"Homophobia"

[Olmy]

Originally posted by ah_19
The town of Lut. This town was destroyed because its inhabitants insisted on practicing homosexuality.

Hate to be pedantic, but the towns were actually called Sodom and Gomorrah (taken from Genesis 19). Thus, the word Sodom being used for acts of sexual "abnormalities".

"Lot" (I think you mean), was actually the brother of Moses. Both of them lived one of the cities in question. As the Bible has it, Lot and Moses fleed the city when God promised to destroy the cities due to their sinful ways. It was actually Lot's wife, who turned back, and due to her lust, was punished with death by God, who apparently turned her into a pillar of salt!

 

[Mags]

Ask Easty.... He knows all about this ****, Dont ya ********?

Mags

 

[Mobbs]

I fully tolerate folks of all non-harmful walks of life. As homosexuality per se is a mode of concent, I respect that mode fully. I place such issues as paedophilia in a different class, as it is not on its own a mode of consent, and is therefore an act of assault.

I also fully tolerate ah_19s attitude, as long as his/her application to that attitude is simply a matter of feeling, opinion and/or argument, and is non-harmful.

If someone's relation 'outed' themselves, and explained to that relation that they didn't agree with the idea of it, in fact were made nauseous by it, but still respected the fact of it, I wouldn't judge this as intolerant.

---
Mind you, what was that Visro said about pack animals? Is that fair dinkum? I wouldn't have believed that! Have you got sources for this? I'm not convinced!

 

[Shinboners]

Ironic how McCartney5 got stomped on for his throwaway line on guns and now someone else is having a go at my throwaway line about homophobes being "ignorant".

Anyway, no use repeating what has been already posted as everyone has said what I would have liked to have said. By the same token, McCartney5, Ah_19, and others who share an opinion that homosexuality is wrong are welcome to their views too (no matter how wrong I believe their views to be).

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by mantis


If you aren't going to contribute to the debate then don't, I have given my reasons for why I have responded negatively to ah19, at least have the balls to post your opinions on the topic as well, although I suspect I already know what they are.

Talk about a ridiculous response.

Who are you to question whether I have "balls" or not? Pfft?

Anyway, I did post as response to an issue that was raised in this topic. My response to your response, which I found inappropriate.

I found your use of the term "Christian" to be extremely condescending. It was insulting to me, as I regard myself as a Christian.

Whether I have the same views as ah_19 or not, it does not justify your lumping of the term "Christian" in with any particular view, nor judgement that you make upon ah_19 for his/her views.

After all, you call for tolerance, understanding, etc. Yet, you have displayed that you are not willing to extend these same values to those who classify themselves as Christians.

Just a touch of hypocracy there, don't you think?

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by mantis

at least have the balls to post your opinions on the topic as well, although I suspect I already know what they are.

Actually, you wouldn't have the slightest clue.

Since when do I have to post my views on a topic to have a "license" to comment on it? Since when does it take "balls" to post ones opinions on topics?

If it does take "balls" to do so, then I suggest that you took the gutless option by resorting to ill-informed and generalised taunts regarding the initial post. Talk about hypocritical.

 

[Darky]

Re: Re: "Homophobia"

Originally posted by Olmy


Hate to be pedantic, but the towns were actually called Sodom and Gomorrah (taken from Genesis 19). Thus, the word Sodom being used for acts of sexual "abnormalities".

Sodom were a sensational German thrash band who put out their first album in 1983 and are still going stronmg, albeit along slightly deathier lines...

As for people who practice the act... it's not something that appeals to me in any way (yeah I'd probably spew if I saw two blokes going at it - sheilas is a different story altogether !), but who am I to say they aren't allowed to do it.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by Mobbenfuhrer
I fully tolerate folks of all non-harmful walks of life. As homosexuality per se is a mode of concent, I respect that mode fully. I place such issues as paedophilia in a different class, as it is not on its own a mode of consent, and is therefore an act of assault.

I also fully tolerate ah_19s attitude, as long as his/her application to that attitude is simply a matter of feeling, opinion and/or argument, and is non-harmful.

If someone's relation 'outed' themselves, and explained to that relation that they didn't agree with the idea of it, in fact were made nauseous by it, but still respected the fact of it, I wouldn't judge this as intolerant.

Well said.

