Homosexuality and religion

[Kerr]

The disregard for the feelings of others has a name: sociopathic. Sociopathy exhibits a lack of moral responsibility and/or social conscience.

I am not sure I would go that far .

 

[sojourner]

It's actually apathy. But I have been called a sociopath before.

Hmm...

 

[sojourner]

hogwash

To say that one is a "viper" is a metaphor. A human being cannot literally be a snake. It equates the reprehensible hypocritical act of striking out in judgment with that of a serpent striking.

That's a far different thing than labeling someone as "gay" because of an illegal sex act.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

I am not sure I would go that far .

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

To say that one is a "viper" is a metaphor. A human being cannot literally be a snake. It equates the reprehensible hypocritical act of striking out in judgment with that of a serpent striking.

That's a far different thing than labeling someone as "gay" because of an illegal sex act.

It's a metaphor for people who are judgmental. To call someone judgmental is to label them as someone who judges. If they don't identify as judgmental, you're not only mislabeling them, but that is an act of VIOLENCE! You sociopath...

 

[Kerr]

Yeah, so mad smoke is coming out of my ears.

To be serious, nope, I am just picky . Like why I disagree with calling a bisexual man "gay" because the term "gay" doesnt fit.

 

[sojourner]

It's a metaphor for people who are judgmental. To call someone judgmental is to label them as someone who judges. If they don't identify as judgmental, you're not only mislabeling them, but that is an act of VIOLENCE! You sociopath...

To call someone judgmental is to label a chronic act. Not the same thing as labeling someone's sexual identity.

Epic fail.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

To call someone judgmental is to label a chronic act. Not the same thing as labeling someone's sexual identity.

Epic fail.

Wasn't trying to make a logical point there. Just thought I'd give super-sensitive whining a try. Not for me...

 

[Kerr]

Wasn't trying to make a logical point there. Just thought I'd give super-sensitive whining a try. Not for me...

Me thinks you two are in love, since as everyone knows love always starts with quarrell! Me make sense!

Kidding. Seriously, I think this debate is pointless. Its either about semantics or about manners. Or about both. Either way, you two just shout at each other with finger in your ears .

 

[sojourner]

Wasn't trying to make a logical point there. Just thought I'd give super-sensitive whining a try. Not for me...

Why would you do that? No one else here is doing that. please try to keep up with the conversation.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Me thinks you two are in love, since as everyone knows love always starts with quarrell! Me make sense!

Kidding. Seriously, I think this debate is pointless. Its either about semantics or about manners. Or about both. Either way, you two just shout at each other with finger in your ears .

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. It was fun for a while, but apparently I will just never get my point across without being told I'm wrong.

 

[Kerr]

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. It was fun for a while, but apparently I will just never get my point across without being told I'm wrong.

If your point is that a man who has sex with men is gay I disagree. He can be gay, but he can also be bi. Or just curious. Or rather have sex with other men then not having sex at all (considering how strong human sex drive is thats not far fetched). But I disagree because I think the term doesnt fit, not because I think its homophobic or anything.

If your point is that we are too politically correct, I guess I can agree to an extent. I find myself trapped in political correctness sometimes. But political correctness is an extreme. Showing respect and consideration of others is a good thing.

If its something else, sorry for missing it. I get confused rather easy, lol.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

If your point is that a man who has sex with men is gay I disagree. He can be gay, but he can also be bi. Or just curious. Or rather have sex with other men then not having sex at all (considering how strong human sex drive is thats not far fetched). But I disagree because I think the term doesnt fit, not because I think its homophobic or anything.

If your point is that we are too politically correct, I guess I can agree to an extent. I find myself trapped in political correctness sometimes. But political correctness is an extreme. Showing respect and consideration of others is a good thing.

If its something else, sorry for missing it. I get confused rather easy, lol.

Yes, that was my point on the first thing. And thank you for not being bitter and saying I'm discriminatory lol. Apparently I have a broader definition of "gay" than other people, seeing as I include bisexuals, and anyone who regularly has sex with people of the same sex, regardless of the motivation for it, but I don't think that is offensive to gay people in the least.

And also, yes, I believe people put way too much energy into political correctness and cultural sensitivity these days, to the point where it makes me sick.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Yes, that was my point on the first thing. And thank you for not being bitter and saying I'm discriminatory lol. Apparently I have a broader definition of "gay" than other people, seeing as I include bisexuals, and anyone who regularly has sex with people of the same sex, regardless of the motivation for it, but I don't think that is offensive to gay people in the least.

I wasn't offended by it. I'm bisexual. But I do think your definition of homosexuality is in error to be that far-reaching. I'm offering some education from this side of the pond.

And also, yes, I believe people put way too much energy into political correctness and cultural sensitivity these days, to the point where it makes me sick.

C'est la vie.

 

[Ingledsva]

If I'm not mistaken - I believe she means -

A heterosexual can perform any sex act including with men, animals etc, with it just being sex - for a thrill - or rape - or prison need - or a show of dominance, etc, and they are still heterosexuals. They haven't suddenly decided they like men instead of women.

Whereas "homosexual" means sexual orientation and attraction toward the same sex, NOT the opposite sex.

