Homophobia

me-skywalker

Just seen the thread that was closed down because the guy was obviously homphobic. No he was way out with is choice of words and use of words but i think his basic point about homophobia in ireland can still be discussed properly...

I personally think Gay ppl should never be allowed to marry. And i think the act itself is rather sick...

Im not a conservative, or christian nut, or right winger, or anyway religious, and im only in my mid 20's and know ppl that are gay and have friends that are that way inclined.

speedboatchase

What act exactly? Anal sex is popular amongst sraight couples, in fact I'd argue nearly every bloke has tried to coax their missus into trying it Also I'm Athiest but I'm allowed marry yet religion stands in the way of homosexual couples to do the same?

dr.bollocko

I can't see a single reason why they shouldn't have all the rights afforded to straight couples. I wouldn't think of it as unnatural either.

r3nu4l

So me-skywalker, I'm guessing that you think that men having anal sex with a woman is disgusting too? Is it the act itself or the fact that it's two men?

Just wondering. I think your attitudes may change with age and experience. A mate of mine was very homophobic in his early-mid twenties but towards his late 20s and having become more exposed to gay people through his girlfriend, he mellowed a lot.

I often think that homophobia is related to insecurity, not necessarily the homophobic being a repressed homosexual themselves but just insecurity.

Terry

me-skywalker wrote: »

Just seen the thread that was closed down because the guy was obviously homphobic. No he was way out with is choice of words and use of words but i think his basic point about homophobia in ireland can still be discussed properly...

I personally think Gay ppl should never be allowed to marry. And i think the act itself is rather sick...

Im not a conservative, or christian nut, or right winger, or anyway religious, and im only in my mid 20's and know ppl that are gay and have friends that are that way inclined.

Why do you think homosexual acts are sick?

Crucifix

me-skywalker wrote: »

And i think the act itself is rather sick...

Straight man finds gay sex unappealing. Shocker

me-skywalker

Now remembering im not a religious person... but the act of marriage is a union blessed by the church thorugh god and all that jazz, and if the church does not agree to homosexuality ppl then they rightly so should not bless gay ppl to marry. Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms.

gazzer

me-skywalker wrote: »

i think the act itself is rather sick...

QUOTE]

Why do you think it is sick? If a man and woman were doing it would you feel the same way?

Crucifix

me-skywalker wrote: »

Now remembering im not a religious person... but the act of marriage is a union blessed by the church thorugh god and all that jazz, and if the church does not agree to homosexuality ppl then they rightly so should not bless gay ppl to marry. Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms.

In a legal context marriage has nothing to do with religion. It's an issue of terminology

Berty

I dont like Panda spread so I dont eat it. Other people like it so do eat it.

I only ask those people not to wave it in my face.

me-skywalker

Crucifix wrote: »

Straight man finds gay sex unappealing. Shocker

it is isnt it?! cliched anti-post, try add somethign better than that.

Helix

me-skywalker wrote: »

I personally think Gay ppl should never be allowed to marry. And i think the act itself is rather sick...

have you got a problem with 2 women going at it?

Rebel021

Marriage was around long before the church.

And gay people mostly get married in a registry office.

Cianos

me-skywalker wrote: »

Now remembering im not a religious person... but the act of marriage is a union blessed by the church thorugh god and all that jazz, and if the church does not agree to homosexuality ppl then they rightly so should not bless gay ppl to marry. Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms.

You seem to be a contradiction in terms.

Many people who aren't religious get married in a registry office...nothing to do with the church. Why shouldn't same sex couples have the same right?

jim o doom

me-skywalker wrote: »

Now remembering im not a religious person... but the act of marriage is a union blessed by the church thorugh god and all that jazz, and if the church does not agree to homosexuality ppl then they rightly so should not bless gay ppl to marry. Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms.

Wow you couldn't be FURTHER wrong if you tried - I am getting married in June.. am I doing in in a church? HELL NO. It's STATE marriage; I'm not religious, so why can't a gay person have the same LEGAL right to marriage, not in a church..?

Terry

me-skywalker wrote: »

Now remembering im not a religious person... but the act of marriage is a union blessed by the church thorugh god and all that jazz, and if the church does not agree to homosexuality ppl then they rightly so should not bless gay ppl to marry. Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms.

Dude. qwerty. Use it.

Terry

jim o doom wrote: »

Wow you couldn't be FURTHER wrong if you tried - I am getting married in June.. am I doing in in a church? HELL NO. It's STATE marriage; I'm not religious, so why can't a gay person have the same LEGAL right to marriage, not in a church..?

