• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

JDavidC

Well-Known Member
I'll just outline some verses that are relevant to what is going on, and again, there may well be translation issues at play here (so I'll mention which Bible version I'm quoting).

1 Corinthians Chapter 6: Lawsuits said:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God.
It's probably best to analyse this in context, because there may not have been much consideration given to people who have natures that deviate from the norm. I believe such people would be offered an opportunity to be 'fixed' and to get into the kingdom of Heaven.

There is also this, I quoted 2 verses due to significance, rather than just the 1.

Romans 10:9-10 NET Bible said:
because if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and thus has righteousness and with the mouth one confesses and thus has salvation.
I'm going to go as far as saying you have to believe in his teachings for the righteousness, rather than simply 'believing' in Jesus, otherwise you're not going to get the righteousness/repentance needed for salvation.

I do not think that people who are born with a specific nature are screwed, they'll be offered the chance to be fixed at some point. For the record, I'm going to say that I do not believe in a God that would allow someone to be screwed due to their nature, nor would I believe in eternal punishment from such a God, neither of those things make any sense, they just contradict his nature, and tbh, I find the idea of things like eternal punishment to be nothing short of blasphemy, IMHO.
 
Last edited:

Kaiserin

please wake up...
What I meant in a (much) less trying-to-make-a-contract-confusing-so-you-don't-know-you-can't-return-mercendice english is if EVERYBODY ignored LGBT stuff (what else could I could have writen here?) we wouldn't have the homophobia problem in the first place!

If everyone ignored it, gays would still be unable to marry. And the fact they would be ignoring it would make things just as bad as they are through discrimination.

So no, I disagree with that statement. Ignoring it would be sweeping the issue under the rug as opposed to arguing why they don't believe it should come to pass, even if they're shitty reasons from my perspective. Personally, I think that's worse, because at least by arguing back, the other side is obviously interested enough in engaging the issue.

Apathy to it would make things even worse, in my opinion.
 

CSolarstorm

New spicy version
If everyone ignored it, gays would still be unable to marry. And the fact they would be ignoring it would make things just as bad as they are through discrimination.

So no, I disagree with that statement. Ignoring it would be sweeping the issue under the rug as opposed to arguing why they don't believe it should come to pass, even if they're shitty reasons from my perspective. Personally, I think that's worse, because at least by arguing back, the other side is obviously interested enough in engaging the issue.

Apathy to it would make things even worse, in my opinion.

By 'everybody' ignoring it, I'm pretty sure he means the people who disagree with it as well. In fact if you recall, the people who disagree were the subjects of his question in the first place: he couldn't understand how anyone would be against homosexuality when it doesn't affect them. If nobody agreed or disagreed with homosexuality (minus gay people themselves) it's less of a 'evil men win when good people do nothing' scenario than a scenario where both the evil men and good men are doing nothing in the first place. If nobody had opinions to force on gay people, I think we'd have one of two situations: a perfect world where gay people could marry however they wanted, or a pre-20th century situation before they coined the word homosexuality, where you wouldn't be persecuted for homosexuality, but trying to marry in the open would still raise questions because of the familiarity toward heterosexuality.

In a world where people mind their buisiness, perhaps we wouldn't know deconstructionism, and wouldn't know how to even explain the equivalancies that make life better today.
 

Psychic

Really and truly
Guys, seriously, please stay on-topic. :/


I'll be the first to admit that I don't fully understand the difference between homosexuality and effeminate there. In our modern English they're usually synonymous to an extent.
To get an idea of this, consider little girls who are tomboys. Plenty of female kids go through a tomboy stage, but that in no way dictates what their sexuality will develop into. While society expects them to grow out of this and become traditionally "feminine," there isn't anything wrong with a girl who doesn't like wearing skirts and playing with Barbies. A woman does not need to be feminine to be heterosexual. Unfortunately, some females are also just born with more "mannish" attributes that don't go away, but again, a girl's large shoulders or small breasts will not dictate her sexuality - you can't help what you're born with. Should they get sent to hell for this? The same applies to effeminate men.

