-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Best friend just blocked me on AIM
- Thread starter Incognito
- Start date
- Status
videogamer
Banned
Even though I don't know you, thanks for standing up for us.
Manabanana
Member
Mama Smurf
My penis is still intact.
I wish I had friends like that. All mine are so nice and cool and hardly ever tell me to shut the hell up.
Mike Works
Member
1. Are you sure he blocked you or did he just leave in a huff?
2. You did try to force him into an argument that he didn't want. He said, in a very non-polite manner, that you shouldn't talk about the subject, because it was going to make him mad. This doesn't make up for the fact that he's close-minded on the subject... just giving a reason.
3. The Bible is interpretable in different ways. Try proving God's indifference towards sexual preference by using the Bible. If you need help, PM me.
2. You did try to force him into an argument that he didn't want. He said, in a very non-polite manner, that you shouldn't talk about the subject, because it was going to make him mad. This doesn't make up for the fact that he's close-minded on the subject... just giving a reason.
3. The Bible is interpretable in different ways. Try proving God's indifference towards sexual preference by using the Bible. If you need help, PM me.
Randam_Hajile
Member
Your friend seems to get really defensive when you bring up people being born gay. Maybe he himself is struggling with his own homosexuality and doesn't want to believe that.... *whispers* he just might be gay!
That or he's just fucking ignorant. *shrugs*
That or he's just fucking ignorant. *shrugs*
I once caused a friend and neighbor in the dorms back at PSU to block me when I found out about that little code you could use in older versions of AIM that actually crashed the program. It's been a long time, so I don't remember what it is, but it wouldn't work in all the new versions anyway.
Jill Sandwich
the turds of Optimus Prime
YOU KNOW WHAT'S JUST AS BAD AS THE IDIOTS WHO ARE AGAINST HOMOSEUXALITY!?
the idiots who don't get that people don't have to like everything. I think people are insane for not liking The Incredibles. Other people think I'm messed up because I don't like cheese.
I don't agree with homosexuality, I think it's pretty disgusting (well, admittedly only with guys), and guess what, that is my informed and entitled opinion.
God, why do some people find bestiality disgusting and others whack off to it.. Because we're wired differently. So does that mean the guys who find it disgusting are intolerant pieces of shit?
the idiots who don't get that people don't have to like everything. I think people are insane for not liking The Incredibles. Other people think I'm messed up because I don't like cheese.
I don't agree with homosexuality, I think it's pretty disgusting (well, admittedly only with guys), and guess what, that is my informed and entitled opinion.
God, why do some people find bestiality disgusting and others whack off to it.. Because we're wired differently. So does that mean the guys who find it disgusting are intolerant pieces of shit?
videogamer
Banned
http://ga-forum.com/member.php?userid=3039deadlifter said:
So he's still lurking around. Thought we taught him a lesson or two in that thread about homosexuals, but he's still recycling those tired arguments. What a dense ex-gaffer.
Littleberu
Banned
I agree, but I won't go further. Homosexuality IS a disease.
Littleberu said:
We don't have to have this debate again, just read this thread if you want to get it out of your system.
http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=21910
So, step back for a moment. See the situation as it actually is. That is important. I mean, have you read the conversation?borghe said:
Now, understand that few people say anyone has to LIKE homosexuality. Just that regarding it as 'wrong' is pretty short-sighted. We are made a particular way. So with such logic, you'd be just as justified in saying that having blonde hair is wrong if you have black hair. There's something of an argument in that man/woman relations produces offspring and allows the species to continue. The fact that homosexuality can not do the same makes it exceptional, but inferring that there is a consequential error in that nature only works superficially, as far as I'm concerned.
The analogy to beastiality is retarded. Because we're talking about relations between humans. That to be gay means an attraction to the same sex with such absence to the opposite. Whereas those that fuck animals could just as easily wish to fuck the opposite sex. Same with the analogy, which you didn't mention but other people have, that incest is of the same nature. But again, people don't naturally choose incest OVER standard sex.
For the record, I think homosexuality is pretty gross. The act of, at least. Yet, that doesn't mean that I feel it is wrong. I've been raised in such an environment where it's been made difficult to tolerate what homosexuality is, but it's not as if I mind the people that they are or judge them based on their sexuality.
beastiality and incest are accepted in other cultures (granted the cultures that accept beastiality are pretty primitive, but...).
The bottomline is that society determines what prejudices are acceptable and what aren't. You can't legitimize or illegitimize any particular point of view. Try to push the acceptance of homosexuality over in Saudi Arabia. I dare you!
There isn't an individual right or wrong in this matter, only whether group A has more clout than group B.
The bottomline is that society determines what prejudices are acceptable and what aren't. You can't legitimize or illegitimize any particular point of view. Try to push the acceptance of homosexuality over in Saudi Arabia. I dare you!
