patrick.net

Just amazing to me, it should be obvious to readers here, the treasury has been fleeced, the safety net is frayed for everyone, straight or gay, there is a huge imbalance of wealth (which affects every child), the housing market, I don't even want to fucking go there. Yet, for some, 'family values' will save us and these Ugandian views on what same sex couples do?

FortWayne says

I never said "ALL". Seeing a heart disease isn't going to give a child a heart disease, but seeing homosexual behave in their inappropriate manner is something totally different, it just might screw them up.

OK, yes children do imitate, but the don't imitate everything they see, and when they do they don't imitate it exactly as it happened. Seeing gay is not going to give a child the gay. No more than seeing women in dresses is going to turn a little boy into a cross dresser. Lots of little boys experiment with wearing dresses, but very few become cross-dressers; it takes much more than seeing someone in a dress to make that happen.

My kids see smelly bums quite frequently in our neighborhood, but have never expressed an interest in exploring that behavior. They have also seen lip-on-lip kissing, but they don't imitate that behavior. I wish that they would imitate the putting poo and pee into the toilet behavior they see.

Yes, seeing some things can "damage" kids psyche, but loving adults holding hands and kissing is not one of them.

If a kid shows a desire to frequently "playact" man-on-man affection or woman-on-woman then there may be something else going on with that kid.

BTW, my kids have seen many gay couples and never imitated or said boo about it.

Billybigrig says

My post has absolutely nothing to do with shapes , only concepts of true nature of things .... Does a Mystro use a toilet plunger to lead an orchestra , does a carpenter use a saw for a hammer

? what is it about a man mouth that makes is so much less suited for a penis than a woman mouth?

Dan8267 says

As I said, if anything this makes me objective and thus better qualified to deal with the inherent conflicts of interest between parents and children. A judge must be impartial.

It is a question of understanding not impartial judgement, to which anyone's claim of is absurd.

Not defending the homophobes who project their subjective opinions of morality on their children but I do understand where the need to protect children arises from. It is not a simply from the head brain

There was a time when I didn't have children, I now have children my understanding of children and their relationship to parents and the outside world changed.

This thread is great. Here is what I learned...

If something bad happens to someone in my religion, that is god testing their faith.
If something happens to one of my enemies, that is god punishing them for their sins.

If I don't like something, then it is immoral and should be banned. Otherwise, someone might do it in front of the children and then my children will be doing it. Think of the children. It must be immoral in order to save the children.

In other news of circular logic: gay sex is immoral. Therefore, if we allow gay sex, we will then allow bestiality. Therefore, it is a slippery slope, and gay sex is immoral.

Gay people have a square penis.

Dan is smarter than most of the adversaries that he hooked into this debate. Bap seems to be smart enough to generally agree to disagree and avoid the debate.

Prostate exams are or maybe should be immoral.

Some people still think that homosexuality is a psychological disease.

Does that pretty much sum it up or did I miss something?

rdm says

There was a time when I didn't have children, I now have children my understanding of children and their relationship to parents and the outside world changed.

Yes.

Dan8267 says

Someone who is not homosexual cannot possibly have a valid philosophy regarding homosexuality

Color me clueless then.

Dan8267 says

h, Republican math. No wonder you guys could never balance a budget

Hey at least Bush and Reagan provided a budget.
Obama is the first and only President in History to not have a Budget period. Put it this way, our federal government is operating the same way I do. I just spend and don't stop until my debit card is declined. That is why my makes the budget, pays the bills, and warns me when the checking account can't afford one of my whimsical musical gear acquisitions.

My wife would be a better President.

Gay marriage is immoral? Only if you accept the idea that the right wing has the authority to define what IS immoral.

But it keeps a price floor for politcal contributions. And there's also that Freudian Reaction Formation thingy too.

An interesting anecdote concerning the bad example that gays may have on kids.

My boy has never expressed a desire to wear dresses, but it is quite common for little boys. Well...when we were at Disneyland he did want to get a similar set of sequined Minnie Mouse ears as his sister, but I was able to pretty easily steer him towards some Mickey ears.

Anyway, I have known several straight couples that have let their boys put on dresses, but only at home. I have never known anyone even close to that German father who wears a dress with his son around town. The only couple that I know who outright refuses to let their boy try on a dress, despite repeated requests, is a Lesbian couple.

leo707 says

My boy has never expressed a desire to wear dresses, but it is quite common for little boys. Well...when we were at Disneyland he did want to get a similar sequined Minnie Mouse ears as his sister, but I was able to pretty easily steer him towards some Mickey ears.

That's a strange diagnosis of your son. Are you saying that he is odd because he doesn't want to wear a dress? What would you then say if he did?

Never mind. I'll let you think about that and chase your own theories in circles.

upisdown says

Never mind.

OK.

leo707 says

upisdown says

Never mind.
OK

I so wanted to watch you take it to a whole other level. Thanks for cheating me out of that entertainment.

