| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
08 Sep 2005 09:19:14 AM |
| Object: |
California And Gay Marriage |
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/sept/article102.html
California And Gay Marriage
By Nicholas Olson
Sept. 7, 2005
It was announced today that California is sending a bill to the governor
approving the rights of gays to marry. I say hurray for ending another form
of discrimination.
Republicans and their bible-thumping constituents can hem and haw all they
want about their sanctity and that it is against the nature of humanity and
whatever. All I have to say is that I am sick to my stomach that this form
of discrimination is even up for debate.
The stupidest argument I have heard in this whole ordeal is the one where
they have men and women marrying their pets. Let's be logical about this.
If a man wants to marry a woman, he needs her consent, at least in this
country. Since when does your dog ask you to marry it? I can see it now. It
gets down on one knee and pulls out this ring... Wait, that never happened.
The next argument is about sanctity. You know, when two heterosexual people
divorce at over 60 percent of all marriages and infidelity runs rampant and
don't get me started on alimony. Besides, if you want to get married in
this country, shouldn't gays have the same right to be as happy and
miserable as a hetero couple?
The most controversial reason why I am happy about this decision is because
it opens the door for the secular part of our culture to go for the jugular
of the religious right. You see, if you want to call marriage a religious
ceremony or a representation of their love before a spiritual being, then I
can go to the words of James Madison where he specifically noted that there
is a distinct separation of church and state. If religious people want to
keep their precious word "marriage," then they can do without the rights
afforded by our government to married people by having an equitable
separation of this right for all citizens. This would mean that you could
be married but get no benefit by it. After all, if it only matters in the
eyes of God that you are married then be married with no benefits.
Anti-homosexual sentiment is born out of need to discriminate against
something. At once mixed race marriage was looked down upon, so will we
adapt to gay marriage.
Americans are going to have to start realizing that change is going to come
in the form of the future youth, those that feel that the current adults
are messing things up, will not tolerate the indignities of the past. It
happened in the 1860s, it happened in the 1960s and it will happen in the
not-so-distant future. Learn to deal. California is on their way. Why not
in your state?
------------
About the author: Nicholas Olson is a long-time journalist who has been a
columnist at his college newspaper and is currently a military journalist.
***************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 12:45:38 AM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
Nor is there a genetic marker for left-handiness. Yet no one is dumb
enough to claim that being a leftie is a choice.
Anyone can be left-handed or right handed all it takes is practice. I
can't
believe anyone is dumb enough to claim that as justification for their
sexual preference.
No, handiness is determined before birth. Attempting to change that
dominance can cause brain damage. You can train yourself to do things
with the opposite hand, but the primary hand stays the same (for
example I shoot scoped rifles right-handed because that's how I
learned it in sniper school. Everything else is done lefty.)
Don't believe everything you hear. I have a doctor friend who says the
opposite and he is a left hander.
Do you know Skip Lester?
I never chose my sexuality. I simply am bisexual.
Well practiced, no doubt. The fact that you won't admit it's your choice
is
telling.
Not really, three boyfriends in 39 years. I've always been more into
women.
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how it
works.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:14:34 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males? I know I am not able to
do it. Can you?
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 10:55:43 AM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm with.
This queer logic reminds me of the old joke where the fellow tells the judge
that he was just walking down the street sharpening his knife and when he
walked around the corner of the building the guy was just there. He couldn't
help that the stabbing happened, it just did and he was a victim just the
same as the dead gentleman that fate had brought him into contact with. To
which the judge retorted, twenty seven times?
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:36:09 PM |
|
|
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm with.
This queer logic reminds me of the old joke where the fellow tells the judge
that he was just walking down the street sharpening his knife and when he
walked around the corner of the building the guy was just there. He couldn't
help that the stabbing happened, it just did and he was a victim just the
same as the dead gentleman that fate had brought him into contact with. To
which the judge retorted, twenty seven times?
So, gay men cannot help themselves and they are forced, by their earlier
choice, to have sex with any man that they come into contact with?
Are you insane or just stupid?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:43:05 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:tZlXe.5428$nV1.5371@trnddc06...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm
with.
This queer logic reminds me of the old joke where the fellow tells the
judge
that he was just walking down the street sharpening his knife and when
he
walked around the corner of the building the guy was just there. He
couldn't
help that the stabbing happened, it just did and he was a victim just
the
same as the dead gentleman that fate had brought him into contact with.
To
which the judge retorted, twenty seven times?
So, gay men cannot help themselves and they are forced, by their earlier
choice, to have sex with any man that they come into contact with?
That is what they're saying.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 07:59:18 PM |
|
|
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:tZlXe.5428$nV1.5371@trnddc06...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm
with.