Does the missus not want a big church shindig that lasts a couple of hours and costs a couple of grand?

jim o doom

me-skywalker wrote: »

it is isnt it?! cliched anti-post, try add somethign better than that.

"Try add something better than that"? from the person uninformed about marriage in a civil ceremony and makes a blatantly homophobic comment about disliking homosexual activities. that's rich.

You do realise Gay people would be as disgusted by what you would do with a woman right? they don't choose to be gay, they just are. It's like hating someone for being a different colour - as if they chose to be a different race to spite you. pah!

Wagon

Gay people should be allowed to marry. They shouldn't be looked down upon for being attracted to the same sex. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it whatsoever and it's never disgusted me.

But I do have a bit of an issue when it comes to the question of bringing in children to the equation .ie. a same sex couple adopting a child. I'm not religious or homophobic but i do think that a child needs the influence of both parents. Single parents are okay in a lot of cases, but maybe having 2 parents of the same gender can hinder certain areas of development. I'm not sure. It's fairly tricky to call as all cases are different.

alexandros

me-skywalker wrote: »

Now remembering im not a religious person... but the act of marriage is a union blessed by the church thorugh god and all that jazz, and if the church does not agree to homosexuality ppl then they rightly so should not bless gay ppl to marry. Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms.

Is the act of PRIESTS MOLESTING PREPUBESCENT BOYS a union blessed by the church?

Take this thread and shove it up your ...

calahans

They should be allowed to get married - why should they avoid the misery ??

me-skywalker

r3nu4l wrote: »

Just wondering. I think your attitudes may change with age and experience. A mate of mine was very homophobic in his early-mid twenties but towards his late 20s and having become more exposed to gay people through his girlfriend, he mellowed a lot.

exposed to gay people.. is that a pun?
ah no seriously tho, my attitude will never change! ive been 'exposed' to gay ppl for years... and ive seen the corruption and chaos that follows with them and fightin their inner demons moreso... social nature that our 'rights' and 'freedoms' allowed it to persist in the first place. Back centuries ago if gay ppl where persecuted the way jews where there wouldnt be as many as there woudl be today.

Crucifix wrote: »

In a legal context marriage has nothing to do with religion. It's an issue of terminology

well then legally they could go to england and et a civil marriage... but in terms of a 'normal' marriage (church, blessings, masses) all that is complelty void to homosexual ppl. like the way valhalla is void to me! or like i will never reach zen.

jim o doom

Terry wrote: »

Does the missus not want a big church shindig that lasts a couple of hours and costs a couple of grand?

Nah we're having a civil ceremony in a CASTLE! that's WAY cooler plus a ska band and a reggae dj afterwards.. and a cake with frankenstein + frankensteins bride atop.. should be rockin

Plus it would be VERY heretical - neither of us are even remotely religious..

Dragan

me-skywalker wrote: »

exposed to gay people.. is that a pun?
ah no seriously tho, my attitude will never change! ive been 'exposed' to gay ppl for years... and ive seen the corruption and chaos that follows with them and fightin their inner demons moreso... social nature that our 'rights' and 'freedoms' allowed it to persist in the first place. Back centuries ago if gay ppl where persecuted the way jews where there wouldnt be as many as there woudl be today.


well then legally they could go to england and et a civil marriage... but in terms of a 'normal' marriage (church, blessings, masses) all that is complelty void to homosexual ppl. like the way valhalla is void to me! or like i will never reach zen.

This post makes no sense.

Are you implying that homosexuality is somehow passed on genetically, like race is?

Rsaeire

me-skywalker wrote: »

Back centuries ago if gay ppl where persecuted the way jews where there wouldnt be as many as there woudl be today.

How exactly would there be less gay people if they were "persecuted the way jews where", since gay people don't reproduce with each other i.e. same sex and all that?

jim o doom

Dragan wrote: »

This post makes no sense.

Are you implying that homosexuality is somehow passed on genetically, like race is?

hahaha nice - I didn't even imagine that myself! that would be preeeetty difficult

RaverRo808

Personally,its in issue Im not bothered with,my view is behind closed doors,consenting adults should be allowed do what they want,its open displays of sexuality that annoy me,of any kind,and in the case of gays,unfortunately alot of them make a song and dance about being gay,and it just gives them a bad name,if you like to ride a man up the hole fine,but keep it to yourself and do it in the privacy of your own home

Hydroquinone

me-skywalker wrote: »

Back centuries ago if gay ppl where persecuted the way jews where there wouldnt be as many as there woudl be today.

Jewish people were persecuted in the past and there are Jewish people today
Homosexuals were persecuted in the past and there are homosexuals today.

