« previous   misc   next »

Why the hell is gay sex immoral?


By Dan8267   Follow   Wed, 14 Nov 2012, 3:22am PST   61,439 views   872 comments   Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (7)   Dislike (7)  

This question goes out to all the people who actually believe that gay sex is immoral. I am formally challenging that belief. If any of you honestly believe that gay sex is immoral, give your reasons here. I reserve the right to challenge the validity of those reasons.

Attendance by Bap33 is mandatory. By the way, that avatar is pretty gay for someone who's homophobic.

Just saying...

« First     « Previous     Comments 353-392 of 872     Next »     Last »

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:25pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 353

Dan8267 says

Bap33 says



In today's America, the liberal voter mentality is very close to the pack mentality.


Wow, the hypocrisy. Democrats are arguing with each other all the time and can't get anything done. Meanwhile, Republicans all mindlessly chant the same sound bites. And the liberals are the ones with pack mentality?

hey Dan, ummm, if you just count the small group on here that is busy holding your cape off the ground, you will find you are leading a pack as we speak(type). lol

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:28pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 354

leo707 says

Bap33 says



Christianity and God's message, not the pope, helped end the Roman empire because of how it changed man's idea of self and freedom, in my opinion.


So we agree then that belief in Christ was a cause in the fall of the Roman Empire.


Remembering that the last emperors of Rome were Christians, but not true Christians? Right?


Only, those that receive the Bap seal of approval are "true" Christians.

the proof is in the pudding. A person calling themselves a Christian has nothing to do with a person being a Christian. For the 9 zillionth time.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:29pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 355

New Renter says

Bap33 says



very basic history of man. You are suggesting I am wrong? If so, based on what?


I am suggesting that your knowledge of the sex life of the early Latins is flawed.

you are wrong, but could be more wrong with some effort.

mell   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:29pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 356

Still at it! Here's something to lighten up, another epic classic - enjoy ;)

&noredirect=1

Dan8267   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:30pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 357

Bap33 says

the proof is in the pudding. A person calling themselves a Christian has nothing to do with a person being a Christian. For the 9 zillionth time.

Tell that the the IRS. If the "church" they go to doesn't have to pay real estate or income tax, I get to call the patrons Christians.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:34pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 358

If Dan8267 says

When a man has sexual intercourse with another man as with a woman, both men are doing something disgusting and must be put to death. They deserve to die.That's right. Your religion says we must murder men who have gay sex. Advocating such murder is evil and has evil consequences such as the murder of Mathew Shepard and countless other men.

my good fellow, is the OT law the law of the land? Do we kill birds and sheep each week? You are being dishonest in your approach for some reason. ANd the blasts are coming faster and harder from you and your co-captians now that my point was made about the simple act of waiting in line and male/male coupling. "Truth hurts" comes to mind. I know, I know, atheits good, Christians bad. Copy that.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:35pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 359

Dan8267 says

Bap33 says



the proof is in the pudding. A person calling themselves a Christian has nothing to do with a person being a Christian. For the 9 zillionth time.


Tell that the the IRS. If the "church" they go to doesn't have to pay real estate or income tax, I get to call the patrons Christians.

sure you can, and what you call people matters only to you.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 12:38pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 360

Dan8267 says

New Renter says



Yes, one does wonder about someone with such strong negative beliefs about sodomy yet chooses such a blatantly homoerotic avatar.


I said that in the original post. Bap reminds me of Eric Massa.

Captian America is only homoerotic to male sodomites, and he's ok with that. The tights do have a function.

Buster   befriend   ignore   Tue, 20 Nov 2012, 1:26pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 361

Per andrewsullivn today;
"What some have yet to understand is that marriage equality is not an "attack" on "morality". It's a way to affirm the already existing commitment to one another that a gay couple can achieve, to create a stable home where none existed before, to affirm values of mutual responsibility and care that are conservative, in as much as they protect the family from the acid of homophobia. It's homophobia that tears families apart, not same-sex orientation. And it's marriage that brings families together - including, at last, the gay members within it.