This queer logic reminds me of the old joke where the fellow tells the
judge
that he was just walking down the street sharpening his knife and when
he
walked around the corner of the building the guy was just there. He
couldn't
help that the stabbing happened, it just did and he was a victim just
the
same as the dead gentleman that fate had brought him into contact with.
To
which the judge retorted, twenty seven times?
So, gay men cannot help themselves and they are forced, by their earlier
choice, to have sex with any man that they come into contact with?
That is what they're saying.
That is what who are saying?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Altarriba" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 12:00:13 PM |
|
|
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
Did you choose to be attracted to females "early in life" as well? Does
one wake up one day and say "I think that, for the rest of my life,
I'll only be attracted to females?" That doesn't seem very likely.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm with.
<irrelevant joke snipped>
So, could you "decide" to find males romantically/sexually attractive,
and females unattractive? Do you think you could have decided that
yesterday or ten years ago, or twenty, or... ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 03:10:32 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 10:55:43 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
That nobody has ever detected, but you know that it exists; except
that below you admit that it doesn't.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm with.
In other words sexual orientation is not a choice.
This queer logic reminds me of the old joke where the fellow tells the judge
that he was just walking down the street sharpening his knife and when he
walked around the corner of the building the guy was just there. He couldn't
help that the stabbing happened, it just did and he was a victim just the
same as the dead gentleman that fate had brought him into contact with. To
which the judge retorted, twenty seven times?
Yet you just admitted that you are unable to choose to be attracted to
someone of the same sex.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 03:49:39 PM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:0qeri1t9ngh2ivj1qagc6u5f1t9lf1ecf0@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 10:55:43 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly
how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
That nobody has ever detected, but you know that it exists; except
that below you admit that it doesn't.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm
with.
In other words sexual orientation is not a choice.
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example of
queer logic.
This queer logic reminds me of the old joke where the fellow tells the
judge
that he was just walking down the street sharpening his knife and when he
walked around the corner of the building the guy was just there. He
couldn't
help that the stabbing happened, it just did and he was a victim just the
same as the dead gentleman that fate had brought him into contact with.
To
which the judge retorted, twenty seven times?
Yet you just admitted that you are unable to choose to be attracted to
someone of the same sex.
Queer logic on display.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
19 Sep 2005 03:27:27 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 15:49:39 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:0qeri1t9ngh2ivj1qagc6u5f1t9lf1ecf0@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 10:55:43 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:41cqi1h3qe3n08tlsjf5iubfjrso6qks2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:45:38 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:d7vpi1tfvab1dapkav977a0q9tqoiftnsp@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
00:29:47 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:6brpi1ljgkft5v86p74m4d7o8kn16cnm28@4ax.com...
snip
And I never made a choice. I simply began noticing both sexes about
the time my buddies were noticing girls.
Everytime you did it you made the choice to do it. *That's* exactly
how
it
works.
How did he choose to be attracted to males?
Something early on in life no doubt.
That nobody has ever detected, but you know that it exists; except
that below you admit that it doesn't.
I know I am not able to do it. Can you?
No, men are not my preference. Women are and I choose which women I'm
with.
In other words sexual orientation is not a choice.
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example of
queer logic.
I asked you if you could choose to be attracted to somebody of the
same sex. You said "no". Was I wrong? Can you choose to be
attracted by the same sex?
This queer logic reminds me of the old joke where the fellow tells the
judge
that he was just walking down the street sharpening his knife and when he
walked around the corner of the building the guy was just there. He
couldn't
help that the stabbing happened, it just did and he was a victim just the
same as the dead gentleman that fate had brought him into contact with.
To
which the judge retorted, twenty seven times?
Yet you just admitted that you are unable to choose to be attracted to
someone of the same sex.
Queer logic on display.
Are you or are you not able to choose to be attracted by the same sex?
A "yes" or "no" answer would be enough. If you believe your claim, it
should be easy to answer the question.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:39:07 PM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:59:17 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business, don't
you understand? Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 08:05:44 PM |
|
|
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business, don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 08:27:29 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
Typical queer logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 09:27:11 PM |
|
|
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 09:40:34 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:3mpXe.10833$Yu2.1165@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example
of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 09:43:57 PM |
|
|
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:3mpXe.10833$Yu2.1165@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example
of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
It is? Please explain.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 09:46:39 PM |
|
|
DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in news:NBpXe.11017$Yu2.7821
@trnddc02:
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
It is? Please explain.
He doesn't like it. That makes it 'queer'. Remember junior high, where
anything you didn't like was 'queer'?
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
PGP ID: 0xC4CE8CF0
Faith is a cop-out. If the only way you can accept an assertion is by
faith, then you are conceding that it can’t be taken on its own merits.
-Dan Barker, "Losing Faith in Faith", 1992
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 10:33:00 PM |
|
|
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in news:NBpXe.11017$Yu2.7821
@trnddc02:
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
It is? Please explain.
