Homosexuality.

[Legobricks]

I have no specific stance on homosexuality same as I have no specific stance on heterosexuality, et al.
That's what the notion of equality is ultimately about, not merely acceptance but essential indiscrimination.

 

[Dawn]

Several thoughts occur to me when I think of homosexuality.

Most notably, it says nice things that we rallied so much support for a minority that actually makes up less than 5% of the population. A blatantly-fraudulent-in-hindsight statistic stated it was at least 10% some time ago, but it turns out that was... an oddly well-placed stunt to get people's attention. I kinda theorize that the government is actually pushing the movement along from the shadows and pretending not to be involved. They did the same thing when we were fighting for the equality of African-Americans, in a similar manner I might add. (Example, Rosa Parks was far from the first African American woman to pull the stunt she did. It wouldn't have gotten the publicity it did without interference.)

...It's nice to be able to say nice things about our government. Even if they do arguably sound hilarious.

On the other hand... Speaking of support, supporters of the LGBT movement, associated with being the main supporter of homosexuals everywhere, have always had this tendency to bother me in a "Moral ends, amoral means" sort of way. I am not an "ends justify the means" sort of person, and so out of anything, the supporters are what bothers me more than anything else. At this point though we're so close to 'equality' that I question whether it's worth making an emotional investment in. That is to say the probability of anything changing in the time left is rather low, which I find unfortunate in spite of the satire artists that will inevitably mock these things for my amusement later.

On a whole, whenever I think about homosexuality I'm either being trying to avoid unnecessary drama related to it or puzzling over the ever so intellectual question of whether other girls secretly hate me. I'm far past the point where I ever have to question how I personally feel about homosexuals. It's not like I'm bi or anything >>; But since that's totally the topic I'll go ahead and say.

Everybody has their kinks and it's not worth any emotional investment on my part until it starts to remotely involve me. In this particular case, I'm actually pretty cool with it for blatantly obvious reasons, whereas my default reaction is generally rather neutral.



Also, on a completely unrelated note...

The words "idiot", "moron", and "imbecile" were all once medical terms to describe various degrees of mental retardation. Word censorship is a hopeless battle people. Try not to invest too much emotions into it.

 

[Nick]

I don't have a stance on it, really. I don't know why people make a big deal out of it. Homosexuals are people who happen to like the same sex. That shouldn't outcast them like it does and make an entire issue out of them serving the country, marrying each other, or adopting a child.

 

[Nick]

imo, they should remove the legal protections inherent with marriage, and tie those to a Civil Union. That way, everybody can get those protections and those who want the religious ceremony to go along with it can have the marriage as well. Everybody wins.

You know, you can already get married and be granted all the rights that come with it without the religious ceremony. Marriages don't just happen in churches, after all. I don't know ~all~ (but I know some) of the differences between the two, but if you remove the legal protections inherited from marriages and put them into civil unions, then doesn't that just defeat the purpose of a civil union, which is supposed to be different? I don't think many people want to settle for civil unions if they want to be married and be granted those legal rights, especially with when so many states have legalized it and recognize it.

The problem is only there because the churches are involved, and in my opinion, the government has been doing just what they shouldn't have done. Religion and politics don't mix.

 

[Nick]

No it isn't. Marriage is recognized by the law as a legal bond between two people. If it was religious, it wouldn't require legalization by the government. But I have to say, I do agree with your ideals. I do agree that the power should be stripped from marriage and given to civil unions for everyone, but that isn't how it is right now.

 

[Shining Raichu]

I completely agree with Pudz' idea. If you strip away the concept of marriage entirely and replace it with something that is uniform and inclusive to everybody, then I think that is a fantastic thing. The problem with marriage is that while it is a legal institution now rather than a religious one, it still has religious connotations which is where people get hung up. I'd call the new order something a bit less cold than "civil union", though I don't know what. Then if they wish to be bound by God as well as by law, then that's between them and their pastor/priest/minister/rabbi/whatever. It really is the perfect solution.

