• 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

What Is Your Stance On Homosexuality?

Status
Not open for further replies.

muumajii23

Well-Known Member
No but really I have nothing to contribute, because the debate was once again derailed by, well... yeah.

xD As it usually happens in this thread...
 

Ethan

Banned
Looks like someone has a short fuse! Bahahaha.

No but really I have nothing to contribute, because the debate was once again derailed by, well... yeah.

Or instead of pointing out the obvious and wasting ten seconds of my life, you could have made a constructive post that would foster discussion.

Oh and I'm just seething with rage man. I bet you're picking up all sorts of bad vibes. Can you see the blue spider vain in my forehead? You should be concerned. Really.

And I'm a moderator, which means I'm allowed to be hypocritical.
 

Vaporeon4evr

Cyndakill
Thanks everyone. Self-confidence +1.

Honestly, homosexuality is fine. Opponents are just clinging to the oppresive idealism of an earlier age. People who oppose homosexuality because of some sick sentimentality for the past where they were suppressed are simply propaganda-sucking b*tches. And I mean that in the nicest way possible. If you would just isolate yourself from what your surroundings have told you about homosexuality, and judge its merits from your OWN perspective, you'll find that there's truly nothing wrong with homosexuality.

To make a historical connection, opposers of homosexuality are no different from white slave owners who got p*ssed when abolition was instated. I bet they cringed every time they saw a free black man. I bet they clung to Biblical scriptures that vaguely referenced tolerance for slavery. That doesn't mean it was justified. Neither is our oppression of gays (again, provided the gays are only hot lesbians).
 

Slash4life

uncollared
Don't you just love lesbians? Those ladies can take a licking and keep on ticking!

But seriously, about the discussion: Fresno, CA is a very conservative place. Roughly 70% of the population voted in favor of Prop 8. Yet they have one of the most famous gay bars on the west coast, The Den. When I am 21 I want to go there. Who doesn't love a bar full of bears, leather included?
 

muumajii23

Well-Known Member
Who doesn't love a bar full of bears, leather included?

WOOT! xD


In all seriousness, Vaporean4evr is quite correct. It's just people holding on to these idealistic, old-style views, trying to push it onto the masses.
 

muumajii23

Well-Known Member
Actually, my friend, the proper term is "WOOF!", which, when used correctly, may be a noun, verb, adjective or greeting.


xD Slipped my mind for a moment. Sorry! xD
 

Waldorf

ungrateful
Ethan said:
Oh and I'm just seething with rage man. I bet you're picking up all sorts of bad vibes. Can you see the blue spider vain in my forehead? You should be concerned. Really.

That was actually directed at Fused. Short fuse? Get it? It was a pun. A bad pun. An intentionally bad pun.

But yes okay whatever I'm sorry.
 

Gren Draco

RIOTRIOTRIOTRIOTRIOT
So basically we can say:
"i feenk been a *** is rong cuz....err....teh bible tellz me so" is what people who don't like homosexuality think, on average.
Of course you get the random brainless idiots who think it's different therefore it's wrong.
No one's compared homosexuality to bestiality yet, which is suprising. I always love it when people try to make that point.
 

CSolarstorm

New spicy version
No one's compared homosexuality to bestiality yet, which is suprising. I always love it when people try to make that point.

Nobody in all these pages? All these pages?

I better do it then.

Remember the "Dumbledore is gay" controversy? I never heard anyone throwing out there that Dumbledore's brother Aberforth was into goats. What was she trying to say there, anyway? Tons of gay Harry Potter fans were ecstatic that...basically she recognized that gay people exist...and mobilized creating clubs like "Dumbledore's Army" and such...

But really the unsettling feeling I've always had is that the so-called Shakespeare of our time put being gay in the same family as beastiality. And to me, that's not right.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this.
 

Fused

Shun the nonbeliever
Nobody in all these pages? All these pages?

I better do it then.

