We Can Cure the Gheys!

ntlbell

prinz wrote: »

I truly believe that if someone could cure it tomorrow he'd be right at the front of the queue.

I think there would be many people like this.

I always get accused of trolling in threads like this but I firmly believe, it will be cured/fixed at some point.

Puddleduck

Totally ridiculous. I think rather than trying to 'fix' something that isnt broken they should focus their efforts on making the people in question more accepting of who they are.

ntlbell

Puddleduck wrote: »

Totally ridiculous. I think rather than trying to 'fix' something that isnt broken they should focus their efforts on making the people in question more accepting of who they are.

course it's broken :rolleyes:

the penis goes into the vagina

like the kinder garden cop twins

boys have a penis, girls have a vagina...

You can't reproduce rubbing bums...

Puddleduck

ntlbell wrote: »

course it's broken :rolleyes:

the penis goes into the vagina

like the kinder garden cop twins

boys have a penis, girls have a vagina...

You can't reproduce rubbing bums...

And the days of constantly needing to reproduce are over. Where exactly does it say that it has to be a man and woman to form a couple, other than in religion.

meganj

Ok this may just be because i watched it the other day... but does this "cure" remind anyone of X-Men (i can't remember which one.. the one with the cure!)? and we all saw what happened there....

By saying there is a cure your implying that everyone who is gay (happy or not) has a disease.. which will offend a lot of gay gay people (see what i did there???)

Oh and before anyone shouts at me no i'm not comparing gay people to mutants, just making an observation..

ntlbell

Puddleduck wrote: »

And the days of constantly needing to reproduce are over. Where exactly does it say that it has to be a man and woman to form a couple, other than in religion.

so the ghey "gene" manifested because it new the world was becoming over crowded?

That doesn't make any sense it's either broke or it's not and it's broke.

I don't know much about religion, I don't see what religion has to do with it at all...

ntlbell

meganj wrote: »

Ok this may just be because i watched it the other day... but does this "cure" remind anyone of X-Men (i can't remember which one.. the one with the cure!)? and we all saw what happened there....

By saying there is a cure your implying that everyone who is gay (happy or not) has a disease.. which will offend a lot of gay gay people (see what i did there???)

Oh and before anyone shouts at me no i'm not comparing gay people to mutants, just making an observation..

calling a blind person blind is not offensive?

why should a homosexual be offended if the fault is found and then fixed to be called by the name of their ailment?

Elessar

ntlbell wrote: »

course it's broken :rolleyes:

the penis goes into the vagina

like the kinder garden cop twins

boys have a penis, girls have a vagina...

You can't reproduce rubbing bums...

Oh dear.

Puddleduck

ntlbell wrote: »

so the ghey "gene" manifested because it new the world was becoming over crowded?

That doesn't make any sense it's either broke or it's not and it's broke.

I don't know much about religion, I don't see what religion has to do with it at all...

Religion comes into it because that seems to be where the majority of problems accepting people that are gay come from. I never said anything about genes, then again, how do we know its not an eveloutionary thing?

ntlbell

Puddleduck wrote: »

Religion comes into it because that seems to be where the majority of problems accepting people that are gay come from. I never said anything about genes, then again, how do we know its not an eveloutionary thing?

It's a bit like saying " I accept this person as a mentally retarded dwarf"

to not offend all retarded dwarf's we won't look into the cause's/prevention for it in the future.

Puddleduck

ntlbell wrote: »

It's a bit like saying " I accept this person as a mentally retarded dwarf"

to not offend all retarded dwarf's we won't look into the cause's/prevention for it in the future.

I see, so being gay means that you dont function properly?

DubArk

ntlbell wrote: »

calling a blind person blind is not offensive?

why should a homosexual be offended if the fault is found and then fixed to be called by the name of their ailment?

Because of attitudes just like yours!! If your up for a cure best deal with your own ailment first. :rolleyes:

ntlbell

Puddleduck wrote: »

I see, so being gay means that you dont function properly?

the point I was making was about "accepting" it's not about if one accepts someone for who they are.

We don't accept cancer, we don't accept mental illness, we don't accpet thousands of situations where something has gone "wrong" we try to fix that.

I don't see why a "ghey" should be anymore insulted than anyone else we try to "fix"

ntlbell

DubArk wrote: »

Because of attitudes just like yours!! If your up for a cure best deal with your own ailment first. :rolleyes:

what's an attitude like mine?

Spunge

Obviously there are people who are gay but would rather not be. Makes sense.

Queue the pc brigade.

Puddleduck

ntlbell wrote: »

the point I was making was about "accepting" it's not about if one accepts someone for who they are.

We don't accept cancer, we don't accept mental illness, we don't accpet thousands of situations where something has gone "wrong" we try to fix that.

I don't see why a "ghey" should be anymore insulted than anyone else we try to "fix"

Because being gay isnt a disease, it dosent threaten your life or hinder you from doing the things you want to do. It also isnt wrong. Its time society woke up to that fact. By your reasoning we should try to 'fix' anyone who dosent fit into the catagories that we find acceptable. Maybe theyll invent a 'cure' for being black, or for liking certain music the majority of us dont like.

