Support NeoGAF

[Cerebral Palsy]

What really gets me is... Listening to conservatives/Republicans whine all day long about how liberals, gays, whatever etc are trying to force their lifestyles on them. But then they turn around and try to force their lifestyle, morals, and religion onto the entire U.S. population through attempts at altering our constitution, and other laws. Fucking nazi hypocrites.

 

[Ristamar]

I know, but because of how little those donations were, I don't think it was worthy of being bolded in the original post. Those donations are one of the least important details about this news.

I see. A valid point...

 

[Meier]

Heh, ABC and NBC here in Tallahassee. But that $68.000 number must be a mistake... that's seriously like absolutely nothing for a company that large -- not to mention that the context isnt as if they're pointing it out like it's chump change either which is odd.

 

[Catalyst]

Hmm...typical republican, or someone who doesn't want to warrant himself a ban if he knew what was good for him?

Two things that I know surely won't get me banned: shoplifter's hilarious, making great sarcastic points, and two, xsarien, I'm not getting into it because no one really ever listens. If you want to talk about republican ignorance, look at how you're going about it for a change, being so defensive. I'm a confessed republican/conservative, however, I know when to draw the line, and I'm not going to let my fuse become ignited over a few petty differences. These conversations and discussions become uncivil.

So it ends there with me. Finish the story.

 

[WordofGod]

Ok

Moore needs to get Farenheit 9/11 on free TV

And this has to be breaking some sort of election laws doesn't it?

Here is link to an article that rebuffs Michael Moore's "documentary"

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/


If Fahrenheit 9/11 aires on national TV, then it would only be fair to show FahrenHYPE 9/11 also. http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

Uh what? I'm asking you to flesh out your argument.

That seems to be asking a bit much of conservatives, especially of the ones on this board. You'll get nothing but more blanket statements, and spin that they can't backup.

 

[Father_Brain]

If Fahrenheit 9/11 aires on national TV, then it would only be fair to show FahrenHYPE 9/11 also. http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

You're right. And that's exactly what Sinclair isn't doing.

 

[xsarien]

Hmm...typical republican, or someone who doesn't want to warrant himself a ban if he knew what was good for him?

Two things that I know surely won't get me banned: shoplifter's hilarious, making great sarcastic points, and two, xsarien, I'm not getting into it because no one really ever listens. If you want to talk about republican ignorance, look at how you're going about it for a change, being so defensive.

Because I see the anti-gay marriage position as indefensible, and my mind - honestly - can't wrap itself around how anyone could ever think of something so blatantly discriminatory in a GOOD light.

 

[Dilbert]

It's very simple -- Catalyst has an opinion totally unconfused by facts or rationale, and GODDAMNIT he's just not going to sink to the level of discussion with heathens.

 

[demon]

Hmm...typical republican, or someone who doesn't want to warrant himself a ban if he knew what was good for him?

Two things that I know surely won't get me banned: shoplifter's hilarious, making great sarcastic points, and two, xsarien, I'm not getting into it because no one really ever listens. If you want to talk about republican ignorance, look at how you're going about it for a change, being so defensive. I'm a confessed republican/conservative, however, I know when to draw the line, and I'm not going to let my fuse become ignited over a few petty differences. These conversations and discussions become uncivil.

So it ends there with me. Finish the story.

Shut the fuck up and give us your reasoning. No republican has ever been banned for justifying their views on these matters....because it never fucking happens.

 

[Drensch]

I'm lucky enough to have two Sinclair stations here in Columbus, and their nationally syndicated op-eds are so right leaning they'd make Limbaugh blush.

I hate that ass. I knew this would be Sinclair the second I heard the story. This has got to be a violation of the FEC. I'm sure Mike Powell will investigate this with due diligence afforded a tit.

 

[Ristamar]

*looks in horror at demon's avatar*

What the fuck is that?!?

 

[Catalyst]

Shut the fuck up and give us your reasoning. No republican has ever been banned for justifying their views on these matters....because it never fucking happens.

How am I supposed to argue with your retort? You come off a bit more indefensive and inoffensive, and I'll come back with a decent answer. Until then, go get some help or some shit for that anger, because you people are surely riled up easily. Keep your cool, it'll be okay.

 

[xsarien]

*looks in horror at demon's avatar*

What the fuck is that?!?

Obviously what the average American male would look like if gay marriages were allowed. TEH HORROR!!

