U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-19-2011, 03:32 PM
 
17,853 posts, read 11,866,060 times
Reputation: 4113

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoppers View Post
I told myself I wanted to avoid politics, but I at least want to make one observation about Alexander the Great.

Not a good example, since Greek bisexuality was common during that age. Alexander was not, what we would strictly term, a homosexual, and a homosexual only - such strict qualifications would not have been known in the ancient world. Julius Caesar, of later Rome, was a 'bisexual' who used his effeminate proclivities to his political advantage - his men poked fun at him because of this. Not because he was engaging in homosexuality, but because he chose to be on the 'receiving' end of it. The manly thing to do, back then, was to be the dominant partner. Being the object of anal sex was considered feminine, and unmanly - it was reserved for women, boys and male prostitutes, usually.

This age was one of those time periods in which environment did influence sexual habits - despite what some modern studies may claim about environment having absolutely no role in sexuality. Tell that to the Greek youths who were raised by older men into a homosexual relationship, where the youth learned the ways of his people in exchange for glorified sexual favors, until they became an older man - and continued the tradition. Like the example of Caesar, it was common for definate roles to be assumed.

Hellenism spread throughout the ancient world - and with it, various sexual practices became more normalized. This can be shown - if you place any credence in historians and anthropologists - to be not merely a genetic influence (what a conicedence THAT would be!), but also environmental, social, religious and geographical.

For an interesting look at sexual roles, see Reign of the Phallus: Sexual Politics in Ancient Athens by Eva C. Keuls, (1985). Chapter 11, The Boy Beautiful: Replacing a Woman or Replacing a Son? is especially interesting, as the title should show.

I still feel sexuality is not as simple as some have asserted here, and the above is just one aspect of it that can be explored critically.

As for "weak" great figures of history, Alexander drank himself to death after the death of his male lover. I'm not sure if we can make a judgement on this - whether this belies a "weakness" or not. But the suggestion has been made.
Thanks for your post Whopper. Ancient Greece was a culture which celebrated all things male.

However, from what I understand, not many Greek men had adult male lovers as it wasn't as acceptable as the adult/youth dynamic of pederasty which was practiced by men who were probably heterosexual or bisexual. Alexander did have an adult male lover - for a long time. To me that shows he was predominantly homosexual.

 
Old 10-19-2011, 03:38 PM
 
17,853 posts, read 11,866,060 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
That's ridiculous! Lesbians have sex with women (by definition). You came into this thread and started posting things like "I heard" or "Studies show" or "statistically." Please post some links so we can actually see the bizarre sources of your information.
Yes, I hope she does post those links again - then I can post the actual study and show exactly how the authors of her anti-gay website completely misrepresented the study for their anti-gay agenda. Again.
 
Old 10-19-2011, 03:38 PM
 
2,379 posts, read 2,625,512 times
Reputation: 1191
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
Really? Do tell about all of the rights of others that "gay rights" are imposing on?

Also, can you give any information to back up/quantify that bit about negative influences that gay marriage has on children?
I already posted info & several links indicating that children benefit most from the 2 that created them - a MOTHER & a FATHER.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
Can you name one single other legal contract that two people of the same sex are barred from entering into together?...
Yes... they are barred from entering into any legal contract that is against laws...
Laws are suppposed to be intended for the good of society as a whole.
Children need a mother & a father - that family structure is what is best for society as a whole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
That seems an awful lot like gender discrimination to me
Hm... let's see which attempt you're trying... #1, #3, #13... & implying others...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul
1. The "Whoah is me" - pity card is played, acting as if homosexuals are being harassed, even when they aren't.

2. They demand that others support them impulsively acting on their thought-produced feelings. Statistics clearly indicate homosexuals change partners frequently so are more likely to contract & spread AIDS & STDs, yet they will look the other way regarding dangerous sex practices & persuade others to think being loving is going along with what others want, not what is best.

3. They want "equal rights' yet deny others rights to free speech, & respect of significant religious beliefs.

4. They call others names, like homophobic, simply for objecting to harmful behavior statisitcally displayed prominantly by homosexuals, even when one has repeated they love & do not fear family & friends with homosexual preferences.

5. They accuse others of being "closet" homosexuals for opposing homosexuality.

6. They claim babies are born with the preference to have sex with someone of the same sex, when babies brains are only 25% developed, waiting for environmental influences to help complete development.

7. They claim that if animals do it, it's natural & acceptable for humans, when most regard animalistic behavior as uncivil, considering some eat their young & hump anything.

8. They compare human consciousness with animal consciousness.

9. They deny psychological & environmental influences.

10. They believe that children & parents should have no choice but for schools to teach children about homosexuality. They believe that vulnerable children should be instructed & sometimes encouraged in anatomically unnatural sexual practices.

11. They insist others believe their beliefs & if they don't, they will try to hurt them by calling names, or even hurting them financially, legally or in their career.

12. They will make ridiculous comparisons, again trying to get pity. They will try to compare homosexuals with African American persecution, or as mentioned - comparison with animals. Some will try to compare the risky sexual behavior of homosexuals with heterosexual teen pregnancy.

13. They will play the pity card often...Also refered to as positive discrimination. They point to a personal trait (ie homosexuality) which somehow justifies their actions or inability to do something they'd ordinarily be expected to do (like behave responsibly sexually). They use guilt-trips when others state something they get offended by, in hopes they take it back.
What they don't realize, is this behavior often enforced negative stereotypes & hurts those who want to be treated like normal human beings.

14. They blame others. They may even blame those who oppose homosexual risky behavior, for the consequences of the risky behavior of homosexuals. They also may blame those who oppose homosexual harmful behavior of hating people, even when they have repeated they love people & hate harmful behavior.
 
Old 10-19-2011, 03:40 PM
 
17,853 posts, read 11,866,060 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
Homosexual couples ALREADY have rights under both Common Law Marriage...
Common-law marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...and they have rights under Cohabitation Agreements.
Cohabitation agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These rights may include, but are not limited to...
- Eligibility for health insurance benefits,
- Life insurance benefits,
- Child visitation rights,
- Hospital visitation rights,
- Inheritance when named in the deceased will &...
- For those under common law marriage - inheritance even without a will - called interstate succession,
- With common law marraige, courts may be ased to settle post-relationships property disputes,
- With common law marriage, alimony awards
- Domestic partners may also if entered a formal agreement for palimony prior to cohabitation
Marvin v Marvin, 18 Cal. 3d 660, 557 P.2d 106, 134 Cal. Rptr. 815 (Cal. 1976)

It's concerning how homosexuality is pushing it's way into the legal system & into others' lives, sometimes imposing "gay rights" over the rights of others.
This especially applies to legally redefining marriage & legalizing gay marriage, which can & has had significantly negative influences, especially on children...

It has been proven over & over that children do best being raised with a mother AND father.
Supporting gay marriage is devaluing mothers & fathers, claiming one or the other is not necessary, when BOTH are.
Children have the RIGHT to be raised by the 2 different, complimentary sexes that created & conceived them.

Children have the right to not be taught homosexuality in school. Yet, in places where gay marriage has been enacted, these rights have been infringed upon.
Freshmen were told not to tell their parents about a pro-gay seminar & were required to sign a confidentiality agreement (Derrfield, Illinois Mar. 2007).
In March, 2007, a Massachusetts high school banned parents from attending a seminar for students on how they can know they are homosexual.
In October, 2008, First graders (6 year-old students) were taken on a field trip to watch their lesbian teacher's wedding.
In Oct 2008, a Hayward CA public elementary school celebrated "Coming Out Day."

Normalizing & even encouraging children to explore homosexuality obviously causes more to experiment with homosexuality.
Psychotherapy for the Sexually Confused Teenager - Joseph Nicolosi

Also, others' rights have been infringed upon in favor of supporting gay rights.
In April 2008, an Albuquerque photographer was fined over $6,000 for refusing to be hired to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony.
In May, 2008, a black administrator was fired from the U of Toledo, Ohio, for writing an editorial objecting to the comparison of black discrimination to same-sex marriage.

An intolerant opponent of Proposition 8 even violently attacked & injured a Proposition supporter in Oct. 2008.

On November 19, 2008, eHarmony, a Christian-based matching service was forced by New Jersey's Division on Civil Rights to provide website matching services for homosexuals.

Redefining marriage is trying to impose a minority's belief on a majority, forcing social acceptance through the legal system & is causing harm to others in the process.
Lying for 'Jesus' is still lying. Isn't that a sin?
 
Old 10-19-2011, 03:45 PM
 
17,853 posts, read 11,866,060 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
Prior to Dec. 1974, the American Psychological Association defined homosexuality as a disorder.
After being harrased by a gay activist group, the APA changed the definition of homosexuality, not out of scientific evidence, but out of political pressure.

The Born "Gay" Hoax |

Nobody is "born" gay any more than they are born anorexic. They may have tendencies, but environmental signals must be present for those tendencies to be expressed.
http://www.cwfa.org/images/content/bornorbred.pdf
Archives of Sexual Behavior (JournalSeek)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/724179/posts

If it is accepted that one can't help how they act, they were just "born" that way... what does that imply for those with other sexual deviations?
The APA's and the Pedophilia Controversy
On the Pedophilia Issue: What the APA Should Have Known
Statistics on homosexuals - 1978 to 1994
LOL! NARTH? The 'pray away the gay' group? Your anti gay crusade is really making you desperate to find anything at all to besmirch and vilify gay people.

Lying for Jesus is still lying.
Do you realise you are damning your soul?
 
Old 10-19-2011, 04:12 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
7,769 posts, read 7,549,557 times
Reputation: 3294
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
I already posted info & several links indicating that children benefit most from the 2 that created them - a MOTHER & a FATHER.
But since homosexual couples, by and large, adopt children "the two that created them" are not an option for those kids. Would not a loving household with two parents be better than foster homes, etc? Not to mention all the single-parent "families" out there. Would you like to make them illegal, as well?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
Yes... they are barred from entering into any legal contract that is against laws...
Laws are suppposed to be intended for the good of society as a whole.
Children need a mother & a father - that family structure is what is best for society as a whole.
Nice attempt to side-step the question. I'll ask again, perhaps you were confused. Can you name ANY other legal contract, besides legal marriage, that two people of the same sex are prohibited from entering into base solely on the sex of the two people involved?


Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
Hm... let's see which attempt you're trying... #1, #3, #13... & implying others...
No, I absolutely am not.

#1 - pity card. Asking for equal protection under the law is the "pity card". Tell those black folks to get to the back of the bus and stop asking for pity! The idea that this is asking for pity is ridiculous.

#3 - deny others rights to free speech, & respect of significant religious beliefs. What free speech is being denied? This also has nothing to do with religion, we are talking about the legal status of being "married".

#13 - seems to be repeating the "pity" argument above.

Sex/gender is a protected class under our Constitution. To deny the ability of two people to enter into a legal contract based solely on the gender of the two parties involved is pretty clearly gender discrimination and unconstitutional. Can you deny that?
 
Old 10-19-2011, 04:50 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,426 posts, read 5,605,497 times
Reputation: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
Homosexual couples ALREADY have rights under both Common Law Marriage...
Common-law marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...and they have rights under Cohabitation Agreements.
Cohabitation agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Marvin v Marvin, 18 Cal. 3d 660, 557 P.2d 106, 134 Cal. Rptr. 815 (Cal. 1976)
.
1. Not every state has common law marriage.
2. Not every state with common law marriage allows it between same sex couples.
3. Marvin claims may work in California, but it doesn't apply to other states. California has a rather interesting and unique legal tradition.
 
Old 10-19-2011, 04:52 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,426 posts, read 5,605,497 times
Reputation: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
I already posted info & several links indicating that children benefit most from the 2 that created them - a MOTHER & a FATHER.
Yes... they are barred from entering into any legal contract that is against laws...
Laws are suppposed to be intended for the good of society as a whole.
Children need a mother & a father - that family structure is what is best for society as a whole.


Hm... let's see which attempt you're trying... #1, #3, #13... & implying others...

What of people that don't want to have children? Should they be allowed to be married?
 
Old 10-19-2011, 05:26 PM
 
2,379 posts, read 2,625,512 times
Reputation: 1191
Boxcar, Thanks for clarifying that about how different states have different laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
What of people that don't want to have children? Should they be allowed to be married?
No.
For the same reason why we don't make it acceptable to legally run red traffic lights, just because an exception, like an emergency vehicle had to cross it when red.

Marriage is the base of society's future - where children grow from. Of course, not all marriages create children, but many do - & the primary societal purpose of marriage is the protection of children, secondary is the protection of spouses.
 
Old 10-19-2011, 05:30 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,426 posts, read 5,605,497 times
Reputation: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSoul View Post
Boxcar, Thanks for clarifying that about how different states have different laws. No.
For the same reason why we don't make it acceptable to legally run red traffic lights, just because an exception, like an emergency vehicle had to cross it when red.

Marriage is the base of society's future - where children grow from. Of course, not all marriages create children, but many do - & the primary societal purpose of marriage is the protection of children, secondary is the protection of spouses.

So you mean both gay and straight couples should not be allowed to get married if they don't intend, or are unable, to have children?

Very interesting.

At least I can say you are consistent here.

Thanks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top