Homosexuality : Moral or Immoral ?

Any thoughts ?

Kinda immoral for me.. I dont care if people are having buttsex, that is their issue.. I just dont want to hear about it

A person's sexual orientation has nothing to do with their morality but I consider it immoral to repress someones sexuality.

Homosexuality is not immoral but its flamboyant expression in my view is.

Diogritor wrote:

Kinda immoral for me.. I dont care if people are having buttsex, that is their issue.. I just dont want to hear about it

LOL!!!!

you all knew my position, i say it more than enough and very detailed

It's neither moral nor immoral. I don't see how it could possibly be either. And as far as flamboyent expression goes, why shouldn't they be able to do that? It's not like shutting down a couple streets a year is that big a deal. We do it for Macy's...

Quote :

Kinda immoral for me.. I dont care if people are having buttsex, that is their issue.. I just dont want to hear about it

Then that really has nothing to do with homosexuality. You just have to suck it up. I hear backwards, ignorant shit all the time, but that's not the reason i think it's immoral.

EDIT: Wow, three people voted sickness? Is that a sickness?

Quote :

Wow, three people voted sickness? Is that a sickness?

to 70%

i voted imorral but not sickness, its imorral bcus the bible says so, but its not sickness

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

It's neither moral nor immoral. I don't see how it could possibly be either. And as far as flamboyent expression goes, why shouldn't they be able to do that? It's not like shutting down a couple streets a year is that big a deal. We do it for Macy's...

Flamboyant expression is not only unnecesary it's a hindrance for them and uncomfortable for society. I hate their parades, (except for cute lesbians) I hate them tagging themselves as if they were some sort of abnormality or aberration. I know many gays that hate their flamboyant collegues and that feel offended at such way of expression. If they want to do that as part of a private party, awesome, if they want to close my street and flood it with semen while spanking some who may pass by, I won't agree.

Tyrlop wrote:

i voted imorral but not sickness, its imorral bcus the bible says so, but its not sickness

God dammit. God also said he put the rich on this earth for a reason, so why are you a socialist?

Quote :

Flamboyant expression is not only unnecesary it's a hindrance for them and uncomfortable for society.

how is it a hindrance for them? They obviously want to act in that manner. They should be able to. And they probably wouldn't have these parades if they were exacted the same treatment as the rest of society (But let me be clear that even if they were treated the same, i would have absolutely no aversion to a parade once or twice a year).

And why does society need to be comfortable? They need to be accepting and understanding, not ignorant and backwards.

Quote :

I hate their parades, (except for cute lesbians) I hate them tagging themselves as if they were some sort of abnormality or aberration.

I don't quite get your meaning as far as 'tagging' goes (more like i don't get your use of the word tagging).

So you like it when the lesbians get all handsy, but its not okay for the men to do that? Because it makes you uncomfortable?

Quote :

I know many gays that hate their flamboyant collegues and that feel offended at such way of expression.

Then they're backwards too. Believing that homosexual people all need to act in some uniformed way is backwards. Each person is individual, and as such, you're inevitably going to have people acting in different ways. And believing that your way of acting is the appropriate way for people like you to act is also backwards.

Quote :

If they want to do that as part of a private party, awesome, if they want to close my street and flood it with semen while spanking some who may pass by, I won't agree.

Well, ya, i'd be opposed to any unwanted spanking, but unless all parades are abandoned, they have every right to have a parade of their own.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

how is it a hindrance for them? They obviously want to act in that manner.

I'm convinced that such behaviour breeds intolerance towards them.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

They should be able to. And they probably wouldn't have these parades if they were exacted the same treatment as the rest of society (But let me be clear that even if they were treated the same, i would have absolutely no aversion to a parade once or twice a year).

Precisely I advocate for them being treated equally and that includes not excluding themselves from society as something weird.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

And why does society need to be comfortable? They need to be accepting and understanding, not ignorant and backwards.

I guess I don't have to be understanding and tolerating towards a guy that spanks me and is obstructing my freedom to go through one of the places I like the most without fear to get partially raped.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

I don't quite get your meaning as far as 'tagging' goes (more like i don't get your use of the word tagging).

By tagging I mean something like "tag someone as" as part of a prejudice.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

So you like it when the lesbians get all handsy, but its not okay for the men to do that? Because it makes you uncomfortable?

If I could disallow homosexual men to make parades and did so, I would equally disallow lesbians even if I enjoy watching at them.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

Then they're backwards too. Believing that homosexual people all need to act in some uniformed way is backwards. Each person is individual, and as such, you're inevitably going to have people acting in different ways. And believing that your way of acting is the appropriate way for people like you to act is also backwards.