 

[shoplifter]

How am I supposed to argue with your retort? You come off a bit more indefensive and inoffensive, and I'll come back with a decent answer. Until then, go get some help or some shit for that anger, because you people are surely riled up easily. Keep your cool, it'll be okay.

Then reply to me. I feel that I was ever so respectful.

 

[Ristamar]

Obviously what the average American male would look like if gay marriages were allowed. TEH HORROR!!

:lol :lol :lol

 

[DarienA]

Here is link to an article that rebuffs Michael Moore's "documentary"

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/


If Fahrenheit 9/11 aires on national TV, then it would only be fair to show FahrenHYPE 9/11 also. http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

The article doesn't seem to come back to this point:

1) The Bin Laden family (if not exactly Osama himself) had a close if convoluted business relationship with the Bush family, through the Carlyle Group.

The movie doesn't even point to Osama himself it really points to the family... and I see nothing in the posted article that disclaims that the Bin Laden's and the Bush's did have a pretty tied together business relationship, truth I did just skim the article, but if there is something there I missed.

 

[Mercury Fred]

because you people are surely riled up easily. Keep your cool, it'll be okay.

I love this. The wonderfully condescending "you people" thing is always so amusing. I also enjoy the directive to "relax," "calm down," or, in this case "keep your cool." Because there's no reason to get upset when a total breakdown of logic and reason is steamrolling over the American consciousness, right?

 

[demon]

How am I supposed to argue with your retort? You come off a bit more indefensive and inoffensive, and I'll come back with a decent answer. Until then, go get some help or some shit for that anger, because you people are surely riled up easily. Keep your cool, it'll be okay.

That wasn't a retort. It was request for you to explain your views as so many people have asked you to. But after all that, you choose to respond only to my above reply while ignoring everyone else and the issues being discussed. Stop doing that.

 

[Catalyst]

Then reply to me. I feel that I was ever so respectful.

Oh yes, you. I like your sarcastic remarks.

So here's my reply. When people like me are by themselves in a discussion with a few liberal fellows, they're pounded with labels constantly, made fun of, trampled over, etc etc. We're personally attacked without reason. I decide not to answer, I'm told I can't defend. It's pretty simple. It's like arguing with my 9-year-old brother, and I can't discuss with that. What would happen is I'll get suckered into explaining my views, and then be made fun of because I believe these things. It's exactly what liberals preach against....so why try?

People are basically indoctrinated into believing things, but as they grow older, their views begin to change. Normally it's induced by social influence and a weak intellect, where others it's changed by emotional scarring. Many psychological undertakings. This could be put on anything. However...I'm not going to argue, and I will allow myself to be chastized even further for not giving a straight answer. It's my way of having fun.

 

[shoplifter]

We welcome your comments regarding the upcoming special news event featuring the topic of Americans held as prisoners of war in Vietnam. The program has not been videotaped and the exact format of this unscripted event has not been finalized. Characterizations regarding the content are premature and are based on ill-informed sources.

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry has been invited to participate. You can urge him to appear by calling his Washington, D.C. campaign headquarters at
(202) 712-3000.

if you would like to make further comments on this matter, you may do so at:
comments@sbgi.net

Holy fucking shit.



Also, the DNC is filing with the FEC right now.

DNC Files FEC Complaint Against Sinclair Broadcasting; Conference Call 1:30 PM ET Today

10/11/2004 12:09:00 PM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor

Contact: Chad Clanton or Phil Singer, 202-464-2800, Both of Kerry-Edwards 2004; Web: http://www.johnkerry.com

News Advisory:

Conference Call at 1:30 PM ET Today

DNC Files FEC Complaint Against Sinclair Broadcasting

DETAILS:

Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Terry McAuliffe and DNC Legal Counsel Joe Sandler will host a conference call today at 1:30 PM ET to announce the DNC's decision to file an FEC complaint against Sinclair Broadcasting's illegal in-kind contribution to the Bush-Cheney campaign.

WHO:

DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe and DNC Legal Counsel Joe Sandler

WHAT:

Conference Call to announce the DNC's decision to file an FEC complaint against Sinclair Broadcasting's illegal in-kind contribution to the Bush-Cheney campaign.

