Opskrifter:
Forumtråde:
Profiler:

Underskrifsindsamling: Russisk homofobi

 

Politik

Sider: << < 4 5 6 7 8 > >>
bebop
Forum-indlæg: 12
Område: KBH
Dato: 18/10 2013 09:45

Jeg enig med Martin. Hvis man er for eksempel født med et aggressiv temperament, burde man forsøge at lære
at kontrollere den. Hvis homoseksualitet er kulturelt (det er der ikke meget der tyder på) så kan jeg stadig ikke
se noget forkert i det.
Aros
Forum-indlæg: 848
Opskrifter: 2
Område: Århus
Dato: 18/10 2013 13:25

-Martin-Kriteriet for accept må vel være, at folk må indgå i de relationer, de har lyst til, hvad enten det er biologisk eller kulturelt betinget, uden at samfundet blander sig i det (Jeg taler her udelukkende om personer over den seksuelle lavalder, ellers bliver det for indviklet for mig).


Det er jeg ikke uenig i. Jeg tror ikke vi er uenige på nogen måde faktisk. Derfor er det dog stadig et faktum at sexualitet er medfødt. Og at sige at hvis man kunne vælge sin sexualitet synes jeg i princippet folk skulle have lyst til at gøre hvad de vil er sådan lidt meningsløs, for homosexuelle dyrker ikke og har ikke lyst til at dyrke hetrosexuel sex og omvendt, så hvad er pointen i at sige at man synes de i princippet skal have det frie valg?

-Martin-Det kan bare hurtigt komme til at lyde noget i retning af: "Nåja, han/hun er født sådan, så det kan han/hun jo ikke gøre for!". Forstår du, hvad jeg mener? Min pointe er, at det ikke bør handle om, hvad man er i biologisk/'naturlig' forstand, men at det afgørende må være, at vi insisterer på den enkeltes borgerlige og kulturelle frihed til at forme sit liv, prøve ting af og gøre som han/hun føler for, sålænge det ikke skader andre


Ja jeg forstår hvad du mener. Jeg har også hørt argumenter som "De kan ikke gøre for det, de er født sådan osv" , og der hentydes til at homoseksualitet er en slags medfødt sygdom. Det er bestemt ikke det jeg argumenterer for. For det første opfylder homoseksualitet ikke nogle af de krav vi normalt definerer sygdom ved, og det at sexualitet(både homo og hetroseksualitet) er medfødt skal ikke tillægges mere betydning end at være født med brunt hår, høj eller hvad ved jeg. Prøv at se den film jeg linker til. Moralsk eller etisk er jeg enig, og her spiller biologi som sådan ikke ind for mig, for selv HVIS man selv kunne vælge sin sexualitet, ville jeg synes folk skulle have lov at gøre hvad de vil, bare det er imellem samstykkende voksne, men det giver ikke mening at tale om ens biologi som om det var muligt at handle imod den. Hvordan skulle det fungere? Du kan selvfølgelig godt sige at du i princippet synes folk skal have lov til at gøre hvad de vil, men folk får jo ikke pludselig lyst til at have sex med en fra et køn de ikke finder tiltrækkende. Personligt er jeg f.eks en hetrosexuel mand, og at du synes jeg skal have min kulturelle frihed til at forme mit liv osv, vil stadig ikke ændre på det. Hvis man kun finder kvinder tiltrækkende begynder man jo ikke bare at gå i seng med mænd fordi man har friheden til det. Det er irrelevant at jeg moralsk set godt må. Argumentet er selvmodsigende, for hvis en f.eks hetrosexuel kvinde "vælger" kun at være sexuelt sammen med kvinder, så er hun ikke hetrosexuel men homosexuel. Om sexualitet er medfødt eller ej er ikke et moralsk spørgsmål. Det er blot et videnskabeligt faktum. Det handler ikke om det er okay at være homosexuel eller ej. At prøve ting af ved f.eks at være sammen med begge køn betyder blot at personen er bisexuel og altid har været det. Derfor kan en bisexuel godt hælde mere til et køn end det andet, og en anden bisexuel har det måske modsat, eller finder begge køn lige tiltrækkende. Der kan være variationer i sexualitet, men det er aldrig noget der bevidst er valgt. En der er født homosexuel eller hetrosexuel og siden barnsben har vidst det, har ikke lyst til eller behov for at prøve ting af i den forstand. Tidligere ville en del homosexuelle måske prøve at "konventere" dem selv, fordi de ikke ville indse deres sexualitet pga fordømmelse fra samsundet osv. Og sådan er der også lande hvor det stadigt er. Der er nogle mennesker der tror eller gerne vil have at alt skal være et valg, for ellers føler de at vi ikke er frie. Men der er altså ting der er medfødt. Og at sexualitet ikke er et valg er hverken godt eller dårligt. Jeg føler det da ikke som en frihed der er taget fra mig at jeg er hetrosexuel. Folk har jo ikke lyst til at det skal være anderledes end deres medfødte natur, derfor er der heller ikke en følelse af at have mindre valgmuligheder, mindre frihed osv. Hvis sexualitet er et valg, så spørg dig selv, hvornår du satte dig ned og bevidst besluttede hvad du vil finde tiltrækkende?.

