Would it be 'wrong' to choose to be gay?

[eFestivals]

That's just silly... To me anyway...

you do realise that you've just called your own bigotry 'stupid', don't you?

[eFestivals]

I am very untrusting on any "papers" from "experts".

so instead you go with your own thoughts which are based in no knowledge whatsoever, as you've confirmed by having said you know of no kids being brought up by gay parents.

Way to go, smart guy.

I do see the issues coming out of single parents where there is a lack of mans presence and likewise when there is a missing mother.

as gets proven continually, there is fuck all difference caused by the lack of one parent to a child's upbringing.

Any differences are caused by the quality of the parenting (and perhaps the environment in which the parenting is done [which is a reference to the lead poisoning thing cropped up in last day or two, and other things such as poverty]). Or are of you of the belief that all of the 'bad' people in society are the product of just single parents?

[zero000]

Not doing that though... I am just saying I don't just read something and take it as read... People have vested interests etc... Not saying its all wrong or any of it is wrong.

[eFestivals]

You are one of the best posters on here, you can actually have a real none nasty discussion with you on subjects like this.

Given your own nastiness in this discussion, which you've admitted is based wholely in your ignorance, while feral's attitude can be applauded, the rest of us are simply being blunt in pointing out your own nastiness rather than being nasty ourselves.

It's only you who are saying that gays are lesser people than straights. It doesn't get more nasty than that.

Edited January 10, 2013 by eFestivals

[feral chile]

Can see a lot of sense what you are saying in regards the need for a good support network to overcome a missing farther or mother. And it's lacking in a lot of situations I feel and why you get issues, but also why you see success as well.

When it comes to adoption and fostering we are told we can take no risks with a child yet the basics of a family setup can be ignored. It concerns me. I think it's important.

I don't think these are unreasonable, hateful or intolerant concerns to be frank. O its a bit intolerant but that in itself should not be an issue,

You are one of the best posters on here, you can actually have a real none nasty discussion with you on subjects like this.

[zero000]

But you implied you would need a personal experience to make a judgement, which was my point.

[eFestivals]

Which one? Never said I had even met one!

despite knowing no children of gay parents, you reject the research that's been put together by people who do know children of gay parents.

That's some non-intellectual approach you've got going on!!

But you're not a bigot or intolerant, oh know.

[feral chile]

On a lesser note, but related to what barry's saying, when i was a young trendy mum, i wanted to avoid gender stereotyping, so bought both boys and girls dolls, cars and trains etc. for my children regardless of their gender. this was easy for the boys to hide from their friends, but they were clearly uncomfortable with it, though they liked playing with traditionally girls toys. I did wonder if my good intentions were causing them harm though, by singling them out as different. They had to exist in the society as it is, not as I wanted it to be, so is it ethical to use them as tools for change?

i didn't repeat the experiment with my youngest son, who already stood out as being painfully shy.

[Uncle Liam]

*father

[fred quimby]

So in Conclusion. Is Tony getting Cock tonight?

[Guest]

Forgive me but I don't belive anything you say....

Edited January 10, 2013 by tonyblair

[Guest]

So in Conclusion. Is Tony getting Cock tonight?

[Guest]

who cares if it's choice or not?

[eFestivals]

We know how many think it's a disease that can be cured, imagine if they were told it was a choice..??

it makes no difference either way, this is what the homophobes are too stupid to understand.

If being gay is a choice, then so is being straight.

If being gay has no choice about it then so does being straight.

If being gay is a disease, then there's nothing - absolutely nothing - to indicate that being straight is not also a disease. The facts of the necessities for creation do not change that, they only matter towards creation, not relationships or non-creation.

The only known difference is that there's a difference. There's nothing to say which is 'right'.

[jump]

I'm sure it would be much harder, for swathes of society and the establishment, to accept homosexual relationships if they were told it was simply a choice.

[Guest]

I'm not sure it would as bisexual or even people who have had a gay expereince get the same level of bigotry as gays, people who don't accept it are doing so because they don't like it regardless of what the reason maybe.

[Guest]

it makes no difference either way, this is what the homophobes are too stupid to understand.

If being gay is a choice, then so is being straight.

If being gay has no choice about it then so does being straight.

If being gay is a disease, then there's nothing - absolutely nothing - to indicate that being straight is not also a disease. The facts of the necessities for creation do not change that, they only matter towards creation, not relationships or non-creation.

The only known difference is that there's a difference. There's nothing to say which is 'right'.

[jump]

but saying "I didn't have a choice" is a harder stance to argue against...

or maybe it isn't..?

I used to be indecisive....

Edited January 10, 2013 by jump

[Guest]

The people who begrudgingly tolerate gays mainly do it as wider society has accpeted them so they are forced to join in not because of reasoning and would probably be the same case if the reason for being gay is different.

[feral chile]

it makes no difference either way, this is what the homophobes are too stupid to understand.

If being gay is a choice, then so is being straight.

If being gay has no choice about it then so does being straight.

If being gay is a disease, then there's nothing - absolutely nothing - to indicate that being straight is not also a disease. The facts of the necessities for creation do not change that, they only matter towards creation, not relationships or non-creation.

The only known difference is that there's a difference. There's nothing to say which is 'right'.

[feral chile]

not me.

but it seems to be the default response from most of the gay I people I know and many more that we read about, that it's absolutley not a choice. I'm sure it would be much harder, for swathes of society and the establishment, to accept homosexual relationships if they were told it was simply a choice. We know how many think it's a disease that can be cured, imagine if they were told it was a choice..?? "Well, you've simply made the 'wrong' choice... ".

I suppose there's still a long way to go...

as always?

[Guest]

is there a type of homphobia that gay people can have?

or is it simple narrow-mindedness that anyone can have?

[feral chile]

is there a type of homphobia that gay people can have?

or is it simple narrow-mindedness that anyone can have?

[Guest]

It used to be thought that homophobia was repressed homosexuality.

Edited January 10, 2013 by tonyblair

[eFestivals]

That's one of the arguments against gay marriage - you can't play because you're not following our rules type of thing.

Well change the bloody rules then!

they are not anyone's rules to own - they are not "our rules" for anyone. They're simply the rules that have existed recently.

If the rules of marriage are unchangeable, then why aren't those same people out there campaigning for the village squire to be able to shag any girl on her wedding night?

The rules have changed for the better before, and the can change for the better again.