However, it's not practical the way things are now. Gays are being granted the right to marriage place by place and since we're already travelling down that path (and we will get all the way eventually despite the idiots who are opposed), it's too late to turn back and try for something different altogether. I'd rather play it safe and just continue on a sure thing rather than creating a revolution which may take twice as long.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

No it isn't. Marriage is recognized by the law as a legal bond between two people. If it was religious, it wouldn't require legalization by the government. But I have to say, I do agree with your ideals. I do agree that the power should be stripped from marriage and given to civil unions for everyone, but that isn't how it is right now.

The concept of marriage predates the governments role in it. It is a religious concept, like Pudz said.

I'm for gay marriage, in the legal sense. Religious institutions though should be able to maintain their practices. Which is generally the case in places where gay marriage is legal.

But for some reason, just the term "marriage" is difficult to swallow for a lot of people. Even if the religious institutions aren't affected by it. Gays should not have their own term - like "civil unions". It should be equal.

So, as Pudz suggested, if we strip the concept of marriage from the government and leave it to the religious institutions and come up with a new legal concept, like civil unions but as Shining Raichu said, with a nicer more romantic name) that applies to everyone gay and straight that might make it a bit more palatable for some.

When a straight couple gets married in the church they would then also receive a "nicer name for civil union" certificate which a gay couple would also receive when getting "nicer name for civil union-ed" at city hall. Equals rights, with marriage returning to a religious role with the legal aspect being something different (yet simultaneous). You can only get married then if it is part of your belief system, just like baptism for example... unless, of course, Mitt Romney does it to you after you're dead.

 

[Nick]

The concept of marriage predates the governments role in it. It is a religious concept, like Pudz said.

I'm for gay marriage, in the legal sense. Religious institutions though should be able to maintain their practices. Which is generally the case in places where gay marriage is legal.

But for some reason, just the term "marriage" is difficult to swallow for a lot of people. Even if the religious institutions aren't affected by it. Gays should not have their own term - like "civil unions". It should be equal.

So, as Pudz suggested, if we strip the concept of marriage from the government and leave it to the religious institutions and come up with a new legal concept, like civil unions but as Shining Raichu said, with a nicer more romantic name) that applies to everyone gay and straight that might make it a bit more palatable for some.

When a straight couple gets married in the church they would then also receive a "nicer name for civil union" certificate which a gay couple would also receive when getting "nicer name for civil union-ed" at city hall. Equals rights, with marriage returning to a religious role with the legal aspect being something different (yet simultaneous). You can only get married then if it is part of your belief system, just like baptism for example... unless, of course, Mitt Romney does it to you after you're dead.

Yes, I agree with that and know that it predates the government, but now it needs to be recognized by law in order for it to be accepted in many situations. Do I agree with that? Of course not. But the problem for most people is the different rights (because of very choice wording in technicalities in specifications for similar rights) granted by the government to those engaged in them, and the rights for married peoples are more beneficial and practical for ~most~ people interested in sharing their lives together compared to the rights for civil unions.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

and the rights for married peoples are more beneficial and practical for ~most~ people interested in sharing their lives together compared to the rights for civil unions.

Like Shining Raichu and I said, we'd use a different term from civil unions.

But, in any event, the rights should be the same. The main issues of contention as I see it are strictly financial and logistical (hospital visitation rights, for example).

 

[Nick]

Didn't I already state that I agree with those ideals?

 

[idi0ts]

Gays are people too so I don't see why people hate on them. How would they feel if they told they were not allowed to marry or have a child.

 

[Karma Police]

Gay people are people as well, aren't they? They weren't born with any defect, or anything like that. I seriously don't know why people have to discriminate like this. Just because a man likes another man doesn't mean that he has to be treated this stupid way, that he can't have kids/join the army. I support gay marriage, and gay rights. No need to spread hate about them. And seriously, people should really stop portraying gay people like the way they do. It's stupid, really, showing them as always carrying a handbag/dressed in pink all the time/moving the way people show them. Maybe it's just that problem in my country, but really people should stop doing that.