So what - if anything - is your point?

Cianos

me-skywalker wrote: »

exposed to gay people.. is that a pun?
ah no seriously tho, my attitude will never change! ive been 'exposed' to gay ppl for years... and ive seen the corruption and chaos that follows with them and fightin their inner demons moreso... social nature that our 'rights' and 'freedoms' allowed it to persist in the first place. Back centuries ago if gay ppl where persecuted the way jews where there wouldnt be as many as there woudl be today.

eh what?

It may seem that there are more gay people today, simply because it is more acceptable today and so more people can be open about it. And being openly gay 200 years ago would be a lot scarier than being openly jewish or any other religion. You would be targetted by nearly everyone, not just those who don't agree with your religious opinions.

well then legally they could go to england and et a civil marriage... but in terms of a 'normal' marriage (church, blessings, masses) all that is complelty void to homosexual ppl. like the way valhalla is void to me! or like i will never reach zen.

Someone who is open enough about their sexuality to the point that they want to get married is probably going to be open minded enough not to want to be married under the catholic church anyway. You don't just do it because it's the status quo (like most Irish couples)...you're supposed to do it because you believe in the institution and what it represents.

me-skywalker

No im not sayin its passed on genetically and i dont belive ppl are born gay.
But les hypothetically say that centuries ago there was liek a culling of homosecual ppl ie witches style the repercussions of being gay would trickle on and on through centuries... and yes our civil liberties would all remain the same as we are all one and equal but if gay ppl want to marry then why dont they just do it online. It s wrong and you know its wrong, even the homosexual ppl that are reading this or are posting or have family or firneds and agree with it know deep down that its wrong.

Crucifix

me-skywalker wrote: »

well then legally they could go to england and et a civil marriage... but in terms of a 'normal' marriage (church, blessings, masses) all that is complelty void to homosexual ppl. like the way valhalla is void to me! or like i will never reach zen.

In an ideal situation I suppose the government would only issue 'civil unions' to straight or gay couples, and leave marriage to the churchs and synagogues

midlandsmissus

There's no way I'd get married in a church either. civil ceremony all the way for me!

Being blatantly honest, even though I think we should all have bascially the same rights.....the gay men I have met turn my stomach.

I've known a few through college, work and other things and they are so VULGAR, they's tell you the ins and outs of aboslutely everything about their sex life, which I or nobody else wanted to know.

And I also think the act is disgusting, between men and women or men and men, the idea of it obviously appeals to some people but definitely not to me.

jim o doom

RaverRo808 wrote: »

Personally,its in issue Im not bothered with,my view is behind closed doors,consenting adults should be allowed do what they want,its open displays of sexuality that annoy me,of any kind,and in the case of gays,unfortunately alot of them make a song and dance about being gay,and it just gives them a bad name,if you like to ride a man up the hole fine,but keep it to yourself and do it in the privacy of your own home

hell man - I agree with the start of your post, but I have to disagree with the latter.

All normal mixed couple sexes walk around holding hands, hugging each other in public constantly, leaning on each other in cinemas and generally being couples..
in my experience you don't see that many gay couples doing the same, because Irish people are very judgemental (as evidences by this thread) - and I have to say, why can't they? why should they be denied what other couples have?

I've been abroad in Europe and the states and gay people are a lot more open when in couples - very different to Ireland.

What your post points out to me is that you just don't like thinking about it at all - and when you see it, it forces you to think about it. Just let it go - it's not you kissing a man, so why do you care what they do in public?

jim o doom

midlandsmissus wrote: »

And I also think the act is disgusting, between men and women or men and men, the idea of it obviously appeals to some people but definitely not to me.

haha you should clarify the act - I assume you mean "sodomy" and not anything else but in fairness - it disgusts you, but nobody is making you do it, eh? if someone else wants to, why stop them!

Dragan

me-skywalker wrote: »

No im not sayin its passed on genetically and i dont belive ppl are born gay.
But les hypothetically say that centuries ago there was liek a culling of homosecual ppl ie witches style the repercussions of being gay would trickle on and on through centuries... and yes our civil liberties would all remain the same as we are all one and equal but if gay ppl want to marry then why dont they just do it online. It s wrong and you know its wrong, even the homosexual ppl that are reading this or are posting or have family or firneds and agree with it know deep down that its wrong.

Why do i get the feeling that you and dellat are posting from the same IP address?

Also, don't tell me, or anybody else, what we do or should find wrong.

You just look like a retard.

How you can talk about oppression of someone choices and our civil liberties staying the same in the same sentence is beyound me.

You are slowly but surely ending up in the troll pile mate.

