Larry Flynt and the Democrats go to war together again- YUCK!

So if there is even a possibility that god made us this way then how can you judge us as wrong? Does your god make mistakes?

The Bible says a lot of things. Leviticus tells us homosexuality is wrong but it also says the same thing about eating shellfish. Thou shall not kill isn't followed by any society.

You are entitled to your opinion but what is that based on? Did you make a choice to be heterosexual? Could you choose to become homosexual if you wanted to?

 

outlaw --

i have no problem with you interpreting scripture...what I do have a problem with is you misquoteing it....

it never says.."thou shalt not kill." the word is "murder"...there's a distinct difference, particularly when you look at the Greek translations of the word in that text. God justifies war/death penalty even in the New Testament in Romans Ch. 13.

also..i'm not sure if its innate or not...but the argument is made that alcoholics are "made" that way...that it's somehow genetic...nevertheless, the Bible clearly states that the abuse of alcohol is wrong, as it tends to pull you further from God. The fact is we all have our struggles...some of which we're born with. Many struggle with lust in incredible ways...others struggle with drugs/alcohol...others struggle with physical handicaps...perhaps those are struggles through which people grow character...perhaps that's one way God molds character..i dont know. But no, God doesn't make mistakes.

the prohibition of shellfish was culturally-relative...Paul goes on to say in the New Testament that God only wants you to avoid eating certain foods if they somehow cause you to stumble...like if you get so caught up in the pleasures of food that you neglect everything else...or if you're eating/drinking causes someone else to stumble. It's also important to note that Leviticus isn't the only book that says homosexuality is wrong...the theme is reiterated in the New Testament as well.

 

What MM said. I would have never stated it better.

 

The Irony of the TALIBAN and their super strict guidelines with men and women separation tears the thread of humanity.
I feel that is another reason why homosexuality is rampant in these EXTREMIST religious groups.

Its the prison affect. Everyone will have certain urges, yet if no contact is available to meet women to marry or carry on a relationship in a normal fashion, homosexual actions will be prevalent. I myself have been to many of these lands and have seen this.

From Here on is strictly my opinion so please keep that in mind:

I think it is wrong for Priests and Nuns to give up having a family and children and having a spouse. We have thousands of years of human instinct that cannot be forgone by a simply decision. I truly feel that is why homosexuality and child molestation is prevalent in the catholic church.

In regards to whether society or heredity causes homosexuality, no one can be certain as of yet. Geneticists from the Baylor College of Medicine have found no proof of genetic disposition or propensity towards homosexuality.

Until scientific evidence supports otherwise, I would imagine that many homosexuals do so for many of the reasons Outlaw stated that there should be a Gay channel, a sense of community.

No one wants to be normal and not special or noticed or be a part of something. Some people join gangs, some people join social groups or ethnic groups and some people feel a sense of community and uniqueness by being homosexual.
I personally find it strange that I can a majority of the time tell when a male is homosexual after talking with him for even a minute. I personally feel its the need to feel unique and special that pushes mannerisms, voice and body language to let everyone know they are gay and recieve attention.
Most gay people I know carry themselves in a fashion that it is very obvious that they are homosexual and relish in the attention it brings to them. Whether it stems from a lack of attention as a youth or a need to be different and unique, i'm not quite sure.

Everyone Also Once Again Note: I am stating all of this as my opinion and not a fact.

If anything I don't believe it is my idea to control other people's action's ala Religious groups. I feel everyone has their own personal relationship with God, and its not Jerry Falwell or the Taliban or the Pope's job to disseminate info from the lord to me.

They were born from a woman's womb in the same manner I was and no voice speaks to them, therefore if I read the bible and I feel it says something, than that is how I interpreted the word of God and its not someone else's job to tell me i'm wrong.

The whole system of organized religion seems more a personal power trip more than anything else. Countless people fighting for "their" power, versus that of the glory of our lord.
I listen to people like Osama Bin Laden, the Taliban, Fallwell, Robertson, Meir Kahane, and others and I see no traces of humility. I see this arrogant prideful stance filled with judgemental words and condemning actions that is the antithesis of what God wanted to bring to this world.

Humility, Love, Peace and Respect

 

huh? i'm confused. are you saying the taliban is gay? then why do they drop big boulders on gays to execute them?

I would really appreciate it if you would not use homosexuality in the same sentence as child molestation as you give credence to those who believe them to be equal. or do you share that belief?

yeah that's why i'm gay cuz i like the attention. oh please.

 

Though its forbidden in Islam like it is in Christianity and Judaism, Homosexuality is prevalent in Muslim countries. It is quiet and not in the public eye, but it is rampant. I know this from personal experience so this is not from an article i've read.

And OUTlaw, you've made it very clear to everyone on this board that you are homosexual, yet I don't know the sexuality of 99% of people on this board. Maybe you do like the attention.

 

f.d. khan...just for the record, i dig chicks.