People are confusing heterosexual men having anal sex with men for "some reason," with actual homosexuality which is sexual orientation, and exclusive attraction to the same sex.

It is also distressing to see the outdated bull in posts above, equating homosexuality with pedophilia. They are obviously not the same, nor does being homosexual make you rape children. The stats show across the board that the majority of pedophiles are HETEROSEXUAL.

Nobody was saying homosexuality is the CAUSE of rape or pedophilia... I've made myself pretty clear on that subject.

Bull! There have been such comments above, as well as the suggestion that PEDOPHELIA in the church is because those raping priests are actually gay!

And I love how "some reason" is in quotes like it's unreasonable to think men that have sex with men might be gay...

Again - this truth has been pointed out to you by many people. HETEROSEXUAL men have been having sex with men for many different reasons - including cultural norm - for thousands of years of record history - right up to the present - without being homosexual.

As has already been stated - we think you are purposely being "obtuse" to provoke argument.

I also never said they were exclusively attracted to men, just that they are indeed attracted to men if they make the conscious decision to have sex with one.

Again! The conscious decision of a heterosexual man to have sex with a male (for some reason) does not make them homosexual, or attracted to men.

A man is homosexual when he is exclusively attracted to only men.

And yes Homosexual men can have sex with women (for some reason - for a child, hiding their identity out of fear, etc.) and they are still homosexual - they don't suddenly become heterosexual by the act. That idea is just ludicrous!.

*
*

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Bull! There have been such comments above, as well as the suggestion that PEDOPHELIA in the church is because those raping priests are actually gay!

I didn't say they rape kids BECAUSE they're gay, it is clear to me that not all gay people rape children... And clear to everyone besides you that I didn't say that. I said they choose BOYS in particular to molest because they're gay. There are many female Catholics, yet it was mostly males who reported being molested. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that before you understand what I'm saying. You and sojourner seem to be the only people accusing me of gay bashing, except he gave me a reasonable explanation as to why (although I disagree with him). You're just taking what I say to mean "all gay people are pedophiles/rapists" which is not at all what I said. Again I'll use this example: If I say "Dr. Phil is fat" is that the same thing as saying "all fat people are Dr. Phil"?

 

[Ingledsva]

Bull! There have been such comments above, as well as the suggestion that PEDOPHELIA in the church is because those raping priests are actually gay!

I didn't say they rape kids BECAUSE they're gay, it is clear to me that not all gay people rape children... And clear to everyone besides you that I didn't say that. I said they choose BOYS in particular to molest because they're gay. There are many female Catholics, yet it was mostly males who reported being molested. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that before you understand what I'm saying. You and sojourner seem to be the only people accusing me of gay bashing, except he gave me a reasonable explanation as to why (although I disagree with him). You're just taking what I say to mean "all gay people are pedophiles/rapists" which is not at all what I said. Again I'll use this example: If I say "Dr. Phil is fat" is that the same thing as saying "all fat people are Dr. Phil"?

Your quotes tell us all we need to know about what you think! And RAPE is not a homosexual act!

“Homosexual priests are accepted in the church, as evidenced by numerous transfers put in for child molesting priests rather than prosecution under the law. Or maybe they only care if you're attracted to adults of the same sex...”

“Sarcasm... How it escapes the intellectual masses... Also, while the majority of child molesters in general may be heterosexual, the majority of people who were vocal about sexual abuse by priests were males. I'd call any male that sexually assaults another male a homosexual (again, nothing against gay people collectively, before you grab your torch and pitchfork)”

“I still refuse to call any male who willingly performs any kind of sexual act on another male a heterosexual. I also think any man who rapes another man in prison is gay. A duck is a duck, you can't say "I'm not gay, I just have sex with men"...”

“Being in prison wouldn't change my perspective; anyone who raped someone in there I would consider gay...”

“Like explaining gravity to a chicken... Anyone that has sex with someone of the same sex is not a heterosexual IMO, whatever the reasoning behind it.”

In reply to, “Yeah, that would make them pedophiles,” – “Gay pedophiles...”

…”You can be gay AND a pedophile, as any man who rapes a boy is.”

*

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Yeah, you're still misquoting what I said. Take the time to read it with a little comprehension. It's not the fact that the priests raped children that makes them gay as you are implying I said, it's the fact that those children were male. If you read the quotes all the way through it's pretty obvious that's what I said.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

On a side note, is English your second language?

 

[Kerr]

Yes, that was my point on the first thing. And thank you for not being bitter and saying I'm discriminatory lol. Apparently I have a broader definition of "gay" than other people, seeing as I include bisexuals, and anyone who regularly has sex with people of the same sex, regardless of the motivation for it, but I don't think that is offensive to gay people in the least.

Nothing to be bitter about, lol. As for what is offensive to gay people, I wouldnt consider it offensive. Just very inaccurate. I like being accurate . Ultimately, though, its up for the gay to decide whats offensive to them.

And also, yes, I believe people put way too much energy into political correctness and cultural sensitivity these days, to the point where it makes me sick.

It doesnt make me sick, but I think its a rather big wall that at times can make it problematic to debate some topics.