He doesn't like it. That makes it 'queer'. Remember junior high, where
anything you didn't like was 'queer'?
No, I don't. Anything I didn't like was "stupid." ;-) Thankfully, I
have matured since then.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
19 Sep 2005 03:27:28 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:40:34 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:3mpXe.10833$Yu2.1165@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another example
of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
Okay, let's forget the personal hostility just for a little bit. You
have claimed that homosexuals choose to be homosexual. Maybe you are
right, but I cannot see how it can be done. I know, to use myself as
an example, that I never chose to be attracted to women; I just am. I
can't even choose what women I find attractive; I just find some more
attractive than others. I also know that I cannot choose to be
attracted to other males, yet you seem to believe that such a choice
is possible. That is why I asked you if you could choose to be
attracted to your own sex. I am trying to understand how such a thing
could be possible Are you willing to answer that or not?
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
19 Sep 2005 05:00:10 PM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:7e7ui1l3l1fjrvfe8lu3ndndcvvo2knevo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:40:34 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:3mpXe.10833$Yu2.1165@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women
and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another
example
of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose
to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused
by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of
their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a
Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with
them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
Okay, let's forget the personal hostility just for a little bit. You
have claimed that homosexuals choose to be homosexual. Maybe you are
right, but I cannot see how it can be done. I know, to use myself as
an example, that I never chose to be attracted to women; I just am. I
can't even choose what women I find attractive; I just find some more
attractive than others. I also know that I cannot choose to be
attracted to other males, yet you seem to believe that such a choice
is possible. That is why I asked you if you could choose to be
attracted to your own sex. I am trying to understand how such a thing
could be possible Are you willing to answer that or not?
Well, golly gee...this is a hard one, let me see, ah...oh...ENVIRONMENT!
There that wasn't so hard now was it? If you were raised in an environment
where an attraction to, or a particular behavior towards, *whatever*, was
highly and repeatedly rewarded, it is highly likely you would carry that
behavior over into adulthood. That's precisely why the state wants children,
especially ghetto kids in school at an early age. There is no genetic
evidence for homosexual behavior; it is extremely likely that their behavior
is learned.
In that context, I guess it could be said that the individual didn't choose
their behavior, but someone did. In any case, it is not a condition created
in the womb.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
20 Sep 2005 09:04:14 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:00:10 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:7e7ui1l3l1fjrvfe8lu3ndndcvvo2knevo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:40:34 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:3mpXe.10833$Yu2.1165@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women
and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another
example
of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you choose
to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be aroused
by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of
their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a
Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with
them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
Okay, let's forget the personal hostility just for a little bit. You
have claimed that homosexuals choose to be homosexual. Maybe you are
right, but I cannot see how it can be done. I know, to use myself as
an example, that I never chose to be attracted to women; I just am. I
can't even choose what women I find attractive; I just find some more
attractive than others. I also know that I cannot choose to be
attracted to other males, yet you seem to believe that such a choice
is possible. That is why I asked you if you could choose to be
attracted to your own sex. I am trying to understand how such a thing
could be possible Are you willing to answer that or not?
Well, golly gee...this is a hard one, let me see, ah...oh...ENVIRONMENT!
There that wasn't so hard now was it? If you were raised in an environment
where an attraction to, or a particular behavior towards, *whatever*, was
highly and repeatedly rewarded,
The above indicates the attraction already existed. How did it come
into existence in the first place?
it is highly likely you would carry that
behavior over into adulthood. That's precisely why the state wants children,
especially ghetto kids in school at an early age. There is no genetic
evidence for homosexual behavior; it is extremely likely that their behavior
is learned.
What is known is that homosexuals experience sexual attraction just as
early as heterosexuals do, i.e. there is no more evidence that it is
learned than that heterosexuality is learned. If you disagree, you
could cite evidence that supports your position.
In that context, I guess it could be said that the individual didn't choose
their behavior, but someone did. In any case, it is not a condition created
in the womb.
If you know that to be a fact, you know more than the professionals.
You should make your studies public and become famous.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
20 Sep 2005 09:28:33 AM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:5j50j1ddmknmv0c5n4l1ai35sdjcbu133q@4ax.com...
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:00:10 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:7e7ui1l3l1fjrvfe8lu3ndndcvvo2knevo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:40:34 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:3mpXe.10833$Yu2.1165@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women
and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another
example
of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you
choose
to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be
aroused
by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your
business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of
their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a
Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with
them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
Okay, let's forget the personal hostility just for a little bit. You
have claimed that homosexuals choose to be homosexual. Maybe you are
right, but I cannot see how it can be done. I know, to use myself as
an example, that I never chose to be attracted to women; I just am. I
can't even choose what women I find attractive; I just find some more
attractive than others. I also know that I cannot choose to be
attracted to other males, yet you seem to believe that such a choice
is possible. That is why I asked you if you could choose to be
attracted to your own sex. I am trying to understand how such a thing
could be possible Are you willing to answer that or not?
