The Rainbow Connection [LGBTS Club]

[Toujours]

Originally Posted by Shining Raichu

I love you. I don't care if you're a woman, marry me.

I support this wholeheartedly. Scarf x Shining Raichu

Originally Posted by Pikapal642

Though I can't wait to hear how this goes over with single and divorced parents. That should raise a ruckus with them, and since they are straight, THEY'LL be listened to. >____< (Ok, likely, they won't be and that is even more annoying. >___<)

Single and divorced parents are pretty much in the same boat, honestly, at least in Catholicism. Single parents aren't considered a full family unit because they had sex outside of marriage which is a sin, and divorce...doesn't exist in the Catholic church. After decades of not being part of it, when my mom went back, she had to prove that the marriage wasn't legitimate in the eyes of the Catholic church in order to get it annuled. Because an annulment isn't just a Catholic divorce, it's literally saying that the two people, when they got married, weren't in a position to make that decision for some reason or another (they felt pressured due to an unexpected pregnancy, one partner didn't reveal themselves fully until after the marriage was complete, or a lack of wish to have children are common reasons). Basically saying the marriage never existed, not like a divorce where it's "the marriage existed, then it ended". So a divorced couple, unless they're annuled, are wrong in the eyes of the Church.

[Magdalena~]

Originally Posted by Shining Raichu

I've never seen it once with my own eyes outside of the Internet. In my experience, religion has truly become synonymous with intolerance and I haven't once seen anything in my own life which contradicts that.

The only two churches I ever remember being to in my life were exceedingly accepting. It was practically insane how much understanding and completely blind acceptance I got from the people in the second church. By blind acceptance, I mean when I came in the first time dressed in girl clothes, not passing even remotely and going by a perfectly obvious female name, no one asked any questions or showed me any contempt, whether direct or oblique, and everyone was very pleasant. Everyone gladly called me the name I introduced myself with too and didn't even seem awkward when they said it.
I can't emphasise this enough. A lot of Christians are supportive of LGBTcetera.

I also am in the same boat with Envy--it's nothing to do with actually being religious, at its core.

[Scarf]

Originally Posted by Shining Raichu

I love you. I don't care if you're a woman, marry me.

Sorry, sweet cheeks, but I'm not the marrying type. ;D

Originally Posted by QuilavaKing

Whenever someone tries to use the "Hate the sin, not the sinner." line, I use a saying of my own: "Hate nothing."

I'm going to steal this line from you.

And here's a little piece of news. It seems that the Girl Scouts USA are having some people trying to start a boycott of their cookies because the Scouts allow trans kids into their ranks. Who knew that they were cool with trans kids? That's a nice surprise for a change, but the regressive people getting upset with it is a bit of a downer.

Oh, here's an [article] 'bout it.

Edit: Looks like someone already brought this up over in OC.

[Magdalena~]

Oh my sister showed me this yesterday. I think it's so sweet. ^^ I spent most of my childhood as an "honourary Girl Scout" (my mother was a troop leader and my sister and all her friends were scouts, so I kind of had to haha) so the Girl Scouts are really very close to my heart <3

She goes on to note, "I am asking you to take action with me and boycott Girl Scout Cookies."

-Cue 50% of everyone who has read this article to each buy enough cookies for themselves and her combined-

Offtopic: I love Do-Si-Dos. <3

[Eпvy]

I didn't know that Girl Scouts allowed trans people either, but that is certainly a good thing!

I tried reading the article, but got to the part (in the first sentence, I believe) where the words "radical homosexual agenda" were put, and I just couldn't even bring myself to read it even further. Even if the article itself is neutral, just seeing that anybody said something so ridiculous puts me off from reading about it any further.

The worst thing is that it's not even about homosexuality, right? It's about somebody being transgendered. So not only is the concept of a "homosexual agenda" one of the most ridiculous things ever, but gender identity has NOTHING to do with homosexuality.

I'm sorry, but how are people this dumb? Just how is it even possible?

[Pikapal642]

Originally Posted by Scarf

Sorry, sweet cheeks, but I'm not the marrying type. ;D


I'm going to steal this line from you.

And here's a little piece of news. It seems that the Girl Scouts USA are having some people trying to start a boycott of their cookies because the Scouts allow trans kids into their ranks. Who knew that they were cool with trans kids? That's a nice surprise for a change, but the regressive people getting upset with it is a bit of a downer.

Oh, here's an [article] 'bout it.