Sleipnir

me-skywalker wrote: »

Back centuries ago if gay ppl where persecuted the way jews where there wouldnt be as many as there woudl be today.

Oh that's right, there was some guy a few decades ago who nearly sorted out that whole Jewish thing wasn't there? What was his name again.....
There aren't as many Jewish people around as there was before he showed up!

How, exactly, would persecuting gays centuries ago mean that there would be less today? PLEASE explain.

jim o doom

me-skywalker wrote: »

It s wrong and you know its wrong, even the homosexual ppl that are reading this or are posting or have family or firneds and agree with it know deep down that its wrong.

Anyone else want to vote this as the threads most homophobic and prejudiced post?

OP - why do you care? nobodys asking you to have sex with a person of the same sex - why do you care what other people do, eh? It doesn't affect you in any shape or form whatsoever.

Sesudra

A mate of mine told me she didn't think homophobia still existed and that I(a gay man) was being too oversensitive-just need to show her this thread!

what always makes me laugh is that people say "I don't have a problem with it like but what they do in bed is disgusting etc etc"-hate to break it to ya lads,but a gay relationship consists of a lot more than what goes on in the bedroom-we go out for dinner,to the cinema,with mates to the pub,watch telly together-*gasp* all the things a straight couple would do.but every time,all the straight boys obsess about is our s*x lives -GET OVER IT!

javaboy

me-skywalker wrote: »

No im not sayin its passed on genetically and i dont belive ppl are born gay.
But les hypothetically say that centuries ago there was liek a culling of homosecual ppl ie witches style the repercussions of being gay would trickle on and on through centuries... and yes our civil liberties would all remain the same as we are all one and equal but if gay ppl want to marry then why dont they just do it online. It s wrong and you know its wrong, even the homosexual ppl that are reading this or are posting or have family or firneds and agree with it know deep down that its wrong.

You have a full keyboard. Your enlightened views are much easier to read when you use it.

dr.bollocko

Sesudra wrote: »

A mate of mine told me she didn't think homophobia still existed and that I(a gay man) was being too oversensitive-just need to show her this thread!

what always makes me laugh is that people say "I don't have a problem with it like but what they do in bed is disgusting etc etc"-hate to break it to ya lads,but a gay relationship consists of a lot more than what goes on in the bedroom-we go out for dinner,to the cinema,with mates to the pub,watch telly together-*gasp* all the things a straight couple would do.but every time,all the straight boys obsess about is our s*x lives -GET OVER IT!

To be fair the OP of this thread's homophobic views have been fairly bashed by pretty much everyone who replied. At least it looks, thank God, that this kind of view is not a majority one.

oeb

me-skywalker wrote: »

Just seen the thread that was closed down because the guy was obviously homphobic. No he was way out with is choice of words and use of words but i think his basic point about homophobia in ireland can still be discussed properly...

I personally think Gay ppl should never be allowed to marry. And i think the act itself is rather sick...

Im not a conservative, or christian nut, or right winger, or anyway religious, and im only in my mid 20's and know ppl that are gay and have friends that are that way inclined.

I promise, if you kindly give your permission for gay people to do what the fu*k they want in their own homes, that they won't make you marry (or participate in 'acts') with them (unless you want to).

That's the whole point of the argument. Why does it matter to YOU what other people do? I think onions are sick but I would want to be some kind of retard if I thought that ment I had any right to tell other people if they could eat them or not.

me-skywalker

Dragan wrote: »

Why do i get the feeling that you and dellat are posting from the same IP address?

Also, don't tell me, or anybody else, what we do or should find wrong.

You just look like a retard.

How you can talk about oppression of someone choices and our civil liberties staying the same in the same sentence is beyound me.

You are slowly but surely ending up in the troll pile mate.

why because my opinion doesnt agree with your opinion? i havnt used any slanderous or vulgar terms, yes im homophobic but i have alot of respect people and their lives and if there is a contradiction tahts because there's a contradiciton in all of us. Homosexual activity is a contradiction to life, the basic human nautre to procreate and reproduce.

jim o doom wrote: »

Anyone else want to vote this as the threads most homophobic and prejudiced post?

OP - why do you care? nobodys asking you to have sex with a person of the same sex - why do you care what other people do, eh? It doesn't affect you in any shape or form whatsoever.

what do you mean why do i care? thats just a silly statement, why does anyone care about anything? why does anyone have an opinion? or vote? because i live in this world. life affects life.

tony1kenobi

me-skywalker wrote: »

But les hypothetically say that centuries ago there was liek a culling of homosecual ppl ie witches style the repercussions of being gay would trickle on and on through centuries... and yes our civil liberties would all remain the same as we are all one and equal but if gay ppl want to marry then why dont they just do it online. It s wrong and you know its wrong, even the homosexual ppl that are reading this or are posting or have family or firneds and agree with it know deep down that its wrong.