bebop: Jeg enig med Martin. Hvis man er for eksempel født med et aggressiv temperament, burde man forsøge at lære
at kontrollere den. Hvis homoseksualitet er kulturelt (det er der ikke meget der tyder på) så kan jeg stadig ikke
se noget forkert i det.



Jeg er også enig med Martin. Der er ikke nogen der har sagt at homosexsualitet er forkert uanset om det er kulturelt eller ej. Der er heller ikke nogen der har sagt noget om der er forkert hvis det var baseret på et bevidst valg eller ej. Nu er det bare et videnskabeligt faktum at homosexualitet er medfødt, det samme er iøvrigt hetrosexualitet. Mit argument er blot at ud fra den basis er det ikke anderledes at tale imod homosexualitet end at tale imod f.eks at være brunhåret eller blond. Det har ikke noget med at vælge at gøre og det har ikke noget med moral at gøre. Det er hverken godt eller negativt at være homosexuel eller hetrosexuel. Det er bare.



Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 18/10 2013 14:08 | Indlæg redigeret den: 18/10 2013 17:20

Mit argument er blot at ud fra den basis er det ikke anderledes at tale imod homosexualitet end at tale imod f.eks at være brunhåret eller blond.


Eller mørkhudet eller lys, eller med en tissemand eller ej...


Spørgsmål: Skal man have lov til at fortælle børn, at det er ok at have mørk hud eller at være en kvinde?

Eller har de brug for "protection" (som er et ord Earthling* har brugt)?
Inkognito
Forum-indlæg: 287
Område: Andet
Dato: 18/10 2013 14:59

Det er godt at Earthling ikke har med børn at gøre... "protection", fy for helvede...
Earthling 2
Forum-indlæg: 633
Område: Andet
Dato: 18/10 2013 15:36 | Indlæg redigeret den: 18/10 2013 15:45

Jeff,

I did NOT use the word protection in the context you seem to suggest, and I think it is extremely misleading, dishonest and slanderous of you to even name me in your comment. As Inkognito´s follow-on remark proves...

For crying out loud, I work with children every day.

Do you seriously think I can´t or won´t tell them what a homosexual is or what homosexuality means? Do you seriously think that I fill their minds and hearts with hatred and prejudice? Do you seriously think that I would ban them from asking questions or refuse to answer their questions? Do you seriously think that I would object to homosexuals working with children? Or that I would refuse to deal with same sex parents?

For the record, I have experience in every single one of these situations, and no one has ever lodged a complaint against me. This, despite the fact that I don´t agree with the concept of "gay marriage".

No, Jeff, when I did mention protection, it was specifically in relation to heterosexual marriage, and to the Children´s Rights Document. It was also in relation to the fact that a large amount of empirical research is showing that children who grow up in committed heterosexual relationships fare better in many regards than those who don´t. Links available.

And while we´re on the issue of protection, check out this video. The cases mentioned do give serious reason for concern.

The consequences of homosexual marriage (21.mins)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=afDZPivGIo4#t=14




Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 18/10 2013 15:45

You used the words "protection" and "protecting".

And not just in the context of marriage

And I even pursued you on the usage.

Now, please show me in my comments where I indicated any particular context.

I said that it was a word you used. Period.

You would do best to clarify your position here - then there will be no room for confusion.
Earthling 2
Forum-indlæg: 633
Område: Andet
Dato: 18/10 2013 15:51 | Indlæg redigeret den: 18/10 2013 15:54

Indeed, you tried to pursue me, and I stated then, as I state now that you took my words entirely out of their context.

