|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:17 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| seosan08 wrote: |
| It's not mainstream or even normal if so many people around the world and thru history are against it. |
Actually, many cultures have a very long history of tolerance and acceptance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seonsan: if you read the entire thread, you'll find that my position on prop 8 is not one of an apologist, let alone an 'apologeticist' -haha. my beef with your posts is that you make everyone who isn't necessarily 100% for gay marriage look like grade-A morons by association. if you're going to be blatantly homophobic, at least say something that's somewhat amusing and/or original. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seosan08
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
| seonsan: if you read the entire thread, you'll find that my position on prop 8 is not one of an apologist, let alone an 'apologeticist' -haha. my beef with your posts is that you make everyone who isn't necessarily 100% for gay marriage look like grade-A morons by association. if you're going to be blatantly homophobic, at least say something that's somewhat amusing and/or original. |
Homophobic. There's the standard f@ggot propaganda word again. Next you'll call me a hater, then a bigot. Talk about predictable! *YAWN!* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| are you unable to form an argument without resorting to name calling? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xingyiman
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thiuda wrote: |
| bassexpander wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| What is the problem in teaching acceptance of alternative lifestyles? We teach kids to accept people from other cultural backgrounds. Why not teach them about gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people? Why exclude this group of people? |
Because it doesn't need to be "taught" in a public school at all. It is, in its own way, a belief system, and should be classified as a religion. Public dollars should not be spent to "teach" alternative lifestyles. |
Of course it needs to be taught. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is normal human behaviour, and someone's sexual orientation should no more be the basis of discrimination than skin colour or political creed. Also, since we spend public tax dollars on educating youth about heterosexual sex, I think it only fair that we spend public dollars on educating youth about homosexual relationships. After all, gays pay tax dollars as well.
Homosexuality is not a belief system, nor a religion. Homosexuality is simply a difference in preference with which sex you prefer to couple with. Why do so many people have a problem with homosexual love? We should be happy for two people in love, regardless of whether the couple is a man and a woman, two men, or two women. |
There has NEVER been any scientific proof that suggests homosexuality is a normal function of homosapiens, primates, etc....
Enough with the liberal PC BS. You are advocating minority status to a group of people based solely upon the fact that they crawl into the sack with a person of the opposite sex. If only other minorities could change their status by a mere act.
This is an extremely hot topic that, contrary to your PC rhetoric, is no where near being resolved. There have been many studies (many carried out by admittant homosexual researchers) which suggest that homosexuality(among males) is as you say an entirely natural phenomena. There are others that have been conducted, such as those on prison inmates who have adopted the gay lifestyle after periods of incarceration and intensified stressful conditions which suggest otherwise. If you wish to perform a grand cultural experiment while gambling on the consequences (remeber Dr. Spock anyone?) then continue to try drawing support against the majority of American citizens who do not support this. Do not lie and spew your unsubstantiated bias as undisputible fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hugekebab
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| xingyiman wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| bassexpander wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| What is the problem in teaching acceptance of alternative lifestyles? We teach kids to accept people from other cultural backgrounds. Why not teach them about gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people? Why exclude this group of people? |
Because it doesn't need to be "taught" in a public school at all. It is, in its own way, a belief system, and should be classified as a religion. Public dollars should not be spent to "teach" alternative lifestyles. |
Of course it needs to be taught. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is normal human behaviour, and someone's sexual orientation should no more be the basis of discrimination than skin colour or political creed. Also, since we spend public tax dollars on educating youth about heterosexual sex, I think it only fair that we spend public dollars on educating youth about homosexual relationships. After all, gays pay tax dollars as well.
Homosexuality is not a belief system, nor a religion. Homosexuality is simply a difference in preference with which sex you prefer to couple with. Why do so many people have a problem with homosexual love? We should be happy for two people in love, regardless of whether the couple is a man and a woman, two men, or two women. |
There has NEVER been any scientific proof that suggests homosexuality is a normal function of homosapiens, primates, etc....
Enough with the liberal PC BS. You are advocating minority status to a group of people based solely upon the fact that they crawl into the sack with a person of the opposite sex. If only other minorities could change their status by a mere act.
This is an extremely hot topic that, contrary to your PC rhetoric, is no where near being resolved. There have been many studies (many carried out by admittant homosexual researchers) which suggest that homosexuality(among males) is as you say an entirely natural phenomena. There are others that have been conducted, such as those on prison inmates who have adopted the gay lifestyle after periods of incarceration and intensified stressful conditions which suggest otherwise. If you wish to perform a grand cultural experiment while gambling on the consequences (remeber Dr. Spock anyone?) then continue to try drawing support against the majority of American citizens who do not support this. Do not lie and spew your unsubstantiated bias as undisputible fact. |
That doesn't explain why my next door but one neighbour was clearly observably gay from the age of 4. He wanted to be a ballerina and would only play with girls toys. His older brother was a girl chasing heterosexual. How did he learn this behaviour from such a young age? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seosan08
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hugekebab wrote: |
| xingyiman wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| bassexpander wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| What is the problem in teaching acceptance of alternative lifestyles? We teach kids to accept people from other cultural backgrounds. Why not teach them about gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people? Why exclude this group of people? |
Because it doesn't need to be "taught" in a public school at all. It is, in its own way, a belief system, and should be classified as a religion. Public dollars should not be spent to "teach" alternative lifestyles. |
Of course it needs to be taught. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is normal human behaviour, and someone's sexual orientation should no more be the basis of discrimination than skin colour or political creed. Also, since we spend public tax dollars on educating youth about heterosexual sex, I think it only fair that we spend public dollars on educating youth about homosexual relationships. After all, gays pay tax dollars as well.
