The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

NuMarvel wrote: »

I'm not sure what this has to do with my post. I asked why you focused solely on LGBT rights when there are other examples of freedom of conscience vs personal liberties and civil rights. So far, you haven't responded.

The only one avoiding the subject matter is you.

Well I'm avoiding the topic fully in this thread not of my making. In case you missed my earlier post after my thread was moved here:

I'm not into the abomination that is the megathreads so I'm out. Feel free to delete, or you can leave it be for others.

Also, your post doesn't deal with the topic, but rather says there's more conflicts, and seems to take exception that all the examples I gave were in relation to LGBT rights conflicting. So rather than dealing with the subject, you seem to want to go down the 'Why are you picking on us' route. this is a rabbit hole that just tries take the discussion down a personal route. This may not be your intention, but I hope you see the issue. LGBT rights are very much in vogue in these times, even our own Tanaiste says as much, describing them as the human rights issue of our time. So its current, and has many examples to pick on. Don't take it personal, its more like current affairs.

JimiTime wrote: »

Well I'm avoiding the topic fully in this thread not of my making. In case you missed my earlier post after my thread was moved here:

I'm not into the abomination that is the megathreads so I'm out. Feel free to delete, or you can leave it be for others.

I did see that post. But I also see that you're continuing to post about a topic you claim you're fully avoiding. If don't want to have anything to do with the topic, then I suggest you stop posting.

And in that spirit, I'll address the other part of your post when you make it clear if you're in or out.

MrPudding wrote: »

I know exactly who, and what, you are
MrP

Sure there you go. People don't seem to be able to help themselves when dealing with this topic. Its one of the things that makes me extremely suspicious about the whole thing. People seem to just want to shut down discussion with personal abuse. There is a great, great intolerance of any dissenting voice. More worryingly, is that most of you really don't seem to realise your appalling behaviour.

One can alway hope that a person will change, however.

You pay lip service to such a hope, but your actions defy your words. If I'm to give you the benefit of the doubt though, I'll give you this advice. Abusing people, misrepresenting them, lying about them etc, is not the greatest method to fulfil your alleged hope. In fact, I think what you actually do is actually the opposite of what you say you hope for. You will in fact drive some people to a more extreme view as you just appear as hateful and intolerant. Foaming at the mouth to verbally assault. Thankfully, I'm neither hateful or intolerant. Nor do I care what people do in their bedrooms (This is ironically an obsession of the folk who accuse me of it). I have concerns with where the LGBT agenda is going to bring us as a society however, and no matter how much you guys try to shout me down and lie and abuse, I shall not grow as hateful towards you as you are towards me, nor shall I cower in fear of the abhorrent, disingenuous labels you bestow on dissenters.

Apart from that, your post makes my point more than anything I could say in terms of the absolute waste of time engaging with you over yonder would be.

JimiTime wrote: »

Actually, you'll find I'm addressing other things, like showing you how you are not actually dealing with the topic though you say you are. Consider it a public service

So you instead want to make this a discussion on the discussion? No, thanks.

endacl wrote: »

While there is an apparent logical consistency to your post above. I'll leave it to others to point out the flaws. I'll just remind you that there were gay people long before there were christians. And that there will be gay people long after christianity has given way to whatever comes after it. No matter what belief system people have held throughout history, the only constant has been people.

That's a fact. There is people. And some of them are homosexual.

This does not imply anything.

Below is a link to a rather famous (among activists) piece of homosexual literature fist published in 1987 about the agenda of desensitisation, vilification of dissenters and a whole lot more etc. Worth a read. Gotta hand it to them, its certainly worked/working.

http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm

28064212 wrote: »

Should they be taught that heterosexuality is the norm, and that if they're gay, they're not normal?

No. Just because you are against schools indoctrinating children with homosexual activist groups' propaganda curriculum, doesn't mean that you are for vilifying homosexuals, or teaching that they are not normal.

28064212 wrote: »

Quote: "Children to be taught 'heterosexuality not the norm' in Australian schools project". Maybe BB meant it as a positive thing, but somehow I doubt it. The only alternative to being taught "heterosexuality not the norm" is "heterosexuality is the norm". Are you advocating the latter?

I really dislike use of the word "normal" to describe a group of people. It obviously has that undertone of anything else being abnormal (even if it's not vocalised explicitly). I don't think it's helpful to suggest that anyone in a minority is not "the norm" and I wish newspapers would choose their words more carefully.

