Oddworld Forums

Oddworld Forums (http://www.oddworldforums.net/index.php)
-   Off-Topic Discussion (http://www.oddworldforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Religious Debate - Homosexuality (http://www.oddworldforums.net/showthread.php?t=10750)

Sydney 12-12-2004 02:58 AM

:

I hate to disturb your thought process, but you have made an error in this assessment. A religion is a belief system. As such, you believe there is no deity.

Why do you keep making shit up? First you say "scientific studies" show that children raised by gay parents turn out f*cked up, which I proved wrong (and you conveniently ignored), now you say that Atheism is a religion.

I'll refer you to TheRaisin's most recent post, which offers a definition of 'religion'.

Nepharski, you're a liar. You make shit up to 'prove' your points.

Rich 12-12-2004 03:16 AM

:

Nepharski, you're a liar. You make shit up to 'prove' your points.
Oh dear, I sense trouble :fuzsad: :(

Esus 12-12-2004 03:16 AM

Religion:
1.
1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Atheism:
1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.


Some people seemed a little confused, so I thought I'd pop in to clear it up.

Alcar 12-12-2004 04:57 AM

I guess all I can really contribute at this moment in time, is that the majority of Christians are heading for Hell, in the ironic twist I so often chuckle to myself about. As for my opinion on how the Universe was created, I'd have to say that I don't know. And my mind boggles at the concept.

I'd like to add, as well, that I believe Science could somewhat be described as a religion, or belief system as well. In Science, a lot of things are based on assumptions that we must blindly believe in. Talking to scientists about the validity of their scientific constants, they will no doubt prove themselves fundamentalist-scientists.

Alcar...

Jacob 12-12-2004 11:33 AM

So - i ask again;

What's everybodies opinion on Faggots adopting?
What about teaching about Homosexuality as part of Sex-ed?
What about painting Gay animals Pink? To make it easier to persecute against them?

Rich 12-12-2004 12:27 PM

:

What's everybodies opinion on Faggots adopting?
What about teaching about Homosexuality as part of Sex-ed?
What about painting Gay animals Pink? To make it easier to persecute against them?
I can accept all, providing that any stupid homophobes don't take the piss or act terribly as in the 'so cruel' thread.

Nate 12-12-2004 02:10 PM

:

On a just barely related note, in Washington we recently had to put down an insidious motion called the charter schools act (or something very close), which would have, in effect, created essentially private schools receiving public funding. The argument was that tax dollars should follow students and not schools (quoting almost directly here). This would have taken even more money away from the already poor public schools we have around here. It pissed me off so much. I know schools differ from state to state. I think I must have been unlucky in being born in Washington.

Jeez, who thought Australia would be ahead of the US in something like that? We've had private school funding for years and its been growing constantly under our current Prime Minister, John Dickwad. I mean, Howard.

TheRaisin 12-12-2004 02:13 PM

I cannot think of a single generalization about a race, religion, or system of beliefs that has been true for all members of said group.

From what source do you derive your information, Nepharski? I don't even hear about atheists as a group, really. Probably because I live in an area so full of religion. I know like two other atheists, and they never even thought of what sort of beliefs they have until I brought it up sometime last year (when I started giving up the whole Quaker thing).

If the parents want their child to be baptized or whatever, that's fine. If the kid, later on, decides not to be a part of that religion, then the baptism no longer holds any meaning at all to them, so they might as well be baptized in case they do continue to be a part of that religion.

EDIT: Australian private schools get public funding? Jeez. I always thought the U.S. was worse than any other country when it comes to stuff like this.

Homosexuals adopting is fine by me.
Homosexuality in Sex Ed is fine by me. As long as they don't go overboard. The schools seem to not be able to do anything halfway. Some teens get pregnant, so in their eyes, ALL teens are out their madly humping away. I guess the same probably wouldn't hold true for the topic of homosexuality, though, so that's fine.
Paint. . . gay animals. . . pink. This thread is hilarious.