In many organic social changes right now, what appears to be de-moralizing is actually a form of re-moralizing, devising ways to channel already existing behavior into new and more productive and more responsible forms. That's what the marriage equality movement has in common with the fight against marijuana prohibition. It admits reality - loads of people are gay and even more people smoke weed - and makes the best of it, in true Burkean fashion. It offers civil marriage to gay people and a perfectly marketable, legal product to marijuana-enthusiasts - giving states revenues, parents' more security, and millions of people a reason to watch HD TV. It folds people into middle class society, rather than marginalizing them outside".

Dan8267   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 12:38am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 362

Bap33 says

my good fellow, is the OT law the law of the land? Do we kill birds and sheep each week? You are being dishonest in your approach for some reason.

If you want to disavow half the Bible, then fine. I disavow the entire damn thing. However, if you are taking the stance that the New Testament is all that matters, then what in the New Testament says that homosexual sex is a sin or immoral? Jesus never said anything about gay sex being bad.

You can't have it both ways. No pun intended.

Let's go with the New Testament is good and the Old Testament is evil -- forgetting that the New Testament is pro-slavery for the moment. Once again, I ask the question, "Why the hell is gay sex immoral?"

Dan8267   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 12:39am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 363

Bap33 says

ANd the blasts are coming faster and harder from you and your co-captians now that my point was made about the simple act of waiting in line and male/male coupling.

I must have missed that. Exactly how did you make the leap of logic from "cutting in line is immoral" to "gay sex is immoral"?

Dan8267   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 12:50am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 364

Bap33 says

That is why you see cutting in line as only being wrong because it harms the lone individual. Order, process, proper conduct, are all part of why waiting in line is a good thing and, for the record, waiting in line is ONLY needed for the good of the group. A singular person has no line. THere must be plural people to need the line. Waiting your turn is better for a moral society, just like shunning male/male coupling is.

Oh, I missed this because it was preceded by so much bullshit I had to stop reading. I can only take so many logical fallacies in a post before I just give up on it.

So, cutting in line is immoral because it creates chaos, interferes with a process, and is improper conduct. Surely decreases in efficiency are bad in the practical sense, but not necessarily in the moral sense. And the underlying reasons for all your complaints about cutting in line ultimately have to do with inflicting costs on individuals. In fact, there is no way to inflict costs on a group except by inflicting costs on the individuals that constitute that group.

More importantly, whether or not waiting your turn in a line is better for a moral society has nothing to do with shunning gay sex. How the fuck does calling gay sex immoral help society or any individual? It most certainly harms society and individuals. When a person like Mathew Shepard is murdered horrifically because of "shunning male/male coupling", it hurts the person murder, his family, his friends, his neighbors, and the community at large.

If you base morality on what makes community runs smoothly, then it is a moral imperative to fully accept homosexuality and homosexual relations. By the very principle you propose, it is utterly immoral to shun homosexual acts.

By demonizing gay sex, you not only harm society in all the ways I just mentioned, but you also create strife within families that have a homosexual member. Such strife can and does tear apart families unnecessarily. Given your emphasis on the need of strong families for society, this is yet another reason that demonizing gay sex is immoral.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 1:32am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 365

Dan8267 says

By demonizing gay sex, you not only harm society in all the ways I just mentioned, but you also create strife within families that have a homosexual member. Such strife can and does tear apart families unnecessarily. Given your emphasis on the need of strong families for society, this is yet another reason that demonizing gay sex is immoral.

Dan, remove the words "gay" and "sex" and insert thievery, or murder. And where it says "homosexual member" insert thief or murderer. Now, read the sentance again and explain how soiciety is correct to protect itself from the actions of individuals that just happened to be born with the mental/physical condition to be such people. And then, go read the reasons you and others gave as to why cutting in line is immoral. You are willing to shun line cutters for the good of the one person that gets cut in front of, and that will bring strife to the family of the cutter. I am willing to shun line cutters for the cause of normalcy, order, good, and for the betterment of society - knowing that their family may be harmed, but hoping that their family has an understanding of what is moral, and why.