Remember the "Dumbledore is gay" controversy? I never heard anyone throwing out there that Dumbledore's brother Aberforth was into goats. What was she trying to say there, anyway? Tons of gay Harry Potter fans were ecstatic that...basically she recognized that gay people exist...and mobilized creating clubs like "Dumbledore's Army" and such...

But really the unsettling feeling I've always had is that the so-called Shakespeare of our time put being gay in the same family as beastiality. And to me, that's not right.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this.

Well I'm sure the comparison has been brought up several times.

Pluss, Sunny C, I don't remember ever reading that Aberforth was into goats, nor are Aberforth and Dumbledore the same person, therefore their sexual desires do not equate. Second, Dumbledore didn't create, think of, or truly endorse "Dumbledore's Army." It was a group of people who wanted to get rid of the bad in the world.

Lastly, no one will ever be Shakespeare. He perfected several writing genres and writing as a whole, while she has just entertained and expanded upon the techniques of Shakespeare. All she has done is entertain the world and ****** of crazy-psycho Christians for wanting to treat gay people with respect and for Satan's magic aka wizardry.
 

Slash4life

uncollared
All she has done is entertain the world and ****** of crazy-psycho Christians for wanting to treat gay people with respect and for Satan's magic aka wizardry.

That all sounds good to me. Totally p*issing off Reverend Fred Phelps supposedly loving christians the Republican Party that kind of people is always a hoot
 

CSolarstorm

New spicy version
Well I'm sure the comparison has been brought up several times.

Pluss, Sunny C, I don't remember ever reading that Aberforth was into goats, nor are Aberforth and Dumbledore the same person, therefore their sexual desires do not equate. Second, Dumbledore didn't create, think of, or truly endorse "Dumbledore's Army." It was a group of people who wanted to get rid of the bad in the world.

Lastly, no one will ever be Shakespeare. He perfected several writing genres and writing as a whole, while she has just entertained and expanded upon the techniques of Shakespeare. All she has done is entertain the world and ****** of crazy-psycho Christians for wanting to treat gay people with respect and for Satan's magic aka wizardry.

You probably don't remember ever reading that Dumbledore was gay, either. The only reason people consider this canon is because of a reading in...New York, I believe...where a little girl asked, "Did Dumbledore have a love interest?" Rowling answered, "To tell you the truth, I have always considered him to be gay."

In the same reading, someone asked why Aberforth is obsessed with goats. She answered, "Because its horns were curly and easy to clean" which, in unofficial circles has always been taken as Aberforth was into goats as a teen.

And, of course Dumbledore and Aberforth aren't the same person. They're brothers. Same genepool, and that's what I was getting at.

And I wasn't saying that Rowling was an equivalent to Shakespeare in my own opinion, I was talking of the impression she makes on the world, which is a pretty titanic one. She has been called a modern day Shakespeare, probably for borrowing from Macbeth.

I'm not sure what sort of stance on homosexuality J.K. Rowling has. She simply acknowledged gay people exist, not that they should be respected. Dumbledore's only ever canon gay relationship was abusive to his family and caused mass murder and genocide...arguably the only favor he did to the series was to overcome his own sexuality!

But I digress, this is a Pokemon forum, not a Harry Potter forum, and I was supposed to be talking about something relating to beastiality. XP
 

Porygandrew

Well-Known Member
But I digress, this is a Pokemon forum, not a Harry Potter forum, and I was supposed to be talking about something relating to beastiality. XP
Try reading through all the posts again. There's plenty about trying to compare bestiality and homosexuality.
There is no comparison.
consenting adult + consenting adult =/= adult + (cannot consent) animal. That's rape.
It's like an adult having sex with a mentally invalid adult. It's considered rape because the disabled adult probably doesn't comprehend what's happening to an extent of consent.
Think of it this way: my grandmother is in the hospital but isn't coherent. My grandfather has to sign papers for her because if something should go wrong, given the state that she is in, anything she signs can be argued as invalid because her mental state at that time is put into question (whether she actually comprehends what she's signing or not).
 

lucarioman098

Aww isnt that cute
i think homosexuality is fine i dont see whats wrong with that if a guy wants to makeout with another guy then just let them for christs sake!
 

