Homosexuality is a Mental Disorder

no... but i guess bisexuality is found in animals... and rape is also found in animals. so im saying we can make something illegal even if its "seen in nature" we have and continue to do that. so the natural argument is not one that should be taken seriously

 

What makes you think pedophilia is a natural and good state?

 

We are in agreement. So when the Anti-Gay bigots start chanting that homosexuality is not 'natural' you and I both will point out that we do not base our laws based upon what is or is not found in nature.

Sodomy used to be illegal in most states. Then states changed that to make sodomy between two men illegal. Now most states have changed those laws altogether. Which makes sense- laws about consensual sex between two adults cannot be uniformly enforced, and are inevitably used as tools to enforce a biased morality code.

- - - Updated - - -

What makes it not natural? Define what your criteria for 'natural' is for humans?

 

I will point out once again how disgusting your whole concept of trying to convince people that it is okay to kill gays.

- - - Updated - - -

Just as heterosexuality is.

 

thats asking a lot from me here lol.... long definition. but in short humans are above animals and have morals and values. nuff said

 

Well stick with me here. You claim that something wasn't 'natural' but you also claimed that we can't look to the natural world for examples.

What you seem to be saying here is that what is 'natural' are 'morals and values'-

Now that could imply that you think that 'morals and values' are universal amongst all humans- is that what you think?

Or that the "Western morals and values" that you grew up with are 'natural'- but what makes them 'natural'?

I think this is important. Lets continue this discussion respectfully, and if idiots jump in and try to derail it, lets ignore them.

 

SFJeff, if a gay is going to commit indecent exposure or harass other men for sex such as in public restroom, then the man has a right to use any reasonable force to end this. I don't want gays having sex in bathrooms nor do I want gays masturbating in front of others. Of course, you're an apologist for homosexual statutory rapist Harvey B. Milk. RighttoLife doesn't have to tolerate queers sending him harassing emails after he asked the gay to stop contacting him. Also SFJeff, it's my view that in 'gay bashing cases' the gays or the gay's family should have to pay the gay basher's defense if he is acquitted on self-defense grounds.

 

Yes I believe my western morals are human morals. we all have them. some of us choose not to follow them, but we all naturally have the same morals...

- - - Updated - - -

your forgetting the

 

Wow....that's kind of a crazy opinion, and I don't know where to begin unwinding it.

 

Morality is fluid, and there is plenty of animal behavior that could be considered moral by human standards.

Like monogamous Penguins.

 

RightToLife, I haven't forgotten but the Mods told me I can't use those icons & I got infractions for using that icon including not being allowed to post for several days. But RightToLife, are you still getting harassing emails from that gay? Please update, thanks.

 

They love to throw out "abomination"...i.e. Leviticus... at homosexuality. But then you ask them the part about executing people who work on the Sabbath or wear clothes made from two different cloths or touching a pig's skin (pretty much rule out the NFL).....and they say "Oh, that part doesn't count anymore!"

Only other thing in the Bible is the Apostle Paul.....who apparently was a "lifelong bachelor"....sort of like Rock Hudson.

- - - Updated - - -

So do you want to make homosexuality illegal?

 

Until about 150 years ago, slavery was considered "moral" in some parts of the West.

 

If they decided to make gay/lesbian behaviors criminal, then I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. World's a better place w/o gay/lesbian behaviors. Priority must be to make sex changes a crime as the transexuals are worse than gays.

 

Criteria are. It is the plural of criterion. Heterophobes try to intimidate us by claiming that they are on the cutting edge of psychiatric science, but they don't even have a high-school knowledge of English.

 

So do you think that if your child was abducted by you at child birth and whisked away to the Kalahari to be raised by San aborigines, that the child would end up with the same moral values as you have?

See- I don't think so. Lets at two items:

Do you think that it is immoral for two unmarried adults to have sex together?

Do you think that it is immoral to kill a puppy?

- - - Updated - - -

Spelling criticism is the last refuge of those who can't actually respond to the topic.

 

That old testiment was one cold mutha frucker... lol Interestingly RIGHTTOLIFE is arguing a contradiction. That since it exists in nature (all over the place) that does not matter, we should not consider that reasoning for supporting it; While also arguing that since marriage is somehow natural so we should consider it valid?? Yes that was meant to make little sense. If you turn the logic over on its head, he's really saying "I only believe what the Bible says or what I want to believe", nothing of substance in my opinion. Am I missing something, I'm skimming messages here. I guess I would ask him, what in your eyes determines the difference ?

 

well you are also okay with gays killing themselves, and using "gays hit on me' as a defense for killing gays.

I would use you as a poster child for virulant homophobia but frankly most anti-gay bigots don't express ideas as bizarre as yours.