Edit: Looks like someone already brought this up over in OC.

I had no idea the Girl Scouts were accepting of transgendered children! :D That is amazing! And I don't know why, but I get the feeling the boycott won't be too effective. Idk why, must be a gut thing. xD

[Alakazam17]

I already posted about this in the OC, but I'll recap some of my opinions here. First of all, it was wonderful news to hear that the Girl Scouts accept transgirls, and it was horrible news to hear that someone was so viciously against it. If I ever have the chance to buy Girl Scout cookies, I'll buy even more than I would originally. This boycott girl will probably only increase the sales of cookies, not the other way around.

[PhantomX0990]

Now I need girl scout cookies. :/

They are addicting!

[Toujours]

Does anyone else find it strange that the Girl Scouts accepted a transgender girl but the Boy Scouts won't accept gay boys or leaders? Although I heard somewhere (secondhand so don't quote me on this) that the girl was only accepted after public pressure.

[Alakazam17]

Originally Posted by Toujours

Does anyone else find it strange that the Girl Scouts accepted a transgender girl but the Boy Scouts won't accept gay boys or leaders? Although I heard somewhere (secondhand so don't quote me on this) that the girl was only accepted after public pressure.

They don't accept gay boys in the Boy Scouts? Yeah, that does seem strange. I wonder if the Girl Scouts accept lesbians....

I read in an article yesterday that the girl in question was accepted after public pressure, yes. Means we need more public pressure to let every child, regardless of sexuality or gender identity, be a part of the Scouts.

[Shining Raichu]

Wait, what? I'm not very versed on the idea of scouts in general, but I thought boy and girl scouts were something that happened in the younger years before sexual preference is even an issue in a kid's life. How would they know an 8-year-old boy scout is gay?

[Toujours]

Boy Scouts can be older as well, in my year there was an Eagle Scout (high ranking boy scout). They start young but grow up in the program.

Boy Scouts of America believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the obligations in the Scout Oath and Scout Law to be morally straight and clean in thought, word, and deed. The conduct of youth members must be in compliance with the Scout Oath and Law, and membership in Boy Scouts of America is contingent upon the willingness to accept Scouting’s values and beliefs. Most boys join Scouting when they are 10 or 11 years old. As they continue in the program, all Scouts are expected to take leadership positions. In the unlikely event that an older boy were to hold himself out as homosexual, he would not be able to continue in a youth leadership position.

They had that on their website for a while and then took it down but that's their official stance on it. They've kicked out adult leaders in the past before too for being gay.

[Shining Raichu]

"morally straight and clean in word, thought and deed"

I didn't realise the scouts were a religious program.

[AshleyKetchum]

So there saying your pure if your a scout? I doubt all scouts are 100 % good. To think I was in the program many years ago ugh...

[Alley Cat]

Originally Posted by Shining Raichu

"morally straight and clean in word, thought and deed"

I didn't realise the scouts were a religious program.

I wouldn't necessarily say that that makes them religious, just... morally sound. Although I do know from personal experience that the scouts I've been apart of were HIGHLY religious, it even took place in a church. I think the religious aspect of the scouts would vary from place to place, as well as accepting gays or not. I know that the scout leader here would not only accept, but embrace gay scouts.

[Magdalena~]

Originally Posted by AshleyKetchum

So there saying your pure if your a scout? I doubt all scouts are 100 % good. To think I was in the program many years ago ugh...

I once joined the Cub Scouts for like a day . . . During the first meeting we all had a bathroom break in there and everyone was waving their things around wildly and laughing and shooting pee all over the walls. There were no separators between the urinals so I had to lean into the urinal, literally touching it because I'm modest. That's all I remember of the experience. I didn't want to ever see the organisation again after that.

Anyway to get to the point, this doesn't exactly read clean to me, and most of the boys there actually had signs of having been in the scouts for a while...

[Usagi-Chan~]

Can I join, I'm gay and closeted.

As for Boy Scouts, I believe the stance is your fine if your a youth, but they don't accept homosexual leaders. (In addition your kicked out no matter what if your an Atheist or Agnostic, not sure how much they enforce any of these rules though) The only reason I know this though is cause I'm a Boy Scout.

[-ty-]

I don't think that all or even that most cub or boy scout leaders or families of the children are homophobic; I think that the organization at a national level is though. Most the the leaders and families of local groups did not sign their kids up for bible study, most of them wanted to get their kids to learn the secular values of teamwork, outdoor-skills, exercise, meeting new people, having responsibility, and having fun.

