Homosexuality in Australia (3 Viewers)

[bigboyjames]

More than breeders? Faw shaw. I just come to this with more sympathy to community obligations, not individual rights. I'm yet to be convinced that society as a whole is not damaged by the current open/vocal gay culture

is your citizenship under review yet? how dare you voice such concerns.

 

[Kwayera]

I'm yet to be convinced that society as a whole is not damaged by the current open/vocal gay culture

Why would it be?

 

[Iron]

Why would it be?

Ultimately I think it undermines the strength of heterosexual relationships. When falls the English family, England falls

 

[*TRUE*]

The current very open gay culture ( meaning its flamboyant and in your face nature ) id probably something that will only last a season , similar to feminism , it will leave a mark - but cease to be as is.

 

[Kwayera]

Ultimately I think it undermines the strength of heterosexual relationships. When falls the English family, England falls

How would it? People being gay doesn't stop heterosexual couples having lots of sex and babies.

 

[Iron]

How would it? People being gay doesn't stop heterosexual couples having lots of sex and babies.

Well then I become a little less reasonable and talk about the sacredness of life, embodied in a loving, heterosexual setting. Homosexual sex - which is the crude basis of the movement's mass marketing - undermines the overall respect of human life because it is an act that cannot produce life. They devalue the love and joy in sex and therefore in life itself
For example, since Roe v Wade, there have been ~40 million abortions in America alone. Some would call that a holocaust
We must shift attitudes back to the greater good: self sacrifice, devoting ourselves to something bigger, less selfish

 

[Kwayera]

Well then I become a little less reasonable and talk about the sacredness of life, embodied in a loving, heterosexual setting. Homosexual sex - which is the crude basis of the movement's mass marketing - undermines the overall respect of human life because it is an act that cannot produce life. They devalue the love and joy in sex and therefore in life itself
For example, since Roe v Wade, there have been ~40 million abortions in America alone. Some would call that a holocaust
We must shift attitudes back to the greater good: self sacrifice, devoting ourselves to something bigger, less selfish

Do couples that have sex when the woman or man is infertile devalue the love and joy of sex and thus life? Does it undermine other heterosexual couples because it is a union that cannot produce life?

 

[Slidey]

Iron, stop cunting well cunting cunt.

Kwayera, don't get up bigboyjames's goat because he has a gay username and doesn't like gay sex - he did say he still supports homosexuals doing whatever their own thing. I think that's more than anybody can ask for.

 

[Kwayera]

Oh, I'm just messing with him because he's a bigoted arsehole. See: other threads.

 

[Iron]

Do couples that have sex when the woman or man is infertile devalue the love and joy of sex and thus life? Does it undermine other heterosexual couples because it is a union that cannot produce life?

It's a long leap from infertile couples to homosexuality ('oh well I cant have kids, so I might as well me gay') Im not sure that it's always certain that someone is 100% infertile, but at any rate they would still have love. This faith and devotion can be encouraging to other couples. It's still a natural, selfless union which celebrates love and life.
In this instance, the infertility is tragic, not certain.

 

[Kwayera]

It's a long leap from infertile couples to homosexuality ('oh well I cant have kids, so I might as well me gay') Im not sure that it's always certain that someone is 100% infertile, but at any rate they would still have love. This faith and devotion can be encouraging to other couples. It's still a natural, selfless union which celebrates love and life.
In this instance, the infertility is tragic, not certain.

Why is it such a long leap? An infertile heterosexual couple is essentially the same as a homosexual couple; they still love, and experience joy in each other's company, but cannot have children. They're both natural, selfless unions which celebrate love and life.

In your words, it is a tragedy that homosexual couples cannot have children together, not something that should detract against them.

 

[Iron]

I dont deny that homosexuals have the feelings or that they can love eachother. But in terms of the broader community context - see, i'm always trying to enlarge the canvas here: you keep infernally shrinking it - in the community context, heterosexuality is how our species thrives.

To claim that the dominant sexual relationship is relative to a range of other ones: with the same gender, other species, children, objects, yourself - you do cheapen the family unit (the building block of society). I actually think that it is a moral duty of homosexuals to simply abstain from sex. This would be the noble thing to do. They must concentrate their rage into something constructive, not destructive, to society

 

[bigboyjames]

I dont deny that homosexuals have the feelings or that they can love eachother. But in terms of the broader community context - see, i'm always trying to enlarge the canvas here: you keep infernally shrinking it - in the community context, heterosexuality is how our species thrives.

To claim that the dominant sexual relationship is relative to a range of other ones: with the same gender, other species, children, objects, yourself - you do cheapen the family unit (the building block of society). I actually think that it is a moral duty of homosexuals to simply abstain from sex. This would be the noble thing to do. They must concentrate their rage into something constructive, not destructive, to society

+1 brilliantly said. i whole heartedly agree with this.

 

[Kwayera]

I dont deny that homosexuals have the feelings or that they can love eachother. But in terms of the broader community context - see, i'm always trying to enlarge the canvas here: you keep infernally shrinking it - in the community context, heterosexuality is how our species thrives.

