(April 11, 2011 at 6:57 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I thought the overarching question of rationalism over hatred worked either way.

I think Dotard is getting to me... I'm starting to think that homophobia is a natural mechanism to preserve the species. I think it's right that any minority is protected and it's freedoms preserved, as nature will out.

Yes because gay people don't hire surrogate mothers

Lastpoet Wrote:I know, I also predicted you'd storm in in defense, damn, should've put that in the post

And so this is how our alliance is discovered

Quote:1. Do you believe in free speech about homosexuality for everyone except conservatives or Christians?

Well, I live in the town that showed that everybody had the right to state their own views publicly, no matter how reprehensible. If we don't reserve the right to free speech to people we don't like, we don't believe in it at all.

Quote:2. Do you participate in name-calling of those who object to homosexuality -- names like bigot, hate-monger, etc.?

That depends on how big of assholes they are.

Quote:3. Do you believe ‘gays’ have been deprived of the right to marry? Doesn’t pretty much everyone have the right to marry now -- to a person of the opposite sex?

Imagine this: in a parallel world, children are born in hatcheries like in Brave New World, and homosexuality is the norm to the extent that only homosexual marriages are allowed. You are a heterosexual and you want to marry your opposite-sex partner and you aren't allowed to. Would you be mollified by being told you could marry any same-sex person of your choice? I thought not.

Quote:4. Do you believe those who object to homosexuality are motivated by fear or ignorance? Do you believe they could never be motivated by compassion for the people involved, and if they say so, they must be lying?

I tend to agree with this, except for one change. I would not use the word lying, and replace that with naive.

Quote:5. Do you believe some people will just inevitably be homosexual, and that there’s a set percentage of the population that will always be ‘gay’, and that this won’t increase, even if a culture embraces ‘gay’ sex? Do you think homosexual experimentation could never become ‘chic’ and popular? Is there no risk for the people involved or our culture if this happens?

What tends to change is the degree of openness with which they have gay sex. Of course, "Experimentation" does get chic sometimes, but I wouldn't count those who "experiment" as gay, and neither would most people.

Quote:6. Do you automatically dismiss any conservative comments about homosexuality without listening? Do you believe you are well-informed, while refusing to learn about what homosexuals actually do and the risks involved?

What exactly would count as something so disgusting it would have to be outlawed? And besides, if acts performed by two consenting adults disgust you, then the answer is simple: Just don't do it.

Quote:7. Do you believe that the tragedy of any suicide by someone involved in homosexuality is the fault of conservatives? Is the best solution to these tragedies to demand that everyone in America accept homosexuality?

Well, there will always be people who commit suicide for a lot of reasons, gay or straight. It would be a great exaggeration to say that they're all the result of gay-bashing.

Quote:8. Do you automatically dismiss the idea that anyone could be a former homosexual, despite the hundreds of groups started by ex-‘gays’ and the thousands who live in America?

Here's a challenge for you: find one person who went through an ex-gay program, is currently leading a fulfilling sex life with somebody of the opposite sex, but doesn't have a job working for the ex-gay program. Chances are, you won't. And, for that matter, what about all the ex-ex-gay communities, including Michael Bussee and Gary Cooper, who founded Exodus International, the first major ex-gay program, who fell off the wagon three years after they built it?

Quote:9. Do you believe that homosexuals are born that way? Do you refuse to consider the evidence against this claim? Have you ever looked at the connection between child sexual abuse and later homosexual attraction?

Considering that scientists have shown that there's likely to be a genetic element to Homosexuality, and while even that is ultimately inconclusive, the evidence that it's due to being sexually abused is even less conclusive.

Quote:10. Do you believe that only churches that accept homosexuality have interpreted the Bible in the ‘correct’ way? Do you feel it isn’t necessary to read the relevant Bible passages yourself, all of which are straightforward in condemning homosexual acts? Do you believe it’s impossible to be “kind” and oppose homosexuality?

The fact is, that people take verses of the Bible out of context. For instance, a mere four verses before Leviticus 20:13, which states that gay sex should be punished by death, the Bible also states that "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him." Perhaps you should also be killing disobedient children along with your gays, just to be consistent.

Quote:11. Are you quick to say “Judge not, lest you be judged” ( Matthew 7:1) and similar passages, without understanding the Christian theology behind it, and all the while being very judgmental yourself?

This article really says all that needs to be said.

Quote:12. Do you sincerely believe Jesus would have accepted homosexual sex acts? Do you believe Jesus is cool with whatever anyone wants to do? Do you believe there’s such a thing as ‘sin’ and if so, how is it defined? Are you the one who defines sin for yourself? Do you have no need of a savior and if not, wasn’t Christ’s death and resurrection pretty pointless? Despite all these contradictory and self-constructed beliefs, do you consider yourself a “Christian”?

Well, Jesus didn't mention it at all, but he did seem to be okay with stoning disobedient kids (Mk. 7:9-10), so it's likely that he would have done that. For the record, no, I am not a Christian.

Quote:13. Do you believe sweeping stereotypes, like that all ‘gay’ people are innocent victims or that all conservatives must be mean and stupid?

There's people who are innocent, and people who aren't in every group.

Quote:14. Do you close your ears and figure it’s a conservative plot if you hear that at least 2/3 of all the HIV transmission in the United States still involves males having anal sex with each other?

Of course, what about lesbians? They have a lower rate of getting HIV than even heterosexuals.