 

Homosexuality is not "forbidden" in the Catholic church. Homosexual acts are, but a homosexual is not "forbidden".

You also state that "child molestation is prevalent in the Catholic Church".

What do you base that belief on? Granted, you occasionally see a story concerning a priest's inappropriatness with a young boy, but I suspect it is no more "prevalent" in the Catholic Church than it is in the rest of society. You do know that "prevalent" is defined as "widely or commonly occurring", don't you? Please cite some of these "commonly occurring" examples of child molestation in the Catholic Church.

 

bobrek -- the roman catholic church should not share similar rates of molestation with the rest of the world...it's a freaking church!! if it has the same rates, something is wrong! a real comparison would be to compare it to molestation rates among other churches of various denominations.

 

This goes along with my theory that the more you try to control, enforce certain principles on society, the more appealing you make those actions.

In an extremist muslim nation like Afghanistan there is no normal interaction between men and women, so individuals enveloped by homosexuality to battle the instinctual urges they have to procreate. And, yes they drop boulders on homosexuals there, but it is still rampant behind closed doors.

Outlaw, this is simply my opinion. As the paragraph above states, I feel your actions are your own and to deny you of the lifestyle you wish to live is detrimental to what the united states stands for. As long as actions and rights to homosexuals are not detrimental to the United States as a whole ,then I am all for them.

 

What??? I realize this is "just" your opinion but your comments about so-called religious leaders was astute enough that I can't imagine why you'd make such a claim like "people become homosexual to join a community." First off, most people want to be unique in a socially accepatable way. So why would anyone want to "be unique" in a fashion that almost guarantees scorn, discrimination, and even physical danger? Of course, there are those who seek to challenge social mores. But if people were becoming homosexual to do just that, wouldn't you expect all homosexuals to challenge all social customs? But you don't see that - I don't think I've ever heard of a single anarchist, atheist, amoral, anti-family homosexual (or heterosexual for that matter), let alone observe such characteristics in all homosexuals. Finally, if homosexuality was the result of a lack of attention, it would take much longer than the onset of puberty (or even earlier) to manifest itself.

Also, don't ever eqate homosexuality with prison rape. Prison rape is about brutality and power.

I'm not damning you here nor can I change your opinion on homosexuality, but I am challenging your opinion so that you might reevaluate your reasoning.

 

they might not come right out and say "i'm straight" but people here talk about their wives and their kids and their girlfriends and even their one-night-stands all the time, i don't see how I'm acting any different from the rest of you.

 

I find it slightly ironic that it is OK for a small group to offend the majority, but if any minority is offended by the majority, the "activists" come out of the woodwork...

Where are the PC Police when you really need 'em?

outlaw, heterosexuality is the norm, like it or not. If the norm offends you, then maybe the problem is not with the norm?

People get offended too easily nowadays...

 

heterosexuality doesn't offend me but heterosexism does.

 

If by "heterosexism" you mean prejudice against gays, then you'll get no argument from me. I agree that that is just as wrong as any other prejudice. I'm straight, but I don't share the Christian views on the subject - my view is live and let live, and don't worry too much about what goes on behind closed doors... I don't think of it as "sinful", just freaky...

But I'd learn to live with the hetero comments if I were you. That's the norm, and it ain't gonna change.

 

1. Go to West Hollywood. When I was there I saw so many gay couples (mainly males) walking down the street topless holding hands with their tit rings hanging out.

2. Have you ever tried to announce a lesbian wedding in the newspaper? I'm not saying some places won't reject you, but I seriously doubt a same sex marriage has never been announced in a paper.

3. Same sex couples don't have the ability to have kids.

 

1. I mean in real public, not some gay ghetto.
2. i mean on a regular basis with no one making a big deal about it.
3. not in the conventional sense but not all opposite sex couples can either.

 

well at least this thread got back on topic to Larry Flynt.

 

Neither do infertile opposite sex couples or most couples that include a female over 40. What is the point?

I agree that people don't have the right to NOT be offended, whether strait, homosexual, Christian or whatever. I don't think Outlaw said heterosexual behavior in public should be criminalized or even sanctioned, mainly just pointing out that it is everywhere and that it is hypocritical to condone that form of public affection but not similar behavior by same sex people (maybe it actually repulses and offends him, but that I think is irrelevant given the thesis of this paragraph).

The argument something should be prohibited because it might offend a sub-group (homosexual men) or even a majority group (say WASPS in central Ohio) holds no merit because free speech trumps it. All peoples should have equal access to public venues of expression (parades, rallies, kissing in public, etc.) regardless of "majority" opinion or whom it may offend.

Most homosexuals and homosexual activists I am aware of don't want "special treatment" just equal rights. It is not even like the argument put forth for reparations to minorities (e.g., Indians, African Americans, Latinos)--that something has to be done proactively to rectify past oppression. The language for homosexual rights is far more similar to the 50s and 60s civil rights language (equality for all) than the 80s and 90s civil rights language (rectify past discrimination) that is more often politically attacked.