323 replies to this topic

[kittycat]

I wonder if it's a lot of guys finally experiencing the "female" side of things, and it's scary being in the non-dominant position. Men getting hit on/groped by creepy gay guys is no different than women getting hit on/groped by creepy hetero guys.

Also, there is a selection bias when it comes to "gay" behaviors. You remember the ones that are the most flamboyant, while you pay no attention to the regular old joes going about their everyday lives. I know lots of gay men, but only one you could really guess was gay. Most people on here probably know many gay people, they just don't know it!

Yeah I know a lot of gay people who can easily pass for hetero, the only thing that gives them away is their manicures. What is so wrong with a flaming homosexual though? What's wrong with being overtly feminine, those are the ones those straight folk shouldn't worry about because they're on their radar to ~*~STAY AWAY~*~ from where as them breeder camouflaged homosexuals can take you up from behind when ya least expect it!

[Rambo]

Are we talking about the physical attraction here? Or the way that some gay men act i.e. camp, overly feminine?

[Boggart]

Yeah I know a lot of gay people who can easily pass for hetero, the only thing that gives them away is their manicures. What is so wrong with a flaming homosexual though? What's wrong with being overtly feminine, those are the ones those straight folk shouldn't worry about because they're on their radar to ~*~STAY AWAY~*~ from where as them breeder camouflaged homosexuals can take you up from behind when ya least expect it!

in all fairness, I get uncomfortable when straight people act overly feminine/masculine. Like when a guy is just so "manly" that it makes me uncomfortable that they're so forward. Same with women.

Sorta why I get uncomfortable around feminine men or manly women. It's not that "it doesn't fit their societal gender role", it's because they're usually so forward about it

[jcrdude]

I'm fine with gay people.. really... as long as they don't touch me

Don't worry. They don't want to

[Raui]

grinds your 'gear' up against your pants after seeing such a public display of homoeroticism?


does the rest of the world use 'gear' as slang for penis or is that just where I live?

No, I'd say it's more like my penis retreats into my body. Akin to me having sex with myself, anti-boner action right there..

[Mikes]

Don't worry. They don't want to

Speak for yourself!

[pabs123]

Speak for yourself!

haha...be afraid, be very afraid!

[Adina]

Sorry, you are correct. A straight man should be fine with gay men watching him naked and touching his ass.

You don't need to have guys touching your ass in order to not be a homophobe.

[Eliam]

Do you get erections in the locker room?

Can you do it by looking at yourself? (not do you)

Which part of the male body turns you on the most?

Did you come out yet?

No.

I could if I thought about something sexy.

Nothing in particular.

Yes.

[emerkeng]

My only comment is that being gay is against the bible to coin a phrase god created adam and eve not adam and steve he did not want gays to be united as one flesh he wanted a man and woman to be together in holy matrimony

[Sweeney]

My only comment is that being gay is against the bible to coin a phrase god created adam and eve not adam and steve he did not want gays to be united as one flesh he wanted a man and woman to be together in holy matrimony

Great job.
Now all you have to do is provide evidence that God exists, and that the Bible is an accurate summary of his wishes for mankind.

[emerkeng]

Great job.
Now all you have to do is provide evidence that God exists, and that the Bible is an accurate summary of his wishes for mankind.

Look at the signs that are currently appearing around you such as more earthquakes, obama planning on forcing Israel to sign a peace treaty and signs such as the creation of the European Union/New Roman Empire plans for a world government, development of technology that can potentially be used for the "mark" and you'll realize what you just said is stupid God exists and the Bible is an accurate summary of his wishes for mankind. Just cause you don't believe in him doesn't mean he's not real.

[Sweeney]

Look at the signs that are currently appearing around you such as more earthquakes

Apart from an anomalous peak in 2008, worldwide earthquakes have remained pretty constant for the last 20-odd years.

obama planning on forcing Israel to sign a peace treaty

Yup, peace treaties will be a sure sign of the End Times.

and signs such as the creation of the European Union/New Roman Empire plans for a world government

Paranoid delusions of an extraordinary degree.

development of technology that can potentially be used for the "mark"

I have no idea what that is even supposed to mean.

and you'll realize what you just said is stupid God exists and the Bible is an accurate summary of his wishes for mankind.

More assertion without evidence.

Just cause you don't believe in him doesn't mean he's not real.

This is the only true thing I think you've said.

[Georgina]

Look at the signs that are currently appearing around you such as more earthquakes, obama planning on forcing Israel to sign a peace treaty and signs such as the creation of the European Union/New Roman Empire plans for a world government, development of technology that can potentially be used for the "mark" and you'll realize what you just said is stupid God exists and the Bible is an accurate summary of his wishes for mankind. Just cause you don't believe in him doesn't mean he's not real.