Alcar 12-12-2004 03:09 PM

While Australian private Schools receive funding, the students who attend are still paying in excess of $5,000 AUD a term. The Public School sector receives a lot more funding than private or systemic schools, unlike what some Public schools would have you believe. Systemic Schools students pay in excess of $500 AUD a term. Public Schools students pay very little.

:

What's everybodies opinion on Faggots adopting?
What about teaching about Homosexuality as part of Sex-ed?
What about painting Gay animals Pink? To make it easier to persecute against them?

I'm okay with homosexuals adopting, but I do believe a woman as a maternal figure is the best choice for children growing up. I don't think most men have the love and absolute connection with a child that a mother does. But, homosexuals should still have the choice to adopt - like everyone else. And yes, I did see what Sydeny posted on gay adoption and child development. But I am entitled to my opinion, even if based on a shaky emotional stance.

I would love for Homosexuality to be taught in Schools, not just limited to Sexual Education.

As for painting gay animals pink... I take it you're joking? Or am I completely missing the seriousness? :p

Alcar...

AquaticAmbi 12-12-2004 03:42 PM

:

What's everybodies opinion on Faggots adopting?
What about teaching about Homosexuality as part of Sex-ed?
What about painting Gay animals Pink? To make it easier to persecute against them?

I believe homosexuals and anyone wanting to be a good parent to a parentless child deserves the right to do so. Hmm... And if someone brings up that children grow up best in a nuclear family (the term for the traditional two straight parents and their children type family), what about single parents? Should their children be taken away and put into a nuclear family? Oh, oh... what about sperm banks? That's sort of way out there, but yeah, what do you think of them? Should single women not be allowed to go there to be artificially inseminated because the child wouldn't have a father? Hmm, I never really thought about it, but I guess that artificial insemination takes care of lesbian couples wanting children, so gay male couples are the only ones not given the right to be parents from that perspective... poor gay guys.

Sex Ed in the US is worthless. My health type class just had a few speakers in some crappy program come speak to us for a few days. Once the female speaker mentioned something about lesbians, and she was like "but that's a whole other story...let's not get into that", followed by a disgusted face, when talking about STDs. Actually, when addressing issues of STDs were the only times homosexuality came up. Anyway, interesting fact: Teaching anything but abstinence only sexual education is ILLEGAL in the US. They can't teach us how to obtain birth control or how to use birth control. The only times they talk about it is when they tell us how often certain types of birth control don't work and the scary side effects. The program was far from educational.

Pink bonobos! Cuteness!

mawk 12-12-2004 04:12 PM

:

I shall now presume...as promised.

In truth, there has yet to be any scientific evidence that the aforementioned activity is natural in anyway...

Apparantly, gay sex has been observed in animals already. Gayness may be a response of nature to keep population levels respectable, thereby keeping the balance in the eco system food chain thingy.

Strike Witch 12-12-2004 04:29 PM

:

Apparantly, gay sex has been observed in animals already. Gayness may be a response of nature to keep population levels respectable, thereby keeping the balance in the eco system food chain thingy.


You know, That sound interesting.....Maybe a Species memory, There comes a point where the "Homo Gene" kicks in....It could be natures way of combating and regulating population growths.....

Anyone want to expand on that?
Like this

:fuzzle: :fuzzle: :fuzzle: = Hetros
:fuzwink: :fuzzle: :fuzzle: =Some Homos <--Over the course of history
:fuzwink: :fuzwink: :fuzzle: =1/3 Homos

Just a theory :p

Jacob 12-13-2004 06:24 AM

I've always believed that Homosexuality is Natures way of keeping the population down. And that if Homosexuality wasn't so frowned upon, there'd be a lot more than 10% of the world being in Homo relationships.

Saying this however, Nature obviously hadn't thought about a Lesbian and a Gay having a child [Neph - is that okay? One man. One woman. Any problem there?]. Or Surrogacy. Or other such hijinks.

Meh, who cares. We're all going to die soon anyway, so what's the point in fretting over something so trivial.