But that didn't happen...

.....and you would have hated ancient Rome....which was centuries ago......it was balls all over the place.....and they conquered/civilized the world.

LeixlipRed

The OP's views disgust me. If only we had a Hitler for the homosexuals I think is his point. How enlightened. But he's not religious and he "knows gay people" so it's ok. Question OP, if you had a gay friend and they read your views here, would they ever talk to you again?

midlandsmissus

dr.sucks.bollocko wrote: »

To be fair the OP of this thread's homophobic views have been fairly bashed by pretty much everyone who replied. At least it looks, thank God, that this kind of view is not a majority one.

He said he found something disgusting

I wouldn't call finding something disgusting 'homophobic'.

I would find it disgusting if straight or gay couples did it. And I know alot of gals who would agree with me.

RaverRo808

jim o doom wrote: »

hell man - I agree with the start of your post, but I have to disagree with the latter.

All normal mixed couple sexes walk around holding hands, hugging each other in public constantly, leaning on each other in cinemas and generally being couples..
in my experience you don't see that many gay couples doing the same, because Irish people are very judgemental (as evidences by this thread) - and I have to say, why can't they? why should they be denied what other couples have?

I've been abroad in Europe and the states and gay people are a lot more open when in couples - very different to Ireland.

What your post points out to me is that you just don't like thinking about it at all - and when you see it, it forces you to think about it. Just let it go - it's not you kissing a man, so why do you care what they do in public?

You missed my point entirely,I said I dont like public displays of affection 'of any kind',straight,gay or otherwise,sex and sexuality is something that belongs in the bedroom and should stay there.Im not abit homophobic,Im actually siting beside a gay work mate,and he agrees with me

midlandsmissus

RaverRo808 wrote: »

You missed my point entirely,I said I dont like public displays of affection 'of any kind',straight,gay or otherwise,sex and sexuality is something that belongs in the bedroom and should stay there.Im not abit homophobic,Im actually siting beside a gay work mate,and he agrees with me

I also can't stand public displays of affection, and neither does my fiance, thank God.
Slobbering all over each other is never attractive for anybody else to see.

Dragan

me-skywalker wrote: »

why because my opinion doesnt agree with your opinion?

Not at all, because you told us that "we know it's wrong", that is not offering your opinion, it is forcing it upon us....which is retarded.

Ironé

I can never understand homophobia. How on earth does it impact you if someone else is gay? It is the most natural thing in the world. Some people think that its social conditioning. It's not. It occurs in nature - there are gay animals - many studies done to show this. A friend of mine actually did her thesis on this

I have gay friends who have gone through hell in their teenage years coming to grips with the fact that they were attracted to someone of the same sex. Not because it was wrong but because of the attitude to homosexuality in this country. It's not something that anyone would want to choose. Who would ask to be exposed to people's narrow minded opinions.

People throw around such generalizations as well - the poster who said that gay people she has met are "vulgar". That has nothing to do with them being gay - straight people can be vulgar as well.

The issue of marriage which the op, I think was trying to open a discussion on - although its hard to tell as his comments so far seem in my opinion to be childish and quite ignorant of the facts. Personally I'm for it - what possible harm can it do. And why should these people not be entitled to have their family legally recognized? Children being in the equation has absolutely nothing to do with it. Couples are entitled to adopt whether they are married or not. Or entitled to procreate themselves using artificial means. There is no basis in fact to say that children with same sex parents are somehow losing out. They don't need to have a father (if it's two women), a male figure in their life yes but not necessarily their father. And vice versa for two men.

Final point - I agree with the poster who stated that insecurity is often at the root of a lot of homophobia.

Kintarō Hattori

me-skywalker wrote: »

...the act of marriage is a union blessed by the church thorugh god...

And that's why we have civil marriages. If you have a problem with gay people getting married because of the church aspect, what's your opinion on a couple getting married in a civil ceremony?

dr.bollocko

midlandsmissus wrote: »

He said he found something disgusting

I wouldn't call finding something disgusting 'homophobic'.

I would find it disgusting if straight or gay couples did it. And I know alot of gals who would agree with me.

My problem was with this line:

me-skywalker wrote: »

It s wrong and you know its wrong, even the homosexual ppl that are reading this or are posting or have family or firneds and agree with it know deep down that its wrong.

And not with any discussion of whether or not anyone finds the act of anal sex disgusting.