As for context, look at the framework of the conversation and read how Inkognito understood what you wrote.

You did not have to mention me - at all. PERIOD.





Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 18/10 2013 15:55 | Indlæg redigeret den: 18/10 2013 16:40



On 23.8.2013 at 20:29 you stated that it could argued that nations have the right to protect children from "propaganda".

Again, you would do best to clarify your position here - then there will be no room for confusion.

Are you a homophobe or not?
Earthling 2
Forum-indlæg: 633
Område: Andet
Dato: 18/10 2013 16:15 | Indlæg redigeret den: 18/10 2013 16:19

What are you now, a parrot??? ;)

True. I´d forgotten that. But again, those words are being taken out of context. I was speaking of (and I´m pretty sure I made this clear somewhere) information being pushed on children and of situations where teenagers might be forced into early sexual activity. I maintained that the state has a right to protect children from such.

If I have misunderstood you, you will tell Inkognito that he misunderstood you, and that his comment is uncalled for.

Are you a homophobe or not?

Let´s see,
Homophobe: a person who fears or hates homosexuals and homosexuality; has an intense hatred or fear of homosexuals or homosexuality.

MOST DEFINITELY NOT ME. Get that: MOST DEFINITELY NOT.

Why are you so afraid of me? I´m sure it must qualify as Earthlingphobia. Christophobia. Heterophobia.

I believe a sexual relationship comes to its fullness in a heterosexual marriage. Does the fact that I disagree with sex outside marriage make me heterophobic?

No. Then why does the fact that I disagree with homosexual marriage make me a homophobic?

Also, if you think I´m homophobic, are you okay with the way the people in the cases named in the video above are treated?


Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 18/10 2013 16:49

Here is what you said:

It also omits to say that this law concerns distributing information to people under 18, ie. minors. They are guardians of the state and of their families.

The latter might be questionable given the right to freedom of information (article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights). However, it might also be argued that if states have the right to flood their countries with sexual propaganda, they also have the right to refrain from doing so, in the name of protecting their young people. (Children´s Rights Document)


Now, you may have later attempted to qualify this, but we really need to ask why you brought this up the way you did in the context you did - that is, specifically concerning a law about distributing a specific kind of information to minors (= about homosexuality, in general) connected by the phrase "sexual propaganda".

Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 18/10 2013 17:07 | Indlæg redigeret den: 18/10 2013 17:12

Earthling*,

Good that you state that you are not a homophobe, but let's get some more things cleared up.

1) Is it okay to tell minors that being gay is ok, yes or no?

2) Is it okay to tell minors about the basics of sex, yes or no?

3) Is it okay to tell minors about the basics of sex between people of the same sex, yes or no?


Now, let's look at the logic of these statement here:

I believe a sexual relationship comes to its fullness in a heterosexual marriage. Does the fact that I disagree with sex outside marriage make me heterophobic?

No. Then why does the fact that I disagree with homosexual marriage make me a homophobic?


1) You "disagree with sex outside marriage "

2) You "disagree with homosexual marriage"

I could almost construct an geometric proof out of this and state,

3) Ergo, you disagree with homosexual sex.

If you want me to demonstrate how clearly that follows*, please ask.

(Un-)Remarkably, this follows quite closely with the Vatican's position on the topic, too.


*I already tested this by posing the first to statements to someone and asked them what the logical conclusion was - their answer was immediately exactly (3) above.




Earthling 2
Forum-indlæg: 633
Område: Andet
Dato: 19/10 2013 16:25 | Indlæg redigeret den: 19/10 2013 16:25

Jeff,
I think it´s pretty evident now, seeing both the comments by Inkognito and Aros, and my objection, that your comment of Dato: 18/10 2013 16:08 | Indlæg redigeret den: 18/10 2013 19:20 was NOT helpful. It was, in fact, ambiguous and wide open to (mis)interpretation. Rather than suggesting that Aros deletes his comments, I suggest you delete that comment.


You did not answer me..
...are you okay with the way the people in the cases named in the video above are treated?