What happened to the discussion about prison behavior and prisoners that are sodomized and/or sodomizing. If they are gay, you would have to say it is no different than having women and men together in prison. But the very mention of that resulted in "Oh no there will be RAPE!". That conversation was going well and then fell silent. I'm not suprized. THe pro-deviant-male-sodomite crowd has no problem subjecting male prisoners to sodomite rape by force, but is against the idea of male/female prisoner sex. That is some queer thought process.

David9   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 1:47am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 366

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/04/homophobic_maybe_you_re_gay_the_new_york_times_on_a_new_study_of_secret_sexuality_.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/homophobia-homosexuality-gay_n_1412846.html

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/09/study-homophobic-people-likely-repressing-homosexual-attraction/

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-big-questions/201106/homophobic-men-most-aroused-gay-male-porn

http://www.care2.com/causes/study-homophobia-masks-gay-feelings.html

Food for thought?

leo707   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 2:02am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 367

Bap33 says

my good fellow, is the OT law the law of the land?

So, man's law trumps god's law in your opinion? Hmmm...that does not sound very Christian, putting the law of man above the law of god...

Bap33 says

A person calling themselves a Christian has nothing to do with a person being a Christian.

So, how do we know you are actually a "real" Christian? You seem to pick-and-choose which of gods laws you want to follow.

If "man" passed a law requiring you to partake in homosexual behavior would you just shrug your shoulders and say,"Oh, well! I gotta follow man's law over gods."

leo707   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 2:06am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 368

Bap33 says

What happened to the discussion about prison behavior and prisoners that are sodomized and/or sodomizing.

I believe that you and I were the only ones taking part in that discussion, and the Pnet time I have is limited.

Bap33 says

If the prisons were mixed, would man/women sex be consensual most times or rape? Give a percentage please.
What is the percentage of male/male sex in prison that is rape vs consensual?

I don't know I would have to do some research on this, and I am sure the data is spotty. Why is this important to you?

When a male prisoner rapes a male prisoner, which one is "gay"? Both?

Gays often become the targets of rape in prison. You should look up "situational homosexuality"; that will answer your question.

leo707   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 2:41am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 369

Bap33 says

THe pro-deviant-male-sodomite crowd has no problem subjecting male prisoners to sodomite rape by force, but is against the idea of male/female prisoner sex.

?
Perhaps you misunderstood my following comment:
leo707 says

It is not that I am assuming rape, but I mentioned rape because rape is what bothers me. Also, because it is very common in place where you put a bunch of anti-social aggressive men--like in prison. Consensual sex does not bother me. If adult consenting men--in prison or not--want to have sex I could really care less. If they can build strong healthy relationships, then I am happy for them.

To clarify...
Rape (any kind) = bad
Consenting sex (any kind) = fine*

*While I think that consenting adults should be able to have any kind of sex they want there are things done in the bedroom by both homo and heteros that would put me off, and I am pretty tolerant. You want percentages? 90% of people are shocked and disgusted by what 90% of people do for sexual gratification.

leo707   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 2:49am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 370

Bap33 says

That is some queer thought process.

Well, we agree that there does seem to be some queer thought process going on...

leo707   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 2:56am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 371

New Renter says

leo707 says

One of my favorite Bap theories is that the earth was once encased, somewhere at or above the thermosphere, in an ice shell. This shell was responsible for a few things that I forget. I think one was the melting of the shell caused Noah's flood.

Sounds like snowball earth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth

I doubt the ice sheet was more than a few miles thick though

A sheet of ice sitting on the surface of the earth? How pedestrian!

Lift that sheet of ice so that it is above the atmosphere, and now you have a theory that sounds reasonable to Bap. Well, reasonable as long as it agrees with the parts of the bible Bap chooses to believe in.

Buster   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 3:09am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 372

From the former GOP RNC Chair on same sex marriage;

Ken Mehlman: Making the Marriage Equality Case
November 21, 2012
AFER Boardmember and former RNC chair Ken Mehlman pens an Op/Ed in the Wall Street Journal making the conservative case for marriage equality.

“They say demography is destiny, and in American politics destiny has belonged to those who best aligned their core beliefs with the rapidly changing and ever-improving citizenry.