Nate 12-13-2004 12:38 PM

I don't know actual statistics, but I don't think the 10% number is the percentage of people in homosexual relationships. I think that its the theorised percentage of people who are gay, whether they admit to it (or realise it) or not.

Certainly less than 1 in 10 of the people I know openly gay. Perhaps if they were, I would have gotten laid recently.

TheRaisin 12-14-2004 06:11 PM

Die soon? Doesn't seem that way to me. Sure, in a cosmological sense, we're basically the smallest subatomic particles, the ones that are basically tiny points of energy, and our lives don't even register in time. But I'll tell you, a year sure feels like a long time to me. Thus, I care. I'm going to be inhabiting this world (hopefully) for what feels to me like a long time, and I want it to be just right.

Jacob, hypothetical question. If a scientist presented you with an easy, cheap medical process which would render you heterosexual, would you undergo it?

Jacob 12-15-2004 12:23 PM

'Jacob, hypothetical question. If a scientist presented you with an easy, cheap medical process which would render you heterosexual, would you undergo it?'

Though i know many-a-Faggot that would say "Yes!" at the chance at becoming a Muffy, and thus avoiding complications and discrimination. No, i wouldn't. I believe i was born Gay for a reason, and taking a "magic pill" to suddenly go against a higher beings life for me, would be wrong.

Plus, i like me as me. I don't think i'd change a lot about me. And my sexuality, at the end of the day, poses no qualms in life for me.

Rich 12-15-2004 12:28 PM

:

Plus, i like me as me. I don't think i'd change a lot about me. And my sexuality, at the end of the day, poses no qualms in life for me.
This is exactly as it should be. People should feel safe and happy whatever their sexuality. This should be no problem for people in todays society. Accept Gays now!

TheRaisin 12-15-2004 02:27 PM

Jacob, that's extremely cool.

Perhaps I've asked this question before, but what exactly are the perceived negative effects of homosexuality? Besides it being "immoral" and against Christianity and whatnot. I mean what are some measurable, real-life negative impacts of it?

Alcar 12-15-2004 04:13 PM

There are none. The 'impacts' are only relevant if you're a slave of society.

Alcar...

AquaticAmbi 12-15-2004 05:50 PM

:

Jacob, that's extremely cool.

Perhaps I've asked this question before, but what exactly are the perceived negative effects of homosexuality? Besides it being "immoral" and against Christianity and whatnot. I mean what are some measurable, real-life negative impacts of it?

Rawr! That's exactly what I've been trying to find out throughout this whole thread, but I've yet to hear a reasonable answer. And I agree with Alcar, there are no negative effects. No harm can come from loving someone.

TheRaisin 12-15-2004 08:51 PM

Heh heh, just the answers I wished to hear.

Somebody on the other side of the spectrum give some feedback.

Nepharski 12-17-2004 05:08 PM

:

Why do you keep making shit up? First you say "scientific studies" show that children raised by gay parents turn out f*cked up, which I proved wrong (and you conveniently ignored), now you say that Atheism is a religion.

I'll refer you to TheRaisin's most recent post, which offers a definition of 'religion'.

Nepharski, you're a liar. You make shit up to 'prove' your points.

To be honest, those aforementioned scientific studies were proclaimed on various radio talk shows. I do believe they offered their sources, but I must confess I have forgotten them. If it would please you, an attempt shall be made to locate these said sources.

Also, forgive me, but you seem somewhat overly dramatic here. Religion or otherwise, it makes little difference how Aethism is classified. Either way, it still stands as a belief system.

If you fail to agree with me, that is your right, and I respect any individuals right to their opinion...but surely there is no call for such fowl language.

Now then, my (actual) final statements...

First off, it is folly to argue for or against the nature of Homosexuality, as nobody (myself included) has any facts or information to support their side. I proclaim, "It has never been proved." You proclaim, "It has never been dis-proved." We argue. We exchange insults for information. We end up beating the ever-loving snot out of each other. Basically, we have a lose-lose situation here.

