Sodom, Greece, Rome and homosexuality.

[AlAyeti]

Does allowing for diversity include parents having no voice in what their children are forced to be taught and have to accept?

Do Christians and the many other cultures and belief systems opposed to homosexuality have the right to have their culture and religious views respected in society when it comes to decent and natural sexual behavior in the education system and in public?

Are homosexuals demanding accesss to children under the label of diversity and anti-hate legislation?

This seems the number one issue between average and normal "family" people and the homosexual agenda.

Can there be laws passed that keeps homosexuality from becoming forced on children and families that oppose it, without the homosexual community and homosexual action organizations crying discrimination?

Is there such a thing anymore as heterosexual rights?

[FreddieFreeloader]

You want science back at you?

Animal homosexuality is always aberrant behavior. Alwyas deviating from the norm.

No procreation and nature eliminates you. Pitilessly.

So? How does deviating from the norm make it unnatural? It happens in nature, and there is a scientific explanation for it. Or if you go by the standards of what our bodies are "intended" to be used for in order to declare something unnatural, we do tonnes of other things equally repulsive. We use our feet and hands for flying airplanes that are heavier than air! Yuck. Should our children be taught tolerance of this weird an unnatural behavior?

Of course they should. Regardless of how many or how few engage in an activity or belong to some group, regardless of how unnatural it is, we have no right to discriminate against said group or activity, as long as it is not harmful. And you haven't argued that yet.

Is it the not having children thing that makes it wrong?

Nothing wrong or bigoted with teaching sexuality by the book. And I don't mean the Bible.

No, you mean the book that contains the very narrow definition of homosexuality as having sex up the bum and that since that doesn't lead to children it's wrong. And seriously, do we actually believe that the vast majority of anti-homosexual advocates are not inspired by the Bible, the Koran or some other religious text.

Defining yourself by what you choose to do sexually is bizaare and inappropriate in an education setting. Diversity should not include private sexual actions defining someone or something as a culture.

It is you that is in the habit of defining people by simple labels. I'm sure that there is a black christian homosexual somewhere, that doesn't define himself as either black, christian or homosexual, but as all those things and a lot more.

[Lotan]

Penis fencing and vulva rubbing does not make a baby bonobo.

How graphic!
Nobody said that it does Al, so why do you bring it up? What it does do is to strengthen social bonds, which enhances the survival of the group.

You know "they say" bonobo's are 98% genetically the same as humans.

Now a science experiment. Send off two "almost touching" objects out into space on the headings that they exist on.

Like for instance, these two dots ---> . . <---

They will never touch. In fact if you think about course headings they are not traveling parallel, but are getting farther and farther apart.

You're right Al. Bonobos will never evolve into humans. Since nobody said that either, why did you bring it up?
You said...

Animal homosexuality is always aberrant behavior. Alwyas deviating from the norm.

...but for bonobos this type of behavior is the norm. In order for you to support your assertion shouldn't you show that it's not, instead of attacking strawmen?

[micatala]

Animal homosexuality is always aberrant behavior. Alwyas deviating from the norm.

Maybe, maybe not. In any large group, there will be a tendency towards a diversity of behavior. Are all behaviors not engaged in by the majority of the population aberrant?

Also, even if it were aberrant, that would not make it wrong or bad or unhelpful or whatever.

At one point in my life, I was a runner and even ran a marathon. This puts me in a very tiny percentage of people. Was my behavior aberrant? If so, was it wrong of me to engage in this behavior?

No procreation and nature eliminates you. Pitilessly.

Only if a sufficient percentage of the population didn't engage in procreative behavior. We have always had segments of the human population which did not engage in procreation for one reason or another, and the same is true in other species. In fact, in some species, only a few select individuals (eg. the dominant wolf) engage in procreation. Your statement is not logical.

I don't want my children, or me, to have to "comply" with an ACLU mandate of what is and what isn't nice behavior in schools.

I can certainly understand this sentiment. However, society expects us to 'comply' with all sorts of rules that we may or may not agree with. A couple of comments.

The compliance seems to be mostly directed at staff of the school. The problem addressed seems to have been largely caused by teachers who ridiculed gay students, thus encouraging similar behavior in the other students. Is it wrong to expect the teachers and students to treat gay students fairly and with at least a modicum of politeness and decorum?

Even if one disagrees that homosexuality is 'OK,' I would think that we could agree that everyone deserves the same level of human respect. No one deserves to be ridiculed, bullied, beat up, etc. whether it be for being gay, being black, or being Christian. At least in this country, Christians very rarely are subjected to the types of abuse that gay people suffer on a routine basis.