Well, golly gee...this is a hard one, let me see, ah...oh...ENVIRONMENT!
There that wasn't so hard now was it? If you were raised in an
environment
where an attraction to, or a particular behavior towards, *whatever*, was
highly and repeatedly rewarded,
The above indicates the attraction already existed. How did it come
into existence in the first place?
No, it doesn't. Example, If a woman feminizes her son because she wanted a
daughter and then the son growns up attracted to men one cannot point to the
son and proclaim that he was "normally" attracted to men.
it is highly likely you would carry that
behavior over into adulthood. That's precisely why the state wants
children,
especially ghetto kids in school at an early age. There is no genetic
evidence for homosexual behavior; it is extremely likely that their
behavior
is learned.
What is known is that homosexuals experience sexual attraction just as
early as heterosexuals do, i.e. there is no more evidence that it is
learned than that heterosexuality is learned. If you disagree, you
could cite evidence that supports your position.
In that context, I guess it could be said that the individual didn't
choose
their behavior, but someone did. In any case, it is not a condition
created
in the womb.
If you know that to be a fact, you know more than the professionals.
You should make your studies public and become famous.
If you know otherwise you should do the same. The point is, no one knows
otherwise. Which, BTW, kills this line of reasoning to be use for political
gain on behalf of the homosexual contingent.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
20 Sep 2005 04:43:52 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 09:28:33 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:5j50j1ddmknmv0c5n4l1ai35sdjcbu133q@4ax.com...
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:00:10 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:7e7ui1l3l1fjrvfe8lu3ndndcvvo2knevo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:40:34 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:3mpXe.10833$Yu2.1165@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:I9oXe.9947$Yu2.5419@trnddc02...
Kelo Disaster wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:m2rri192sorhg3tnf59cu16c1s20i6fp8a@4ax.com...
What's so funny about peace, love and "Kelo Disaster"
<goingoing@gone.net> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005
15:49:39 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
What a goofball. I said I don't choose men, that I choose women
and
from
that you get sexual orientation is not a choice. Yet another
example
of
queer logic.
Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Could you
choose
to
fall in romantic love with a man? Could you choose to be
aroused
by a
homosexual porno?
That's the question.
What part of, my thoughts about sexuality is none of your
business,
don't
you understand?
Yet your sexuality is pushed on gays by your very disapproval of
their
lifestyle. Don't like it? Tough. Grow a pair.
Like I said, and people like you continue to prove, a
government ran by the likes of your kind would be akin to a
Stalinist
regime. Queers are constantly pushing their sexual attitudes on a
society
that by and large wants nothing to do with them.
In the face of straights who are constantly pushing their sexual
attitudes on a society that by and large wants nothing to do with
them.
Typical queer logic.
I am not queer. Try again?
Your logic is.
Okay, let's forget the personal hostility just for a little bit. You
have claimed that homosexuals choose to be homosexual. Maybe you are
right, but I cannot see how it can be done. I know, to use myself as
an example, that I never chose to be attracted to women; I just am. I
can't even choose what women I find attractive; I just find some more
attractive than others. I also know that I cannot choose to be
attracted to other males, yet you seem to believe that such a choice
is possible. That is why I asked you if you could choose to be
attracted to your own sex. I am trying to understand how such a thing
could be possible Are you willing to answer that or not?
Well, golly gee...this is a hard one, let me see, ah...oh...ENVIRONMENT!
There that wasn't so hard now was it? If you were raised in an
environment
where an attraction to, or a particular behavior towards, *whatever*, was
highly and repeatedly rewarded,
The above indicates the attraction already existed. How did it come
into existence in the first place?
No, it doesn't.
I quote:
If you were raised in an
environment where an attraction to, or a particular behavior towards, *whatever*, was
highly and repeatedly rewarded,
In other words you were talking about signs of an attraction towards
being rewarded. not being created.
Example, If a woman feminizes her son because she wanted a
daughter and then the son growns up attracted to men one cannot point to the
son and proclaim that he was "normally" attracted to men.
The above assumes your conclusion. There is no evidence that
homosexuals become homosexuals in that manner. Everything known
points to their sexual identity being established just as early as
heterosexuals.
it is highly likely you would carry that
behavior over into adulthood. That's precisely why the state wants
children,
especially ghetto kids in school at an early age. There is no genetic
evidence for homosexual behavior; it is extremely likely that their
behavior
is learned.
What is known is that homosexuals experience sexual attraction just as
early as heterosexuals do, i.e. there is no more evidence that it is
learned than that heterosexuality is learned. If you disagree, you
could cite evidence that supports your position.
In that context, I guess it could be said that the individual didn't
choose
their behavior, but someone did. In any case, i | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