 

You're right on the 1st part. 'Hit on' is a mild word. If a gay is going to commit indecent exposure or harass other men for sex such as in public restroom, then the man has a right to use any reasonable force to end this including even deadly force if necessary because the gay is committing a crime. I don't want gays having sex in bathrooms & I don't want homos masturbating in front of others-that's indecent exposure. Of course, you're an apologist for homosexual statutory rapist Harvey B. Milk. RighttoLife doesn't have to tolerate queers sending him harassing emails after he asked the gay to stop contacting him. Also SFJeff, it's my view that in 'gay bashing cases' the gays or the gay's family should have to pay the gay basher's defense if he is acquitted on self-defense grounds. I can't use icons because the Mods told me I can't.

 

See all you think: queer abusing man.

I think: abusive emails: block the email from the sender, or change my email address.

See all you think: queer abusing man.

Your posts wouldn't seem so obviously anti-homosexual bigotry if it wasn't always about the poor straight man dealing with being hit on by some aggressive queer.

Let me see what this sounds like when it is phobic neutral:
'it's my view that in assault cases, that the victims should have to pay the attackers defense if he is acquited on self defense grounds.'

lets try another version:
'its my view that in rape cases, that the alleged victims should have to pay the alleged attackers defense if he is acquited because she had it coming.'

 

And no one need be surprised as within this very culture, that rather than lay down and die, they learn to FIGHT BACK (hopefully in all the right ways) and be literally as intolerant of the homophobia... as the homophobes are of them.

In a society where "2nd Amendment solutions" are practically worshiped by many off-center individuals... I often wonder WHY there are are those who would purposely SEEK to place/set certain individuals off-balance.

I'm certainly not for violence (I've seen and had enough of it)... but if assorted idiots and bigots in our society continue to think that the constant hammering or mistreatment of homosexual people (or any other group) in our society won't lead to dire effects for ALL, then they need to properly educate themselves.

 

Do you really think that "assault" is justified in the situation you just described? With all the firearms violence we see in this society, you would promote such an idea?

You need to think more clearly, IMO.

 

SFJeff with rape, if it's proven the rape suspect is innocent such as in 2006 Duke case where it was proven CG Mangum lied, then yes, the rape accuser should pay for the rape suspect's defense as no rape happened. Most 'gay bashings' are men reacting to crimes the gays & lesbians did and gay/lesbian groups are not to be trusted. Transexuals are worse and make it a crime to do sex changes. With harassing emails, RightToLife doesn't need to change his email because of a crime the homo is doing. The queer who is harassing RightToLife is committing a crime and email harassment is a crime. It's the gay who must change his conduct not RightToLife. After RightToLife asked him to stop contacting him, it's criminal to repeatedly contact some1 after they've asked you to stop-Internet Stalking is a crime.

Johnny-C, that' a jury topic. You don't know the gay's history, such as has he done this or other violence to others in past. These cases unpredictable-harassment or assault & battery such as 'crotch grabbing', indecent exposure, etc. may not be the only crime. If the homosexual is high on drugs (many gays drugjunkies) or has violent history (violent propensity) then it's possible the homosexual is trying to commit a more violent crime such as homosexual rape. Many cases where homosexuals committed more violent deeds after the homosexual did indecent exposure, email harassment or assault and battery. With gay panic, let's say a man kills a gay in a lot after the gay repeatedly proposed to him after the man said no and or after the gay pinched the man's butt or groin against man's will (many gay bashings happen after the gay committed this assault/battery) and the man's defense lawyer raises gay panic defense. Defense will say the gay committed crimes such as indecent exposure, assault/battery and so on. Many cases where homosexuals committed more violent deeds after the homosexual did indecent exposure, assault and battery.For the charge to be dismissed or for an acquittal to happen with gay panic, the defense has to make a credible case that the gay was attempting something more violent. If the homosexual has a history of attacking other men in the lot after he harassed them, then a case can be made that the gay was trying to do something more violent as he had done to others before him-jury decides if man used reasonable force.

For gay panic defense to have best chance of success, the defense should try to find out criminal and drug history of the homosexual and the defense should try to subpoena the homosexual's medical records to find out if the homosexual is a junky and more importantly if the homosexual has a history of violently attacking other men after he proposed to them. These things can make the difference between getting the charged dismissed by the prosecutor or if it goes to trial an acquittal and getting convicted. Anyhow RightToLife, I hope you are no longer getting harassing emails from him, but report him to the police because he has no right to be emailing you repeatedly after you asked him to stop and you don't know what his history is. Transexuals are worse & many transexuals get their brains ruined by the hormone shots which has been linked to higher rates of sex abuse crimes committed by transexuals.

 

If you are going to throw up 'mock' scenarios, then of course, we cannot reach any final conclusions here.

Even so, I would not advocate assaulting other human beings, merely because they socially offend someone. That is crazy-talk.