As for morality...where does one learn morality, but in religion? If nothing else, religion is a moral guideline, of sorts. Those of us who remain, or have become, unaffiliated...chose their own morals (NOTE: If such is not the case, feel perfectly free to correct me). My only bone with this, is that it suggests that their is no absolute good or bad, in which case nothing can ever really be classified as evil. Of course, most all who select their own morals usually select wisely...but such is not always the case.

As such, I see Homosexuality is sinful and immoral. If religion never existed, then (in theory) all morals would be relative. We know this to be incorrect of course (Example: I am most confident that all of us can agree that the taking of another individual's life is wrong).

:

Perhaps I've asked this question before, but what exactly are the perceived negative effects of homosexuality? Besides it being "immoral" and against Christianity and whatnot. I mean what are some measurable, real-life negative impacts of it?

An excellent question, to be sure.


Negative Side Effects of Practicing/Endorsing Homosexuality:

-An increase in serious health problems (disease including but not limited to HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and rectal cancer; substance abuse; mental illness, including depression and suicide attempts) and hence a siginificant decrease in life expectancy.
-An increase in the incidence of same-sex pedophilic and adult-adolescent sexual activity.
-Significant erosion in ecclesiastical and societal expectations of long-term monogamous relationships and thus a further cheapening of the institutions of marriage and family.
-The annihilation of all societal gender norms, which in turn will normalize the most bizarre elements of the homosexual movement (transsexualism, transvestism) and increase sexual-identity confusion among the young.
-The public, political, educational, professional, and legal marginalization of any (by organizations and individuals) who make known their opposition to homosexual behavior, as the societal equivalent of racists.*

This is an transcript from a book entitled, "The Bible and Homosexual Practice," By Robert A. J. Gagnon (Copyrigth 2001 by Abingdon Press). I would suggest both sides of this argument to take a closer look at this literary piece (Do not be in fear, those who do not trust the Bible...it consults both the Bible and other evidence). There is more enclosed within this volume, which I have no time (right now) to share, but I shall if requested too, albeit on a later date.

Finally, I would like to announce that, with the exception of the aforementioned request, I shall be gone from this thread, for all of the following reasons:

-Are we really, "converting," each other to our side of thinking? No.
-Amongst other things, this thread breeds hatred and enemies within the Oddworld fan community. I'll wager some of you totally detest my very essence. I desire no enemies, and shall leave this thread, in an effort to halt their continued growth.
-I travel here for fun conversations relating with Oddworld and such. Instead, I find myself wrapped up in this mess. No thank you. I'll spend my time enjoying myself, thank you very much.
-My mind is constantly returning to this thread, when I should be focusing upon activities such as homework. As I desire to complete my aforementioned work, and complete it well, I must limit my distractions.
-Although they have seemingly since departed, I am sick and tired of individuals who fail to, and have no desire to, understand or tolerate my point of view. Whereas I have contemplated my opponents arguments, many deemed it a better hobby to riducule me. If we have a debate on a mature topic, I (for one) expect my fellow debaters to exhibit some maturity, as many of them have...but not all.

Anyway, cheers everyone...

*Footsteps fade.*





*As stated before, I disagree with them, but peacefully co-exist with them. Endorsing it would lead to a society in which I could be attacked and/or punished for simply disagreeing with them.

AquaticAmbi 12-17-2004 06:09 PM

Oh give me a break... The issues you posted are not enough reason to disagree with homosexuality because they have nothing to do with a person's sexual preference, (except for the specifics of how such things come to be) They occur in the heterosexual world too.

HIV? AIDS? Hepatitis?The only reason this is as big of an issue as it seems is the fact that homosexuals aren't targeted enough by sexual educationy stuff. Many don't realize that safe sex should be practiced even when there's no risk of pregnancy. Rectal cancer? Same goes for heterosexual females and ovarian cancers, cervical cancers, and the like. Mental illness? Depression? Suicide? All because they can't be accepted by society. This is not their fault.