Homosexuality is not a belief system, nor a religion. Homosexuality is simply a difference in preference with which sex you prefer to couple with. Why do so many people have a problem with homosexual love? We should be happy for two people in love, regardless of whether the couple is a man and a woman, two men, or two women. |
There has NEVER been any scientific proof that suggests homosexuality is a normal function of homosapiens, primates, etc....
Enough with the liberal PC BS. You are advocating minority status to a group of people based solely upon the fact that they crawl into the sack with a person of the opposite sex. If only other minorities could change their status by a mere act.
This is an extremely hot topic that, contrary to your PC rhetoric, is no where near being resolved. There have been many studies (many carried out by admittant homosexual researchers) which suggest that homosexuality(among males) is as you say an entirely natural phenomena. There are others that have been conducted, such as those on prison inmates who have adopted the gay lifestyle after periods of incarceration and intensified stressful conditions which suggest otherwise. If you wish to perform a grand cultural experiment while gambling on the consequences (remeber Dr. Spock anyone?) then continue to try drawing support against the majority of American citizens who do not support this. Do not lie and spew your unsubstantiated bias as undisputible fact. |
That doesn't explain why my next door but one neighbour was clearly observably gay from the age of 4. He wanted to be a ballerina and would only play with girls toys. His older brother was a girl chasing heterosexual. How did he learn this behaviour from such a young age? |
Damaged DNA?!? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicam
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DoubleRS is spot on. It is sad that Prop 8 passed, sad for California, and religious groups certainly are contributing to advertising campaigns, which technically should result in a revocation of their tax-exempt status. For the past 8 years it has consistantly felt as if America is in danger of becoming theocratic.
One thing I was reminded of during the Prop 8 hubris was how large of a state California is, and how outside of the coast from San Francisco down to L.A., California is a conservative state. An overwhelmingly large portion of the population just happens to live in the liberal coastal area. Even Orange County and San Diego are generally conservative. And San Francisco is a very small city population-wise. Still, I am surprised and saddened by America's lack of tolerance and overall ignorance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xingyiman
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hugekebab wrote: |
| xingyiman wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| bassexpander wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| What is the problem in teaching acceptance of alternative lifestyles? We teach kids to accept people from other cultural backgrounds. Why not teach them about gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people? Why exclude this group of people? |
Because it doesn't need to be "taught" in a public school at all. It is, in its own way, a belief system, and should be classified as a religion. Public dollars should not be spent to "teach" alternative lifestyles. |
Of course it needs to be taught. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is normal human behaviour, and someone's sexual orientation should no more be the basis of discrimination than skin colour or political creed. Also, since we spend public tax dollars on educating youth about heterosexual sex, I think it only fair that we spend public dollars on educating youth about homosexual relationships. After all, gays pay tax dollars as well.
Homosexuality is not a belief system, nor a religion. Homosexuality is simply a difference in preference with which sex you prefer to couple with. Why do so many people have a problem with homosexual love? We should be happy for two people in love, regardless of whether the couple is a man and a woman, two men, or two women. |
There has NEVER been any scientific proof that suggests homosexuality is a normal function of homosapiens, primates, etc....
Enough with the liberal PC BS. You are advocating minority status to a group of people based solely upon the fact that they crawl into the sack with a person of the opposite sex. If only other minorities could change their status by a mere act.