Good that you state that you are not a homophobe

I don´t particularly care how "good" you think it is. It is insulting that you even asked. I have made myself clear here and elsewhere when the subject of homosexuality has come up. I never degrade homosexuals or speak down to them. I defended someone on VK some time ago, and I have consistently spoken out of my abhorrence of anti-gay violence and hate. It´s time you moved beyond your fears and prejudice towards me.

Anyway, what´s your issue? Why are you also so defensive when the subject comes up? Are you gay, or not? Could we clear that up?


As for
let's get some more things cleared up

What are you, the VK gay inquisitioner? Do you put everyone else through your vetting machine?


1) Is it okay to tell minors that being gay is ok, yes or no?

Just to be clear, what do you mean when you say minors? I mean children and young people from 0-18 years of age who have parents, guardians or are wards of the state.

To be honest, I never tell anyone it´s okay to be heterosexual so I see no need to tell anyone it´s okay to be homosexual either. I just treat people as human beings. I would tell children that homosexuals are human beings like everyone else. I would tell them that bullying and ridiculing someone for being gay was not acceptable, just as the bullying and ridiculing of other human beings is not acceptable. I would encourage them to treat homosexuals with the same respect they show everyone else, and to stop or report mistreatment to adults if they come across it. Obviously, this is aimed at the age. If I´m talking to small children, I keep it simple. If I´m talking to teenagers, I go into more detail.


2) Is it okay to tell minors about the basics of sex, yes or no?

Of course it is. What´s your problem?! That said, what kind of "basics" are we talking about? I would question some of the "sexual education" material which is available. I don´t agree with value-free sex education. I don´t agree with sex-ed which is clearly a promoter of pornography, promiscuity and abortion. I would also be wary of programmes which shut parents out.

And again, sex education is aimed at the age. If I´m talking to small children, I keep it simple. If I´m talking to teenagers, I go into more detail. I pose questions to provoke further reflection, and I encourage them to task questions.

3) Is it okay to tell minors about the basics of sex between people of the same sex, yes or no?

Ditto.

My problem would be with legislation which imposes programmes and inhibits people from voicing their opinions/beliefs/arguments about issues like chastity, abstinence, and marriage between a man and a woman, and open to the possibility of children from that union. Or which promotes the view that such people are homophobic for thinking this.

I have seen programmes which aggressively promoted and encouraged early hetero and homosexual activity between minors, pornography and contraception while underplaying or ignoring consequences like porn addiction, STD´s and abortion. Some of these programmes promote false information, led young people into early sexual activity before they are emotionally ready, thus exposing them to all kinds of dangers.

I have also come across stories of young people being pressured into "coming out" before they were emotionally mature, and of heterosexuals growing up in homosexual/lesbian households who suffered harrassment and pressure to be gay... I would protest at and seek to prohibit this kind of material/behaviour and protect parents rights with regard to the education of their children. I would also always seek to talk about sex in the framework of love and commitment.


As to,
1) You "disagree with sex outside marriage "

2) You "disagree with homosexual marriage"

I could almost construct an geometric proof out of this and state,

3) Ergo, you disagree with homosexual sex.

If you want me to demonstrate how clearly that follows*, please ask.

(Un-)Remarkably, this follows quite closely with the Vatican's position on the topic, too.



I expected this comeback... I stated quite clearly that
I believe a sexual relationship comes to its fullness in a heterosexual marriage.

From that, yes, it may be deduced that I don´t agree with sex outside that framework. You could also include the practice of polygamy, arranged marriage, child marriage, prostitution, pornography, whatever. It still happens. Interestingly, no one makes an issue of the fact that there is disagreement there...

That said, I recognize that people will not necessarily agree with me. I also recognize that the issue of homosexual attraction is not necessarily back and white. I have questions, particularly in regard to what I learned recently about Epigenetics. I think I - and we as a Church - need to look at this. I have also heard rumours of blessing ceremonies for homosexual pairs in early Christianity. I would like to be able to look into that. In any case, I think we need to listen to homosexuals more, especially those who have been wounded by the harshness of some Christians.

I would not deride anyone living in a long term committed homosexual relationship. I would meet them with the same respect with which I meet everyone else with whom I may or may not agree, be they black, white, yellow, pink, atheist, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, boy girl, married, divorced, single, whatever... I would not encourage anyone to live a promiscous life.

Now, hopefully that is the end of your fear, your prejudice and your gay vettting. As far as I´m concerned, I have nothing to hide and nothing of which to be ashamed.