So how would you explain the scientific evidence of evolution, hundreds of unearthed skeletons that provide an acurate dateline of the changes over thousands and thousands of years in the human body going back to ape like similarities?

Along with the big bang evidence and general science laws.

Along with the fact that the amount of suffering and evil in the world isn't being stopped by "god".

More proof?

Edited by Georgina, 18 July 2010 - 01:36 PM.

[emerkeng]

So how would you explain the scientific evidence of evolution, hundreds of unearthed skeletons that provide an acurate dateline of the changes over thousands and thousands of years in the human body going back to ape like similarities?

Along with the big bang evidence and general science laws.

Along with the fact that the amount of suffering and evil in the world isn't being stopped by "god".

More proof?

You do realize that never in the bible did God say people would not suffer and that there would be no evil. Evil is not just the absence of God and the presence of satan and sin. The bible mentions sin does it not? Sin is evil and people suffer due to sin like it says in the bible. The big bang evidence is not proven to be a fact it is still widely debated you may have Stephen Hawking's viewpoint on it but there are others (http://www.physicsmy...k/cosmology.htm) as it is the Big Bang has not been proved to be real it is still at this moment being widely debated and it is just a theory not scientific fact. General Science laws like Newton's laws of motion? Where in the bible did it say that general science is flawed if you cite man walking on water as a reason that general science is flawed realize that Jesus Christ can do miracles (ie man walking on water). Also look up http://www.religious.../ev_noway.htm#4 and while you're at it realize that evolution is a theory still it is not considered scientific fact many people are discovering new discoveries that point to the fact that evolution is not possible.

Anyways, I'm done debating about Christianity unbelievers will find any reason to not believe.

[Sweeney]

I like that you ignored my post.

I also like that since you can't back up your bigoted opinions under pressure, you're leaving the topic with cries of unfair opponents.

while you're at it realize that evolution is a theory still it is not considered scientific fact many people are discovering new discoveries that point to the fact that evolution is not possible.

Also, this is a lie

And, having just clicked that link about evolution that you posted, did you know it's actually a list of more lies and misconceptions about evolution, along with rebuttals? That doesn't back up your "point", and makes you look very, very stupid.

[Lychee]

Where in the bible did it say that general science is flawed if you cite man walking on water as a reason that general science is flawed realize that Jesus Christ can do miracles (ie man walking on water).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U65XpQpHStU

It's not a miracle, Michael.

It's an illusion! (Sorry for crappy quality, best I could find.)

[emerkeng]

I like that you ignored my post.

I also like that since you can't back up your bigoted opinions under pressure, you're leaving the topic with cries of unfair opponents.


Also, this is a lie

And, having just clicked that link about evolution that you posted, did you know it's actually a list of more lies and misconceptions about evolution, along with rebuttals? That doesn't back up your "point", and makes you look very, very stupid.

Classic case in point of unbelievers trying to say irrational things to disprove the existence of god . . .

[pabs123]

And, having just clicked that link about evolution that you posted, did you know it's actually a list of more lies and misconceptions about evolution, along with rebuttals? That doesn't back up your "point", and makes you look very, very stupid.

i've met many many people in my life who have tried to argue the same thing he just argued, about the existance of God and such. i have to say that was some of the worst points and "evidence". i'd like to see the people that are "discovering new discoveries" all the time about evolution not being right, or even any of these discoveries.

regardless this thread is about gayness and homosexuality, and you have all the right to express your discomfort/ disapproval of gays due to your christian views, but don't try to prove god exists when there is absolutely no proof. Moreover don't try to make it seem like everyone else is stupid for not believing in god, we all have the same right you do to believe in what we choose to, and when someone like Sweeney comes in and dispproves every dumb thing you lay on the table and all you can do is leave it doesn't help your case.

[Georgina]

You do realize that never in the bible did God say people would not suffer and that there would be no evil. Evil is not just the absence of God and the presence of satan and sin. The bible mentions sin does it not? Sin is evil and people suffer due to sin like it says in the bible. The big bang evidence is not proven to be a fact it is still widely debated you may have Stephen Hawking's viewpoint on it but there are others (http://www.physicsmy.../cosmology.htm) as it is the Big Bang has not been proved to be real it is still at this moment being widely debated and it is just a theory not scientific fact. General Science laws like Newton's laws of motion? Where in the bible did it say that general science is flawed if you cite man walking on water as a reason that general science is flawed realize that Jesus Christ can do miracles (ie man walking on water). Also look up http://www.religious.../ev_noway.htm#4 and while you're at it realize that evolution is a theory still it is not considered scientific fact many people are discovering new discoveries that point to the fact that evolution is not possible.

Anyways, I'm done debating about Christianity unbelievers will find any reason to not believe.

Im not debating that both theroies arent proven but nor is god,

And just to let you know, I have been christened under the church of england and do actuly beleive in a higher force, but Im just open minded.