Quit wasting so much time and energy worrying about what is right and what is wrong, and just do what feels good

Have to figure the homophobes for some dead lays, because if you are a productive person with a healthy sex life of your own, no way would you have the time to fret about whatever the hell flamers are doing in their bedrooms.

I'm repulsed by people that poison their selves, and more importantly their children, who rely on their parents for proper nutrition, with copious amounts of sugars. Cereals, fruit juices, all that crap that makes people fat and chronically ill. Is poisoning your child with sugar immoral? Some of y'all got your priorities all the way fucked the hell up

Dan said, "Someone who is not a parent cannot possibly have a valid philosophy regarding parenthood."

That's not what I was claiming, and that's not what others are saying either. Not entirely. Intelligence and internal modeling (creative thinking) are a hallmark of humanity, but they're no match for experience. It's the difference between reading and thinking about Love and being in love. It's the difference between reading about how to swim and actually jumping into the water. How do you explain colors to a man blind from birth? Some things you won't "get" until they happen to you.

"Impartial judge though you imagine yourself, you're just not qualified to be anything but an observer in the matter of how to teach children about sex.

upisdown says

leo707 says

upisdown says

Never mind.

OK

I so wanted to watch you take it to a whole other level. Thanks for cheating me out of that entertainment.

You are welcome.

upisdown says

That's a strange diagnosis of your son.

It is not a diagnosis it is an observation.

upisdown says

Are you saying that he is odd because he doesn't want to wear a dress?

No, I am not sure how you can read that in what I wrote...

leo707 says

[The] desire to wear dresses...is quite common for little boys.

"Common" does not mean "majority", also it does not mean "everything else is 'odd' or abnormal." It means that it is normal for a little boy to have a desire to wear a dress.

upisdown says

What would you then say if he did?

I would try and dissuade him, but if he insisted I would let him wear one inside the house. I did let him try on the sequined mouse ears at Disneyland, but I was not going to buy them for him.

I hope you found my response satisfactory entertainment.

FYI, I am happy to respond to questions, but if you followup the question with a "never mind" then it is easier for me to not answer the question.

In so far as I can the people I see who have the biggest problems with homosexuality all seem to be parents.

leo707 says

I would try and dissuade him, but if he insisted I would let him wear one inside the house. I did let him try on the sequined mouse ears at Disneyland, but I was not going to buy them for him.

I can't blame you for not wanting to buy the overpriced ears from China. We didn't and never will. Walt Disney's "creative" genious came in the form of getting people to spend every dime that they bring in on useless junk that they don't need before they leave, not simple geometric renditions of animals.

zzyzzx says

In so far as I can the people I see who have the biggest problems with homosexuality all seem to be parents.

Parents who are afraid that their kids are going to catch the gay.

Does anyone here really think it is a choice whether you want to lick pussy or suck dick?

http://www.medicaldaily.com/articles/10287/20120613/homosexuality-gene-mother-reproduction-evolution.htm

Less respect for this site after this thread.

upisdown says

I can't blame you for not wanting to buy the overpriced ears from China.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I bought ears for my boy, just not Minnie mouse ears. My girl did get a set of pink sequined ears.

upisdown says

Walt Disney's "creative" genious came in the form of getting people to spend every dime that they bring in on useless junk that they don't need before they leave, not simple geometric renditions of animals.

Yeah, for the most part it is true. I try and avoid getting things that the kids will not appreciate after leaving the park. I think that the only thing that has been unused has been my boy's Mickey ears. My girl wears her Minnie Mouse ears quite often.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/14/opinion/china-challenges-one-child-brooks/index.html?iref=obnetwork

I think I found your answer to your question.

What's the difference in China breeding all Males, most of which will never get a chance to mate and leave their legacy offspring, or if the American male turns into Richard Simmons. The outcome would be the same.

David9 says

Less respect for this site after this thread.

I redact this statement I made.

As usual, learning is achieved, in this case astounding.

Dan8267 says

The gay rights movement most certainly is not about exposing children to sexual images.

not correct. the male/male sodomite message has been forced into public schools by the PC police. Fact.

Bap33 says

Dan8267 says

The gay rights movement most certainly is not about exposing children to sexual images.

not correct. the male/male sodomite message has been forced into public schools by the PC police. Fact.

Citation?

CaptainShuddup says

What's the difference in China breeding all Males, most of which will never get a chance to mate and leave their legacy offspring, or if the American male turns into Richard Simmons. The outcome would be the same.

Nope, you can look deeper into other sociological studies on this. The problem is not so much having children, but having a steady sex partner. In societies where young men's access to sexual partners is limited violence ensues, when they have access peace is more common.

Situational homosexuality (think prison or ancient Greek army) will act as a "release valve" for this sexual tension (another evolutionary advantage). Yes, Shaddup if you find yourself in prison you may start having "strange" attractions to men (if you don't already).

