tedificator (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
tedificator) wrote2004-01-28 04:41 pm
tedificator) wrote2004-01-28 04:41 pm
Continuing on thoughts
Things that I don't fight to the ground with, are situations where if I win, I will hurt somebody, and before I jump in, no harm is done.
Prime examples are religion and (rightfulness of) homosexuality.
I say homosexuality is ok, but this is just for convenience. The truth is I do believe it is a disease. However, I don't say this in people's faces (who knows who could be gay)(and please see my reasoning if you are). Because I know that there is no way (yet) to "cure" homosexuality. And to label innocent people as sick is unneeded. I mean, statistics show that hetero's are just as likely to commit sexual harrassment and assualt as homo's are. Relationships between homo's seem to be caring, and are beneficial to both. Overpopulation is becoming a problem, so if they can satisfy their feelings without making babies, even better! And damn you YMCA boyscout administration, because you should know that sexual assault are just as common amoung homos and heteros, and there are multiple cases of rape where heterosexuals "penetrate" (w/ an object) a person of the same sex. so, there is no justification of your discrimination, except for the passage about sodom in the bible, but if you're gonna stay truthful to the old testament, you better tell your scouts to never touch anything made by pig, and all to be circumsized as well.
*Warning* If you are homosexual and you read on, this is just an opinion of the idea, not an attack to anyone.
Although I defend homos like such, I cannot say that it is not a disease. Beastiality, is that not a disease? I mean, the main reason beastiality is not ok, is because it is barely possible to find the concent of the animal, making it a raping of an animal, making it animal cruelty. Obviously homosexuality and beastiality are wrong, I mean, religiously and scienctifically. I'm pretty sure that human's sexual feelings wre intended to help them reproduce. That is why in public (except here), I say that homosexuality, although not common is something completely ok. However, privately, I do believe that it is a disease. I do think it's "wrong", but I think it's even worse to go and hurt people who have not done anything to you, and discriminate these people who have done no wrong, and treat them any differently. Remember you conservatives (directed towards DR and JP), they are only as or less harmful as you are.
P.S. now you know why I didn't finish it yesterday. And there will be more examples to support my claim of the most efficient debate/discussion methods.
Prime examples are religion and (rightfulness of) homosexuality.
I say homosexuality is ok, but this is just for convenience. The truth is I do believe it is a disease. However, I don't say this in people's faces (who knows who could be gay)(and please see my reasoning if you are). Because I know that there is no way (yet) to "cure" homosexuality. And to label innocent people as sick is unneeded. I mean, statistics show that hetero's are just as likely to commit sexual harrassment and assualt as homo's are. Relationships between homo's seem to be caring, and are beneficial to both. Overpopulation is becoming a problem, so if they can satisfy their feelings without making babies, even better! And damn you YMCA boyscout administration, because you should know that sexual assault are just as common amoung homos and heteros, and there are multiple cases of rape where heterosexuals "penetrate" (w/ an object) a person of the same sex. so, there is no justification of your discrimination, except for the passage about sodom in the bible, but if you're gonna stay truthful to the old testament, you better tell your scouts to never touch anything made by pig, and all to be circumsized as well.
*Warning* If you are homosexual and you read on, this is just an opinion of the idea, not an attack to anyone.
Although I defend homos like such, I cannot say that it is not a disease. Beastiality, is that not a disease? I mean, the main reason beastiality is not ok, is because it is barely possible to find the concent of the animal, making it a raping of an animal, making it animal cruelty. Obviously homosexuality and beastiality are wrong, I mean, religiously and scienctifically. I'm pretty sure that human's sexual feelings wre intended to help them reproduce. That is why in public (except here), I say that homosexuality, although not common is something completely ok. However, privately, I do believe that it is a disease. I do think it's "wrong", but I think it's even worse to go and hurt people who have not done anything to you, and discriminate these people who have done no wrong, and treat them any differently. Remember you conservatives (directed towards DR and JP), they are only as or less harmful as you are.
P.S. now you know why I didn't finish it yesterday. And there will be more examples to support my claim of the most efficient debate/discussion methods.
no subject
Thanks, though. This is the kind of post that, while I may not agree, I don't end up pissed off at the writer, and you stay logical and respectful. Nice.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
dont think anyones gonna bit on this one man
Re: