Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HtownWxBoy

Genetic "fix" for Gays

Recommended Posts

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. There are PLENTY of scriptures against a lot of things in the bible... many of which are not followed even by Christians b/c they are considered rediculous. They pick and choose what they want to preach about... :rolleyes:
People only use religion when they can't think for themselves. Unfortunately, most people can't think for themselves, that's why we have young men blowing themselves up in the Middle East b/c they are brainwashed into thinking it will get them to heaven where lots of young virgins will be waiting for them. :rolleyes:

Well, unfortunetly, all human lives aren't considered equal. If they were, gay people in America wouldn't have to fight for equal rights... like the rights that come with marriage.

How sad it must be to live your life accusing others of ignorance, when clearly, it is you yourself that is ignorant. You tell everyone how they need to just accept you and you were born the way you are, yet you give no reasonable explanation or proof of either statement. Instead you point fingers at everyone else and make assumptions about a topic you know absolutely nothing about. Give me at least something factual to debate, something more concrete than your attitude, because that doesn't give you any credibility whatsoever. It only makes you look foolish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How is the way someone is born their "lifestyle". That's like saying "I don't like 'white people' or 'women' b/c I disagree with their lifestyle". :lol: Moron. :P

Heh, heh...well actually, as luck would have it, I muttered to myself on two occaisions "god damn white people" as I walked between Half-Priced Books and Istanbul Grill in Rice Village just this weekend. ...and only mostly in jest, whatever that means. :mellow:

I swear--we're just noxious in large numbers. I guess any ethnic group is...

Edited by TheNiche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't shoot the messenger but actually she is right. White people do not choose to be white but we all choose to be hetero or not. Even if you believe you are born gay (and I am not claiming that is incorrect because I simply do not know) you have the choice to live a gay lifestyle, or bi, hetero, etc. If you are born white, you can't choose to be black.

Tell that to Paul Wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hate to point out your inaccuracies, but as a WOMAN, I am a MINORITY. Look it up.

Yahoo Answers

USA Sex ratio:

at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female

under 15 years: 1.05 male(s)/female

15-64 years: 1 male(s)/female

65 years and over: 0.72 male(s)/female

total population: 0.97 male(s)/female (2006 est.)

OK, I looked it up. 97 men for each 100 women. That makes you a majority.

You're welcome.

And, I have had the SNOT knocked out of me by another MINORITY, a hispanic male, at the Daiquiri Factory in 1993 for just BEING there with someone gay--so spare me the hate-crime banter; been there, done that, hired an attorney.

In other words, you're acknowledging that what I said was correct. What does the assailant's being Hispanic have to do with anything?

I haven't been condemned to hell in public, but I have been threatened by my boss that if I didn't sleep with him, I'd be fired. I was also felt up by my direct supervisor at a Christmas party. Charming.

Charming, indeed. That's why you're protected by sexual harassment laws. One of your "special rights", you might say.

I didn't meet all my friends in bars, and to be frank, I resent that remark. I met a lot of my friends in school. What an asinine thing to say. A bit of stereotyping, but I suppose I should embrace it. ;)

Read some of your previous posts. You certainly went out of your way to give that impression.

Why should anyone have to re-examine their values if their values simply don't agree with yours? Not everyone that disagrees with the gay lifestyle wants to beat the crap out of everyone that happens to be gay. Sheesh. Give me a break.

If you are saying that I "kind of suck", because I simply pointed out how the majority in this country feel (not really news to anyone, btw), without even saying a word about myself, then you are not nearly as intelligent as I had you pegged to be. I never said, insinuated, or SUGGESTED that the point of view I was discussing was right or correct--only YOU made that assumption. I only said they shouldn't have to embrace or even agree with the gay lifestyle. I'm not referring to politics or law, merely regular every-day people.

Ah, well. Another post I make gets twisted into vile-hate-filled spew by the same people.

Life goes on.

Please reread what I wrote. I didn't say you suck; I didn't mention you at all.

So, in other words, you're not a bigot, you just defend bigots.

I defend bigots' right to free speech; I do not defend what they have to say, because I disagree with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's noble to recognize that everyone has a right to practice his/her own religion but to insinuate that all religions are equal is different altogether. It's called relativism. In such a view where truth is always relative to something else every act can be justified and no one ever has to make a judgment and making a judgment requires courage.

i didn't insinuate that all religions are equal. everyone is attracted to some religion (or not) because it appeals to their beliefs.

It is obviously a reaction to an action. If a law has been created to protect a segment of the population it is because that segment has been unjustly targeted to begin with - not because that segment is superior, special, or above any other segment.

i just think there are always people who feel they are targeted. laws like this just encourage more division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess i don't see anyone as better or worse than me. one thing that i find odd, is hate crime legislation. if a gay or straight was murdered shouldn't the same laws apply?

Good question!

My understanding is that hate crime status is an enhancement to a conviction, and that such laws were passed to address crimes intended to terrorize whole segments of a population.

In other words, spray painting "Joani Loves Chachi" on a wall is a crime - vandalism. Same spray paint on a synagogue depicting swastikas and anti-Jewish slogans is still vandalism. But if it's determined that the intent was to offend or strike fear into all Jewish people, it could be prosecuted as a hate crime.

(Again, this is just my understanding - I am not a lawyer.)

So, if someone says "Let's go put those (pick a racial, ethnic or religious group)s in their place. We'll find one and beat him up; that'll show 'em!" that would seem to indicate something far different from other forms of assault. (Gay people are not covered by hate crime laws in Texas.)

People have argued that these laws are invalid or illogical because the intent has to be shown. But intent is already considered in prosecuting crimes.

I certainly agree that all crimes must be taken seriously, and hope that "hate crime" status is not abused by prosecutors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we all choose to be hetero or not.

When ever I hear someone make this statment I always reply with "When did you choose to be hetero?" because I think it is a legitimate question.

The standard answer is "Well...er...I just KNEW I was."

I would wager if it was such an important life decision a person would remember the time, place and circumstances much as you would remember a marriage or birth of a child.

Did they think about it a long time?

Did they go both ways just to be sure?

Were there other factors involved in making a conscience decision regarding your sexual preference?

I'd really like to know because I have never been given a definitive answer to the above questions from anyone-ever.

Even if you believe you are born gay (and I am not claiming that is incorrect because I simply do not know) you have the choice to live a gay lifestyle, or bi, hetero, etc.

So are you saying it would be best to ignore my nature as a gay man and just take the easy route? Or maybe get in a closet in sort of a "don't ask-don't tell" kind of half-life. And if I choose to be true to myself does that mean I'll just have to remain a second-class citizen because some heteros deemed I'm not worthy based on a faulty religious text?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, in other words, you're not a bigot, you just defend bigots.

I defend bigots' right to free speech; I do not defend what they have to say, because I disagree with it.

sometimes, I think defending what a bigot says [not the right to free speech part of course] is worse than just being a bigot.

Edited by webdude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How sad it must be to live your life accusing others of ignorance, when clearly, it is you yourself that is ignorant. You tell everyone how they need to just accept you and you were born the way you are, yet you give no reasonable explanation or proof of either statement. Instead you point fingers at everyone else and make assumptions about a topic you know absolutely nothing about. Give me at least something factual to debate, something more concrete than your attitude, because that doesn't give you any credibility whatsoever. It only makes you look foolish.

Lots of pot calling the kettle black over here, but the main point:

that someone must make a case for being who they are in order to be accepted as equals, are you sure you want to go that route?

That's the call of bigots, every minority is guilty of being unequal and lower class until proven innocent.

bigots never learn in school that everyone is born free and equal.

Edited by webdude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it was in kindergarten when I looked at a gorgeous little class mate named Lucia and I got that tingling in my stomach that I now know was puppy love but felt pretty darned powerful back then. That kind of set me on a hetero path. Prior to that, attraction/or orientation probably never even enterered into my thought process.

So it was a tingling. Was that when you made a conscience decision that you were going to be straight or gay? Was that when you made your choice because as you have said we all choose to be hetero or not. Does an inate tingling or feeling count? If I had the same experience at that age about another boy, would that constitute a conscience decision to be gay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yahoo Answers

USA Sex ratio:

at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female

under 15 years: 1.05 male(s)/female

15-64 years: 1 male(s)/female

65 years and over: 0.72 male(s)/female

total population: 0.97 male(s)/female (2006 est.)

OK, I looked it up. 97 men for each 100 women. That makes you a majority.

You're welcome.

In other words, you're acknowledging that what I said was correct. What does the assailant's being Hispanic have to do with anything?

Charming, indeed. That's why you're protected by sexual harassment laws. One of your "special rights", you might say.

Read some of your previous posts. You certainly went out of your way to give that impression.

Please reread what I wrote. I didn't say you suck; I didn't mention you at all.

So, in other words, you're not a bigot, you just defend bigots.

I defend bigots' right to free speech; I do not defend what they have to say, because I disagree with it.

Help me out here, chief. You've thoroughly confused me. You are basing your answer on a Yahoo calculation? I prefer to get my definitions and numbers from a more reliable source.

From NSF.gov:

"A minority or subordinate group is a sociological group that does not constitute a politically dominant plurality of the total population of a given society. A sociological minority is not necessarily a numerical minority

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we all choose to be hetero or not.

I was just assuming when you made the above broad and unsubstantiated statement you had the inside skinny on what everyone chooses. Again, I have never-ever-heard anyone say they choose their sexual orientation except Parrot-and she was vague as to the when and how, casual and nonchalant about what you would think would be a memorable event-and I've been around for more than half a century. You'd think I would have gotten a straight answer by now...

I have already stated that I don't know if someone is born gay or not. I know I was attracted to the opposite sex and I have chosen that hetero lifestyle as a result.

So I'll ask again: when did you consciencely choose and based on what? An inate hormonal and emotional attraction? A tingle? Or would you just say "Well...er...I just KNEW I was."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lots of pot calling the kettle black over here, but the main point:

that someone must make a case for being who they are in order to be accepted as equals, are you sure you want to go that route?

That's the call of bigots, every minority is guilty of being unequal and lower class until proven innocent.

bigots never learn in school that everyone is born free and equal.

and if someone calls themself unequal and lower class, what does that make them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How sad it must be to live your life accusing others of ignorance, when clearly, it is you yourself that is ignorant. You tell everyone how they need to just accept you and you were born the way you are, yet you give no reasonable explanation or proof of either statement. Instead you point fingers at everyone else and make assumptions about a topic you know absolutely nothing about. Give me at least something factual to debate, something more concrete than your attitude, because that doesn't give you any credibility whatsoever. It only makes you look foolish.

Only when you do the same :P;)

I have already stated that I don't know if someone is born gay or not. I know I was attracted to the opposite sex and I have chosen that hetero lifestyle as a result.

If you were attracted to the same sex I am not judging you for it because it is not my place to judge someone's actions when those actions do not impact me in anyway. But regardless of whether one feels gay or not, every person chooses his/her sexual behaviour. We choose to have sex with folks from the same gender or from the opposite gender. I could also choose monogamy, or to have multiple partners, etc. Unless someone puts a gun to your head every time you do your thing, you too are choosing your sexual behaviour and the gender of your partner. I am not telling you that is horrible, or that you are 2nd rate as result, etc.

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was just assuming when you made the above broad and unsubstantiated statement you had the inside skinny on what everyone chooses. Again, I have never-ever-heard anyone say they choose their sexual orientation except Parrot-and she was vague as to the when and how, casual and nonchalant about what you would think would be a memorable event-and I've been around for more than half a century. You'd think I would have gotten a straight answer by now...

dude, it's time to move on to another topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Marty
dude, it's time to move on to another topic.

It's time for HtownWxBoy to remove his stupid avatar school children do research on this site!

Edited by Marty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Marty
:rolleyes:

I am not offended by it i could care less like i said...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Marty

If i had that avatar i would get digitally delicate flower slap in a heartbeat and deserving so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If i had that avatar i would get digitally delicate flower slap in a heartbeat and deserving so!

What's wrong w/ my avatar? :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Marty
What's wrong w/ my avatar? :mellow:

This is a architecture forum not a porn site grow up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please explain to me how it's pornographic?? :huh:

i agree it's not pornographic, however some parents might find it offensive, particularly if they knew their children were using this site for research purposes. most adults are totally fine with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dude, it's time to move on to another topic.

Ummm...the topic is gays and genetics. I just thought you could answer my questions with more than a tingle defense. Guess not.

It's time for HtownWxBoy to remove his stupid avatar school children do research on this site!

Should Trae remove his as well? Or is it OK because it's more oriented to straights...or lesbians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should Trae remove his as well? Or is it OK because it's more oriented to straights...or lesbians?

i would say that with respect to children, it is inappropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yawn.