Also, you may be interested to know that there are entire groups of, for example, straight men who enjoy crossdressing. They get along fine in their day-to-day lives, and many have happy, if not supportive wives. You don't have to be of a certain sexuality to look or dress a certain way, nor do you have to be male to wear pants. Homosexuals dress the same way as heterosexuals do, just like women often dress in the same clothes men wear (meaning it's not always skirts and dresses and high heels).


As a general note...why do I care about getting into heaven, anyway? I'm a straight gal, and I will sacrifice getting into heaven if it means I can do what I please in the sack. I would much rather live my life, do what I want and be happy than spend it bored to death in the hopes that it means getting into some place that may or may not exist when I'm dead. That's how I roll, and if you believe I'm going to hell, I would prefer if you just kept your thoughts to yourself, however well-meaning your intentions may be.

Some of these translations are very weird, by the way. Like physical abusers can get into heaven fine as long as they don't use any verbal abuse? Are drug addicts allowed into heaven? Tomboys?


Ok but after you educate the people and they still have their opinions what then? We may not like the chauvinist, or the bigot, but what right do we have to tell them they cannot have their opinion? This is the part that is being missed Psychic. Both sides have a right to express their opinion, and then move on.
My point really wasn't that "disagreeing is bad," but "when your opinion infringes on the rights of others, there is a problem." It's when you let someone with that kind of opinion have any kind of power that these issues arise. Hitler was entitled to his opinion, and then he became the leader of the Nazi party, and here we are millions of deaths later.

Exactly, so why do the gays insist on making everyone comfortable with their way of life? It's not going to happen, shoot for the ones on the fence, and get them to see the light, but just walk away from the haters.
Welcome to Canada. We don't care about that ****. There are still haters, but it's damn well possible for a country to accept that gays as people, too, the same way we accepted women are people.

Why? both are opinions, one is just stronger than the other. Also, it takes a majority to change laws, and to date the majority is still saying no. So the minority has to do it's level best to become a majority. But for the moment, it is what it is.
Actually, the majority in the US is changing iirc, especially after Obama voiced his support. Many other countries are way ahead of you already.

You don't have to break it to me. I've had friends of mine beaten to death because they were gay, or denied employment because 'a woman could never do construction jobs', I know full well. BUT I also look back on history and see it's nothing new to mankind in the least.
I am sorry to hear that. However, looking back on history you can still see that times have changed. Black people went from being slaves to being people. But change doesn't happen on its own, especially if nobody works to bring it on. The fact that it`s not new doesn't mean we should ignore it and hope things just get better by themselves.

I do realize I'm being harsh Psychic, and I do apologize for it. It is however my opinion based on my experience and I do have a right to express it. I also have the obligation to accept what ever verbal backlash that comes. I was one of those bullied kids until Junior High. Have you seen the YouTube video of a student verbally bullying the bus monitor?
I am just stunned that you think it's okay to blame victims. The point is to blame the aggressor for what they did, not blame the victim for what they were forced to endure. You know that bus monitor's son killed himself? Do we blame him for his situation, whatever it may have been? Blaming victims of physical or verbal abuse ignores the actual problem, which is that there was a person who tried to get away with physically or verbally abusing them, and it lets them walk away.

I am defending their right to have their opinion not to act upon it. It's one thing to say I don't support gay rights, then there is a whole different level where someone lynches someone and beats them to death cause they are gay!
But there is also a difference between disliking homosexuals vs suppressing their rights. Whether or not they should get equal rights keeps getting put on ballots, so even if you're not actively beating up a person, you are still able to vote to prevent them from having the same rights you enjoy. Democracy is great and all, but whether or not someone should have basic human rights should be a given, and not up for debate.

