Political Crossfire Forums

[cap'n queasy]

And that has what to do with the idea that the earth is treating us like a virus?

If you want to live your life like that go ahead.

[Gryff1nd0r]

cap'n queasy wrote: And that has what to do with the idea that the earth is treating us like a virus?

If you want to live your life like that go ahead.

:?

Forget it. You don't have to actually read other people's posts if you don't want to, but I'm not going to sit here and repeat myself unless you do.

[Enoch]

Pepper wrote: what i'm trying to say...is.....the homosexuals on there own would not last. I remember back in the day, if you were a homosexual....you would be in trouble because someone would probally kill you.....now...everyone is so worried about be politically correct, that they say its ok for people to be homosexual.

That's because it is socially okay to be homosexual. Now, religiously, it may not be (depending on your religion). But, that doesn't matter.

[Kt]

Pepper wrote: ok...i have found a great way to make everyone happy....

stick all the gays on an island and see how they reproduce.


years later......there goes out democrat problem.

Umm, BS, The homo-island would reproduce just fine.
And it wouldn't fix your democrat problem eaither.

Quote: what i'm trying to say...is.....the homosexuals on there own would not last. I remember back in the day, if you were a homosexual....you would be in trouble because someone would probally kill you.....now...everyone is so worried about be politically correct, that they say its ok for people to be homosexual.

What you're trying to say is how such a homophobe you are.
And an island full of homosexuals, as unpractical as it is, would thrive.
Your arguement is biggoted and pointless and borderline retarded. I won't even mention your character.

[Gryff1nd0r]

Shim Eun-Ha wrote: Pepper wrote: ok...i have found a great way to make everyone happy....

stick all the gays on an island and see how they reproduce.


years later......there goes out democrat problem.

Umm, BS, The homo-island would reproduce just fine.
And it wouldn't fix your democrat problem eaither.

Quote: what i'm trying to say...is.....the homosexuals on there own would not last. I remember back in the day, if you were a homosexual....you would be in trouble because someone would probally kill you.....now...everyone is so worried about be politically correct, that they say its ok for people to be homosexual.

What you're trying to say is how such a homophobe you are.
And an island full of homosexuals, as unpractical as it is, would thrive.
Your arguement is biggoted and pointless and borderline retarded. I won't even mention your character.

Ok, well I'm not defending Pepper, but..................

How does a same-sex island reproduce "just fine"?

[Enoch]

thegriffinator13 wrote: Shim Eun-Ha wrote: Pepper wrote: ok...i have found a great way to make everyone happy....

stick all the gays on an island and see how they reproduce.


years later......there goes out democrat problem.

Umm, BS, The homo-island would reproduce just fine.
And it wouldn't fix your democrat problem eaither.

Quote: what i'm trying to say...is.....the homosexuals on there own would not last. I remember back in the day, if you were a homosexual....you would be in trouble because someone would probally kill you.....now...everyone is so worried about be politically correct, that they say its ok for people to be homosexual.

What you're trying to say is how such a homophobe you are.
And an island full of homosexuals, as unpractical as it is, would thrive.
Your arguement is biggoted and pointless and borderline retarded. I won't even mention your character.

Ok, well I'm not defending Pepper, but..................

How does a same-sex island reproduce "just fine"?

Pepper's contention was that an island of homosexuals (meaning gay men and lesbians) would die out. Not true. While gay men and lesbians are sexually oriented toward their same gender, sexual intercourse between men and women could (and most likely would) still happen purely out of a desire to have children.

[LDA]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: The silence from the right on this is deafening. Not so much as a peep even from the trolls. Wow.

There you go. "the right." Good work, you've really defeated us.

What do you want people to say? Don't be gay? Being gay is wrong? Gay people shouldn't have any rights? Regardless of what I actually believe, people are going to believe that homosexuality is wrong, unnatural, immoral, or whatever. Post after post telling them how wrong they are, and how intolerant they are, and how they're homophobes isn't going to do a damn bit of good.

[F'losrix]

LDA wrote: Skeptical Mystic wrote: The silence from the right on this is deafening. Not so much as a peep even from the trolls. Wow.

There you go. "the right." Good work, you've really defeated us.
'Defeat' wasn't the intent. Are you honestly going to try to deny that the majority of those who identify themselves as subscribing to rightist philosophies aren't also opposed to homosexuality?