CSolarstorm

New spicy version
Try reading through all the posts again. There's plenty about trying to compare bestiality and homosexuality.
There is no comparison.
consenting adult + consenting adult =/= adult + (cannot consent) animal. That's rape.
It's like an adult having sex with a mentally invalid adult. It's considered rape because the disabled adult probably doesn't comprehend what's happening to an extent of consent.
Think of it this way: my grandmother is in the hospital but isn't coherent. My grandfather has to sign papers for her because if something should go wrong, given the state that she is in, anything she signs can be argued as invalid because her mental state at that time is put into question (whether she actually comprehends what she's signing or not).

Of course I'm not going to read through 100 pages of the same argument, and I probably have seen it compared to beastiality here. In case you're confused in the midst of these tangents I'm bringing up, I'm 100% pro gay rights - family ties.

I agree with you, there is plenty of comparison going on between homosexuality and beastiality, not just in these forums but in the world at large. And so, I gave the example of the Harry Potter series. Only two outed gay characters faced enormous retribution for their lifestyle. For the political rights of LGBT, this is publicity, I suppose, but I wish it was more mature, open minded publicity then,

"Okay, I'm gonna create this really old, pure-blooded wizard family with inbred genes - and there's going to be three children. One will be a reclusive sister, one will a gay man whose first major love affair leads to the death of his sister, and the third will play with goats in servility for the rest of his life as a bartender. And the first genocidal dark wizard - he's probably also gay."

And as for your example, it would depend on the degree to which the adult is "invalid".
 

TogeticTheRuler

Well-Known Member
I hate homosexuals because they all ruin the world with their nasty same gender love and AIDs and bring cancer and I say we raise a campaign to kill all of them like Hitler did the Jews
 

J.T.

ಠ_ಠ
I hate homosexuals because they all ruin the world with their nasty same gender love and AIDs and bring cancer and I say we raise a campaign to kill all of them like Hitler did the Jews

You're joking, right?
 

pichu_power

But Never Again...
I hate homosexuals because they all ruin the world with their nasty same gender love and AIDs and bring cancer and I say we raise a campaign to kill all of them like Hitler did the Jews

...Uhm...I don't recall any significant cases regarding homosexuals being a cause of cancer...AIDS, yes....Cancer...errr...no.

I am curious as to why you feel that way...they haven't done anything to you, now have they!?! Why must you feel that way!? I smell ignorance...
 

Fused

Shun the nonbeliever
You probably don't remember ever reading that Dumbledore was gay, either.

Ha ha. How hilariously false.

In the same reading, someone asked why Aberforth is obsessed with goats. She answered, "Because its horns were curly and easy to clean" which, in unofficial circles has always been taken as Aberforth was into goats as a teen.

And, of course Dumbledore and Aberforth aren't the same person. They're brothers. Same genepool, and that's what I was getting at.

Like the use of the word unofficial. And even if he was obsessed with goats, there's no implication of sexual desire. Also, yes same genepool, but neither sexual orientation or sexual fetishes have strong ties to genes, nor are they of the same genetic makeup. Plus, we're debating about the sexualities of two fictional characters in a book about magic written by a middle-aged mother in Scotland.

I hate homosexuals because they all ruin the world with their nasty same gender love and AIDs and bring cancer and I say we raise a campaign to kill all of them like Hitler did the Jews

lol. GTFO. If you can't bring one ****ing rational thought to an intelligent debate and blame homosexuals for problems they didn't create and support genocide resembling Hitler's horrors, then just get the **** out of here right now.

You better be ****ing joking because there is so much wrong witht he claims you made, especially since AIDs came from ****ing African monkeys, heterosexuals also get and spread AIDs, and since homosexuality has no real correlation to cancer, and since "nasty" is a very opinionated word and in no way based on fact.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top