You no like: your problem ;)


Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 19/10 2013 16:26 | Indlæg redigeret den: 19/10 2013 17:00

I didn't watch the video yet.

And just what purpose do you think this sentence serves here other than rudeness?

I don´t particularly care how "good" you think it is.


I only put people through the vetting machine who do not signify clearly enough on their positions - especially when the parts I am seeing are heinous. Challenge me to enlist numerous VKers in agreement on this point: you are waffling around on this issue and it is time that things be made clear.

But alas, things are becoming clear, even as you try to evade direct questions with polemics.

For instance, knowing full well that people growing up in many places are told that it is not okay to be gay, you would not do any work in dispelling that impression - that is what you "heteros don't need to be told it's okay..." lame piece of verbiage precipitates?

I see.

Basically, you disagree with the It Gets Better Campaign in the US then, I guess.

http://www.itgetsbetter.org/video/entry/geyafbsdpvk/
http://www.youtube.com/user/itgetsbetterproject?feature=watch

50,000 stories and growing...

And, no, I don't like your clear assertion of the normative homosexual marriage paradigm. This aligns you with directly with what the protest is against here.

But I am glad we have that out in the open. When I get some time, I will take things a little more to task.


Earthling 2
Forum-indlæg: 633
Område: Andet
Dato: 19/10 2013 21:25 | Indlæg redigeret den: 19/10 2013 21:47

Jeff,
I find the sentence - "Good that you state that you are not a homophob" - patronising, to say the least. Being put through a vetting machine is rude. Having it suggested that I´m homophobic is rude.

You talk about positions not being clear. Well, you haven´t answered my question: are you gay or not? I ask because every time the subject of homosexuality comes up you get very defensive. As for the "numerous VKers" you can enlist...

Heinous: infamous, flagrant, flagitious, atrocious, villainous, nefarious.

I see nothing heinous in my posts. You asked me several questions. I did not have to answer. I took the time to do so, and I answered honestly. I also said I had questions, by which I mean I am learning and reflecting. I also said that Christians should be listening to the experiences of homosexuals. That is itself shows an open heart.

You could have asked me more questions, asked for clarification. You could express disagreement without using emotive and derogatory adjectives, and jumping to conclusions.

But, no. You go immediately on the attack, and make false assumptions and accusations.

I NEVER said I had not or would not do any work in dispelling destructive ideas about gay people. You can search the whole forum and you will not find me making one such statement. I have taken part in campaigns defending homosexuals, lesbians and tranvestites from discrimination, violence, imprisonment, and rape, and I´m quite sure I will do so again.

I had no idea what you were talking about when you mentioned, "It Gets Better Campaign in the USCampaign". I had never heard about it. I can assure you that I speak up against hate and intolerance, have done so and will always do so. Why wouldn´t I? I have been exposed to enough of it here on VK and elsewhere.

I was a victim of SERIOUS and SUSTAINED bullying as a teenager.

Who spoke up for me? Who speaks up for the Christians suffering 80% of ALL persecution and discrimination in the world today? 11 killed EVERY hour in persecution that comes from Islamic fundamentalists, Hindu fundamentalists, hard core communists and others. Sisters in my own congregation have been imprisoned, kidnapped, abducted, killed... Are you speaking out against that hatred and intolerance? Are you asking the mainline media and political leaders why they are not covering it and addressing it? I´m sure some of these Christians are homosexuals too.

I don´t know what you are talking about with your "normative homosexual marriage paradigm". How dare you align me with thugs who bully, beat-up, torture, rape, imprison and kill homosexuals because I don´t happen to share your views on marriage? How dare you presume that because I don´t happen to share your views on marriage, that I defend, support or agree with these thugs? How dare you come with your heinous accusations?

Don´t bother to "take things a little more to task". As things stand, I want nothing more to do with this conversation. I see no good coming out of it.




Earthling 2
Forum-indlæg: 633
Område: Andet
Dato: 19/10 2013 21:46




Serenity
Forum-indlæg: 1675
Område: Nordjylland
Dato: 19/10 2013 22:28

John Lennon - Give Peace A Chance :D

Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 20/10 2013 06:11 | Indlæg redigeret den: 20/10 2013 07:11

Ad

I don´t know what you are talking about with your "normative homosexual marriage paradigm". How dare you align me with thugs who bully, beat-up, torture, rape, imprison and kill homosexuals because I don´t happen to share your views on marriage? How dare you presume that because I don´t happen to share your views on marriage, that I defend, support or agree with these thugs? How dare you come with your heinous accusations?


