Homosexual
-
Heng,
U said i had a small mind.Isn't that show your arrogance?
U called me as "siggy". Isn't that an insulting word? -
1. Is heterosexuality right or wrong? Right.
2. Is homosexuality right or wrong? Some ppl say there is no answer to this question.Then why does the 1st question has answer and it is also about sexuality? So the opinion of these ppl is wrong.Maybe they don't know the answer to the question or they have something to hide.
CX,
I've given my reasons why homosexuality is wrong in my past msg.Pls read them again. -
Originally posted by PRP:
what's so right about it? why should a physical and biological function have a "right" or "wrong" attached to it??? its like asking if it is right to sit down and pee, or is it wrong to stand up and pee. either way, WHAT'S SO RIGHT OR WRONG ABOUT IT???
1. Is heterosexuality right or wrong? Right.2. Is homosexuality right or wrong? Some ppl say there is no answer to this question.Then why does the 1st question has answer and it is also about sexuality? So the opinion of these ppl is wrong.Maybe they don't know the answer to the question or they have something to hide.
the first question was based on flawed premises to begin with. so your second conclusion, is similarly flawed. your first question is INVALID and your second question is complex BEYOND a simple right / wrong answer.
unfortunately, your ignorance blinds u to the possibilities and u just keep insisting on your narrow OPINION.
an opinion is like an arsehole... everyone has one... unless u can back it up with PROOF like i keep asking u to, you have NOTHING to argue with.CX,
i've also told u that your "reasons" are based on faulty pre-conceived notions, ignorance and bigotry.
I've given my reasons why homosexuality is wrong in my past msg.Pls read them again.
u have not addressed ANY of that and u have not brought up ANY proof to support your position.
i have nothing more to say to u and u can basically take your ignorance and bigotry, and shove it up your arse where it belongs. -
CX,
Is heterosexual right?
U argued that what was so right about it.I refrain from saying u are stupid even thou u said i'm stupid.
Many ppl can answer that question correctly but u can't Are u more intelligent than they? They: the herterosexual majority.
If u eat with your mouth,then that's right.Suppose u eat with your ear,then u are wrong.Simple to understand or not? -
Originally posted by PRP:
u quite obviously are... otherwise why i keep asking u for PROOF, but i keep getting OPINION???
CX,
Is heterosexual right?
U argued that what was so right about it.I refrain from saying u are stupid even thou u said i'm stupid.Many ppl can answer that question correctly but u can't Are u more intelligent than they? They: the herterosexual majority.
pple will just tell u that it is a preference. there is no right and wrong to a preference. it doesn't take a genius to know that... but it would takes a stupid bigot to totally miss that.
majority = correct? so going by that logic, racism is perfectly justified? Sg got 70% chinese... so chinese are always right? u're talking cock.If u eat with your mouth,then that's right.Suppose u eat with your ear,then u are wrong.Simple to understand or not?
u really do sound like u got pork chops stuffed in your ears... refer to my example on peeing. -
ahahahaOriginally posted by PRP:Heng,
U said i had a small mind.Isn't that show your arrogance?
U called me as "siggy". Isn't that an insulting word?
no when stating a fact, it is hardly called arrogance. u know why i say u have a small mind?
the answer lies in your 2nd question.
no. siggy is not an insulting word. wherever did u hear that from genius? siggy is a slang for "signature" a siggy is the lines the always appear with your every post, at the bottom of your post. in your case, your siggy is "PRP, for fairness, righteousness & kindness". mine is "Bernie Ecclestone talking in July 2002 about the location of the next new grand prix country: "I can't tell you where it is. But they eat a lot of Chinese food." (the next GP turned out to be in Bahrain)" while CX's is "...Aimez ce que jamais on ne verra deux fois..." geddit?
soooo there. u can even misunderstand the meaning of the word "siggy" now u know why i think u're small minded?(actually the correct phrase is narrow minded, but lets use your terms so u can understand better) -
I dont' think the argument is whether homosexuality is right or wrong.