Pedophilic stuff? The problem with pedophiles is not their sexuality. Other mental issues, especially the need to feel powerful for whatever reason are to blame. I think that should be pretty clear to an individual of your intellect.

Erosion in ecclesiastical and societal expectations of long-term monogamous relationships and cheapening of the institutions of marriage and family? Please... Hetersexuals are taking care of that all on their own. And hey, maybe if gays were given the right to marriage there'd be a better chance of their having such relationships. Back to the cheapening thing, if a person allows anyone else's actions to decrease their values on such things like marriage and family, the problem lies within that very person. My homosexual friends don't make me view marriage and family as less sacred, and they still wouldn't if someday they received equal rights. If anything, that would make me raise my values in family and marriage because I would know everyone has a chance to have them both, making them both more precious.

Sexual-identity confusion? This is only an issue for children whose parents try to drive into their poor little brains that homosexuality is wrong, so if the son or daughter does feel like he or she might be gay, then they'll wonder if something is wrong with his or herself. A child raised in a home of open-minded parents will accept and embrace whatever their sexuality is easier.

Those making their opposition to homosexuality are seen as the equivalent of racists? That's because they are equivalent. Segregation/"separate but equal"/denial of rights. History is repeating itself. Heck, people even Biblically defended denying African Americans civil rights.

If I sound angery, it's because I am. More like really frustrated, but meh. It really is a pity that you won't be replying anymore.

Majic 12-17-2004 08:31 PM

Morality in a non-religious society can be perfectly well-defined. While I may not believe that there isn't any true definition of right or wrong, that doesn't mean I refrain from aggresively pressing my beliefs upon others. Trying to refrain from abrasive control in any shape, fashion or form is left up to horribly fanatical liberals. Determining laws, morals, codes of ethics, etc... can easily be determined by average humans. All it takes is a little leadership, and some focused reasoning. The need for a higher power is arguable. One can say it's the only true leveling group, another can respond that they've never followed any other path.

It's all interpretive.

Alcar 12-18-2004 03:30 AM

:

Negative Side Effects of Practicing/Endorsing Homosexuality:

-An increase in serious health problems (disease including but not limited to HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and rectal cancer; substance abuse; mental illness, including depression and suicide attempts) and hence a siginificant decrease in life expectancy.
-An increase in the incidence of same-sex pedophilic and adult-adolescent sexual activity.
-Significant erosion in ecclesiastical and societal expectations of long-term monogamous relationships and thus a further cheapening of the institutions of marriage and family.
-The annihilation of all societal gender norms, which in turn will normalize the most bizarre elements of the homosexual movement (transsexualism, transvestism) and increase sexual-identity confusion among the young.
-The public, political, educational, professional, and legal marginalization of any (by organizations and individuals) who make known their opposition to homosexual behavior, as the societal equivalent of racists.*

1) Actually, the most at risk group at contracting HIV / AIDS are introvienous drug users. Homosexuals, through a lot of education (not school based though) have turned around, and they are now just as, if not more, less at risk than Heterosexuals. And I don't find this hard to believe. Heteosexuals are so much more apathetic (most!), as they aren't 'required' by society to keep on their toes about everything. Another irony of society.

2) Ugh! This is what I hate MOST about Homophobes! They seem to think that Paedophilia and Homosexuality are the SAME thing! But they're not! There are more Heterosexuals engaging in paedophilic acts than Homosexuals.

3) Marriage is over-rated. At least, in todays society. And you only have Heterosexuals to blame. Homosexuals WANT to be able to have marriage, therefore one can only conclude that it is Heterosexuals who undermine marriage and the family - as they are the only ones ALLOWED to do it.

4) About the sexual-identity confusion. That's been there for as long as time. Everyone here knows that you've had at least one homosexual thought, it is natural, especially during adolescence. No need to deny it, it's on par with saying you've never touched yourself in a sexual manner. Societal gender norms changing? Change is inevitable, I'm afraid. And it will change, the process has been there for decades, only becoming less subtle as time moves on. As much as I hate to say it, the Media is, for once, doing something right - promoting Homosexuality in a non-biased way. They provide both for and against arguments if you look deeply, but the positives are usually more endearing.