Quote:15. Do you believe anyone who objects to homosexuality is automatically “hateful,” while you seethe with hate yourself?

Hell, the Dalai Lama considers himself to be against anal sex, but I don't consider himself to be hateful.

Quote:16. Do you believe it’s okay for thirteen- year- olds to learn at school that they have the right to have homosexual sex with each other? Do you close your ears when concerned parents are outraged? Would you call such parents “ignorant” and accuse them of “censorship”?

Why wouldn't I? Of course, at the age of 13, it's better if teachers tell them to postpone sex until they're older.

Quote:17. Do you believe that, after several thousand years where most cultures have prohibited homosexuality, only now the ‘real’ truth is emerging? Do you believe this is not an arrogant, narrow or immature position?

It's about as narrow, arrogant, and immature as living in the 19th century and believing that slavery should be abolished in a world where most cultures had allowed it.

Quote:18. Do you believe that ‘gays’ are the target of widespread violence that goes unpunished in the United States? Do you understand that hate crimes stats don’t support this claim and that laws already exist to punish all crimes, no matter why they are committed? Would you be unconcerned about overall civil liberties if trumped -up charges of so-called “hate speech” were used to silence people?

"Hate crime" is an ultimately idiotic idea. Legislating morality when it doesn't involve keeping people who don't wish to be harmed from harm does not work. I suppose that it's a fairly good way of showing how we've advanced, but it really doesn't make anything better, it only makes society look better.

Quote:19. Do you believe that conservatives are making a big deal out of a behavior that has no harmful effects on individuals, families, communities, or societies? Do you scoff at any claims that serious public health issues are involved, like sexually transmitted diseases or risks to children?

Straight people can give each other STDs, and mess up children's lives. Why single out one particular group?

Quote:20. And--very big question: Is your need for other people’s approval greater than your appreciation of truth? Do you refuse to consider an unpopular viewpoint because it might make you appear unenlightened to some people? If your mind and heart changed about this issue, would you have the courage to be a rebel for a worthy cause, to speak up and inform family, friends--and fellow humans who are involved in homosexuality?

If I didn't believe that the truth trumped popularity, I wouldn't be an atheist.

(April 11, 2011 at 5:17 pm)LastPoet Wrote: I predict that in the future Dotard will come in with his rants, waaaaaaait for it!, waaaaiiiit for it....

HA! I disappoint you! No rants for me. But after reading some more of this silliness I will answer the questions.

---

(April 11, 2011 at 5:20 pm)Aerzia Saerules Arktuos Wrote: Rants? Hmmm, funny really. I tend to agree largely with them.

And quite strangely, I tend to agree with 99% of the stuffs you write.

---

(April 11, 2011 at 7:11 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: I didnt know that gay "Eat da poopoo"?

See how uninformed you are?

I tried to take this "quiz", RJ. I really did.

First, I noticed about 40 some-odd questions in the 20 question quiz that purportedly tries to establish an "honest" discussion. Then I noticed, some of the "questions" in the quiz-for-honesty, were more like rhetorical statements. Then as I read the question, my brain melted from the stupidity.

Just put me down for "LOL, wut?"

Quote:1. Do you believe in free speech about homosexuality for everyone except conservatives or Christians?

No,everyone has an equal right to be pig ignorant and offensive.

Quote:2. Do you participate in name-calling of those who object to homosexuality -- names like bigot, hate-monger, etc.?

Of course, when such terms are accurate descriptions,which is often.

Quote:3. Do you believe ‘gays’ have been deprived of the right to marry? Doesn’t pretty much everyone have the right to marry now -- to a person of the opposite sex?

This a question and a strawman clumsily masquerading as a question. To answer the question "Yes. gays have been deprived of the right to marry"

Quote:4. Do you believe those who object to homosexuality are motivated by fear or ignorance? Do you believe they could never be motivated by compassion for the people involved, and if they say so, they must be lying?

Same as for 3. "Yes, they are ignorant and fearful" (they may also be naive,deluded or closet gays,which is apparently common with homophobes)

Quote:5. Do you believe some people will just inevitably be homosexual, and that there’s a set percentage of the population that will always be ‘gay’, and that this won’t increase, even if a culture embraces ‘gay’ sex?

Yet again "Yes,there will be a percentage of gays. "

Got bored.

Here in Australia we have a technical term for such a piece of loaded bullshit ; "a lot of hot cock." Seems especially appropriate given the topic..

Here ya go;



There. All done. Can I go home now?

---

And Thanks to Pad for stopping his load of shit early in the game, my rubber boots are at the cleaners.

lol WTF???

boring piece of shit.

(April 11, 2011 at 3:38 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: A lot of these questions read to me like "how long ago did you stop beating your wife?"

All I read was "are you a dirty queer loving liberal?"

When did being against bigotry make you a bigot? If hating prejudice makes me prejudicial then I guess I hate myself. If not being prejudicial means tolerating all view points, even the retarded ones, then I choose to be a prejudice asshole. This quiz was intended to scare people who believe themselves tolerant into thinking they're a bigot and I see through the bullshit.

(April 12, 2011 at 5:44 am)FaithNoMore Wrote: If not being prejudicial means tolerating all view points, even the retarded ones, then I choose to be a prejudice asshole.

You chose not to tolerate other views, even calling them 'retarded' and that is not bigoted?

I hold an opposing viewpoint than you, yet I have no problem tolerating them and I am a bigot?