We do not have the right to judge.
It's a matter of whether you can accept it.
If you can't. Oh well.. who cares? To each his own.
Until the time someone gets violent with a homosexual it doesn't concern me. -
so what would you do IF someone DID get violent with one of an different sexual persuasion?Originally posted by Lingos:I dont' think the argument is whether homosexuality is right or wrong.
We do not have the right to judge.
It's a matter of whether you can accept it.
If you can't. Oh well.. who cares? To each his own.
Until the time someone gets violent with a homosexual it doesn't concern me. -
time to bring out the posse, guns blazin', thugs be thuggin' leave 'em lying in white chalk.Originally posted by CX:so what would you do IF someone DID get violent with one of an different sexual persuasion? -
Hmmm.. put it this way.Originally posted by CX:so what would you do IF someone DID get violent with one of an different sexual persuasion?
Dog lovers, cat lovers.
People who love dogs hate cats.
Whatever.. who cares?
But when people start setting kittens alight, i'd be really pissed and want them to burn too. Ya know what i mean? -
yes of course. those people are the perfect targets for the sadist in me.Originally posted by Lingos:Hmmm.. put it this way.
Dog lovers, cat lovers.
People who love dogs hate cats.
Whatever.. who cares?
But when people start setting kittens alight, i'd be really pissed and want them to burn too. Ya know what i mean? -
CX,Originally posted by PRP:CX,
Is heterosexual right?
U argued that what was so right about it.I refrain from saying u are stupid even thou u said i'm stupid.
Many ppl can answer that question correctly but u can't Are u more intelligent than they? They: the herterosexual majority.
If u eat with your mouth,then that's right.Suppose u eat with your ear,then u are wrong.Simple to understand or not?
U SEEM to be very good in arguing.Like the above argument,u still can't understand the logic.
Make it simple, pls answer the question directly: Is homosexualilty right or wrong? -- a simple answer pls,ie right or wrong -
life is not as simple as right or wrong. there are many grey areas. pls don't be so simplistic because it's never simple.Originally posted by PRP:CX,
U SEEM to be very good in arguing.Like the above argument,u still can't understand the logic.
Make it simple, pls answer the question directly: Is homosexualilty right or wrong? -- a simple answer pls,ie right or wrong -
Lingos,Originally posted by Lingos:I dont' think the argument is whether homosexuality is right or wrong.
We do not have the right to judge.
It's a matter of whether you can accept it.
If you can't. Oh well.. who cares? To each his own.
Until the time someone gets violent with a homosexual it doesn't concern me.
Why don't we have to right to judge?
As i said before,every thing we do has a dimention of right or wrong.If homosexuality is right, then anybody can choose for it if he so want.
Suppose homo is right, is having sex with animal aslo right? -
thats the spirit PRP!, go get that bitch!Originally posted by PRP:Lingos,
Why don't we have to right to judge?
As i said before,every thing we do has a dimention of right or wrong.If homosexuality is right, then anybody can choose for it if he so want.
Suppose homo is right, is having sex with animal aslo right?
regarding your question on homosexuality being right or wrong?
that would depend on whether you're basing your question on society or the law since the two seems to be seperate, judging from the recent revelation that blowjobs are illegal
i don't think its a right or wrong, its more of acceptable or not
if you're judging by what society can accept, then i would have to say although i'm not in favour of it, society is begining to accept that homosexuality is here to stay and it exists, whether you think its in the genes or by choice
by saying that its wrong just because society does not accept is not a valid reason for rejecting their existence -
oh stuff it up yours...Originally posted by PRP:CX,
U SEEM to be very good in arguing.Like the above argument,u still can't understand the logic.