5) It's the same thing. Only in context with the world today. Any open minded person with a tad of empathy could place themselves in a black's shoes, and see the same discrimination.

Alcar...

Jacob 12-18-2004 05:21 AM

'substance abuse; mental illness, including depression and suicide attempts) and hence a siginificant decrease in life expectancy.'

On the HIV/AIDs issue, i don't know about that. I've heard mixed reports, but amongst the Queers i know, it's never been an issue since they've never had it or known anybody who's had it. Rectal Cancer is more common in Homosexuals, sure. But what difference does that make? Surely if more Homosexuals are getting it, then a few of them will slowly die off, slowly purging the world of Faggotness. Substance abuse? Mental illness? Really? REALLY? Lol. Depression is often caused by ignorant people saying that they're [Queers] not normal and that they choose. Sadly, they believe this, and feel they're odd. Hence the suicide attempts.

[i]'An increase in the incidence of same-sex pedophilic and adult-adolescent sexual activity.'[I]

Ahh yes, i forgot. Because not only are Homosexuals attracted to the same sex. But they have a penchant for some hott six year old ass, too. How could i forget?! Oh and adult-adolescent sexual hijinks also happen amongst the Hetties.

'-Significant erosion in ecclesiastical and societal expectations of long-term monogamous relationships and thus a further cheapening of the institutions of marriage and family.'

Oh God yeh. I forgot all about that. Homosexuals can't stand been in long-term, monogamous relationships at all! That's exactly why they want to get married, just so they can experience divorce! Silly Benders!

'-The annihilation of all societal gender norms, which in turn will normalize the most bizarre elements of the homosexual movement (transsexualism, transvestism) and increase sexual-identity confusion among the young.'

Transsexualism has no part in Homosexuality. For instance, a person may be born male, but be mentally female, and thus, in reality, is actually a straight female. Not a Gay male. And vice versa. And Transvestism is also practiced amongst Heterosexuals too. And surely if sexual-identity confuzzedness were to happen, it would already be happening? Since society on a whole is taking great steps to seperate the stereotypes and the hate that buzz around the Homosexuality issue.

'The public, political, educational, professional, and legal marginalization of any (by organizations and individuals) who make known their opposition to homosexual behavior, as the societal equivalent of racists.*'

This, i agree with, as it's already happening. And personally i don't mind if a Homophobe has an opinion against Gayness, so long as they don't do anything idiotic, such as try and make it illegal. Or make it legal to fire someone because they're Gay. Or make the age of consent 18. I do dislike it, however, when somebody who doesn't agree with Homosexuality is quickly bashed quite violently. Especially when i, myself, make it quite apparent that i do not like the vast majority of Muffies.

Rich 12-18-2004 05:43 AM

It would see that now Neph's gone the remaining posters are in favor of Homosexual equal rights.

:

Originally posted by Jacob:
I do dislike it, however, when somebody who doesn't agree with Homosexuality is quickly bashed quite violently
It's true that we should honour Neph's opinion (Homosexuality is way, way, way unjustified and immoral) even if we all disagree, but his non-Religious evidence does suck.
All the sexual immoralities he pointed out are also done by many Heteros.

Jacob 12-18-2004 08:29 AM

I was thinking more along the lines of Political figures. Such as that random Italian who said "I think AIDs was a plague sent by God to purge the world of Homosexuals" etc. Who then lost his job because of this view. The same, however, goes for people who say "I think Blacks are the scum of the Earth". If they're not going to do anything bad to/for Blacks or Fags, then why be threatened by them? It's hijinks like killing off differing opinions which make the world a dull and boring place.

TheRaisin 12-18-2004 08:34 PM

I like this thread a lot better when everyone is on my side.

Rich 12-19-2004 12:01 AM

:

I like this thread a lot better when everyone is on my side.
If the thread is one-sided it will end. But wait, I'm on your side!