 sj |
||
|
||
BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Sorcha Date: 30 Jul 08 - 07:50 PM OK, that's it.
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Barry Finn Date: 30 Jul 08 - 07:42 PM You voted for Maggie T & you seem to accept lesbian relationships as not being disgusting but gay male relaotionships as unexceptable, you find anal sex for the male species sickening but have no objections for hetrosexual anal intercourse, you are truely an anomaly which although you seem to think that you are joined with other likewise thinkers here on this thread, as an anomaly you are not normal & you stand alone. You are a curse to woman kind, to the human species & to the animal kingdom, if you are a member of any religious organization you are a bane to it's beliefs, if there are any diseases that's worst than AIDS it's ignorance which you are a carrier of & do far worst damage by the spread of your own vile & filth. I find you to be sub human much in the same way you find male relationships disgusting, I find you to be an evil far greater than those that sicken you. You are a breeder of fear & contempt & may you live & let live belifs fall flat on your own feet & family, you are of no further use to the living since there's no room for goodwill in your heart, you are damaged good, goodbye, farewell & rest in peace, finally. I hope that you at least like music, though for the sake of us here I hope it's not folk Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Don Firth Date: 30 Jul 08 - 06:29 PM Agreed! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Lox Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:46 PM Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Little Hawk - PM Date: 03 Sep 07 - 12:54 AM I haven't tried same-sex marriage yet...nor have I had the chance to witness anyone else trying it up close and personal...so I hardly feel qualified to offer a critique of it. ;-) It doesn't strike me as a world-threatening concept. I don't worry about it. I doubt very much that I would ever worry about it even slightly. I agree - common sense indeed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:34 PM I have to say Little Hawk, you have been the voice of reason thoughtout this thread. Read through some of your other comments on other threads, excellent. So hard to find common sense interlaced with logical and reason. I respect you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,lox Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:32 PM I have an image of a hollywood villain in mind. "Damn that fool lox" ha ha |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,lox Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:30 PM Yuck ... those English ... ... flaunting their morris dancing ... ... with their queen and constantly changing guards ... ... why do I have to be offended by their very existence ... ... why can't they all crawl away into a hole and drink ther tea in a suitably shameful fashion ... ROFL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Sorcha Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:29 PM Rest assured that SOMEONE KNOWS who this is. May not be telling, but SOMEONE KNOWS. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,lox Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:26 PM ooh ... somebody with an oooold chip on their shoulder ... Mick has never stated that the British or indeed the English are disgusting for being British/English. He has never argued that British/English people should hide their Nationality behind closed doors as to flaunt their Nationality is an offence to all right thinking people. He has never discriminated against English people. He is not an Anglophobe. You Joy Bringer are a deeply troubled person. Even if this is just shit stirring it is symptomatic of a deep problem as to waste so much time stiring shit in one place is a bit obsessive. Back to your fantasies of Gay people "shoving it down your throat" ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Sorcha Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:18 PM I don't believe this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:16 PM Ruth, you give an understanding to a subject I deplore. I give you my abhorrence and you dismiss me. We will never agree. So to make you feel better you restore to the issue of a name for me, bigot, troll or whatever. I am not resorting to giving you a title, all I will say is in a debate no one will change my opinion. It's not a case of I will change your way of thinking, I know I won't. Hold your opinion Ruth and allow me mine. Regards. So Mick, as an Englishman was that post alright ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Ruth Archer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:07 PM People who use the language and tactics you do are not worth arguing with. Anyone that full of bitterness and hate towards fellow human beings has issues which are not going to be resolved in an internet discussion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Don Firth Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:05 PM Little Hawk, what you say is indeed true. But bigotry is only one manifestation of that pernicious form of hubris that some folks take as axiomatic—that