There isn't an individual right or wrong in this matter, only whether group A has more clout than group B.
beatiality is a completely relevant comparison. it is a sexual condition that some people are wired to thin kis ok and other people are wired to think it's gross.. you are dismissing beastiality as a choice in the same way as other people dismiss homosexuality as a choice. but sure, we can use necrophelia, incest, pedophelia, or whatever floats your boat. The point is that not everyone is wired the same way sexually and some people will find things gross no matter what.Socreges said:
Thinking it's gross and thinking it's wrong is a very fine line. Thinking its wrong is basically a PC/bible thing (you do or you don't). That isn't the real question. The question is, if two guys (or girls) were sitting next to you completely going at it (kissing, fondling, etc) how would you feel. Me personally? I would be uncomfortable and leave. I wouldn't read them the bible, I wouldn't beat them, and I wouldn't throw my drink at them, but I also wouldn't stick around (well, for two girls I would). and that is my perogative. I have a right to feel that way. it doesn't scare me, and if they weren't doing anything I wouldn't have any problem with them, and if they were decent and struck up a conversation I would talk to them... but on a sexual level I am uncomfortable with it and I certainly have a right to be..
so yes, you can sit there all day til you're blue in the face and say it isn't "wrong", but the real proof is in the pudding (sorry, bad pun). are you comfortable with the act of homosexual physical relations. that is what it really comes down to, THAT is what most people are uncomfortable with, and THAT is what is most often mistaken for homophobia.
I don't think it's "wrong" either, but I certainly don't want any part of it and certainly wouldn't feel comfortable with two guys making out next to me, while at the same time am fine with a guy and girl making out next to me...
and there's nothing wrong with that.
Hey, if the comparison only deals with people interpreting specific things as "gross", then that is fine. And you're stating the obvious. I was distinguishing between the notion of 'choice' relative to one or the other, in that beastiality is extra-curricular, so to speak, while homosexuality is an unavoidable lifestyle and essence.
The fact is that gross/not gross WASN'T the question.
Look:
crzyprep911 (10:18:05 PM): yesterday my anthropology teacher tried to teach us that homosexuality is ok
crzyprep911 (10:18:13 PM): i was like so basically youre gay or what
InconspicuousLie (10:18:19 PM): there isn't anything wrong with homosexuality
crzyprep911 (10:18:25 PM): oooh yes there is
crzyprep911 (10:18:29 PM): its so gross
InconspicuousLie (10:18:45 PM): it may be to u
InconspicuousLie (10:18:51 PM): but it's not wrong
crzyprep911 (10:19:30 PM): yes it is wrong
You're dismissing the importance of deeming it right/wrong, but such a notion perpetuates how tolerant people can be. Seeing something as 'gross' and seeing something as 'wrong' are two distinct attitudes.
I think watching baboons having sex would be pretty disgusting, but I'm not against baboons. Why do you care if you don't have to see it? I would be annoyed with hetero or homo couples showing too much public affection, but that's against individual people who do it, not whole sexualities in general.borghe said:
Littleberu
Banned
Hitokage said:
Homesexuality is like Gerontophilia, or Amokoscisia (sexual frenzy with desire to slash a girl or a man). It's just a sexual fantasy.
I studied biology. And it is against nature to be homosexual. It is also against nature to be otistic and such.
And heterosexuals who pratice anal sexe are just anocratism. Again, it's just sexual fantasy.
My homosexuality is not characterized or defined by the fact that I have sex with men, my homosexuality is defined by the fact that I have deep emotional attachments with men and know my life partner will be a man and not a woman. I just don't get emotional feelings for women like I do men. The emphasis on the sexual component is overblown.
Littleberu seems to agree with the catholic church, that any sex without the intent to conceive is against nature or god's law. So anyone that has sex with a condom or while they're on the pill is acting against nature, regardless of whether they're actually making love rather than just having sex and manifesting a deep emotional attachment with someone through the act of intimate intercourse.
Littleberu seems to agree with the catholic church, that any sex without the intent to conceive is against nature or god's law. So anyone that has sex with a condom or while they're on the pill is acting against nature, regardless of whether they're actually making love rather than just having sex and manifesting a deep emotional attachment with someone through the act of intimate intercourse.
BigGreenMat
Member
teiresias said:
Well teiresias you are more human than me. Hell I see absolutely no difference in the way I feel about a man or a woman other than the way in which it is related to sex. Sex and the wish to engage in such an activity is the only real difference.
I have loved a few guys and a few women. The only difference is that with the women I wanted to stick my penis in them. This may lead to some ancillary behavior that differs between the two, but that is simply the result of the sexual feelings.
I realize your point, but just wanted to offer a counterpoint that sexual orientation isn't necessarily emotional orientation. I guess I am emotionally bi or ambiguous, but sexually hetero.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
teiresias said:
Nature's law is so overrated. The Catholic's need to stop being pussies and go at it alone without 21st century medicine, something like Jehovah's Witnesses. When polio curls your back up into a question mark, then hobble back and talk about nature's law.
then again, thousands of years ago, homosexuality was deemed perfectly fine in a place called sparta. where men were men. and women...werent.
and a couple of more things, time and time again i think some of you are viewing "homosexuality" as just plain old "sex", i'd say its more than just the act! you must understand, humans have human emotions.
while us men are perfectly capable of having tons of meaningless sexual relations, we still do fall in love from time to time. so what makes you think a gay man doesnt fall in love emotionally with his partner, in which case the act of sex itself is just an extension of those feelings.
therefore i'd think beastiality or necrophilia are not correct analogies at all, as you are not emotionally involved with your animate and/or inanimate partner.
homosexuals are perfectly capable of maintaining an emotional relationship. why is this fact being ignore by those that keep comparing homosexuality to beastiality or whatever.
- Status