WHEN:

Monday,.Oct. 11

TIME:

1:30 PM EDT

NOTE:

To participate on the conference call contact Parag Chokshi preferably by email at chokship@dnc.org (or by phone if necessary: 202-863-7117)

---

Paid for by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

-0-

/© 2004 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/

 

[demon]

Oh yes, you. I like your sarcastic remarks.

So here's my reply. When people like me are by themselves in a discussion with a few liberal fellows, they're pounded with labels constantly, made fun of, trampled over, etc etc. We're personally attacked without reason. I decide not to answer, I'm told I can't defend. It's pretty simple. It's like arguing with my 9-year-old brother, and I can't discuss with that. What would happen is I'll get suckered into explaining my views, and then be made fun of because I believe these things. It's exactly what liberals preach against....so why try?

People are basically indoctrinated into believing things, but as they grow older, their views begin to change. Normally it's induced by social influence and a weak intellect, where others it's changed by emotional scarring. Many psychological undertakings. This could be put on anything. However...I'm not going to argue, and I will allow myself to be chastized even further for not giving a straight answer. It's my way of having fun.

summary: there is no rationale behind my political views, which is why you still haven't heard any. I am willing to debate the issues at hand, but only under the condition that it is with people of the exact same opinions as me.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Until then, go get some help or some shit for that anger, because you people are surely riled up easily. Keep your cool, it'll be okay.

heh, "you people".

Dude, you're just coming up with silly reasons to not answer people's questions. Telling people they aren't being courteous enough, telling them to not be so defensive. As far as I can see, THEY ARE THE ONES ASKING YOU TO EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION. When someone is pressing someone for answers, that usually means they are attacking you. Therefore, you need to stop being so evasive, and give answers. It's easy to understand why they are being flustered with you, because no answer seems to be forthcoming from your posts. You are pissing people off by not answering their questions.

 

[videogamer]

That seems to be asking a bit much of conservatives, especially of the ones on this board. You'll get nothing but more blanket statements, and spin that they can't backup.

Tell me about it. Sometimes they won't even bother backing up their statements at all. Heh the other week (for me) it was Trasher and his "I have a paper" excuse and this week ....

 

[videogamer]

Oh yes, you. I like your sarcastic remarks.

So here's my reply. When people like me are by themselves in a discussion with a few liberal fellows, they're pounded with labels constantly, made fun of, trampled over, etc etc. We're personally attacked without reason. I decide not to answer, I'm told I can't defend. It's pretty simple. It's like arguing with my 9-year-old brother, and I can't discuss with that. What would happen is I'll get suckered into explaining my views, and then be made fun of because I believe these things. It's exactly what liberals preach against....so why try?

People are basically indoctrinated into believing things, but as they grow older, their views begin to change. Normally it's induced by social influence and a weak intellect, where others it's changed by emotional scarring. Many psychological undertakings. This could be put on anything. However...I'm not going to argue, and I will allow myself to be chastized even further for not giving a straight answer. It's my way of having fun.

Talk about generalizations. Several people this thread have made quality posts (like xsarien)... you could simply discuss with them, and ignore the name callers, wherever they may be.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

I remember reading in my broadcasting classes that if one party has anything on television, the other party has equal time to provide their side of the story. Isn't this still true?

hey, I finally found it.

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/E/htmlE/equaltimeru/equaltimeru.htm

Simply put, a station which sells or gives one minute to Candidate A must sell or give the same amount of time with the same audience potential to all other candidates for the particular office. However, a candidate who can not afford time does not receive free time unless his or her opponent is also given free time. Thus, even with the equal time law, a well funded campaign has a significant advantage in terms of broadcast exposure for the candidate.

some may be quick to point this out...

Stations who gave time to candidates on regularly scheduled newscasts, news interviews shows, documentaries (assuming the candidate wasn't the primary focus of the documentary), or on-the-spot news events would not have to offer equal time to other candidates for that office.

but it specifically says documentaries. This is kind of a "negative time" thing though since it is bashing Kerry. I suppose the logical step would be equal time for a film bashing Bush.

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

People are basically indoctrinated into believing things, but as they grow older, their views begin to change. Normally it's induced by social influence and a weak intellect, where others it's changed by emotional scarring

:lol

Let me get this straight. So brainwashing, or excuse me, indoctrination, of children is a good thing? But growing older, and making up your own mind is considered as having a "weak" intellect? Oh, and the rest of the people that disagree with your religous morals are obviously emotionally scarred. Wow, never thought of it that way.

