit not the best one. But you still have not shown me conclusive evidence that there's a "gay gene".

I've also read worse, but I haven't read worse today.
-Also-
Faulty logic: Male ballet dancers are gay therefore being a ballet dancer makes you gay.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy

Wtf? How do you know? Isn't the definition being attracted to the same sex? This what I'm talking about. Homosexuality is a choice of free will. I hate that "Oh they can't help it nonsense". First you defend them, then you patronize them. Make up your mind.

Definition:
in⋅born
–adjective
naturally present at birth; innate.

It is not a choice of free will. A homosexual could no more chose to be straight than you could choose to be gay.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy

Oh man, you're making them out to be mutants lol. I can't tell if you're defending them anymore or what. You're telling me homosexuals have these wiring problems in the head, or brain damage, or what. I've met gay people, all of whom were happy to have "come out". If you've met a gay person who claims he'd be straight if he could, then I'm not really sure what to call him, other than a self hating homosexual.

Wired differently =/= bad.

I missed the words 'even if'. They couldn't choose to be straight even if they wanted to. It isn't a lifestyle choice any more than being black is a lifestyle choice.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
After the institution of monotheism, it was male+female. Not to mention, even polygamy is male+female so I'm not sure what point you're making. I think I don't get the point. You're blaming the government for not giving homosexuals the right to marry after millennia of marriage between a man and a woman, because.....They can't help it? lol.

1. Monotheism =/= good, necessarily.
2. Polygamy shows that 'one man one woman' (anti-gay rallying cry) isn't 'traditional' marriage at all.
3. The government hasn't been around for millenia. Religions have, and they can call marriage whatever the hell they want to. A pluralistic, just government can not discriminate (deny rights) to a group based on factors they have no control over.
4. 'They can't help it' implies that it is a bad thing. Can you explain why homosexuals are bad?
Originally posted by Darth Sexy

Oh jesus. Let me guess. People are inherently good? That's hilarious. Which brings me to what I thought you were going to say next.

You are putting words in my mouth and then calling them 'typical liberal wackjob nonsense.' All that I said is that people that wish to function within a society wouldn't go around raping old ladies if they were freed from the fear of divine retribution. If you would do something like that then you should get some help.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy

^There we go. This is what I expect next after someone says people are inherently good. If people are inherently good, then there is no evil. If there is no evil, then everything is subjective and anyone can do whatever they want, and justify it by whatever beliefs they have. This kind of thinking leads to the downfall of society. And this kind of thinking is only done by people who dislike organized religion, because it puts a cap on what people can and cannot do. Which is what you are saying next.

Of course. No religion=no babysitting you=no need to answer for anything you've done bad since you're inherently good=no evil=downfall of society.

This is a ridiculous line of thought, one that I despise (not you, your thinking). I do not believe we can survive and grow without religion.

This is a lot of jumps to make at 11 at night. I'll deal with this tomorrow afternoon.

Note: despising someone's thinking is an example of how ideological splits are tearing this country apart. I'm glad that you can still separate the person from the argument though.

Slash_KMC Retired Helper

Six in the morning. 😬

Darth Sexy Restricted

Originally posted by Red Nemesis

I've also read worse, but I haven't read worse today.
-Also-
Faulty logic: Male ballet dancers are gay therefore being a ballet dancer makes you gay.


I never made this assertion, so how can the logic be faulty?

Definition:

It is not a choice of free will. A homosexual could no more chose to be straight than you could choose to be gay.

You don't KNOW that though that's my point. And if it's not his fault and it wasn't his choice, then what you're saying that everyone is essentially supposed to be straight but through some kind of deviation, someone is born gay. If this really is your line of reasoning then how can everyone be born equal (faunus don't say anything i want to see if this actually makes sense at 11 at night). How about the bisexual men who choose to then be homosexual? You can't tell me it's not their fault, they can't help it. Stop attempting to defend them by making them out to be some kind of freaks.

I missed the words 'even if'. They couldn't choose to be straight even if they wanted to. It isn't a lifestyle choice any more than being black is a lifestyle choice.

Half of San Francisco would be inclined to disagree with you.

1. Monotheism =/= good, necessarily.
2. Polygamy shows that 'one man one woman' (anti-gay rallying cry) isn't 'traditional' marriage at all.

Polygamy ceased to be a part, or major part of society with the inception of monotheism. Now if you want to nitpick semantics and say it isn't a traditional marriage at all, I'll nitpick back and say that even polygamy was the marriage between man and woman.
3. The government hasn't been around for millenia. Religions have, and they can call marriage whatever the hell they want to. A pluralistic, just government can not discriminate (deny rights) to a group based on factors they have no control over.

This is funny, seeing as homosexuals would NEVER use this line of reasoning to defend themselves and their right. The government has a right to maintain certain values.
4. 'They can't help it' implies that it is a bad thing. Can you explain why homosexuals are bad?

No it doesn't. It implies that they have a choice, nothing more.

You are putting words in my mouth and then calling them 'typical liberal wackjob nonsense.' All that I said is that people that wish to function within a society wouldn't go around raping old ladies if they were freed from the fear of divine retribution. If you would do something like that then you should get some help.

Unfortunately, without universal definitions of right and wrong, this would happen and would be justified with whatever excuse imaginable. This somewhat proves my point.

This is a lot of jumps to make at 11 at night. I'll deal with this tomorrow afternoon.

Yea I need to wake up in 3 hours so we can continue this later.

Note: despising someone's thinking is an example of how ideological splits are tearing this country apart. I'm glad that you can still separate the person from the argument though. [/B]
[/quote]
I don't hate liberals. I hate their logic and in a way sympathize with them. Liberals typically hate conservatives.