Quote: What do you want people to say? Don't be gay? Being gay is wrong? Gay people shouldn't have any rights? Regardless of what I actually believe, people are going to believe that homosexuality is wrong, unnatural, immoral, or whatever. Post after post telling them how wrong they are, and how intolerant they are, and how they're homophobes isn't going to do a damn bit of good.
No, we'd like them to address the actual assertions and reasoning of the article. I thought that was obvious, but apparently not.

[Kt]

UrielsFyre wrote: thegriffinator13 wrote: Shim Eun-Ha wrote: Pepper wrote: ok...i have found a great way to make everyone happy....

stick all the gays on an island and see how they reproduce.


years later......there goes out democrat problem.

Umm, BS, The homo-island would reproduce just fine.
And it wouldn't fix your democrat problem eaither.

Quote: what i'm trying to say...is.....the homosexuals on there own would not last. I remember back in the day, if you were a homosexual....you would be in trouble because someone would probally kill you.....now...everyone is so worried about be politically correct, that they say its ok for people to be homosexual.

What you're trying to say is how such a homophobe you are.
And an island full of homosexuals, as unpractical as it is, would thrive.
Your arguement is biggoted and pointless and borderline retarded. I won't even mention your character.

Ok, well I'm not defending Pepper, but..................

How does a same-sex island reproduce "just fine"?

Pepper's contention was that an island of homosexuals (meaning gay men and lesbians) would die out. Not true. While gay men and lesbians are sexually oriented toward their same gender, sexual intercourse between men and women could (and most likely would) still happen purely out of a desire to have children.
My thoughts exactly.

[LDA]

Quote: 'Defeat' wasn't the intent. Are you honestly going to try to deny that the majority of those who identify themselves as subscribing to rightist philosophies aren't also opposed to homosexuality?

I don't know. Are you going to deny that the majority of numbers are non-prime numbers? Does that mean there's no such thing as a prime number?
Quote:
No, we'd like them to address the actual assertions and reasoning of the article. I thought that was obvious, but apparently not.

There's nothing to address. What are the assertions? That the right is only concerned about homosexuality, or even mostly concerned about homosexuality? Sorry, that isn't true. If I could comment, Skeptical, I've never seen you comment on ANYTHING except issues dealing with homosexuality. Without a doubt, the majority of your debate is concerning homosexuality. There isn't a problem with that; you came to this forum to debate, and it's an issue that you involves you and is important to you. I'm not about to condemn you for that.

To be honest, this post is nothing but a rant. It's clumping everyone who is opposed to homosexuality into one group. If you define that as a good argument, or a good point, or whatever, then congrats. I don't see anything of substance.

[F'losrix]

LDA wrote: If I could comment, Skeptical, I've never seen you comment on ANYTHING except issues dealing with homosexuality.
That you've never seen me comment on other issues doesn't mean I haven't.

Quote: Without a doubt, the majority of your debate is concerning homosexuality. There isn't a problem with that; you came to this forum to debate, and it's an issue that you involves you and is important to you. I'm not about to condemn you for that.
Indeed, it is the area where I focus most of my effort in this forum. That doesn't mean that I'm ignoring other issues. The reasons why it's my primary focus are:

1) I have a limited amount of time to spend here.

2) As you noted, it is an issue of personal importance to me.

3) It is an area in which I feel I have developed a degree of expertise.

4) There are plenty of people already arguing other issues; no need for me to contribute in some cases because by the time I arrive in those threads, others have already stated a similar opinion - and often better than I could have.

5) There aren't that many people arguing in favor of gay rights on this forum. Actually, there seem to be a heck of a lot more now than when I started here.

In short, it's my niche. But not my obsession, and not the most important issue out there. Just the place where I feel comfortable and feel I have something worthy of contribution.

Quote: To be honest, this post is nothing but a rant. It's clumping everyone who is opposed to homosexuality into one group. If you define that as a good argument, or a good point, or whatever, then congrats. I don't see anything of substance.
I'll certainly agree the article has its flaws. But that doesn't mean it's utterly lacking in substance. Nor do the resident flaws necessarily invalidate the entirety of the arguments made there. Instead of debating the points it makes, what I'm seeing here is an attempt to just dismiss it outright.

Now you can claim that it's because there's nothing of substance there to debate, but unless you can back those claims up by debunking the arguments instead of being arrogantly dismissive of them, I'm going to have to assume you're just trying to avoid the issues.

[Æ]

There's no need to even reply to this thread. Ya just can't touch it!