Actually if they could invent a cure for skangerism Id be happy

Nodin

ntlbell wrote: »

what's an attitude like mine?

Judging homosexuality as an illness?

Bigoted, antediluvian, untrue, incorrect and plain fucking wrong, I'd imagine.

ntlbell

Puddleduck wrote: »

Because being gay isnt a disease, it dosent threaten your life or hinder you from doing the things you want to do. It also isnt wrong. Its time society woke up to that fact. By your reasoning we should try to 'fix' anyone who dosent fit into the catagories that we find acceptable. Maybe theyll invent a 'cure' for being black, or for liking certain music the majority of us dont like.

Actually if they could invent a cure for skangerism Id be happy

you can put any name on it you want it doesn't really change it.

It doesn't have to threaten ones life even tho i'd like to see the satistics on homosexual suicide. You think I'm some old donkey that can't come around having a modern view on homsexuality, I'm not a 13yr old child who thinks "yuck" when I see two men kissing.

not by my reasoning we as a soceity try and fix evertyhing about everyone _all_ the time, the same way I don't think "yuck" when a 25yr old tells me he's just been cured of cancer I don't hold the cancer against him, or if i meet someone who was born paralised there's nothing "wrong" about it but it would of been nice to be able to prevent it.

I'm not some "ghey basher"

ntlbell

Nodin wrote: »

Judging homosexuality as an illness?

Bigoted, antediluvian, untrue, incorrect and plain fucking wrong, I'd imagine.

I don't think i said it was an illness, I might have compared it to one.

Nodin

ntlbell wrote: »

I don't think i said it was an illness, I might have compared it to one.

Well.......

ntlbell wrote:

I always get accused of trolling in threads like this but I firmly believe, it will be cured/fixed at some point.

ntlbell wrote:

why should a homosexual be offended if the fault is found and then fixed to be called by the name of their ailment?

(my bold and underline)

ntlbell wrote:

We don't accept cancer, we don't accept mental illness, we don't accpet thousands of situations where something has gone "wrong" we try to fix that.

(my bold and underline)

....yes, yes you did.

ntlbell

Nodin wrote: »

Well.......



(my bold and underline)

(my bold and underline)

....yes, yes you did.

umm no i didn't

a broken leg is not a disease, we can fix it, it is an ailment and there's something wrong with the "leg"

you're making assumptions.

Nodin

ntlbell wrote: »

umm no i didn't

a broken leg is not a disease, we can fix it, it is an ailment and there's something wrong with the "leg"

you're making assumptions.

Ahem.....

ntlbell wrote: »

We don't accept cancer, we don't accept mental illness, we don't accpet thousands of situations where something has gone "wrong" we try to fix that.

Cancer? Mental illness? Its fairly clear looking at the sum total of your remarks what you're driving at with regards the gays. Equivocating now when you're called on it doesn't do you any favours.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Puddleduck wrote: »

Religion comes into it because that seems to be where the majority of problems accepting people that are gay come from. I never said anything about genes, then again, how do we know its not an eveloutionary thing?

Evoloution doesn't work to help the species in general. It serves individuals to pass on their genes.

Now, theres some ideas that suggest siblings of homosexuals might be more fertile, or that a gay uncle/aunt might have provided support for nieces nephews and as they share 25% of their genes some would be passed on. However, this means siblings of homosexuals would have to have twice as many children to have any effect in the greater scheme of things as parents share 50% of their genes with their children.

I don't think its a coincidence virtually all religions are anti-homosexual. Perhaps religion is used as an expression of dislike.

ntlbell

Nodin wrote: »

Ahem.....



Cancer? Mental illness? Its fairly clear looking at the sum total of your remarks what you're driving at with regards the gays. Equivocating now when you're called on it doesn't do you any favours.

You don't want to have a discussion on it, you want to try and brand me as some caveman who just doesn't understand, that's fine.

If you want to discuss my points I'll discuss them, if you want to question them I'll answer but if you just want to try and make me out to be some ghey hating drone I'm not interested.

dr.bollocko

ntlbell wrote: »

umm no i didn't

a broken leg is not a disease, we can fix it, it is an ailment and there's something wrong with the "leg"

you're making assumptions.

That's not really relevant IMO.
So in fact you did compare homosexuality to an illness.

Elessar

ntlbell wrote: »

umm no i didn't

a broken leg is not a disease, we can fix it, it is an ailment and there's something wrong with the "leg"

you're making assumptions.

Science would like a word with you.

ntlbell

dr.bollocko wrote: »

That's not really relevant IMO.
So in fact you did compare homosexuality to an illness.

You're on the ball, I did compare it, I didn't say it was one, which i mentioned in a previous post.

ntlbell

Elessar wrote: »

Science would like a word with you.

There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.

That sounds like "we don't know what's going wrong"

dr.bollocko

ntlbell wrote: »

You're on the ball, I did compare it, I didn't say it was one, which i mentioned in a previous post.

I think we all totally understand the point that you were trying to make there buddy.

It's almost as if you've done this whole arguing with people on the internet thing before.

ntlbell

dr.bollocko wrote: »

I think we all totally understand the point that you were trying to make there buddy.

It's almost as if you've done this whole arguing with people on the internet thing before.

I'll point you to this also