^^^...and that was an edit! :lol:

I get you, Ralo...you just arn't up to the challange. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please explain to me how it's pornographic?? :huh:

To me, it looks like two nude males pressing their genetalia together. Soft-core, yes, grey area, perhaps, but I do think that it would qualify as pornography, even if the scene is cropped off at waist-level. In any case, it is poor taste for an architectural forum, as the intent seems to be to shock those with opinions counter to HtownWxBoy's, and not merely a comment on aesthetics. In contrast, Trae's avatar shows a clothed woman not engaged in physical contact with anyone or even undertaking a sexually suggestive activity. She's wearing jeans and no skin is shown.

Let's compare: clothed woman in walking in public vs. nude men engaged in physical contact of the genital region, presumably in private or else they'd be arrested for public indecency (as would any couple doing this, straight/gay/lesbian). Seems pretty straightforward to me that it isn't suitable to HAIF.

...having said that, I know that he's just trying to make a statement through art, and I do recognize this as a respectable form of art--but it is also pornography. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To me, it looks like two nude males pressing their genetalia together.

My, aren't you optimistic! ("Oh, Dr. Rorschach! Could you interpret these results for us, please?")

I'd love to hear your commentary on a football game. Hike, indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My, aren't you optimistic! ("Oh, Dr. Rorschach! Could you interpret these results for us, please?")

I'd love to hear your commentary on a football game. Hike, indeed!

If they aren't nude down past the waist, the photographer's implication remains perfectly clear.

Football ain't my thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it took The Pedant ten lines of text to tell us it looks like two guys pressing their genetalia together-even though the shot is from the waste up.

Who would have thought yet another of the topics he seems to think he has some expertise in is gay porn!

Edited by nmainguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well... I think what hate crime laws are supposed to do is try to deter people from committing a crime against someone solely b/c that person was born a certain way... like black or gay.

Htown, let me ask you this, if a gay person commits a crime on a straight person the same hate crime laws should apply correct ?

When a group of black men beats up a white man, it is not considered a "hate crime". It's just a violent crime.

A college fraternity, dresses up like gang members from South Central, and throw a party and take pictures as they are in "costume" they are considered "hatemongers" and "racists". How is dressing up in baggy clothes and putting grills in your mouth RACIST ?

Would the same be said if a black fraternity dressed up in Polo and Tommy Hilfiger and wore Khakis and combed their hair a certain way, and had a peanut butter and jelly sandwich with macaroni and cheese party, would THEY be considered "racists"? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i agree it's not pornographic, however some parents might find it offensive, particularly if they knew their children were using this site for research purposes. most adults are totally fine with it.

Well I get icked out when I see straight people macking in public... but I am not about to call it offensive. If parents find it offensive, that's not my problem. There's NOTHING pornographic about it... no more than if it was a guy and a girl (girl w/ a shirt on of course). If it was a guy and a girl nobody would say anything.

Should Trae remove his as well? Or is it OK because it's more oriented to straights...or lesbians?

My thoughts exactly... funny nobody brought that up. :rolleyes: Thanks nmainguy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I get icked out when I see straight people macking in public... but I am not about to call it offensive. If parents find it offensive, that's not my problem. There's NOTHING pornographic about it... no more than if it was a guy and a girl (girl w/ a shirt on of course). If it was a guy and a girl nobody would say anything.

They would if the girl had her shirt off. Your photo is definately full of innuendo. I don't find it offensive at all, it might ick me out a little. If I saw 2 guys with their shirts off in public embracing like that photo and about to mugdown, I know I would tell them to get a room, just like I would tell a guy and a girl (w/her shirt on) in public. Nobody wants to see THAT, kids or no kids around. It's great that they are "in love", go climb the highest mountain and tell it to the world, but keep all your googely eyeing and tongue groping behind closed doors. What are people like that trying to prove and who are you trying to prove it to ? Hooray, Hooray, you're gay, YES, YES, we get it, it's ok, Yes, we KNOW that you are LOUD and you are PROUD !

I don't even know why the "Genetic FIX" is an issue, you aren't against abortion are you Htown ?