Well, let's just see how I got to that statement. Here is what heteronormativity is

Heteronormativity is the body of lifestyle norms that hold that people fall into distinct and complementary genders (man and woman) with natural roles in life. It asserts that heterosexuality is the only sexual orientation or only norm, and states that sexual and marital relations are most (or only) fitting between people of opposite sexes. Consequently, a "heteronormative" view is one that involves alignment of biological sex, sexuality, gender identity and gender roles. Heteronormativity is linked to heterosexism and homophobia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heteronormativity


And here is what you said:

I believe a sexual relationship comes to its fullness in a heterosexual marriage. Does the fact that I disagree with sex outside marriage make me heterophobic?

No. Then why does the fact that I disagree with homosexual marriage make me a homophobic?


If you don't see the pattern, you are blind. On top of that, despite all your protestations to the contrary, it is apparent that you are not fully aware of the strongly marginalizing force positions like yours, " a sexual relationship comes to its fullness in a heterosexual marriage", exerts as it propagates into the day-to-day consciousness of populations who receive this in moral rhetoric and even laws such as under examination here.

Earthling*, you can shout in capital latters and express all manner of outrage. As you do, I will ever more calmly begin to take these kinds of statements apart and expose how toxic they are.

However, I very much suggest that you read up on the question of heteronormativity, since you seem rather oblivious to it.

Now, for all your autobiographical associations about your own experiences and fighting bullying, you actually did not answer the question.

The question was not "are you against bullying people for being gay" - it was, and I quote,

"Is it okay to tell minors that being gay is ok, yes or no?",

to which you replied, and I quote:

Earthling* skrev:
To be honest, I never tell anyone it´s okay to be heterosexual so I see no need to tell anyone it´s okay to be homosexual either


Let me just underline something here: " I see no need to tell anyone it´s okay to be homosexual "

Would you see no need to tell a black student in an all white school in a racist community that it's okay that he is black? Would you see no need to tell a girl who wants to go to school in a town in Pakistan, where everyone is told (under the threat of violence) that only boys should be educated, that it's okay to be a girl?

Now consider the situation wherein "traditional sex and marriage" is expressly stated in a law as a norm from which discussions with minors must not deviate. Everyone in the country knows about the law. The law arose from a mentality of some large body of individuals who hold views concerning "traditional sex and marriage".

Do you hold to your statement, " I see no need to tell anyone it´s okay to be homosexual "?

Your arguments about Christians suffering are red herrings. That is not what the discussion is about. It is also not about bullying.

Nor, Earthling*, does it have anything to do with my sexuality, or yours, or anyone else's on this thread.

Finally, it seems to me that you have not grasped "It Gets Better" - it is not a "we're sorry you got bullied campaign", it's an "it's okay to be gay" campaign.
Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 20/10 2013 06:47 | Indlæg redigeret den: 20/10 2013 07:12

Earthling*,

Not only do I find the cartoon repulsive but I find it a little scary that you knew where to find it.
Earthling 2
Forum-indlæg: 633
Område: Andet
Dato: 20/10 2013 15:30 | Indlæg redigeret den: 26/10 2013 19:43

Thank you for the information on \"heteronormativity\". I never heard the term before.

I don´t think it applies either to me or what I was trying to say. I don´t assert that \"heterosexuality is the only sexual orientation\", nor would I. I don´t support discrimination such as anti-homosexual hiring policies or workplace discrimination. Neither do I support prosecutors and juries who refuse to investigate, prosecute, or convict those who perform the murders and beatings of homosexuals or consider homosexuality a psychiatric illness serious enough to justify institutionalization.

I do think a discussion on marriage is necessary. Let it be said here that my view of marriage is also argued by some homosexuals. I also think it´s necessary to talk about the rights of children in this regard, and what latest research is showing us. Again, I would think it´s necessary to look at the possible ethical consequences of gay marriage, eg. surrogacy, IVF donors, etc. Finally, I think we need to look at the way homosexuals and others have been treated, and at how they have been welcomed or not welcomed. Christians need to take a serious look at this, I agree.