Make it simple, pls answer the question directly: Is homosexualilty right or wrong? -- a simple answer pls,ie right or wrong
5 pages of posts are WASTED on a pig-headed fool like u...
already told u, explained to u, gave u examples and rebutted your points one by one... STILL u ask the same stupid question.
you are the one that's being illogical and stubborn here.
sure... condemn what u do not understand, insist on your own opinion and refuse to hear any other views. turn a blind eye to all eveidence of doubts... may u live happily ever after in the abyss of ignorance.
if ignorance is bliss, u must be the happiest man alive. -
Originally posted by CX:
what do u expect? he sees things in black and white only. so many things i can point out that i also don't know where i can begain justifying his narrow mindedness.
oh stuff it up yours...
5 pages of posts are WASTED on a pig-headed fool like u...
already told u, explained to u, gave u examples and rebutted your points one by one... STILL u ask the same stupid question.
you are the one that's being illogical and stubborn here.
sure... condemn what u do not understand, insist on your own opinion and refuse to hear any other views. turn a blind eye to all eveidence of doubts...[b] may u live happily ever after in the abyss of ignorance.
if ignorance is bliss, u must be the happiest man alive. [/b]
i say we just let him rave n rant about homos. someday he'll get whats coming to him. -
CX,
1. We haven't come to the end of our debate yet.So the verdict is not out yet.
2. A good intellectual doesn't insult his opponent in debating.It is easy to say your opponent is stupid.I could say it on you too.
3. I'm not persuaded by your argument at all.In fact, i see much flaw in your arguments. -
Originally posted by PRP:
WHAT DEBATE???!!! its all about YOUR opinion.
CX,
1. We haven't come to the end of our debate yet.So the verdict is not out yet.2. A good intellectual doesn't insult his opponent in debating.It is easy to say your opponent is stupid.I could say it on you too.
i would never do it to ANOTHER intellectual. its pretty obvious i do not see u as one.
your views ARE stupid. in this case, it is not an insult, it is an observation.3. I'm not persuaded by your argument at all.In fact, i see much flaw in your arguments.
i told u long ago! CITE THEM!!! pick them out, and lets see why u think they're flawed.
until u adopt a more sophisticated position that takes into consideration the complexities involved, u can carry on debating with yourself.
my position is clear: the study of sexuality is complex beyond a simple "right-wrong" answer. a lot of what we feel and believe are rooted in modern misconceptions and misinformation, and bigotry and narrow mindedness as well as simple fear had spawned the worse ideas of homophobia that i particularly, see in YOU.
why can't we judge u ask? BECAUSE U'RE NOT GOD. -
We haven't come to the end of our debate yet.So the verdict is not out yet.
debate as most completely used in this forum is to engage in argument by discussing opposing points, it is not like trying to agreeing on how much to raise the GST rates or how much clothing is considered indecent on television.
The way i look at it, it's a waste of time to consider any useful debate with you PRP, you have already issued a verdict and thus finished the debate before it even started.
Homosexuality whether it's right or wrong? By what standards do we use for reference?
Sodomy, an act which homosexuals parttake in is considered an offence that would get you stoned to death regardless of whether it was voluntary in the middle east, while in America no one really gives a damn if both sides consented to the act. By the laws of nature? I thought humans have already considered themselves to be beyond that for the past few decades.
So, repeating myself by whose standards do we adhere to decide the conclusion to this debate? Your narrow minded view of the world? Or our own individual opinion ? -
Hi CX,Originally posted by CX:i told u long ago! CITE THEM!!! pick them out, and lets see why u think they're flawed.
until u adopt a more sophisticated position that takes into consideration the complexities involved, u can carry on debating with yourself.
my position is clear: the study of sexuality is complex beyond a simple "right-wrong" answer. a lot of what we feel and believe are rooted in modern misconceptions and misinformation, and bigotry and narrow mindedness as well as simple fear had spawned the worse ideas of homophobia that i particularly, see in YOU.
why can't we judge u ask? BECAUSE U'RE NOT GOD.