This is an extremely hot topic that, contrary to your PC rhetoric, is no where near being resolved. There have been many studies (many carried out by admittant homosexual researchers) which suggest that homosexuality(among males) is as you say an entirely natural phenomena. There are others that have been conducted, such as those on prison inmates who have adopted the gay lifestyle after periods of incarceration and intensified stressful conditions which suggest otherwise. If you wish to perform a grand cultural experiment while gambling on the consequences (remeber Dr. Spock anyone?) then continue to try drawing support against the majority of American citizens who do not support this. Do not lie and spew your unsubstantiated bias as undisputible fact. |
That doesn't explain why my next door but one neighbour was clearly observably gay from the age of 4. He wanted to be a ballerina and would only play with girls toys. His older brother was a girl chasing heterosexual. How did he learn this behaviour from such a young age? |
Fine then, fund a massive study on the chap and publish your results and deal with peer review. Then if your findings are irrefutable then start pushing your agenda. The current state of the research is inconclusive at best and way too politically charged at the moment to be able to arrive at a solid conclusion one way or another. For now the people have spoken. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hugekebab wrote: |
| That doesn't explain why my next door but one neighbour was clearly observably gay from the age of 4. He wanted to be a ballerina and would only play with girls toys. His older brother was a girl chasing heterosexual. How did he learn this behaviour from such a young age? |
If you're saying you can deduce sexual preferences from a four year-old's behavior, I suggest you seek help. You're also stereotyping gays as girlie ballerinas. You're doing no good for your cause. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hugekebab
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| hugekebab wrote: |
That doesn't explain why my next door but one neighbour was clearly observably gay from the age of 4. He wanted to be a ballerina and would only play with girls toys. His older brother was a girl chasing heterosexual. How did he learn this behaviour from such a young age?
|
Black no sugar |
Last edited by hugekebab on Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hugekebab
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| xingyiman wrote: |
| hugekebab wrote: |
| xingyiman wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| bassexpander wrote: |
| Thiuda wrote: |
| What is the problem in teaching acceptance of alternative lifestyles? We teach kids to accept people from other cultural backgrounds. Why not teach them about gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people? Why exclude this group of people? |
Because it doesn't need to be "taught" in a public school at all. It is, in its own way, a belief system, and should be classified as a religion. Public dollars should not be spent to "teach" alternative lifestyles. |
Of course it needs to be taught. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is normal human behaviour, and someone's sexual orientation should no more be the basis of discrimination than skin colour or political creed. Also, since we spend public tax dollars on educating youth about heterosexual sex, I think it only fair that we spend public dollars on educating youth about homosexual relationships. After all, gays pay tax dollars as well.
Homosexuality is not a belief system, nor a religion. Homosexuality is simply a difference in preference with which sex you prefer to couple with. Why do so many people have a problem with homosexual love? We should be happy for two people in love, regardless of whether the couple is a man and a woman, two men, or two women. |
There has NEVER been any scientific proof that suggests homosexuality is a normal function of homosapiens, primates, etc....
Enough with the liberal PC BS. You are advocating minority status to a group of people based solely upon the fact that they crawl into the sack with a person of the opposite sex. If only other minorities could change their status by a mere act.
This is an extremely hot topic that, contrary to your PC rhetoric, is no where near being resolved. There have been many studies (many carried out by admittant homosexual researchers) which suggest that homosexuality(among males) is as you say an entirely natural phenomena. There are others that have been conducted, such as those on prison inmates who have adopted the gay lifestyle after periods of incarceration and intensified stressful conditions which suggest otherwise. If you wish to perform a grand cultural experiment while gambling on the consequences (remeber Dr. Spock anyone?) then continue to try drawing support against the majority of American citizens who do not support this. Do not lie and spew your unsubstantiated bias as undisputible fact. |
That doesn't explain why my next door but one neighbour was clearly observably gay from the age of 4. He wanted to be a ballerina and would only play with girls toys. His older brother was a girl chasing heterosexual. How did he learn this behaviour from such a young age?
|
Two sugars and milk please |
Last edited by hugekebab on Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:18 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hugekebab
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is an argument to nowhere. No one is going to convince anyone else of their argument. Why don't we all just go and have a cup of tea?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seosan08
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bottom line, sodomites thought since the Great Liberal Messiah was being voted in, they'd legalize their pseudo-marriages while they were at it. It didn't happen, and now all the public hissy-fits and histrionics. And now everyone is a homophobic hater.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daskalos
Joined: 19 May 2006
Location: The Road to Ithaca
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jandar wrote: |
If the Government is licensing the behavior it should be equal.
My point is that the government should not be licensing that right, that right being the human right to free association.
As far as I can tell I have the right to engage in whatever relationship I wish with any other individual on this planet by mutual agreement. Just because a partnership involves sex shouldn't make that right any different.
My point is that government should not have the power to license a sexual partnership. Next thing you know they'll make some sex acts illegal.
If you want some kind of "sacred bond" go see some kind of sacred counselor, I mean do we let government regulate baptism?
Marriage is an act of faith, any and all of the legal trapping should be determined through contract law, there need be no special laws for married people or unjust advantages.
I think these arguments should be brought before the Supremes and it is my hope that the supremes will find that marriage has no place in the laws of these governments.
I guess maybe what I am saying is that licensing marriage is anti-constitutional.
That include any preference to marital status in law.
Repeal all marriage laws. |
But governments have pretty much always taken it upon themselves to license marriages, because marriages are far more about legal obligations that sacred bonds, because property is involved. Sometimes that "property" has included the wife, but even in cultures that have moved past that concept, there are certain practical considerations involved. Taxes, houses, children, citizenship. I'm for France's concept that the only marriage that counts before the law is the civil one. Whatever you want to do in church is your own business, and that of the church in question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