Personally, I find the whole issue is so loaded that it´s virtually impossible to talk without someone getting hurt or angry. It is not my intent to hurt anyone. Neither do I want to be hurt.

(Edit) Gay Marriage and the Breakdown of Moral Argument (1 and 2)

(8.mins)

(2.mins)



You could have asked me what I mean by \"a sexual relationship comes to its fullness in a heterosexual marriage\", instead of making assumptions. I was speaking mostly from a theological point of view here, and not necessarily the one you think.



Let me just underline something here: \"I see no need to tell anyone it´s okay to be homosexual \"

I´m sorry. I see the problem now. They were badly chosen words, said without thinking. All I mean is that I don´t generally think about sexual orientation. I just take people as they are.

I don´t go around telling people they are \"okay\" so your question is foreign to me. I just don´t phrase things that way or talk that way. However that said, I would affirm every person in the examples you give, including a homosexual. I would tell them they had worth and value and dignity, the very same worth and value and dignity as everyone else around them. (Btw, we´re teaching those very girls in Pakistan, sometimes at great personal risk). I would defend them and try to change things. I would also tell them they were loved as they are, not least by Christ (if it was possible to say so).

So yes, I am saying, \"it´s okay to be a homosexual\". That is not my problem. My issue is not orientation. My issue is how we (mis)understand and see marriage. My issue is the fact that modern culture will not let people be told that a happy and fulfilled celibate life is a possible option for both homosexuals and heterosexuals. My issue is how best to accommodate homosexuals so that they feel loved and welcomed without other people being forced to compromise their non-violent beliefs and values. In this regard, I have concerns, given what I have seen happening in other countries where people have been threatened, arrested, prosecuted and forced to close businesses, etc. because of perceived \"homophobia\",and with scant regard for the peaceful expression of their rights to freedom of association, speech, conscience and religion. This concerns all of us.




Now consider the situation wherein \"traditional sex and marriage\" is expressly stated in a law as a norm from which discussions with minors must not deviate.

I think discussion should be possible. I think it´s necessary. That said, I think options like the one I mentioned above should also be part of that discussion. Freedom from pressure should also be guaranteed.



Your arguments about Christians suffering are red herrings. That is not what the discussion is about. It is also not about bullying.

They are not red herrings. When Christians and others are being publicly branded as homophobes and as homophobic for peacefully exercising their rights of freedom of speech, conscience and religion, and when they are being phoned by police in the middle of the night, arrested, brought to court, sacked from their jobs and forced to close businesses, suffering and bullying are also issues here. This needs to be addressed every bit as much as the issue of how homosexuals are perceived. Maybe even more so, as it is not politically correct to be a Christian these days. If it goes unaddressed, it will only get worse, much worse, I fear... Are you prepared to countenance that? Speak and act against it? Did you watch the video... yet?



Nor, Earthling*, does it have anything to do with my sexuality, or yours, or anyone else\'s on this thread.

Oh, but it does. Our sexuality necessarily effects our view of things. It effects how we perceive the world, how we react to it and how we relate to it, unless one is asexual – or dead! It´s called a vested interest...


Not only do I find the cartoon repulsive but I find it a little scary that you knew where to find it.

What! More insinuations and assumptions... You are going to have to stop this habit of yours...

Believe it or not, I stumbled on it quite innocently and quite by accident the other day when someone I don´t know posted it in an interesting and amicable discussion thread on FB.

I find it expresses pretty well how I feel when I am classed as a homophobe. I find that repulsive and a little scary...



Jeff
Forum-indlæg: 1943
Område: Sjælland
Denne bruger har i år '14 doneret penge til at holde Vegetarkontakt.dk kørende.
Dato: 20/10 2013 15:43 | Indlæg redigeret den: 20/10 2013 15:48

Before even one minute had elapsed in the video you linked to the phrase "special rights" was used?

Geez, Earthling*, are you kidding me?

And are you really afraid that your "rights", which are not "special" but somehow normative, are going to be trampled due to the marriage of other people?

Do you really think that because two people get married that it has as a consequence that you are going to get fired or arrested?

The video was not only a very egregious example of the heteronormative mentality but also completely defective logic.

I really hope this is not how your reasoning works.

I almost got physically ill and feel like I need a shower after watching that.


Sider: << < 4 5 6 7 8 > >>