This is what I mean, the reason why I can't be bothered to reply his opinions is because he has no facts to back his statements. I guess in another post I said "hateful scam". Too harsh of a word to use. I guess I came out wrongly. What I wanted to say is that why should we allow these kind of opinions to be posted? What I mean is the kinds of opinion that are only based on ignorance and clearly hateful. If a gay basher was to utter all these words, and is able to attract more hate bashers to join in, it is just self perpatuating. Studies have shown for example, chaos, if there was a riot and people standing along the road were to join in, their ability to think for themselves, and say that it might be wrong is greatly reduced. They get caught up in heat of things and fall into the "follow the leader" trap.
What I wanted to say but was not clear about was, if we were to allow hateful words that have no sound facts and just hateful opinions, that are out to discriminate, there could be a backlash of other ignorant people joining in spitting out shit that consist of no intellectual thought behind it. So, shouldn't we stop this?
I guess the lack of ignorant people (except for PRP) replying could show that maybe people are more tolarent and understand the study of sexuality better than PRP. That is a good thing I guess. Hitler was very elequant speaker, he was able to convince people to join his cause.
Personally, I think opinions should be allowed to be displayed. BUT only with facts backing up their points. If opinions have not factual basis, then what is the point? To me it becomes a scam. Other people listening in could very well think that the opinion is fact and have gone through the intellectual process of weeding out biases.
I gave up on PRP and Stupid is Smart (what an appropriate name but think he got it wrong should be stupid is stupid) long time ago. I just wish someone will stop him from spewing out shit.
I didn't mean that you and some others were part of a scam or anything like that... just a wrong word to use, cause I clustered everyone together. However, I dont know why some people think that just because they are a majority, they have the right to force their thoughts and practices down on other's... it is just like the Americans trying to force democracy on Iraq, and not understanding that it has to come from within. I think that is why we should stop these non factual opinion from surfacing. It is harmful to everyone.
Maybe PRP is closeted and is trying his best to deny himself only to wake up 50 yrs later to find out that his life was based on false pretenses. *laugh* If he cannot even try to see the other side of the story, we must wonder why is that.
If this was a real debate, PRP would be long gone.
(lots of spelling errors, please excuse me spell check in word has made me lazy) -
proponents of free speech would accuse you of a "hateful scam" to issue gag-orders on all other views but those u consider legitimate and "factual".
anti-gay rights activists would seize on this point too and clam down on the rights of gay-rights activist to have their views displayed in the mass media, because it is "not factual" and "contrary to societal norms"... the buzzwords of homophobia.
for all the facts, examples and arguments i've brought up that questions our pre-conveived notions, i have not converted a single soul to my point of view, nor encouraged them to look within themselves for the seeds of such doubts.
if anything at all, it had driven some pple to become defensive and accuse me of making insulting remarks. not just in this thread, but others as well.
so what is "factual" or "evidential" to u?
i say air all views... the stupid ones fall apart by themselves. if pple choose to accept the ones we see as stupid, then who are we to judge that they're wrong??? do we not then, become the same arrogant, bigoted pple that we condemn?
p.s. hitler wasn't just a good speaker... he also knew how to repeat old lies that pple wanted to hear. -
Originally posted by SGglobalist:Hi CX,
This is what I mean, the reason why I can't be bothered to reply his opinions is because he has no facts to back his statements. I guess in another post I said "hateful scam". Too harsh of a word to use. I guess I came out wrongly. What I wanted to say is that why should we allow these kind of opinions to be posted? What I mean is the kinds of opinion that are only based on ignorance and clearly hateful. If a gay basher was to utter all these words, and is able to attract more hate bashers to join in, it is just self perpatuating. Studies have shown for example, chaos, if there was a riot and people standing along the road were to join in, their ability to think for themselves, and say that it might be wrong is greatly reduced. They get caught up in heat of things and fall into the "follow the leader" trap.