To claim that the dominant sexual relationship is relative to a range of other ones: with the same gender, other species, children, objects, yourself - you do cheapen the family unit (the building block of society). I actually think that it is a moral duty of homosexuals to simply abstain from sex. This would be the noble thing to do. They must concentrate their rage into something constructive, not destructive, to society

I'm still not getting it, apparently.
- I agree, heterosexual unions produce children, which furthers the species. But how does that harm the family unit?
- A homosexual does not undermine heterosexual sex, or prevent it from happening. Moreover, homosexuals can't suddenly NOT be homosexual and start "benefitting society by having heterosexual sex". A homosexual person does not prevent babies from being born by heterosexuals. So again, what is your point? You can't "catch" homosexuality, it's not a case of "OMG THEY'LL TURN US ALL GAY AND THUS THE SPECIES WILL DIE."
- Why should homosexuals be denied the joy, sensuality, and love that comes from sex? Again, it does not deny heterosexuals sex, or cheapen theirs. They fundamentally cannot have children biologically, and that is a tragic thing. Why deny them sex?
- How is homosexual sex destructive to society? You still haven't answered the question.

 

[Iron]

I'm still not getting it, apparently.
- I agree, heterosexual unions produce children, which furthers the species. But how does that harm the family unit?
- A homosexual does not undermine heterosexual sex, or prevent it from happening. Moreover, homosexuals can't suddenly NOT be homosexual and start "benefitting society by having heterosexual sex". A homosexual person does not prevent babies from being born by heterosexuals. So again, what is your point?
- Why should homosexuals be denied the joy, sensuality, and love that comes from sex? Again, it does not deny heterosexuals sex, or cheapen theirs. They fundamentally cannot have children biologically, and that is a tragic thing. Why deny them sex?
- How is homosexual sex destructive to society? You still haven't answered the question.

You and I agree that human life is valuable and everything endangering it is bad
We know that some people's instinct can be against life, and is therefore fundamentally wrong - not a relative truth to be respected (you mentioned murder etc)
We also know that apart from instinct, people can become corrupted - they can gradually develop a disrespect for human life

Instinctive homosexuals cannot procreate
Instinctive homosexuals can corrupt heterosexuals
Open homosexuality is therefore anti-life
By accepting this in society, the individual triumphs over the collective. A pillar of human cooperation is removed. Suddenly more and more people start to do what they'd like to do, rather than what they should do. We retreat into ourselves. We care less about others. Experience becomes all that matters, not responsibility. Sex becomes not the sacred means of procreation, but a right to be enjoyed by anyone, in whatever way they desire, with no consequences at all. Birth control, anal sex, condoms, artificial insemination, abortions. More and more, life is denied and perverted. We become streamlined consuming machines, not humans.

 

[Kwayera]

Instinctive homosexuals cannot procreate
Instinctive homosexuals can corrupt heterosexuals
Open homosexuality is therefore anti-life

Instinctive homosexuals? Homosexuality is not "instinct". It is genetic. They can't help it any more than a woman born barren, and a woman being born barren is as much anti-life as a homosexual.

I can't believe you just said that.

By accepting this in society, the individual triumphs over the collective. A pillar of human cooperation is removed. Suddenly more and more people start to do what they'd like to do, rather than what they should do. We retreat into ourselves. We care less about others. Experience becomes all that matters, not responsibility.

So homosexuality = the great and terrifying capitalist machine?

Sex becomes not the sacred means of procreation, but a right to be enjoyed by anyone, in whatever way they desire, with no consequences at all. Birth control, anal sex, condoms, artificial insemination, abortions. More and more, life is denied and perverted. We become streamlined consuming machines, not humans.

Sex is not sacred. It never has been, until it was made into such by the Churches in a perverted attempt to control us.

I just... are you listening to yourself?

 

[Slidey]

You and I agree that human life is valuable and everything endangering it is bad
We know that some people's instinct can be against life, and is therefore fundamentally wrong - not a relative truth to be respected (you mentioned murder etc)
We also know that apart from instinct, people can become corrupted - they can gradually develop a disrespect for human life

Instinctive homosexuals cannot procreate
Instinctive homosexuals can corrupt heterosexuals
Open homosexuality is therefore anti-life
By accepting this in society, the individual triumphs over the collective. A pillar of human cooperation is removed. Suddenly more and more people start to do what they'd like to do, rather than what they should do. We retreat into ourselves. We care less about others. Experience becomes all that matters, not responsibility. Sex becomes not the sacred means of procreation, but a right to be enjoyed by anyone, in whatever way they desire, with no consequences at all. Birth control, anal sex, condoms, artificial insemination, abortions. More and more, life is denied and perverted. We become streamlined consuming machines, not humans.

What the fuck dude?

Do you have any concept of equilibrium?

Seriously, just... no.

 

[Iron]

Instinctive homosexuals? Homosexuality is not "instinct". It is genetic. They can't help it any more than a woman born barren, and a woman being born barren is as much anti-life as a homosexual.

I can't believe you just said that.


So homosexuality = the great and terrifying capitalist machine?


Sex is not sacred. It never has been, until it was made into such by the Churches in a perverted attempt to control us.

I just... are you listening to yourself?

Yes, i'm locating gay culture within a broader trend of dehumanization.
Never mind my 'instinctive' label - that was to capture genetic.

Sex is the creation of life. You cant get much more sacred. Our attitudes towards sex, I have argued, shape our attitudes towards eachother. By rejecting the primary link between sex and procreation (thru homosexuality, birth ctrl, whatever), society IS harmed, people DO respect life less

 

[Kwayera]

Sex is much more than the creation of life, dude. I think you need to get laid. And it's not sacred - it only is because your fucking brainwashing church decided it was.

I respect life less because I use birth control? Get fucked.

 

[Iron]

Yeah well "birth" "control" tends to suggest the suppression of life, so I guess you do

We have an irreconcilable difference of opinion, it seems.