~Psychic
 

FE21

Well-Known Member
By 'everybody' ignoring it, I'm pretty sure he means the people who disagree with it as well. In fact if you recall, the people who disagree were the subjects of his question in the first place: he couldn't understand how anyone would be against homosexuality when it doesn't affect them. If nobody agreed or disagreed with homosexuality (minus gay people themselves) it's less of a 'evil men win when good people do nothing' scenario than a scenario where both the evil men and good men are doing nothing in the first place. If nobody had opinions to force on gay people, I think we'd have one of two situations: a perfect world where gay people could marry however they wanted, or a pre-20th century situation before they coined the word homosexuality, where you wouldn't be persecuted for homosexuality, but trying to marry in the open would still raise questions because of the familiarity toward heterosexuality.

In a world where people mind their buisiness, perhaps we wouldn't know deconstructionism, and wouldn't know how to even explain the equivalancies that make life better today.

Yep, that's exactly what I was trying to say!
 

Celestial Moth

Guardian of the Tree of Time
The only anti-gay arguments are either
A. Some kind of fake religious testimony
or B. A nonfactual scientific debate.

Being gay is natural, and there's absolutely no reason why gays can't marry.


Straight out. The only reason people dont like homosexuals is because people dont understand it.
People hate that which they cant understand

I'd like to quote the anime full metal alchemist move: conqueror of shamballa, if i may:

Dietlinde Eckhart:
This land is completly foren, not like my world at all.

Edward: Your wrong about that eckhart, people here laugh and weep just like you, live the same, die the same.
Theirs one thing i wanna know, what made you start this attack, i thought the point was to use weapons of this world to conquer your own?

Dietlinde Eckhart:
I have to,This entire world must perish, opening a new door to a new world was thrilling at first, a utopia that could make us greater, but then i realize how different it was from our own then i got scared, this world is fare to strong to be trusted, i have to destroy it now before it conquers us.


Most People just dont understand that their are things that can operate beyond the comprehension of theirselfs.
 

Adrexus

Do it the bird way!
Straight out. The only reason people dont like homosexuals is because people dont understand it.
People hate that which they cant understand

I'd like to quote the anime full metal alchemist move: conqueror of shamballa, if i may:

Dietlinde Eckhart:
This land is completly foren, not like my world at all.

Edward: Your wrong about that eckhart, people here laugh and weep just like you, live the same, die the same.
Theirs one thing i wanna know, what made you start this attack, i thought the point was to use weapons of this world to conquer your own?

Dietlinde Eckhart:
I have to,This entire world must perish, opening a new door to a new world was thrilling at first, a utopia that could make us greater, but then i realize how different it was from our own then i got scared, this world is fare to strong to be trusted, i have to destroy it now before it conquers us.


Most People just dont understand that their are things that can operate beyond the comprehension of theirselfs.

I would say that is not necessarily true. My reasons for opposing homosexuality are based in my religious convictions. I have no inherent dislike of homosexuals. I do take what the Bible says about homosexuality as a sin seriously. It does me no good to hate homosexuals merely for being effeminate or being attracted to the same sex. I don't approve of christians (or anyone for that matter) bashing homosexuals with derogatory remarks. There are people who dislike homosexuals merely for those reasons I previously stated. But please don't assume that all religious people hate homosexuals merely because we don't understand them. I have spent much thought about this subject before coming to the conclusions that I have.
 

Celestial Moth

Guardian of the Tree of Time
I would say that is not necessarily true. My reasons for opposing homosexuality are based in my religious convictions. I have no inherent dislike of homosexuals. I do take what the Bible says about homosexuality as a sin seriously. It does me no good to hate homosexuals merely for being effeminate or being attracted to the same sex. I don't approve of christians (or anyone for that matter) bashing homosexuals with derogatory remarks. There are people who dislike homosexuals merely for those reasons I previously stated. But please don't assume that all religious people hate homosexuals merely because we don't understand them. I have spent much thought about this subject before coming to the conclusions that I have.