What I wanted to say but was not clear about was, if we were to allow hateful words that have no sound facts and just hateful opinions, that are out to discriminate, there could be a backlash of other ignorant people joining in spitting out shit that consist of no intellectual thought behind it. So, shouldn't we stop this?
I guess the lack of ignorant people (except for PRP) replying could show that maybe people are more tolarent and understand the study of sexuality better than PRP. That is a good thing I guess. Hitler was very elequant speaker, he was able to convince people to join his cause.
Personally, I think opinions should be allowed to be displayed. BUT only with facts backing up their points. If opinions have not factual basis, then what is the point? To me it becomes a scam. Other people listening in could very well think that the opinion is fact and have gone through the intellectual process of weeding out biases.
I gave up on PRP and Stupid is Smart (what an appropriate name but think he got it wrong should be stupid is stupid) long time ago. I just wish someone will stop him from spewing out shit.
I didn't mean that you and some others were part of a scam or anything like that... just a wrong word to use, cause I clustered everyone together. However, I dont know why some people think that just because they are a majority, they have the right to force their thoughts and practices down on other's... it is just like the Americans trying to force democracy on Iraq, and not understanding that it has to come from within. I think that is why we should stop these non factual opinion from surfacing. It is harmful to everyone.
Maybe PRP is closeted and is trying his best to deny himself only to wake up 50 yrs later to find out that his life was based on false pretenses. *laugh* If he cannot even try to see the other side of the story, we must wonder why is that.
If this was a real debate, PRP would be long gone.
(lots of spelling errors, please excuse me spell check in word has made me lazy) and despite what you've just said about them being ignorant you have to come in and insult them?, what difference then , do you have from them?? -
I guess I agree with you, we shouldn't shut people up. If it is stupid it will just die off. I just think this whole thing is pretty funny in a way. On line cat fight! I think sometimes the point does not go through because people are not usually open to think of the unknown. Just like people don't like change.Originally posted by CX:proponents of free speech would accuse you of a "hateful scam" to issue gag-orders on all other views but those u consider legitimate and "factual".
anti-gay rights activists would seize on this point too and clam down on the rights of gay-rights activist to have their views displayed in the mass media, because it is "not factual" and "contrary to societal norms"... the buzzwords of homophobia.
for all the facts, examples and arguments i've brought up that questions our pre-conveived notions, i have not converted a single soul to my point of view, nor encouraged them to look within themselves for the seeds of such doubts.
if anything at all, it had driven some pple to become defensive and accuse me of making insulting remarks. not just in this thread, but others as well.
so what is "factual" or "evidential" to u?
i say air all views... the stupid ones fall apart by themselves. if pple choose to accept the ones we see as stupid, then who are we to judge that they're wrong??? do we not then, become the same arrogant, bigoted pple that we condemn?
p.s. hitler wasn't just a good speaker... he also knew how to repeat old lies that pple wanted to hear.
I don't think we should condamn others, but what should we do with those that condamn others? How about all those fundamentalists that spread their ideology through words too? Just a thought, Just spewing some thoughts online
-
Oldbreadstinks,Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:thats the spirit PRP!, go get that bitch!
regarding your question on homosexuality being right or wrong?
that would depend on whether you're basing your question on society or the law since the two seems to be seperate, judging from the recent revelation that blowjobs are illegal
i don't think its a right or wrong, its more of acceptable or not
if you're judging by what society can accept, then i would have to say although i'm not in favour of it, society is begining to accept that homosexuality is here to stay and it exists, whether you think its in the genes or by choice
by saying that its wrong just because society does not accept is not a valid reason for rejecting their existence
Thanks for your support.
Even the society accept a behavior,it doesn't mean it is right.For example,the society can accept ppl smoke but smoking is still wrong because it is harmful to the health of the smoker.So we should judge homo scientifically.
CX,
U keep on saying I am stupid. It is not that i am stupid but rather u can't understand or accept my REASONABLE arguments.So u are indeed not intelligent or wise enough.