[Sweeney]

Classic case in point of unbelievers trying to say irrational things to disprove the existence of god . . .

Irrational?
I hope you can back that up, because I consider that an insult

And if you weren't talking about me, but the people that wrote the page you linked to, I refer you to their "Our Beliefs" section:
"As of 2010-FEB, we consist of one Atheist, Agnostic, Christian, Wiccan and Zen Buddhist."

[Lychee]

My only comment is that being gay is against the bible to coin a phrase god created adam and eve not adam and steve he did not want gays to be united as one flesh he wanted a man and woman to be together in holy matrimony

Back to the topic at hand, there is considerable evidence that Jesus, according to your Bible, did not discriminate against people based on their sexuality,

Here's a link, but I'll C&P some main points.

"This story is recorded in Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10. In Matthew, we are told that the centurion came to Jesus to plead for the healing of his servant. Jesus said he was willing to come to the centurion’s house, but the centurion said there was no need for Jesus to do so — he believed that if Jesus simply spoke the word, his servant would be healed. Marveling at the man’s faith, Jesus pronounced the servant healed. Luke tells a similar story. ...

In the original language, the importance of this story for gay, lesbian, and bisexual Christians is much clearer. The Greek word used in Matthew’s account to refer to the servant of the centurion is pais. In the language of the time, pais had three possible meanings depending upon the context in which it was used. It could mean “son or boy;” it could mean “servant,” or it could mean a particular type of servant — one who was “his master’s male lover.” ...

In that culture, if you were a gay man who wanted a male “spouse,” you achieved this, like your heterosexual counterparts, through a commercial transaction — purchasing someone to serve that purpose. A servant purchased to serve this purpose was often called a pais. The word boy in English offers a rough comparison. Like pais, the word boy can be used to refer to a male child. But in the slave South in the nineteenth century, boy was also often used to refer to male slaves. The term boy can also be used as a term of endearment. For example, Jeff’s father often refers to his mother as “his girl.” He doesn’t mean that she is a child, but rather that she is his “special one.” The term boy can be used in the same way, as in “my boy” or “my beau.” In ancient Greek, pais had a similar range of meanings.

Thus, when this term was used, the listener had to consider the context of the statement to determine which meaning was intended. Some modern Christians may be tempted to simply declare by fiat that the Gospels could not possibly have used the term pais in the sense of male lover, end of discussion. But that would be yielding to prejudice. We must let the word of God speak for itself, even if it leads us to an uncomfortable destination. ...

The Bible provides three key pieces of textual and circumstantial evidence. First, in the Luke passage, several additional Greek words are used to describe the one who is sick. Luke says this pais was the centurion’s entimos doulos. The word doulos is a generic term for slave, and was never used in ancient Greek to describe a son/boy. Thus, Luke’s account rules out the possibility the sick person was the centurion’s son; his use of doulos makes clear this was a slave. However, Luke also takes care to indicate this was no ordinary slave. The word entimos means “honored.” This was an “honored slave” (entimos doulos) who was his master’s pais. Taken together, the three Greek words preclude the possibility the sick person was either the centurion’s son or an ordinary slave, leaving only one viable option — he was his master’s male lover."

[pabs123]

Classic case in point of unbelievers trying to say irrational things to disprove the existence of god . . .

how is this a case of "unbelievers"? all you're showing is a classic case of believers trying to ignore the rest of the world's views. "unbelievers" use every possible bit of knowledge, logic, and intelligence to debate what believers lay on the table, and all believers do is make up things and blindly support something they have no proof of... believers are the ones that say irrational things to PROVE the existence of god.

I believe in a lot of the morals that the bible lays down, and i'm a raised catholic, i just refuse to believe in all the dumb fictional aspects it attempts to impose on us. i take what i like from Catholicism and i don't appreciate others trying to force feed me everything else.

[emerkeng]

Irrational?
I hope you can back that up, because I consider that an insult

And if you weren't talking about me, but the people that wrote the page you linked to, I refer you to their "Our Beliefs" section:
"As of 2010-FEB, we consist of one Atheist, Agnostic, Christian, Wiccan and Zen Buddhist."

Well at least I am being openminded I bet you don't even understand half the things I've written about and you're saying they're "delusions" and stuff do some research and you'll realize that you are wrong.

[Sweeney]

Well at least I am being openminded I bet you don't even understand half the things I've written about and you're saying they're "delusions" and stuff do some research and you'll realize that you are wrong.

I asked you to explain the things I didn't understand, but you ignored that post.

I have to say, though, the "open minded" accusation is too complex to bring up. I consider myself open minded, to evidence and interesting theories. I don't consider myself open minded towards any old shit that someone can spew up after trawling internet conspiracy sites for half an hour.