I say in somwhat shame that i misjudged you bro, as your logic is sound.
Many people do obviosly hate for lack of knowledge. Though i will not dive into the psychological points of view.
I understand that homosexuality from some points of view could be considered un-natural ( of the sorts) thus holding an affiliation
of an insult towards the beings in which truly created everything, though all things were mirrored first before they could be materialized.
If you hate homosexuality then your hating god's divine plan, as all possible equations and possibilities need to be actualized before all knowledge is harvested.
 
Last edited:
On the topic of homosexuality, there was a news piece on the boy scouts and how someone is trying to fight for gays to join. Those who don't know, they had this rule for quite some time that gays were banned from being in the boy scouts.

What are you thoughts on it?

Also my thoughts are that while I can understand that they are for the safety of the children (yes there ARE some creeps that are after young boys), I wish that they and others could know how easy it is for someone to lie about their sexuality. Like if someone were to ask me whether orally or on paper what my sexuality was, I'd say straight. If I was asked that on a job application, I'd say straight, tho that's not really... what I am. Well, it's easier for someone like me to say they are the norm but for others, it seems hard but in the end it's not that difficult. Can others actually lie about their sexuality in order to draw blood? etc
 

Malanu

Est sularus oth mith
The boy scouts were founded on what was once considered good wholesome values. That hasn't changed since their inception, what has changed is what we consider good and wholesome. Though it is inconvenient and inconsiderate not to mention dated, they have a right to set up guidelines for membership as they see fit. I was a cub scout leader for a minute with my son. I found their rules and "morals" confining and dated. So my son and I left the pack.
 

Sadib

Time Lord Victorious
On the topic of homosexuality, there was a news piece on the boy scouts and how someone is trying to fight for gays to join. Those who don't know, they had this rule for quite some time that gays were banned from being in the boy scouts.

What are you thoughts on it?

Also my thoughts are that while I can understand that they are for the safety of the children (yes there ARE some creeps that are after young boys), I wish that they and others could know how easy it is for someone to lie about their sexuality. Like if someone were to ask me whether orally or on paper what my sexuality was, I'd say straight. If I was asked that on a job application, I'd say straight, tho that's not really... what I am. Well, it's easier for someone like me to say they are the norm but for others, it seems hard but in the end it's not that difficult. Can others actually lie about their sexuality in order to draw blood? etc

I really don't get how protection of the boys is a valid rationale to ban gays from joining the Boy Scouts. Just because someone is gay doesn't mean that they are attracted to young boys anymore than being straight means that you're attracted to young girls. Even if you are attracted to someone, doesn't mean that you're going to rape them.

It's also illegal to ask someone's orientation when interviewing them for a job.
 

Peter Quill

star-lord
On the topic of homosexuality, there was a news piece on the boy scouts and how someone is trying to fight for gays to join. Those who don't know, they had this rule for quite some time that gays were banned from being in the boy scouts.

What are you thoughts on it?

That it's an incredibly disgusting practice and people who would endorse it should be ashamed.

Also my thoughts are that while I can understand that they are for the safety of the children (yes there ARE some creeps that are after young boys)

Those are pedophiles, not homosexuals. The terms are not mutually exclusive. Anybody who is attracted to a small child is a pedophile. If it's a man attracted to a young boy this doesn't make him gay, it still makes him a pedophile.

I wish that they and others could know how easy it is for someone to lie about their sexuality. Like if someone were to ask me whether orally or on paper what my sexuality was, I'd say straight. If I was asked that on a job application, I'd say straight, tho that's not really... what I am. Well, it's easier for someone like me to say they are the norm but for others, it seems hard but in the end it's not that difficult. Can others actually lie about their sexuality in order to draw blood? etc

I think this is a pretty good point. It's incredibly easy to lie about such a thing because there's no way that we can prove it unless we see it in the bedroom. I actually do plan on lying to donate blood (which is incredibly sad but that's for another time.)
 

