I don't think engaging in anal intercourse with a woman means you have underlying homosexual desires.
I've just skimmed this thread and agree with many of the other posters that I don't get the question. Does whether we will have gay sex prove how tolerant we are of homosexuals? Whether we will or won't I don't think has any bearing on tolerance. For example I don't like kale and will not eat it. That doesn't make me intolerant of people who eat kale. "Tolerance" by definition means you are willing to put up with something or someone that you personally don't believe in, do or enjoy.
another brilliant analogy, thanks. anyway, what the point I'm getting at is if most people admit that they are uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuality, is it right for people who have made a moral judgement to accept homosexuals, to look down upon people who have not made that same moral judgement when both people are uncomfortable with the idea.
going back to religion example, I think most people who are tolearant of other religions have no problem going to a place of worship a ceremony etc of a religion other than their own. most people who are intolerant probably wouldn't same with being around people of other races. people who are accepting of racial equality have no problem being around people of other races. people who are uncomfortable don't. the idea of homosexuality and tolerance is a bit more complicated. is really wrong for a person to not want to be around people whom they are uncomfortable with their lifestyle? this is not a legal question, i'm not arguing that gay people shouldn't have the same civil rights as everyone else. that's really not a question in my opinion in our society, in our country. the question is about the moral judgement we make about each other's attitudes towards homosexuality.
Yes - wait, whoaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....no way. NO! I thought the title said, "would you have GROUP Sex?" Man, did I misread that.
Yes. We are talking about tolerance and as I noted tolerance doesn't mean you partake of the activity but that you are willing to accept that some people engage in that activity and that there is nothing wrong with them doing so. As I said I don't like kale and I won't eat kale. I don't think less of people who do. That is a big difference than if I felt that there was something wrong with people who ate kale and that I either had to shun them or fix them.
i would only ram my john thomas into the anuses of contributing clutchfans who are cute. i have standards you know. this thread is utterly useless without pix!
Yes. Absolutely. As to your religion example, I'm uncomfortable going to worship services for other religions, that doesn't mean I'm not tolerant of them. And your analogy is backwards. Can you think of something else where it is ok to be intolerant simply because you're uncomfortable? If you can think of such a thing, then that analogy might be appropriate.
My wife is catholic. I attend mass with her and her family a few times a year. It makes me uncomfortable. The older I get, the more uncomfortable I feel going to mass, but the less uncomfortable I get with the idea of gay sex. At this point it's about 50-50 whether I'd prefer to watch gay sex or go to mass. But my point was that the type of analogy is bad. Don't show something where you are tolerant and not uncomfortable. Find something where it is ok to be intolerant because you are uncomfortable.
no the analogy was freakin awesome because that was the point. tolerance and being comfortable go hand in hand. you may not be comfortable at a catholic church but i seriously doubt the idea a catholic mass makes you uncomfortable
well they still at least look like chicks even though they have a dong. i remember this one from the man show http://www.myspace.com/vaniitysharddrive i guess it just depends what you actually do with them.