It is not inappropriate for us to expect people to 'comply' with reasonable behavior standards towards gay people, anymore than it is inappropriate for us to expect people not to punch other people in the nose whenever the whim strikes them. THis is not 'forcing an agenda' on anyone. It is only expecting civilized behavior from the members of our society.[/quote]

[AlAyeti]

Strawmen?

Absurd, and a cheap rebuttal.

My point is that opposing homosexuality and the people who choose to engage in unnatural (and actually psuedo-sexual acts), is not bigotry or prejudice or inappropriate.

Graphic descriptions are distasteful about homosexuality because homosexuality is distatsetful. But let the truth be shouted from ther rooftops. We all know it's being shouted on Bravo and Showtime!!!

Even straw shouldn't be shaped into a man. It is by nature straw, and always will be. But it can look like something it's not. Ahhh . . .hmmm . . .

An Anatomy Professor is insulting a person who thinks that they can have sex with a rectum or who thinks depositing sperm in a plaate is OK.

Physiology? Yup them teachers too.

Biology? Oh boy, sperm for ovum and ovum for sperm. Perfect empirical view. But unnice to homosexualists. Is the ACLU going to send in jack-booted thugs to make sure science is never taught in truth, and complies with diversity laws?

No. It is the homosexual community that IS forcing their bizaare and deviant behavior on normal society.

The percentage of the population that engage in pro-creative sex are the normal. If that hurts felings it is no ones fault. A child without legs is not going to make the varsity basketball team. Or Run for very long with Micatala. Is micatala a bigot? Should this runner change the rules of the marathon?

But that IS what the homosexual agenda IS doing.

I side with Xenophon and Aristotle. Unless they also built strawmen about the (un) naturalness of homosexuality? (And with science.) Romans didn't tolerate Nero and his aberrant and deviant lifestyle for long either. And Sodom? Poof! And it is clear that it is no myth. Militant homosexuals are demanding to be let in once again.

[Lotan]

Strawmen?

Yup.

Absurd, and a cheap rebuttal.

Assertion and another assertion.

My point is that opposing homosexuality and the people who choose to engage in unnatural (and actually psuedo-sexual acts), is not bigotry or prejudice or inappropriate.

Irrelevant opinion. I don't care what you think is appropriate.
You said...

Animal homosexuality is always aberrant behavior.

Can you back that up or not?

[McCulloch]

My point is that opposing homosexuality and the people who choose to engage in unnatural (and actually psuedo-sexual acts), is not bigotry or prejudice or inappropriate.

It is very clear to all that this is your position. You need not repeat it any more. We get it. What you have not done is to prove your point.

No. It is the homosexual community that IS forcing their bizaare and deviant behavior on normal society.

Your assertion has no basis in fact. The homosexual community is simply asking for toleration. They do not have any interest in forcing you or anyone else to behave in any way that you would call bizarre or deviant.

The percentage of the population that engage in pro-creative sex are the normal. If that hurts felings it is no ones fault. A child without legs is not going to make the varsity basketball team. Or Run for very long with Micatala. Is micatala a bigot? Should this runner change the rules of the marathon?
But that IS what the homosexual agenda IS doing.

I think that I can say with a great deal of certainty that homosexuals are aware of the reproductive limitations on their activity. Do we have a shortage of new humans on this planet? If anyone chooses not to be procreative that should not bar them from fully participating in our society. Many homosexuals do have children (adoption, heterosexual relationships, artificial insemination). Their children are no more likely to be homosexual than children raised by heterosexuals. Although they are much more likely to be tolerant.

[AlAyeti]

Lotan,

You should have stayed awake in anatomy class.

Real men have real parts designed a certain way.

Look up the word aberrant.

It backs me up.

[AlAyeti]

McCulloch,

These children will be tolerant of whom? Their lost mothers or their lost fathers that they will search in vain to find? Or the narcissistic parent who forced them to live in an unfair situation?

[Lotan]

Animal homosexuality is always aberrant behavior. Alwyas deviating from the norm.

Look up the word aberrant.

It backs me up.

I know what aberrant means. Bonobos engage in homosexual activity all the time. For them, it is the norm. Are you saying that it's up to you to decide how these animals should behave?

I can see it now..."Today San Francisco. Tomorrow the Congo!"

[McCulloch]

McCulloch,

These children will be tolerant of whom?

Obviously not intolerant christians. Tolerant of homosexuality even when they themselves don't practice it

Their lost mothers or their lost fathers that they will search in vain to find?

A good argument for open adoption not banning same-sex marriage

Or the narcissistic parent who forced them to live in an unfair situation?

What?