they are better than someone/anyone/everyone else—thereby justifying (rationalizing) their robbing or cheating others ("I deserve this more than they do!"), or condemning others because their beliefs or lifestyles are different ("He's going to Hell!" or "He's a pervert!"). I'm sure you can add to the list of the many ways this can manifest itself, including, of course, collective action when such people form coalitions. They then rob and cheat whole societies or the rest of the world, as you say, "by aggressive multi-national military industrial forces of one sort or another . . . The pursuit of money and empire is the primary engine which creates human misery on a really vast scale." But this springs from that kind of hubris. As does bigotry (which generally contains fear as one of its components), which is inextricably linked with all of the above. Recent history, Nazi Germany. That nightmare was institutionalized bigotry, reaching its peak of horror in death factories built to get rid of "undesirables" such as Jews, the disabled and "defective," homosexuals. . . . One thing that never fails to astound me whenever I read Matthew 7:1-5 and Matthew 25:35-40, is that, 2,000 years later, an amazingly large number of people who call themselves "Christians" still don't get it! But—some (whether they regard themselves as Christian or not) do. Don Firth P. S. And Ake, no one is saying "kill the bigot!" Not even "silence the bigot." Merely point the bigot out for what he or she is and let others make up their own minds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:04 PM Ahh, Ruth will come back into the debate if we all agree to agree with her. Yes this sounds really nice. Let's restart the debate Ruth. And as adults not fall out, not go running to moderators and fight our own corner. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:00 PM If any of you care to take the time to go through a number of previous threads concerning Ireland, or to be precise,Irish politics. You will find one guy that stands firm in his very dim view of the British. It isn't a nice view, he doesn't like Margaret Thatcher, the British army or British government policy in Northern Ireland and he actually pulls no punches in the posts he writes. Well I am English, I voted for Margaret Thatcher, family in the British army and I suppose I could of took offence at what he wrote but I didn't, he is entitled to his view. Possibly someone could have thought he crossed the line a lot more than once. Tell me this Mick, Who polices the comments you write on such threads ? Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Big Mick Date: 30 Jul 08 - 03:08 PM Yep, I concur. That line that shouldn't be crossed is drawing very near. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Ruth Archer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 04:55 PM Ake, I still believe that one can have a rational debate on this topic - indeed, one was going on for a long time before JoyBringer turned up, and I'd participated in it. Personally, I do not object to anyone expressing their point of view on a contentious subject, and have learned a lot from lively debates on Mudcat, sometimes as a participant and sometimes as an observer. But there was vile, hateful language being used by Joybringer which doesn't have a place, IMHO, in a civilised discussion. He was doing it to be deliberately provocative, I know, but that doesn't excuse the fact that NO HUMAN BEING should be spoken about in the terms he was using. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jul 08 - 04:22 PM That's sort of my point, Akenaton. It plays both ways in this discussion. There are always certain forms of bigotry (or mere opinion) that will draw immediate censure in any peer group...because it has become acceptable to attack those specific forms of bigotry (while practicing others that aren't recognized as such)...and attacking them in the most righteous a voluable way will draw the effusive support of your peers. Soon a delighted mob has gathered to stone the vile infidel! ;-) That happened a lot back in Jesus' day too...and the mob had him crucified. He was advising that it was okay to work on the Sabbath...if you were healing someone or doing something constructive like that. (horrors!) He was advising forgiveness of sinners. (Unforgivable!!!) He was advising nonviolence. (Kill him!!!!) Yes, it's always very comforting to be part of a ravening and judgemental mob confronted by a non-officially-scanctioned viewpoint, isn't it? I've always distrusted mobs, regardless of which side of a debate they are on. I figure that there is usually a certain lack of both goodwill and a desire for genuine communication in a situation like that...no real desire to understand where someone else is coming from, just a desire to crucify them and thereby publicly prove one's own righteous credentials in the process. And as I say, you might well find that happening on BOTH sides of a heated debate, mightn't you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: akenaton Date: 30 Jul 08 - 04:18 PM LH.....It is so master! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: akenaton Date: 30 Jul 08 - 04:03 PM Well, you've all got what you've been searching for at last. A "kill the bigot fest" Bet it makes you feel a lot better! You the "intelligensia" should be ashamed of yourselves, thought you could toast "Ole Ake" over the flames for a while didn't you? Well you've found an easier target(maybe he wanted you to find him?) so pitch in with all you've got and may you sleep easy in your beds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jul 08 - 03:48 PM A worthy point, Don. However, I think that the misery caused in this world by aggressive multi-national military industrial forces of one sort or another leaves the misery caused by bigotry totally in the dust. The pursuit of money and empire is the primary engine which creates human misery on a really vast scale. Not that that has anything to do with this discussion.....but I couldn't help mentioning it in passing. One of the most vital teachings in all the great faiths is this one: "Thou shalt not judge (others)." And another is: "Do not inflict upon others that which you would not want inflicted upon yourself." (attack, condemnation, abuse, violence, robbery, slander, bullying, etc...) We know that one as "The Golden Rule". It's in all the great faiths, but it's an aspect people tend to quickly and conveniently forget in the heat of fear or passion. Another teaching of Jesus is to turn the other cheek (meaning, I think, to return good feeling and intention for hostile feeling and intention). Most people find that almost impossible to do because of two things: Their fear and their pride. Fear and pride produce quick and aggressive reactions in people. The authoritative people of Jesus' day seem to have gotten so upset over those kindly teachings he gave that some of them decided to kill him. That doesn't surprise me. ;-) He was undercutting some of their most cherished and jealously guarded emotional crap. It must have just put them in a killing fury, I would think. And that is why in another place in the Bible people are warned not to "cast their pearls before swine"...lest they turn and rend you. All of those teachings can be well borne in mind whenever anyone is posting on an internet forum. It behooves the poster to be as gentle as a dove and as wise as a serpent...or to pay the nasty consequences. It is not so? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,lox Date: 30 Jul 08 - 03:39 PM I feel sorry for him/her for his/her obvious internal struggle. It started out as an attempt to wind a few people up but it has turned into an embarrassing exposition of his/her own psyche. Lets hope it ends up as a positive learning experience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Greg B Date: 30 Jul 08 - 03:39 PM Joe, I don't think you'll ever convince your conservative friends to vote against the 'one man one woman' proposition because their reasons are irrational. Specifically: 1) God told them it was supposed to be this way 2) The Church told them that God told them (1) 3) They've somehow made the leap that same-sex marriages somehow dilute or render meaningless their marriage. This is something they refuse to justify with any form of logical syllogism, because there is none and they know it 4) Their positions are based on bigotry, and bigotry defies the application of logic in order to survive The fact that the celibate (but disproportionately, compared to the rest of society, homosexual) Catholic bishops have made at least the first three if not all four arguments means that you are to a large extent, shouting down a barrel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Don Firth Date: 30 Jul 08 - 03:18 PM When it comes to the causes of human misery in the world, there are few things that can compare with that caused by bigotry. Have they, I wonder, ever stopped to consider whether they are being tested to see just how they "love their neighbour", and what will be the result at their day of judgment?Point well made, Don T. "Joy Bringer," I gather from some of the things you have said that you regard yourself as a Christian. I suggest that you take out your Bible, turn to the Book of Matthew, Chapter 7, verses 1 through 5, and read it. Then read it again. And keep reading it until you understand what Jesus is saying. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Jul 08 - 03:10 PM Yeah. Just wait till Chongo shows up here with some well chosen words of wisdom... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Big Mick Date: 30 Jul 08 - 03:08 PM Yep, I concur. That line that shouldn't be crossed is drawing very near. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Ruth Archer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 02:59 PM Joe, with the greatest of respect - that's exactly what several of us have been trying to say. :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Joe Offer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 02:43 PM If you give a rational statement about why you disagree with homosexual marriage, that's one thing. When you talk of it as "perv marriage" and "DEPRIVED FILTH," then you lapse into the wicked realm of bigotry. So, Joy Bringer," is there something rational you have to say, stripped of all the hateful terms? Rational arguments are welcome, but you have seriously stepped beyond the bounds of rational discussion. Oh, and I think the word you wanted was "depraved." -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,lox Date: 30 Jul 08 - 01:22 PM effective arguments ... scroll down |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 01:17 PM You are entitled to your views Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,lox Date: 30 Jul 08 - 01:06 PM I know some people who are disgusted by spiders. I know some who are disgusted by the sight of blood. Some are disgusted by the smell of cheese, the flavour of meat, the idea of eating pork. Claustrophobes feel revulsion for enclosed spaces, Agoraphobes feel sick when exposed to wide open spaces. Should we ban all these things to make them feel better? No - that's clearly nonsense. Homophobes are revolted by homosexuals. Your phobia (disorder) is your problem. In your case it comes across consistently as pretty much all consuming. It is likely that the roots are in your own sexual insecurity. Being singled out a fool in the total absence of any other response, intelligent or otherwise confirms to me that I'm poking a raw nerve. I've got a knack for nailing people. Sorry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Jul 08 - 12:29 PM Now you see, Beard, I believe that I need to show the same respect for the opinions of others, that I ask from them in return. I see no wrong in homosexuality, because it is not a lifestyle choice. It is, in fact, natural to those with that particular orientation, and, since it is not a matter of choice, there is no logic or value in argument about possible corruption of children. My take on it is that homosexuals are born. They cannot be MADE. Ergo they should not be subjected to discrimination, hatred, or abuse. THAT is my opinion, and I must accept that it is not shared by considerable numbers of good people, who have a totally different view. I will NOT show the same disrespect, and bias as those who advocate said discrimination and hatred. I would point out to those who object on religious grounds that they are flying in the face of THEIR God, who made, and continues to make "gay" human beings. Have they, I wonder, ever stopped to consider whether they are being tested to see just how they "love their neighbour", and what will be the result at their day of judgement? You see Beard, I can even tolerate homophobes, much as I disagree with their attitude. People have been murdered for all sorts of reasons, and morality is a very changeable thing, being totally different in different cultures and times. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Jack Blandiver Date: 30 Jul 08 - 12:06 PM because it detracts from the power and effectiveness of what, more reasonably expressed, might have been a very cogent and potent argument. I wonder, Don - could there ever be a reasoned argument against homosexuality? By its very nature such an argument would be as impotently without reason as all such arguments are. There can, in NO case, be ANY justification for homophobia other than acknowledging that along with the other seemingly inherent evils of our society - racism, paedophilia etc. - it exists as a mindless epidemic however so justified by its proponents. People are persecuted and murdered for their sexuality, thus is Pride not just the reserve of homosexuals, but the concern of every single one of us. In short - homophobia is not a matter of opinion or persuasion, no more than paedophilia a matter of opinion or persuasion; like paedophilia, homophobia is a sickness, and as such it is very much our business. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Ruth Archer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 12:05 PM "And it is a shame that a long-time, honest and registered member like EmmaB should be driven off by this crap (and continue to get abuse after leaving)." Indeed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Amos Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:58 AM Not to mention in combination with "Deprived filth" from the same post. Ach, Sigmund, I tink vee haff found clues!! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: TIA Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:54 AM "Well we clearly sing from two different hymen books." Wow, is that a slip? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:51 AM Glad to see you found your voice Don. Well we clearly sing from two different hymen books. I chose my words to best describe the good or evil of any subject. This particular vile subject was described as such, DEPRIVED FILTH. You are correct on two points in your post above. 1, you're right your viewpoint is meaningless to me. 2,Yes, I shrugged it off quite easily. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Respite from Sanity Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:46 AM If you take even a casual glance at posting histories -- who responds to who, who praises who (and how quickly), who appears only in threads already inhabited by who else, etc. -- it is quite obvious that there is a deeply disturbed gang of one at play here. Sad really. And it is a shame that a long-time, honest and registered member like EmmaB should be driven off by this crap (and continue to get abuse after leaving). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Amos Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:44 AM God is something men came up with to justify their dominion over both nature and women, and yet patriarchy persists... Bigger muscles. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:42 AM ""I think overall this thread has proven beyond any doubt that the majority of posts show there isn't a widespread support of perv marriage."" ""I think it's probably best to wrap it up as really all it is achieving is talking about the depravity and filth concerned with this subject and giving those wishing to befriend such people a platform."" ""I would close it now Joe. I thank you for permitting the freedom of speech and allowing right thinking people such as myself to express our abhorrence at this ghastly sickening practise."" I've been staying out of this thread, and watching the development of the argument, and I was impressed with the fact that Joe, in his long established role as the voice of tolerance refused to close it, when asked by those who disagreed with JoyBringer's attitude to Homosexuals in general, and homosexual marriage in particular. Then I read the points above, posted by JoyBringer. Now, I may not be the smartest debater on the block, but I learned long since that the best way to establish a reputation for bigotry is to use the most pejorative language you can find, when making a point. So to consistently refer to PERVS, DISGUSTING PRACTICES, UNNATURAL ACTS, etc. simply weakens your case. To then request that the topic be closed, purely to prevent the further discussion, by your opponents, of this "DEPRAVITY and FILTH", is another nail in the coffin of your argument. You would deny other posters the right to express opinion, which has just been guaranteed for you by the forum moderator. You then thank the forum moderator for permitting "RIGHT THINKING PEOPLE" such as yourself to ride roughshod over the rights of others to hold a different opinion. I have news for you!! THAT is not what Joe did. He refused to prevent YOU from expressing YOUR point of view, and I'm pretty certain that he has NO intention of preventing others here doing the same. I have NO opinion on the subject of homosexuality, or homosexual marriage. I do not consider what other people do to be any business of mine, since it does ME no harm. However, based on the above post by you, it is my considered opinion that you, Joybringer, have established beyond a shadow of doubt that, regardless of the rights or wrongs of your position, you are bigotted, and that is a shame, because it detracts from the power and effectiveness of what, more reasonably expressed, might have been a very cogent and potent argument. Merely my opinion of course, and I'm reasonably sure that you will shrug it off. No skin off my nose. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: beardedbruce Date: 30 Jul 08 - 11:39 AM "I like to hear both sides of any argument......I many argue strongly against one side, but I would never want them to be silenced.." Hear, hear! Ake, we have always disagreed, but in this I am right with you. 8-{E |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,joy of sanity Date: 30 Jul 08 - 09:52 AM I agree with you sanity bringer that some of these manipulative guests look suspiciously like the same denizen of the far side of sanity. I also agree totally with Joe's description of their solitary pursuits. Yes, looks like we have the same sad w****r at work! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,sanity bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 08:08 AM Joe was right but now it seems to be a form of mutual masterbation! Wake up guys the trolls are taking over! Today a thread - tomorrow the site. Don't close this thread down - give the guests (is there more than one do you think?) the chance to show themselves for what they really are devoid of any kind of compassion, charity and rational arguement; just name callers and hate mongers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: freda underhill Date: 30 Jul 08 - 07:26 AM no probs, ake, my post was resp to Don's light hearted monkey joke :-) it's a 'touchy' subject, and no judgement was intended. back to the old Shakespearean view (nothing is good or bad, it's just thinking makes it so) or the Biblical view (evil in the eye of the beholder). but that Bible is a big doc, isn't it? I have two gay friends who married legally in Norway. They are both smart, lovable and ethical people. They did a second ceremony last year for their friends in Oz, and asked me to conduct the ceremony. It was a happy, moving, and joyous celebration for friends and family. but the judicial view .. in Australia we have made steps to recognise long term committed homosexual relationships, and it's a good thing. I hope we walk the whole path! freda |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Jack Blandiver Date: 30 Jul 08 - 07:13 AM I'd just like to clarify something I said earlier (29 Jul 08 - 04:54 AM ). Human sexual behaviour stopped being natural once we figured out the causal link between sexual intercourse and pregnancy; after this time we became conscious of its possible consequences and started looking into contraception. Once contraception