So, keep heterosexual men from women = violence
Keep homosexual men from men = violence

It is quite possible that this is at the root of the homophobic man stereotype, where the most violently homophobic are actually gay themselves. When denying themselves an outlet for their true sexual passions, they become violent, hostile and lash out.

robertoaribas says

So, I have a capital idea for the idiots on here: If you find yourself bothered by gay sex, don't have gay sex.

I suspect that for some that is easier said than done.

Bap33 says

Dan8267 says

The gay rights movement most certainly is not about exposing children to sexual images.

not correct. the male/male sodomite message has been forced into public schools by the PC police. Fact.

You seem fixated on male/male homosexuality. Does that mean that female/female homosexuality is more palatable in your narrow world view? Or do you only concern yourself with the half of same sex relations that get your dick hard?

FortWayne says

but seeing homosexual behave in their inappropriate manner is something totally different, it just might screw them up.

Sex is perfectly legal, but it's not shown on tv for a reason. Same with homosexuality, not in public, not where children can see it.

Even if every gay rights issue were passed, men would not be having gay sex in public. Yes, I'm fine with that being illegal. There are far bigger problems then legalizing public sex.

However, if that's all you mean by "setting a bad example", I don't think you have anything to worry about. No gay rights movement has ever proposed legalizing public sex, gay or straight.

If you mean you don't want your kids to see two adult men kissing in public, then that is just your own cultural and personal prejudices and the state should not act on them. Men do kiss in public in other countries and it doesn't screw up kids. Heck, heterosexual men kiss in public in some cultures.

Billybigrig says

Does a Mystro use a toilet plunger to lead an orchestra , does a carpenter use a saw for a hammer

Does a theatre troupe use garbage cans and brooms as instruments?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/Zu15Ou-jKM0

Oh, wait.

Dan8267 says

Even if every gay rights issue were passed, men would not be having gay sex in public. Yes, I'm fine with that being illegal. There are far bigger problems then legalizing public sex.

What is the philosophical basis of outlawing public sex?

I doubt it is worse than spitting on the street from a public health stand point. I would feel more threatened by people spewing germ-filled saliva in public.

rdm says

It is a question of understanding not impartial judgement, to which anyone's claim of is absurd.

I can understand the practice of teaching because I was a student. I can understand the practice of parenting because I was parented. I can understand the horrors of the Holocaust, not because I experienced it but because I have empathy. I can put myself in someone else's shoes without having to physically experience the exact same things. I don't understand why this skill is unique to me. Why the hell doesn't every other member of my species possess this skill? It's not that difficult.

But in any case, as I said above, if my opinion on parenting doesn't count for shit since I'm not a parent, then nobody's opinion on homosexuality counts if they are not homosexual. Same diff.

leo707 says

robertoaribas says

So, I have a capital idea for the idiots on here: If you find yourself bothered by gay sex, don't have gay sex.

I suspect that for some that is easier said than done.

Your right. I hate gay sex, but somehow I always end up sucking cock on a Friday night. What's up with that?

Kids are more screwed up by bad parenting than by anything else. People need to stop blaming the society. If we worry so much about having bad kids perhaps we should restrict procreation only to certain people.

robertoaribas says

The people who through time have proven themselves to be the least intelligent are the most against homosexuality. I'd love to see some study of the correlation of intelligence and intolerance, but if this thread is any example, I'd bet its pretty high.

It's the same inverse correlation as intelligence and religion. Yes, there's something fundamentally there.

I consider myself an intolerant person (I prefer exactly 69F or it is either too hot or too cold). I just happen to celebrate choices and differences.

Choice is the most sacred thing a human being can possess.

leo707 says

Bap33 says

Dan8267 says

The gay rights movement most certainly is not about exposing children to sexual images.

not correct. the male/male sodomite message has been forced into public schools by the PC police. Fact.

Citation?

You won't get any citation. The conservative right lives in a bubble and no facts can get through. The fact that Bap33 even made such a ludicrous statement demonstrates that he has no grasp on reality when it comes to the gay rights movement. It's like when McCarthy claimed that the army was full of communists.

I think such delusional perceptions of reality are clear proof that it is homophobia that is the mental disorder, not homosexuality.

CaptainShuddup says

What's the difference in China breeding all Males, most of which will never get a chance to mate and leave their legacy offspring, or if the American male turns into Richard Simmons. The outcome would be the same.

Wow, you are really grasping for straws. First off, that would be an issue of practicality, not morality. Second, unless every single man in the world turned into a flamer and refused to touch a woman, there would be no ill effects. Third, such an argument can't apply to polygamous bisexuals, who are also discriminated against. Fourth, anyone taking a vow of celibacy would be harming America by your assertion. Fifth, even waiting until marriage to have sex would be bad for America by your assertion.

Well, just over two full days and I have yet to hear a single, even remotely plausible justification for considering gay sex immoral. Does the religious right want to concede that they have always been wrong on this issue, or do they need more time to think something up?