In my religion, as far as I know, there is no direct reference to homosexual people. It's still banned in here though, and it's a controversial subject. If you want to read a bit more you should check it here. I don't really support the opponents of gay people here, because imo they don't really have a lot to base their claims on.

 

[Karma Police]

How did you come to that conclusion ?

I don't know if you're a troll or not, but I'll answer this.

The whole problem IS that most people consider gay people not human, which is why they are often denied basic rights like marriage, being able to adopt a child, etc. The whole issue is that people need to start accepting homosexual people as equal people too, and not somebody who is supposed to be shunned or socially boycotted. Which is why I worded that phrase that way.

 

[Harmony]

The only time I feel it's necessary to even use the word gay is when someone is talking about their sexual preference. LGBT people are still people and they should be treated as such. We all should be awarded the same opportunities and that's just that.

 

[SiphonophoreHouse]

I am Christian and fine with Gays.(not lesbian or bi myself tho.)Yes, it is possible.
I guess I can sympathize with thier plight as I am being discriminated myself for what I am.(If you really wanna know why...look at my username... you may be able to figure it out...)

 

[Timbjerr]

I am Christian and fine with Gays.(not lesbian or bi myself tho.)Yes, it is possible.

There's a huge misconception that about Christianity that plays into this issue. Christianity (or at least the school of thought that I was brought up in) doesn't condemn being homosexual, but rather frowns upon homosexual actions (i.e. buttsecks and the like), but Jesus also preached that we shall not judge our fellow men because we're all sinners. Who's to know that your sin of hatred and discrimination don't equate to more than a couple nights of homoerotic pleasure?

IMO, the "Christians" that protest and carry banners that say "GOD HATES FAGS" aren't real Christians because any real Christian would know that God is love and that no sin is beyond His forgiveness.

I guess I can sympathize with thier plight as I am being discriminated myself for what I am.(If you really wanna know why...look at my username... you may be able to figure it out...)

You belong to the order of invertebrates that include polyp colonies such as the Portuguese Man o' War??

 

[Oryx]

You belong to the order of invertebrates that include polyp colonies such as the Portuguese Man o' War??

I had the same thought, hahaha.

As far as Christian views on homosexuality, I know of some people who are really offended by that view only because of the way people handle it. For example, if you're seen getting overly angry, a sin in itself, people normally wouldn't tell you that you're sinning and need to stop. But if you're gay, even if they subscribe to the "sin not sinner" outlook, often they still feel the need to confront you and let you know that you're sinning. :(

 

[institutions]

Should let anyone marry whoever they want, y'know?
Obv. leave an age restriction though, as 10 year olds can't really be sure if they want to marry.

It's sad that this is still an issue in 2012.

 

[SiphonophoreHouse]

I had the same thought, hahaha.

As far as Christian views on homosexuality, I know of some people who are really offended by that view only because of the way people handle it. For example, if you're seen getting overly angry, a sin in itself, people normally wouldn't tell you that you're sinning and need to stop. But if you're gay, even if they subscribe to the "sin not sinner" outlook, often they still feel the need to confront you and let you know that you're sinning. :(

All right, fine, I'm multiple. That's why we chose that name.

 

[Kano Shuuya]

Homosexuality is a sin. 8|

I don't have a stance on it, really. I don't know why people make a big deal out of it. Homosexuals are people who happen to like the same sex. That shouldn't outcast them like it does and make an entire issue out of them serving the country, marrying each other, or adopting a child.

^ That, pretty much.

That's also kind of why I haven't posted here until now, because I might be in the LGBT community, but I really.. don't let it take up all that much space in my thoughts on a regular basis. I have no idea how so many people can walk around protesting with signs, and calling it a sin, and etc. It's sad to me that that's what people are taught to believe. People should be able to marry who they want to marry, love who they want to love, without all the protesting, etc..