 

[Catalyst]

summary: there is no rationale behind my political views, which is why you still haven't heard any.

You're not listening. It's kind of funny how one person can draw such attention to himself by saying the smallest of things. Being evasive draws it. It's fun.

heh, "you people".

Dude, you're just coming up with silly reasons to not answer people's questions. Telling people they aren't being courteous enough, telling them to not be so defensive. As far as I can see, THEY ARE THE ONES ASKING YOU TO EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION. When someone is pressing someone for answers, that usually means they are attacking you. Therefore, you need to stop being so evasive, and give answers.

Do you want to know why? Because they all say the same things. It gets very dull hearing the same shit after a while.


I already gave my answer. I said we're indoctrinated into believing things, I also said that emotional scarring could come into play. My answer's very vague, but I believe you guys can draw a conclusion for yourself. Wait, do you want me to spell it out for you? I'm against gay marriage, I believe there are two sexes for a reason, and I believe people have experiences in their lives that cause them to change their views -- meaning I do believe people, at birth, are imbread with the idea of seeking the opposite sex (unless there's some kind of chemical change, but in my opinion, it's all a matter of choice with that exception). Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

heh, "you people".

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

You seem to be getting civil duties and religous values mixed up.

 

[IJoel]

I already gave my answer. I said we're indoctrinated into believing things, I also said that emotional scarring could come into play. My answer's very vague, but I believe you guys can draw a conclusion for yourself. Wait, do you want me to spell it out for you? I'm against gay marriage, I believe there are two sexes for a reason, and I believe people have experiences in their lives that cause them to change their views -- meaning I do believe people, at birth, are imbread with the idea of seeking the opposite sex (unless there's some kind of chemical change, but in my opinion, it's all a matter of choice with that exception). Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

If you CHOSE to be with females, your problem isn't merely the lack of acceptance for others, but DENIAL.

The rest of your argument is way way way too ridiculous to even be bothered with.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

I see where this is going, so you'd better ready your defenses. He's against gay marriage. What does pro-family mean to YOU? I realize I'm on a mostly liberal messageboard, so I'm trying to watch myself here . I like the gaming board, so don't pound me too hard, please, or I'll get myself a ban, lol.

Kerry and Edwards are against gay marriage. They are also against amending the constitution as well. The Federal govenment has never had jursidiction on marrigae that is a state right and should stay as such.

 

[G4life98]

You're not listening. It's kind of funny how one person can draw such attention to himself by saying the smallest of things. Being evasive draws it. It's fun.


Do you want to know why? Because they all say the same things. It gets very dull hearing the same shit after a while.


I already gave my answer. I said we're indoctrinated into believing things, I also said that emotional scarring could come into play. My answer's very vague, but I believe you guys can draw a conclusion for yourself. Wait, do you want me to spell it out for you? I'm against gay marriage, I believe there are two sexes for a reason, and I believe people have experiences in their lives that cause them to change their views -- meaning I do believe people, at birth, are imbread with the idea of seeking the opposite sex (unless there's some kind of chemical change, but in my opinion, it's all a matter of choice with that exception). Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

Did this clown just compare homosexuality to murder?

 

[krypt0nian]

You're not listening. It's kind of funny how one person can draw such attention to himself by saying the smallest of things. Being evasive draws it. It's fun.


Do you want to know why? Because they all say the same things. It gets very dull hearing the same shit after a while.


I already gave my answer. I said we're indoctrinated into believing things, I also said that emotional scarring could come into play. My answer's very vague, but I believe you guys can draw a conclusion for yourself. Wait, do you want me to spell it out for you? I'm against gay marriage, I believe there are two sexes for a reason, and I believe people have experiences in their lives that cause them to change their views -- meaning I do believe people, at birth, are imbread with the idea of seeking the opposite sex (unless there's some kind of chemical change, but in my opinion, it's all a matter of choice with that exception). Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

Yep, nothing. Just another damned bigot. There is no wondering why he kept this to himself.

 

[videogamer]

I'm against gay marriage, I believe there are two sexes for a reason, and I believe people have experiences in their lives that cause them to change their views -- meaning I do believe people, at birth, are imbread with the idea of seeking the opposite sex (unless there's some kind of chemical change, but in my opinion, it's all a matter of choice with that exception).