 

[mantis]

As I said I already suspect I know your thoughts on this topic, but you won't say it because you don't want people to criticise you. OK no balls was wrong terminology, try gutless.

 

[mantis]

Re: Re: Re: "Homophobia"

Originally posted by Darky


Sodom were a sensational German thrash band who put out their first album in 1983 and are still going stronmg, albeit along slightly deathier lines...

As for people who practice the act... it's not something that appeals to me in any way (yeah I'd probably spew if I saw two blokes going at it - sheilas is a different story altogether !), but who am I to say they aren't allowed to do it.

Sorry Darky, but that is one thing that totally pisses me off, guys are all anti homosexual when it comes to men, yet they get turned on by a homosexual act between women, go figure.

 

[Darky]

Re: Re: Re: Re: "Homophobia"

Originally posted by mantis


Sorry Darky, but that is one thing that totally pisses me off, guys are all anti homosexual when it comes to men, yet they get turned on by a homosexual act between women, go figure.

Why should it piss you off?

As a heterosexual man, I get turned on by the sight of naked women... not naked men. That's not a double standard - that's just my preference - just like gay men probably don't get turned on by two women going hammer and tongs.

 

[play on]

If my best friend was homosexual, I would still think of him the same way as before I knew of him being homosexual. Just as long as he didn't try to come on to me. And I have no reason to think that he would. Same with any friend of mine.


Do the gay community deserve a radio station? Joy Melbourne is one of 17 part time radio stations trying to get a full time license from the Australian Broadcasting authority.

 

[Shinboners]

Originally posted by mantis
As I said I already suspect I know your thoughts on this topic, but you won't say it because you don't want people to criticise you. OK no balls was wrong terminology, try gutless.

I don't think Olmy has ever backed off from expressing his opinion on these boards. Whenever he has had a view on something, he's usually always expressed it clearly and eloquantly.....so I'm not sure why you're accusing him of being gutless.

 

[mantis]

Because shinners, his first contribution to this debate was to attack me, yet he didn't say what his views were on the topic.

I backed up my comments to ah19 with my views on the subject.

 

[mantis]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Homophobia"

Originally posted by Darky


Why should it piss you off?

As a heterosexual man, I get turned on by the sight of naked women... not naked men. That's not a double standard - that's just my preference - just like gay men probably don't get turned on by two women going hammer and tongs.

I don't believe this, it isn't just naked women, it is two same sex people engaging in intercourse, you get sickened by men doing it but not women, you work it out.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by mantis
As I said I already suspect I know your thoughts on this topic, but you won't say it because you don't want people to criticise you. OK no balls was wrong terminology, try gutless.

Gutless? Pfft. Why the need to be so abusive? Do you have some sort of intellectual problem or something?

You've never even met me, nor have the slightest clue of how I am as a person, yet you seem to regard yourself as being righteous enough to judge me as "gutless"?? Who was it who was calling others judgemental just a minute ago? You really are a hypocrit, aren't you!

Judging by your responses, you're only out for an argument of an unreasonable nature, so why should I bother posting my views on here, for you to ultimately misinterpret, void of context, and over-analyse in your typically flawed manner?

It's fairly obvious, that if I were to post my views, that you would merely attempt to ridicule me, regardless of whether I agree with anyone else here or not.

In any regard, I posted my agreement with comments that an earlier poster contributed, and as far as I'm concerned, I couldn't have articulated it in a better manner. So why not just post my agreement? You've obviously overlooked that, in this rage you've gotten yourself into.

So why should I post my views on this topic? I might not even have any, for all you know. At any rate, my views are not subject to the critiqueing of the likes of yourself.

My intention was to pick you up on your error of judgement, in which you haven't been able to defend yourself, as you were clearly wrong, with your generalisation. Then again, considering you're obviously a Christian hater, I am not expecting you to make an apology either.

And just because "you think" you know what I'm thinking, doesn't mean you're correct.

It's like me saying "Mantis's favourite colour is blue", and posting that around as a fact, when it may well not be, and arguing that you are a fool for your choice. Where's the logic in that?

 

[Darky]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Homophobia"

Originally posted by mantis


I don't believe this, it isn't just naked women, it is two same sex people engaging in intercourse, you get sickened by men doing it but not women, you work it out.

Morally, same-sex intercourse is the same thing with males or females... but I'm not talking about morally.