I don't think people should behave in a uniform way, I just think such parades are unnecesary demonstrations of how weird and rejected by society they are.

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

Well, ya, i'd be opposed to any unwanted spanking, but unless all parades are abandoned, they have every right to have a parade of their own.

In the best of cases that should be democratically resolved I think. However, I think that's the only kind of parade that actually can increase intolerance to the community practicing it. That's why I'm against it mainly, because it breeds intolerance towards homosexuals. Just as I'd find a heterosexual parade ridiculous and a guy and a girl kissing holding a big banner aying "Str8 is gr8!" absurd, same goes for gays.

nothing beyond your control should be condemmed immoral.
shame on you.

beatnikzach wrote:

nothing beyond your control should be condemmed immoral.
shame on you.

While many argue it is beyond people's choice, I wouldn't agree so fast.

The problem here is, what if it was a choice? Would that make it immoral then? I don't think so.

but it isnt a choice.
is it immoral to be black?

Diogritor wrote:

Kinda immoral for me.. I dont care if people are having buttsex, that is their issue.. I just dont want to hear about it

same

Why immoral ? Not so far ago, homosexuality (or at least bisexuality) was consider as one of the most noble social behavior.

beatnikzach wrote:

but it isnt a choice.

I'm not sure of that. There's a bunch of theories but no scientific laws yet.

Either way, I don't tink homosexuality is immoral.

beatnikzach wrote:

is it immoral to be black?

Of course not.

Ask a white supremacist and you'll get a different answer.

exactly, it is something you are born with.
ask a homophobe, you will get a different answer.

I once asked a Homophob why he disliked gays, he said "because i was born that way, Its not a choice." I loled

Hutin wrote:

Why immoral ? Not so far ago, homosexuality (or at least bisexuality) was consider as one of the most noble social behavior.

lol Xerxes.

Quote :

lol Xerxes.

Xerxes was a woman. They said so on south park.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

how is it a hindrance for them? They obviously want to act in that manner.

I'm convinced that such behaviour breeds intolerance towards them.

I don't know if that's sufficient reason to make them stop, and i'm in no place to argue against your point, since i have no idea what peoples' reactions are towards these parades.

Zealot wrote:

Anarchist.Dagger wrote:

And why does society need to be comfortable? They need to be accepting and understanding, not ignorant and backwards.

I guess I don't have to be understanding and tolerating towards a guy that spanks me and is obstructing my freedom to go through one of the places I like the most without fear to get partially raped.

I definitely agree with that. But that's the problem of the individual people, not the parade itself. I mean, i'm sure they are more likely to do this during the parade, but this isn't justification, to me, for getting rid of the parade.

Quote :

By tagging I mean something like "tag someone as" as part of a prejudice.

... And they shouldn't do that? i mean, we "tag" ourselves socialist, and we're proud of it. Are these two circumstances really any different?

Quote :

If I could disallow homosexual men to make parades and did so, I would equally disallow lesbians even if I enjoy watching at them.

I sure would hope so (though i would more hope that you didn't take away either, if given the chance)

Quote :

I don't think people should behave in a uniform way, I just think such parades are unnecesary demonstrations of how weird and rejected by society they are.

Then it's simply a difference of opinions and view points. Because i can tell you for sure that they find it necessary.

Quote :

In the best of cases that should be democratically resolved I think. However, I think that's the only kind of parade that actually can increase intolerance to the community practicing it. That's why I'm against it mainly, because it breeds intolerance towards homosexuals. Just as I'd find a heterosexual parade ridiculous and a guy and a girl kissing holding a big banner aying "Str8 is gr8!" absurd, same goes for gays.

But the difference here is that this is more of a protest than a parade. Straight people can already enjoy the things in life that gays must fight for. A parallel being how absurd it would be to see the bourgeoisie going on strike.

Also, i think democracy at this point has a bit of a biased towards gays, so i don't think they would be happy going about this in a democratic manner, since that would effectively take away any say they have in the matter, and would leave the decision up to straight people, and those intolerant of gays.

revolution wrote:

Hutin wrote:

Why immoral ? Not so far ago, homosexuality (or at least bisexuality) was consider as one of the most noble social behavior.

lol Xerxes.

Your mom ?

Hutin wrote:

revolution wrote:

Hutin wrote:

Why immoral ? Not so far ago, homosexuality (or at least bisexuality) was consider as one of the most noble social behavior.

lol Xerxes.

Your mom ?

Your dad?

no U ?