Uh huh, I really wanted to be gay. Gee, I wonder why I'm still in the closet to everyone outside of the internet. Maybe it's because I peed in bed when I was a kid and that experience traumatized me....

Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

Murder and marriage aren't even in the same league.

 

[duderon]

You're not listening. It's kind of funny how one person can draw such attention to himself by saying the smallest of things. Being evasive draws it. It's fun.


Do you want to know why? Because they all say the same things. It gets very dull hearing the same shit after a while.


I already gave my answer. I said we're indoctrinated into believing things, I also said that emotional scarring could come into play. My answer's very vague, but I believe you guys can draw a conclusion for yourself. Wait, do you want me to spell it out for you? I'm against gay marriage, I believe there are two sexes for a reason, and I believe people have experiences in their lives that cause them to change their views -- meaning I do believe people, at birth, are imbread with the idea of seeking the opposite sex (unless there's some kind of chemical change, but in my opinion, it's all a matter of choice with that exception). Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

Couldn't a child be emotionally scarred by being brought up by a single parent, or anything other than a mother and fother famliy? That doesn't make sense. A child can be emotionally scarred by many things, but it ain't gonna be scarred by who its parents are.

 

[demon]

The rest of your argument is way way way too ridiculous to even be bothered with.

The rest isn't even an argument. But to say that sexual orientation is a choice just shows me how ridiculous this guy is. Sexual orientation determines sexual attraction, and there is no choice, no conscious decision making, behind what you're sexually attracted to. Gay people decide to be sexually attracted to the same sex as much as straight people come to the decision that they're going to be attracted to the opposite sex. It just doesn't happen. Homosexuality even happens in many, many other species.

Not to say that sexual orientation is genetically determined, but it's certainly bioloical. But that it's determined by a conscious decision? Who the fuck in their right mind actually thinks that?

 

[Catalyst]

Heh, I knew it'd come to this. Deadlifter, this is relative to the subject at hand, let's not talk about other things. Don't try to change the subject. And I wasn't comparing murder to homosexuality -- my point was choice. Anyway, this is ridiculous. Opinions are "unfounded" or "ridiculous" if no one agrees. And no one agrees, so I'm going to become a subject of label. Therefore, I'm exiting this thread, and I can be ridiculed further. Have fun .

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Heh, I knew it'd come to this. Deadlifter, this is relative to the subject at hand...

The subject at hand is corportations or individuals control of the media. All this other stuff is poppycock.

 

[videogamer]

Heh, I knew it'd come to this. Deadlifter, this is relative to the subject at hand, let's not talk about other things. Don't try to change the subject. And I wasn't comparing murder to homosexuality -- my point was choice.

It was a poor comparison. Murder is a heavily tainted term and it is quite a voluntary action. On the other hand, gay people generally don't think things through and decide that being gay is better for them.

 

[xsarien]

I believe there are two sexes for a reason

Yes, reproduction. But, just for your own knowledge, marriage has nothing to do with that.

 

[StoOgE]

Dear biggot,

Choosing to kill someone is not the same as two men choosing to love each other. It is illegal to murder someone because THEY DONT WANT TO BE KILLED. Now, if a guy ran around and forced himself on other men that would be illegal too, its called Rape. When two consenting adults choose to do something, why should the government care? I thought you were for less government intervention.

 

[Catalyst]

It was a poor comparison. Murder is a heavily tainted term and it is quite a voluntary action. On the other hand, gay people generally don't think things through and decide that being gay is better for them.

I believe I could muster in one more good response before my exit...and that's to say what you just said, eggplant, supports every idea I've had thus far (think back to when I said emotional scarring? Then there's "Gay people generally don't think things through..."). However, it does come down to choice, and depending on your mindset, it may not be a conscious choice, but it's something you can really think about.

Need I say more? Sorry, but no.

So in close for me (haha, for real)....I'll claim to not be a bigot, because openly disagreeing isn't bigotry, or ignorant, I just believe what I believe just like the rest of you do. I'm saying these things from experience, so it may not be directly headed toward you guys. I also don't like getting into these topics of conversation because everything is usually said in a few posts, then everyone replies with redundant statements afterward without thinking about the points already made beforehand. People like myself would be more open to conversation if we weren't stereotyped upfront and called crude words such as "nazi" or "fascists." You can't have a conversation that way, but I do thank the few patient individuals in this thread, thank you.

So....off with the rest of the day, hurrah.