“Conservatives—and I count myself as one—succeed when we attract new supporters to timeless traditions. The Republican Party’s loss in this month’s presidential election resulted partly from a failure to embrace some of America’s fastest-growing constituencies. One area of significant change is in attitudes toward legal equality for gay Americans.

“Some misperceive the issue of marriage equality as exclusively progressive. Yet what could be more conservative than support for more freedom and less government? And what freedom is more basic than the right to marry the person you love? Smaller, less intrusive government surely includes an individual deciding whom to marry. Allowing civil marriage for same-sex couples will cultivate community stability, encourage fidelity and commitment, and foster family values.

“Conservatives don’t need to change core convictions to embrace the growing support for equal rights for gay Americans. It is sufficient to recognize the inherent conservatism in citizens’ desire to marry, to be judged on their work, and not to be singled out for higher taxes or bullying at school. These objectives can be achieved while also protecting religious liberty, as demonstrated by states enacting civil marriage with exemptions for religious institutions.”

mell   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 4:04am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 373

leo707 says

To clarify...
Rape (any kind) = bad
Consenting sex (any kind) = fine*

It's really that simple. Freedom is what the US is supposedly all about. It's part of your civil liberties to stick your finger in somebody else's nose and pull the boogers out as long as it is consentual. And others have the freedom of association, or better non-association if they don't want to be around others that rub them the wrong way.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 6:07am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 374

leo707 says

To clarify...
Rape (any kind) = bad
Consenting sex (any kind) = fine*

umm, that is not correct. There is a requirement of age and mental condition inorder to even be able to legally give consent ... so, one could argue that someone suffering from homosexuality is exibiting mental issues and therefore is not able to give consent. That makes the male/male sex act (any kind) a form of abuse and rape.

leo707   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 6:33am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 375

Bap33 says

There is a requirement of age and mental condition inorder to even be able to legally give consent

Yes...

Bap33 says

so, one could argue that someone suffering from homosexuality is exibiting mental issues and therefore is not able to give consent.

A. Not all mental conditions prevent someone from giving consent.

B. Homosexuality is not viewed as a "mental issue" by any professional body that deals with mental issues (this has been responded to earlier in this thread). There is no evidence to believe that homosexuality is a "mental issue."

C. Even if this were the case. Following your logic, homosexuals would not be able to consent to heterosexual sex either.

Bap33 says

That makes the male/male sex act (any kind) a form of abuse and rape.

Thanks you for finally getting to the point.

curious2   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 7:01am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 376

leo707 says

Lift that sheet of ice so that it is above the atmosphere, and now you have a theory that sounds reasonable to Bap. Well, reasonable as long as it agrees with the parts of the bible Bap chooses to believe in.

This is an issue with monotheists generally; their personal god always agrees with them, and they come to believe that they are God. (See Dan's earlier thread on this topic.) The world was covered by a giant ice dome in the sky, until Captain America FKA Thor heroically hammered it away to make the world safe for American democracy which must impose Bap's theocratic beliefs on everyone. BTW Catholics aren't really monotheists, they have recreated the Roman pantheon with "patron saints" (minor deities) for every purpose, which insulates them somewhat (but certainly not entirely) from Bap's delusions of grandeur.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 7:32am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 377

leo707 says

There is no evidence to believe that homosexuality is a "mental issue."

Wrong. A healthy normal male human is attracted to healthy normal female humans. A male human is attracted sexually to a male human due to mental illness, or due to a male hormone/gland birth defect. In simple terms, male humans that are willing to couple with other male humans are either perverts or wired as women.

loe mentioned that the male population in prison in mostly males with mental conditions and birth defects -- one of the obvious reasons that they are in prison in the first place ... and it is well known that prisons have lots and lots of male/male coupling going on (wanted and unwanted). The mental health of those performing these acts should be questioned .... along with those not in prison.

Bap33   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 7:33am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 378

curious2 says

American democracy

nope, a representative government with limited powers that are granted by the free members of each state.

curious2   befriend   ignore   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 7:42am PST   Share