Edited by TJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To me, it looks like two nude males pressing their genetalia together. Soft-core, yes, grey area, perhaps, but I do think that it would qualify as pornography, even if the scene is cropped off at waist-level. In any case, it is poor taste for an architectural forum, as the intent seems to be to shock those with opinions counter to HtownWxBoy's, and not merely a comment on aesthetics. In contrast, Trae's avatar shows a clothed woman not engaged in physical contact with anyone or even undertaking a sexually suggestive activity. She's wearing jeans and no skin is shown.

Let's compare: clothed woman in walking in public vs. nude men engaged in physical contact of the genital region, presumably in private or else they'd be arrested for public indecency (as would any couple doing this, straight/gay/lesbian). Seems pretty straightforward to me that it isn't suitable to HAIF.

...having said that, I know that he's just trying to make a statement through art, and I do recognize this as a respectable form of art--but it is also pornography. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive IMO.

You can think it looks like whatever you want... doesn't mean that's what it is. Two people holding each other is hardly "soft-core"... if it were a guy and girl would it still be "soft-core"? Something tells me you wouldn't think so. Last time I checked a guy having his shirt off was not considered x-rated... even if he's hugging another guy. I see guys w/ their shirts off at the pool and the beach all the time. And guess what... THERE ARE KIDS AROUND!! You are just assuming the guys have no pants on... something I never assumed when I found the picture. That's your problem, not mine. ;)

Again, if it was a shirtless guy and a girl, say, in a bathing suit doing the same exact thing... nobody would say anything. :rolleyes: Thanks for reminding me why I am so PROUD to be gay! :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's NOTHING pornographic about it... no more than if it was a guy and a girl (girl w/ a shirt on of course). If it was a guy and a girl nobody would say anything.

Actually, that's a double standard that I do have a problem with. What's the problem with female breasts? In all seriousness. :rolleyes: And even more broadly, I dispute that there is any problem at all with nudity in any form.

...but public indecency is another matter altogether. It doesn't belong on the streets and it shouldn't belong on HAIF IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They would if the girl had her shirt off. Your photo is definately full of innuendo. I don't find it offensive at all, it might ick me out a little. If I saw 2 guys with their shirts off in public embracing like that photo and about to mugdown, I know I would tell them to get a room, just like I would a guy and a girl (w/her shirt on) in public. Nobody wants to see THAT, kids or no kids around. It's great that they are "in love", go climb the highest mountain and tell it to the world, but keep all your googely eyeing and tongue groping behind closed doors. What are people like that trying to prove and who are you trying to prove it to ?

A girl having a shirt off and nothing underneath is not the same as a guy having his shirt off. Again, I see guys w/ their shirts off all the time at the beach, at the pool, or just walking down the street on a hot day. If you see two guys in public embracing, you can say whatever you want, doesn't mean they have to listen. I know my boyfriend and I wouldn't listen... we would just laugh at you. If straight people can do things in public... so can gay people... nothing more nothing less. The days of hiding behind clothes doors are over... sorry! :P

Actually, that's a double standard that I do have a problem with. What's the problem with female breasts? In all seriousness. :rolleyes: And even more broadly, I dispute that there is any problem at all with nudity in any form.

...but public indecency is another matter altogether. It doesn't belong on the streets and it shouldn't belong on HAIF IMO.

I see nothing wrong w/ the female breast. If a woman wanted to walk down the road w/ her shirt off I could care less. Heck, walk around nude... that's how God made us.

Hugging is not "public indecency"... sorry, try again. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can think it looks like whatever you want... doesn't mean that's what it is. Two people holding each other is hardly "soft-core"... if it were a guy and girl would it still be "soft-core"?

Yes, it would still be soft-core, so long as there wasn't an act of penetration. Of course, that's just my interpretation. "Soft-core" is not a technical descriptor to my knowledge.

You are just assuming the guys have no pants on... something I never assumed when I found the picture. That's your problem, not mine. ;)

So you mean to say that it is accidental or just random that the photographer chose to frame/crop the photo where it was? You think that it is by mere chance that any hint of there being clothing was not revealed? Come on. You aren't naive. You should be able to recognize the implicit message.

Thanks for reminding me why I am so PROUD to be gay! :wub:

This is what I don't like about many gay people. If you're gay, fine. Doesn't make you special. You have nothing at all to be proud of. Neither do I. You are what you are, and that's just fine. If someone else doesn't like it, well that's just fine too, not something to be proud (or ashamed) of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...