 

[videogamer]

I believe I could muster in one more good response before my exit...and that's to say what you just said, eggplant, supports every idea I've had thus far (think back to when I said emotional scarring? Then there's "Gay people generally don't think things through..."). However, it does come down to choice, and depending on your mindset, it may not be a conscious choice, but it's something you can really think about.

Hmm.. I must not have been clear. I tried to say that gay people generally don't think about things and then decide that they are gay.... it just comes. On the other hand, many of them do question their sexuality. Trust me, I have plenty of anecdotal evidence of gays struggling with their sexuality... hoping and looking for some way to be straight.

 

[StoOgE]

Catalyst, the reason people call you a bigot is because you are. If you lived 150 years ago you would be telling us all how black people are biologically suited for work and not for thinking.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

Saying that men and women should have the freedom to choose is a bit of a cop-out, because I could choose to kill my neighbor -- but the question is, does it make it right? Is "because I can" a justifiable reason? I don't believe so. This is what I believe. Like it or dislike it, be satisfied.

http://www.arts.monash.edu.au/english/undergraduate/1250/FALLACY.htm

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: Drawing wrong conclusions from inadequate premises. Linking things that are not linked; mistaking correlation for causation, coincidence for cause and effect.

 

[FnordChan]

I was having trouble following Catalyst's reasons for refusing to state their political views.

So here's my reply. When people like me are by themselves in a discussion with a few liberal fellows, they're pounded with labels constantly, made fun of, trampled over, etc etc. We're personally attacked without reason. I decide not to answer, I'm told I can't defend. It's pretty simple. It's like arguing with my 9-year-old brother, and I can't discuss with that. What would happen is I'll get suckered into explaining my views, and then be made fun of because I believe these things. It's exactly what liberals preach against....so why try?

So, I made a handy flowchart to reference during the course of this thread:

Now, if anyone can explain to me what the fuck this is all about, I'd be grateful:

People are basically indoctrinated into believing things, but as they grow older, their views begin to change. Normally it's induced by social influence and a weak intellect, where others it's changed by emotional scarring. Many psychological undertakings. This could be put on anything.

FnordChan

 

[MetatronM]

DAMN THE ELITIST LIBERAL MEDIA!

 

[3phemeral]

Hmm.. I must not have been clear. I tried to say that gay people generally don't think about things and then decide that they are gay.... it just comes. On the other hand, many of them do question their sexuality. Trust me, I have plenty of anecdotal evidence of gays struggling with their sexuality... hoping and looking for some way to be straight.

I think most homosexuals go though a lot of hell and self-reflection trying to figure out their sexuality in the midst of the current social climate. Thankfully, it's a little more accepting these days, but it's still not much, expecially if you live within the Bible Belt.

What pains me the most is to hear people relate homosexuality as an option of choice; 'easily' modified with the idea that it's a psychological manifestation derived from childhood pain. You don't just come to the conclusion that one day you're Gay, for some it takes years of feeling mentally angished and socially inadequate simply because of the denial, all the while preventing themselves the right to feel just as equal as everyone else. The injustice perpetuated by religious fundamentalists isn't be the idea that homosexuality is the result of some mental afflication, it's the psychological ramifications of having them constantly deny themselves the right to exist as is even after they've come to accept themselves.

It sort of puzzling to hear people say "Well, homosexuality isn't necessarily a choice to be Gay, but that you must choose to go against every inclination and natural compulsion to act upon your feelings to appease God and absolve your sinful nature." I've also heard that even if there were a possibility that Homosexuality could have a genetic link, they somehow have they right to say, "But the power of God can change all of that, if you just ask him too." Give me a break.

 

[Banjo Tango]

Now, if anyone can explain to me what the fuck this is all about, I'd be grateful:

I think he's saying that our beliefs initially come from indoctrination, and then can be changed through one of two ways:
1 - Social influence... note that for society to change you, you must have a weak mind.
2 - Emotional scarring

So... given a "normal' background, you would be indoctrinated as heterosexual. But then you might "go gay" if there is a culture of acceptance homesexuality (e.g. legal gay marriage) and you have a weak mind.

Incidentally, I find it completely hypocritical that all you supposedly "tolerant" liberals are so intolerant of intolerance. Just because an opinion is formed from ignorance and logical fallacies doesn't mean it shouldn't carry just as much weight as one supported by history and science.