All I said was, it isn't something that would be pleasing to the eye/mind for me personally, but if two blokes want to go at it, I don't care.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by mantis
Because shinners, his first contribution to this debate was to attack me, yet he didn't say what his views were on the topic.

I backed up my comments to ah19 with my views on the subject.

As I said earlier, my issue was not with the views posted about homosexuality. For all you know, I may agree with most of your views. (For that matter, I can understand the reasoning/thinking behind points on both sides of the argument - regardless of whether I agree with them or not).

Rather, the issue I had, was your categorisation, and generalisation of Christians, which I found to be condescending.

In fact, I found the comment to be an unfounded and faceless attack on Christians as a whole. Since then, I commented on the issue, aired my opinions on the matter, backed them up with reasoning.

Considering you made the comment "homophobic Christian", I think it's quite reasonable that the comment "Zealous anti-Christian" is a warrented response.

After all, if Christianity was not part of the insult/slur, then why was it included? It gets back to the same argument, regarding calling someone a B**** B*****.

Don't I, as a Christian, have just as much right as a homosexual, or anyone else, to speak out against comments/actions which vilify my beliefs?

 

[Shinboners]

Originally posted by mantis
Because shinners, his first contribution to this debate was to attack me, yet he didn't say what his views were on the topic.

I backed up my comments to ah19 with my views on the subject.

Well, you described Ah_19 a homophobic Christian and Olmy just commented that you were a zealous anti-Christian.

Olmy later stated that he considers himself a Christian, and therefore, you have just insulted (albeit indirectly) something that would be important and central to his life. So he was just trying to defend his faith (and also indirectly, Ah_19's right to hold his views as dictated by his faith).

In the end, I don't think that Olmy has done anything wrong. If you're happy to attack someone based on their faith, then equally, you should have no complaints should someone else come along and defend it.

 

[mantis]

Well said. you call that stating your opinion on the topic, oh well I guess it is a good side step & I did give my reasons to why I have turned my back on christianity, you seem not to have read that, check mate.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by mantis
Well said. you call that stating your opinion on the topic, oh well I guess it is a good side step & I did give my reasons to why I have turned my back on christianity, you seem not to have read that, check mate.

Ok . . . that post made a lot of sense . . .

You say I made a side-step? Well, at least that's not a backward step! I suggest to you, that I'm by far moving forwards at any rate.

Since when have your personal choices been a criteria to which you feel you must judge others by? You're guilty of the very acts you accuse others of, although, just to a different group of people.

Then again, I'm not surprised at this oversight of yours, as you seem to be lacking in the ability to discuss a topic in a reasonable manner, with an empathetic view towards the views of others (whether you personally relate to them or not).

Similarly, why is it, in every post, you've felt the need to resort to belittling comments? Before you accuse me of doing the same, just remember who it was who started the trend.

 

[mantis]

shinners

ah19 admits he is a christian & his views on homosexuality show that he is homophobic, so where is the problem.

As I said my comments to him were because of his attitude towards homosexuals, quoting the bible to try & prove he was right.

OK if you people want to attack me fine, but I WILL defend homosexuals rights regardless.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by mantis
I did give my reasons to why I have turned my back on christianity, you seem not to have read that, check mate.

Oh, reality check! Here I was forgetting that nothing is relative unless it involves Mantis's personal experiences on the topic at hand!

 

[Santos L Helper]

Originally posted by Olmy


Ok . . . that post made a lot of sense . . .

You say I made a side-step? Well, at least that's not a backward step! I suggest to you, that I'm by far moving forwards at any rate.

Since when have your personal choices been a criteria to which you feel you must judge others by? You're guilty of the very acts you accuse others of, although, just to a different group of people.

Then again, I'm not surprised at this oversight of yours, as you seem to be lacking in the ability to discuss a topic in a reasonable manner, with an empathetic view towards the views of others (whether you personally relate to them or not).

Similarly, why is it, in every post, you've felt the need to resort to belittling comments? Before you accuse me of doing the same, just remember who it was who started the trend.

Just one thing Olmy. It's pretty difficult for anybody to feel empathetic towards people they are in disagreement with. They may have an improved understanding, but to feel empathy would be difficult.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by mantis

OK if you people want to attack me fine, but I WILL defend homosexuals rights regardless.

Actually, there have been very few people in this topic who have "attacked" homosexuals.

I certainly did not, yet you seem to be inferring that I am/have. I cannot for the life of me see why.