enters the equation then sexual intercourse becomes entirely unnatural; we become conscious of its function, which we then remove so that it becomes purely recreational, something we do to exploit the animal pleasure potential of our bodies, which we always did anyway, just we learnt that procreation was now something we could control. This wasn't the only thing we learnt to control, alas, as with the discovery of the cause of pregnancy so the concept of Fatherhood enters the equation. Motherhood is a given; never any doubt who the mother is, but the only way you can assert paternity with any sort of certainty is by effectively enslaving women. This comes down to us today in any number of sexual double standards, but the one most pertinent one to this thread is the acceptability of female homosexuality and the abhorrence of male. Getting off on watching lesbians is one of the great clichés of heterosexual male fantasising. I wonder, do women fantasise similarly over male homosexuals? The internet is full of images of Sapphic Sexual behaviour - much of it entirely bogus but the celebrated Abby Winters site, where ordinary Australian girls openly snog, dance, make love, masturbate, and disport themselves for the video camera, is an example of something at least approaching reality; likewise the various films of Sapphic kissing on YouTube presently. All of which seems perfectly acceptable, and of a broad appeal to both men and women, but mostly men one would imagine. Maybe equivalent sites featuring male homosexual behaviour do exist, but the objectification of female subjective beauty is a perceptive chain in the cultural bondage of women, and a very significant link in that chain is the openly voice revulsion of homosexual behaviour in men even from otherwise reasonable human beings. This revulsion is far from instinctive, neither is natural, rather this revulsion is a perversion of the wider condition of homo-eroticism that permeates all human culture. We were not conceived as male, rather as female; hence male nipples, and that tell-tale line we men have along our wrinkled retainers which marks the closure of our vaginal orifice, as our masculinity kicks in effecting our gender as an evolutionary afterthought, thus rendering us merely servile to procreative cause. All of which is very much of nature, whereas everything else we are is resolutely against it, and certainly diverse enough in its myriad manifestations to make us realise that even that which is entirely natural by no means constitutes a God-given normalcy. God is something men came up with to justify their dominion over both nature and women, and yet patriarchy persists, as does God, even to those who think of God as She, which seems fair enough, given the versatility of the human genital apparatus which is designed purely for pleasure with procreation, as I say, being merely a random by-product. So nothing normal, nothing natural, nothing to get hung up over either, even though cultural homophobia persists as a twisted sickness which, I think, reveals it's true face in protesting, perhaps, a little too much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: akenaton Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:24 AM Freda ...My comment was not about the sexual orientation of monkeys, but that the monkey cited by Don had started to develope human characteristics. So the connotation......Oh why the fuck am I explaining this Cheers Freda ...hope you're OK....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:11 AM Says a lot that report doesn't it. Can you direct me to the results of a survey of native British animals involved in such behaviour ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: Amos Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:08 AM GoS: What I have found unacceptable in BoJ's post is not her position, but the perfervid hatred she brings to bear in expressing it. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: freda underhill Date: 30 Jul 08 - 05:03 AM Re the monkey comments, homosexual, as well as bisexual behavior is widespread in the animal kingdom. A 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior, not necessarily sex, has been observed in close to 1500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them. The bonobo (an ape), which has a matriarchal society (unusual amongst apes), is a fully bisexual species -- both males and females engage in heterosexual and homosexual behavior, being noted for lesbianism in particular. About 60% of all sexual activity in this species is between two or more females. While the homosexual bonding system in bonobos represent the highest frequency of homosexuality known in any species, homosexuality has been reported for all great apes, including humans, as well as a number of other primate species. (wikipedia, citing multiple sources) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Joy Bringer Date: 30 Jul 08 - 04:51 AM Fine, whatever you say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 30 Jul 08 - 04:50 AM Joy, Not yet....I'm waiting to answer some questions...Besides there is no need to silence anyone yet(though some I'd like to)..let everyone finish, as you'd want to finish..let all be revealed...it can't hurt you |