I feel the same way about Christians. Yes, the Pope(ugh, electing a human leader to interpret divine law is kinda sacrilegious! Anyways he has used his position to spread hate and condemnation of gays), many nationalized ministers(mostly they preach for lucrative purposes), and public figures ( basically actors, politicians, celebrities, or other known people who use their media power to advocate their own religious beliefs sometimes for media attention, lucrative purposes, or both) are individuals that we see a lot of the time through the media. Often the rest of the population of Christians are pigeon-holed into the same category as those listed above, and I think that it an unfair way to demonize an entire group of people. I would say that many, if not most, Christians strive to help others, show acceptance, and do countless other selfless acts to show their kindness and empathy to others; come one, Lady Gaga is a Christian!

The point I want to make is that we should scrutinize leaders and public figures of organizations, but do not assume that others associated with an organization hold the same views. I am not assuming that any of you are criticizing the families/leaders of the scouts as a whole, I just want to make sure that there is a distinction between the two, and that it is important to make that distinction while talking about any group or organization of people.

[Shining Raichu]

Hey there Usagi, welcome to the club! :D

Originally Posted by Alley Cat

I wouldn't necessarily say that that makes them religious, just... morally sound.

There is a huge difference between morals and values. For instance, while they may disagree, I would say that discrimination is not morally sound. They are clinging to their conservative values, certainly, but I would never go so far as to call their behaviour moral.

[deoxys121]

It's been quite a while since I posted here. But, I'd like to drop by and show a rather interesting YouTube video. It is National Geographic's explanation of the biology of homosexuality in men. It suggests that a possible cause is that homosexual men absorb enough testosterone during development to masculinize their bodies, but not enough to have an attraction towards women. It does not say anything about homosexual women, but I believe that it could theoretically be caused by a similar manner, but with estrogen instead of testosterone. This video also does not say anything about bisexuality. But, it's worth watching.

[Alley Cat]

Originally Posted by Shining Raichu

Hey there Usagi, welcome to the club! :D



There is a huge difference between morals and values. For instance, while they may disagree, I would say that discrimination is not morally sound. They are clinging to their conservative values, certainly, but I would never go so far as to call their behaviour moral.

Neither would I. But they would, sadly. It's the kind of mentality that needs to be abandoned.

[Magdalena~]

Originally Posted by deoxys121

It's been quite a while since I posted here. But, I'd like to drop by and show a rather interesting YouTube video. It is National Geographic's explanation of the biology of homosexuality in men. It suggests that a possible cause is that homosexual men absorb enough testosterone during development to masculinize their bodies, but not enough to have an attraction towards women. It does not say anything about homosexual women, but I believe that it could theoretically be caused by a similar manner, but with estrogen instead of testosterone. This video also does not say anything about bisexuality. But, it's worth watching.

I was under the impression that this was old news. xD

I think this is the uh "general theory" for transsexuality too. I guess the theory's as good as any really but I feel it's probably dependent on several factors--perhaps a combination of genetics, early-developmental hormone balance, and upbringing, but that's just me. I guess it doesn't matter to me really, but it would be kind of cool for some people to find out!

[QuilavaKing]

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/

This is a group of tests to determine your unconscious feelings toward various groups. I thought it'd be interesting to see what scores you guys get for the Sexuality test.

I got a slight preference for straight people, but I sped up toward the end of the test, because I thought I was going too slow... so I don't think mine was actually accurate... but w/e.

[Shining Raichu]

Your Result

Your data suggest a moderate automatic preference for Straight People compared to Gay People.



I don't think mine is particularly accurate either - I mean, I don't see myself that way and I don't think I have any sort of preference one way or the other as to the people I interact with - though for all I know it is accurate. Who knows what goes on down there in my subconscious lol.

I kept messing up a lot when they switched the sides for Gay and Straight and brought back the Good and Bad values - so I guess the point of that was that it was easier for me to associate gay with bad than it was with good? I don't know, I doubt the test is flawless since it accustomed me to having "gay" and "bad" on the same side first but it's certainly interesting!

[Hybrid Trainer]

{Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for Gay People compared to Straight People}

To be honest I did notice a pattern that when gay was paired with bad words I'd constantly get them wrong but when gay was paired with good words I'd be more likely to get them right. Although gay does also mean happy and good and stuff so I wouldn't be surprised that that was playing a role somewhere in there.