If 1/10 people are gay, then 1/10 kid's books should feature a gay couple. If 2/10 people are Muslim, then 2/10 characters in kid's books should be Muslim. The less issue made about it, the less agenda pushing on either side, the more "normal" it will be to children to recognise that we aren't a homogeneous bunch of people.

Of course, I think pulling kids up on spiteful or inappropriate language is appropriate. I think promoting the idea that it doesn't matter whether you're black/white or straight/gay or [insert desired descriptor here] and that the world is made up of lots of different types of people, all worthy of equal respect is all fine. But I'm not sure that making such a major strategy about it is necessary.

Am I being naive? Or is this what's actually happening and the newspapers sensationalise it somewhat?

28064212 wrote: »

Quote: "Children to be taught 'heterosexuality not the norm' in Australian schools project". Maybe BB meant it as a positive thing, but somehow I doubt it. The only alternative to being taught "heterosexuality not the norm" is "heterosexuality is the norm". Are you advocating the latter?

I certainly wasn't taught that homosexuality was not normal, nor was I thought that heterosexuality was 'The Norm' and I had 3 years of sex and relationship education in a Catholic school, in both biology and religion class. I can't imagine how you would see it as either/or.

JimiTime wrote: »

I certainly wasn't taught that homosexuality was not normal, nor was I thought that heterosexuality was 'The Norm' and I had 3 years of sex and relationship education in a Catholic school, in both biology and religion class. I can't imagine how you would see it as either/or.

Can I ask whether your school acknowledged the existence of homosexuality and, if so, what you were told (briefly)?

I attended a Catholic school and we never received any concerted lessons or teachings on sexuality. As far as I remember, it wasn't mentioned once in any lesson whatsoever. Anything I learned about homosexuality was via parents, informal chats with teachers, friends etc.

To be fair, I attended school before there were many books including gay people. Perhaps coming across such characters in books prompts questioning on the part of the pupil? And that's good thing, right?

My now 15 yr old had a talk in her school in 6th class by Accord where they were told sex is between a man and a woman and everything else is wrong, this was printed in the literature they gave the kids to take home...now its not as strong a word as abnormal but it was enough for me to complain to the school along with other parents. My daughter is gay, I have gay friends, no one should be telling anyone of 12/13 that its wrong to be gay.

doctoremma wrote: »

Note: this answer is going to contain a lots of "you"s but it's not directed at YOU personally.

So how would you word the issue of homosexual acts and religious belief?

I favour the manner you've suggested - "Catholic people believe that homosexual acts are a sin" (of course, I wouldn't bring it up apropos of nothing). But that's speaking as an atheist.

If I were Catholic myself, I could probably sanction "I believe that homosexual acts are a sin". After all, I do have beliefs (albeit not religious) and would be happy to convey them honestly to anyone who asked.

What I simply cannot think appropriate is teaching "Homosexual acts are a sin", as if it were a statement of universal truth. I understand you might well believe it to be a universal truth but don't you have a duty to your child, who may be struggling with their sexual identity, to at least be tactful about it? Forgetting even if it's "proper" or "allowed by the State" or whatever, making such a bald statement has the power to hurt someone, especially those younger than you, who view you as the ultimate authority of the world.

I think that by teaching your child "homosexual acts are sinful and will be punished", when you know that your child will believe you with few (if any) questions, is nothing other than indoctrination. You might be doing your duty - in most cases, it's your right to do so - but it shouldn't be forgotten that this statement represents YOUR belief and YOUR belief only. As such, you are almost lying to your child if you don't acknowledge this?

TBH, I wouldn't get into the topic of homosexuality with my children unless asked by them, and what I said would depend on the question and its context.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Heterosexuality is the norm. FWIW my views generally mirror Penn's here so no need to re-state.

On a personal level I am glad that these kind of views weren't pushed into my consciousness as a teen. In my mid-teens in the 90's I was big into the drug scene as were a lot of homosexual men and my path would converge with theirs in parties etc more often than not.

I was then an awkward, boyish looking 15-year-old who looked a lot younger who was at these parties off my head on drugs and alcohol. I was propositioned on numerous occasions by predaratory middle-aged to elderly gay men at these parties in very direct and sometimes aggressive manners.

I hate to imagine what might have happened if I was left under the impression that their behaviour was somehow normal because of what I was thought at school.

Surely you weretaught informed that drugs were bad and you still went and did them .

Secondly you met these men while at drug parties, so lets just assume that most of the attendies would be fairly shady charecters

Hetrosexuals can be preditory too, its not a homosexual trait.

That behaviour wasnt normal by most people standards, you just met with pervs and peadoes who just happened to be homosexuals