Look, I'm not here to tell you that you should be pro gay or anti-gay, but at least don't be an idiot. The callers on Sports Radio who are saying things like "Why does he have to tell me his personal business! Don't hear players telling me they are straight!" are driving me crazy. Anyone who says something like that I go ahead and assume you have a problem with homosexuals and just don't want to be labeled a bigot so you won't flat out say it.
I have to believe that most of the people here condemning homosexuality don't have gay friends or family, and just haven't been exposed. My basic moral compass, centered around empathy, will not allow me to do anything but accept and embrace them. If you condemn homosexuality, it is a blight on your moral character. It conveys a basic lack of empathy, and history will rightfully judge you harshly in a few years. I am horrified by some of the responses here. The fear of difference oozes from each bigoted post. You think homosexuality is a choice? Do you choose to be straight? Even if it is, why is it a lesser choice? Oh, you think it's a sin? Try reading the Bible and form an opinion on its wholistic message. Do you also abstain from eating shellfish as also commanded by Leviticus? Oh, it's Paul's writings that convinced you? Then I assume you also embrace is opinions on subservient women. Is your problem that the big scary gay man is going to get you in the locker room? Get real. Shockingly, gay people aren't automatically pre-disposed to random acts of sexual assault. Let go of your fear. Think about the flaws in your moral character. Most of all, put yourself in another's life for 2 minutes, and think about what it would be like to have people condemn part of you.
Whether homosexuality is a choice or not shouldn't matter that much. If it is two adults consensually engaging with each other then I don't see the harm in it or any reason to treat them differently as co-workers or teammates. If anything it seems like teammates and others will now treat him differently, consider him to be sinful, immoral and etc.., than he is to treat them. Considering that he has kept quiet about this for decades I would be surprised if in a locker he did start acting differently now.
This is the end-game for the gay movement, people... it is the formulaic subversion of public opinion away from biological absolutes regarding sexual/reproductive complementarity as the final arbiter on whether homosexual behavior is considered normal and healthy or not, and once that foundation is shaken by pseudo-scientific arguments to the contrary, the idea morphs into the creation of a permanent civil-rights establishment to support the individuals who choose to behave in that manner. It is a grave insult to the concept of civil rights protection in our society, that those who are not born with obvious and identifiable traits, such as race and gender, can raise up practice of habit to be its own category for protection. Because it is not a self-evident circumstance, it cannot be done naturally; it requires co-operation with the entertainment/mass media complex and its all-encompassing resources. Who, but the comfortably well-off and wealthy, can afford to advocate so strongly for their behavior of choice? Jason Collins fits the socioeconomic profile of everyone else who has foisted a public declaration of homosexual practice upon a captive public- obviously, where his career is concerned, he has never been held back by virtue of his physical appearance. But he seeks an endorsement of his behavior, and so... here we are. I won't speak to the genetic predilection towards homosexual tendency, any more than I will to hereditary inclinations towards alcohol, substance abuse, and schizophrenia. There's no accounting for the hand we're dealt. But just as the latter conditions warrant special attention to prevent both self- and societal harm, the former must be treated as a cross to bear, not a light to shine. On its face it provides neither societal good nor benefit.
blah blah blah. Show me the post where anyone hates or fears homosexuals. There are some people who find homosexual acts immoral (not I), but that hardly equals what you are whining about. Get over yourself. People in this forum are so desperate to try to paint others as bigots like they get off on the moral superiority.
I have family members who have proclaimed their homosexuality. It has not changed my love for them as family members. My opinions on the topic stem from socio-biological constants, and the willful measures on the part of the non-compliant to seek subjugation of the concept of complementarity, i.e. the parts used as intended for the perpetuation of humanity. Straw-man arguments and corner cases do not change biological fact.
*feels very offended by when others are "purporting their moral superiority" by highlighting a deficiency in civil rights, and the rule of law in America *part of belief system entails going to a nice suburban neighborhood in the sky based on moral superiority, while others burn below.
biological fact that many mammals are programmed to be f**king machines that turn away from old partners? i dunno
I once had a gay friend explain to me that anyone who assumes that gay people just couldn't control themselves around them is highly narcissistic. I think he was spot on.
Eh... I think that is demonizing the argument. Would women be OK with one man being in the showers with them if they knew he was straight? If not would be because they were afraid he'd rape them all? Or is it because they are just all narcissistic? Or are they just uncomfortable with someone looking at their naked bodies who might be sexually attracted to them? I don't have a problem with someone being uneasy showering with someone that is attracted to their gender. I don't think that makes them a narcissist or a bigot. The reason we don't let boys and girls shower together is not because of a fear of rape. Edit: To be clear, I'm sure there are some people who wouldn't want to shower with them out of disgust, same as some racists don't want to shower with black guys. That obviously does make them a bigot, but that is not the only reason someone wouldn't want to shower with a gay guy.
If it is biological fact, why are there other species who have homosexual relationships, such as those cited in Lawrence v Texas (which I think we're bonobos and giraffes, but I'm not 100% on the details)?
Many of the posters in this thread remind me of the old retort from the 19th and the first half of the 20th century...... I don't hate black people, I just wish they would go back to Africa. I find it odd that so many people, now in a passive agressive manner, have such strong negative opinions about what people do that in no way harm anyone.
has it occurred to people that they might be the equivalent of a very fat girl, and that gay people want nothing to do with them.
It is just a stupid argument. We have all been in restrooms, public showers, etc where there were gay people and didn't know it.... Honestly it is stupid.
wondering why all the gay clutchizens are not taking this golden opportunity to jump out the closet...
Some people could claim that interracial marriage was against their morals but they don't hate or fear certain minority races.
Are you married? Would it bother you if a straight man was in a public shower with your wife? Daughter? It's not stupid or bigoted to be uncomfortable naked around people attracted to your gender, regardless of whether they might actually be attracted to you personally. I'm not attracted to my coworkers that are female but I bet they wouldn't be comfortable walking around naked in front of me. Are they just stupid? Or bigots?