CSolarstorm

New spicy version
Um... not sure how to react to this. My imagination cancompose a number of possible theories, but I recommend you NOT donate blood if you need to lie about it. Sorta off topic, and possibly offensive which makes me wonder why I even bothered to post it, but I felt morally obligated to. Sorry if I was 100% wrong (I think I am).

I think it's fair as a means to an end. Blood banks are always in need of more blood for sick patients, and I think anyone who wants to give blood should be given a big hug and accomodated in whatever way they need.

I'm reading that the questionaire doesn't ask whether you are gay, but whether or not you've had sex with other men or women. Which is...subtly different. At first glance, it's not really discriminatory because it has a solid reasoning behind it: there is a apparently a higher rate of HIV and other STD's amongst sexually active gay men and women, and they don't want to pay for inspecting the blood if they're going to get contaminated blood too often. So basically, it's a combination of a medical reason and a limit to $$$. Not disciminatory, but they could definately do better to make it so that they don't look so damn discriminatory.

It doesn't make sense to me anyway; instead of turning away people who are gay and sexually active, why not at least allow them to give blood if they give documentation of a full physical and testing for all sorts of STD's on their own time and their own insurance? It's dumb to turn away someone who wants to donate blood. They could easily compromise.

I don't see too much of a risk of lying in order to donate blood...I highly doubt that it will get under their radar if there's anything wrong with it.
 

7 tyranitars

Well-Known Member
On the topic of homosexuality, there was a news piece on the boy scouts and how someone is trying to fight for gays to join. Those who don't know, they had this rule for quite some time that gays were banned from being in the boy scouts.

What are you thoughts on it?

Also my thoughts are that while I can understand that they are for the safety of the children (yes there ARE some creeps that are after young boys), I wish that they and others could know how easy it is for someone to lie about their sexuality. Like if someone were to ask me whether orally or on paper what my sexuality was, I'd say straight. If I was asked that on a job application, I'd say straight, tho that's not really... what I am. Well, it's easier for someone like me to say they are the norm but for others, it seems hard but in the end it's not that difficult. Can others actually lie about their sexuality in order to draw blood? etc

Pedophiles and Homosexuals aren't the same.

About the blood thing, they have to check the blood for diseases anyway so it really doesn't make much sense.
 

Zevn

Lost in Translation
I'm allowed to be a camp councilor, when some of the kids are girls, when it should be obvious to everyone that because I'm a man I have perverse interest in children.

.....

Can someone lend a towel? I'm sick of dripping in sarcasm.

Following that path of logic is absurd, but whatever, the world isn't going to change.
__

I would say that is not necessarily true. My reasons for opposing homosexuality are based in my religious convictions. I have no inherent dislike of homosexuals. I do take what the Bible says about homosexuality as a sin seriously. It does me no good to hate homosexuals merely for being effeminate or being attracted to the same sex. I don't approve of christians (or anyone for that matter) bashing homosexuals with derogatory remarks. There are people who dislike homosexuals merely for those reasons I previously stated. But please don't assume that all religious people hate homosexuals merely because we don't understand them. I have spent much thought about this subject before coming to the conclusions that I have.

I don't understand why aspirations levied against you were retracted based on this. Why should religious conviction give you the right to dislike something? <.< *cough*

I take it you're alright with the killing of women who aren't virgins on their wedding night. Perhaps you also believe that a woman is unclean for sixty six(?) days after giving birth to a girl, and only thirty three(?) days after giving birth to a boy. Right? Riiighhhttt?

If you are willing to pick and choose your beliefs(which you clearly do, as you would likely be imprisoned if you obeyed the Bible word for word), like so many of your faith do; why not overlook the absurdity that perpetuates the persecution of a trait people are born with?
 
Last edited:
why should your personal logic give you the right to support homosexuality?
no one needs any reason to like or dislike anything.
there are no opinion police.
we have the freedom to form whatever opinions we want for whatever reason.
even if he was picking and choosing, which he is probably not, he has the right to do so.
 
Top