BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 11:51 AM

Almost everything we do as animals has a) survival, or b) reproductive reasons behind it. We have to survive to sexual maturity in order to procreate in other words. When we look at almost all we do there is some strategy tying in a, b or and and b above... until we come to homosexuality. That then seems to fly in the face of evolution and procreation. BUT most animal groups display homosexuality and that it continues to survive in the gene pool it must have some evolutionary advantage ultimately linked to a and b above.

Of course gay people actually do reproduce so as to why the genes continue is not so hard to answer as to what the evolutionary advatage is of homosexuality in nature. That said, many homosexuals never reach sexual maturity because of hate deaths and suicides :-(

One train of thought is a kind of 'keeping you hand in' approach to reproduction and the fact that humans developed pleasurable orgasms means anything that gives that pleasure will be utilised. There are as many ideas as for why it happens as there are detractors of it being evolutionary. That it exists, and will likely continue to exist, is without doubt really.

I found a short precis type idea which expalins some ideas. Hope it is of help.

What_is_the_scientific_explanation_for_homosexual_behavior


The thread is going a little off topic and I apologise for my part in that already

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 12:11 PM

Ake's most recent post states:

"I am in favour of letting homosexuals get on with their lives in private, as long as the appropriate health education is provided."

I see.

So now you're line has evolved to a point where you are saying the same thing that is being ... er ... "promoted" in schools.

... oh no ... one thing missing ...

that homosexuals deserve the same civil rights as everyone else.

In other words, that homosexuals should not be discriminated against.



2 key points here Ake that you may dick to avoid as much as you like but that this thread has come down to.


1. Have you changed your view of homosexuals since 2004?

2. Do you agree or disagree with discrimination against homosexuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 03:50 PM

Amos dear boy, dont be so shocked....See here, the Williams Institute,UCLA School of Law, have found the take up figures for homosexual marriage to be exceedingly low...about 5 new homosexual marriages to 1000 new heterosexual marriages.

Why So Few? Looking at what we know about same-sex marriage
By Stanley Kurtz
National Review Online
June 5, 2006

Why have so few gays chosen to marry? A new study by Maggie Gallagher's Institute for Marriage and Public Policy (iMAPP) estimates that, in countries that legally recognize same-sex unions, typically between 1 percent and 5 percent of gays and lesbians have entered into a same-sex marriage. Obviously, that is a very low number. Much of the argument for gay marriage turns on the claim that same-sex couples need the cultural, legal, and economic benefits of marriage. Yet if only a small number of gays actually marry, the practical impact of the change on gays themselves would be minimal.

The fundamental purpose of marriage is to encourage mothers and fathers to maintain stable families for the children they create. It would be a mistake to undercut that purpose by redefining marriage, whatever the take-up rate for same-sex unions. Yet, for those receptive to arguments for same-sex marriage, the case for this reform would be greatly weakened if it turned out that only a few gays actually marry.

And there's more at stake than numbers. Since the "conservative case" for same-sex marriage holds that marriage will import a more conservative ethos to the gay community, we need to know something besides how many same-sex couples actually marry. If substantial numbers of gay couples take advantage of the legal benefits of marriage, while simultaneously rejecting traditional marital norms (like monogamy), that would greatly weaken the "conservative case" for same-sex marriage.

Despite the few short years formal same-sex marriage has been available, we can now offer some preliminary answers to questions about why so few gays marry, and how those gays who have married understand their unions. The iMAPP study covered only countries that have formal same-sex marriage, with data going back, at most, five years (for the Netherlands). Yet a turn to Scandinavia provides a fuller story. A series of recent empirical studies on Scandinavian registered partnerships have made available a fascinating body of data about a same-sex partnership system that has been in existence for 17 years in Denmark, 13 years in Norway, and 12 years in Sweden (19 years if we go back to the same-sex unions Sweden created in 1987).

The new studies show that after nearly two decades of Scandinavian registered partnerships, only a very small number of gays have actually entered legal unions. And there are clear indications are that even many couples who have registered may be doing so more for legal benefits than because they aspire to traditional marital norms. In short, there are now clear signs that same-sex marriage is not working the way its defenders claim it should, even for gays.

Complete article

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:07 PM

I'm sorry, but there being a low take up on gay marriages does not mean that it ought'n't be legal for those who choose to. Many heterosexuals decide not to marry, or remain "living together" for many years, even their entire lives, why shouldn't the gay population have the same reasons for staying unmarried? Some people in striahgt relationships live together and have children together and consider themselves lifelong parteners and still do not marry. I think this is a personal choice (though a slightly odd one) and everyone should have their pick.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:17 PM

To answer mauvepink... sure, I know that 'some' women were attracted to gay guys, but whatever relationships *I* saw were usually just friendship. It was kinda rare for that to interfere with women also wanting straight BFs.
(sometimes having a gay friend allowed a woman to go places and do things and feel safe from being hit on by other guys. I knew a couple of gay guys who often acted as escorts for women friends at a bar or something.)

Oh... and I knew several people of BOTH sexes who were quite bi-sexual. It never seemed like a conflict and they didn't make a big deal out of it...it was just 'known'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:23 PM

Agreed Elsie, but Amos did accuse me of an "outrageous assertion" in stating...."The trouble is that it seems, in general terms, homosexuals are uninterested in "marriage" or monogamy".

My link makes it clear that my assertion was quite correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:33 PM

I think it's a generation thing...no offence of course, but most people gay people I know of my generation do want to settle down. The gay people far more than the straight! Almost as if to prove that being gay isn;t something dirty, just a fact and not making them promiscuous in a way...and actually a lot of the gay people I know are fair more honourable (dating wise) than the straight ones.

I know a LOT of bi peoploe, myslef included her, that get very angry when it's implied that most bisexuals are just promiscuous when I can tell you honestly that I have never cheated or slept around nor do I have any intention of doing so and I am most _definately_ attracted to both sexes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:55 PM

I think I should make it clear, that I am referring to male homosexuals in health issues and promiscuity.

The figures for lesbians are as good or sometimes better than heteros.

Can you clarify something for me? what is the proper way to describe a woman who is sexually attracted to other women exclusively.
I always thought the word homosexual described a man sexually attracted to men?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:06 PM

Ebbie...I haven't changed my views and have explained them pretty clearly above.

Oh BTW...the next time you get your "stiletto" out of the woodpile, make sure you get it plumb between your victims shoulder blades....I think the old eye to hand co-ordination may be going..:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:23 PM

Well, it's been awhile, and I notice that Mr. Snide, who simply ignores questions that he can't answer or doesn't answer because it would reveal too much about the basis of his attitudes and beliefs, has not answered the question I posed some time back.

What, intrinsically, makes two men "an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman?"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:33 PM

While scrolling through the thread, to get caught up, I caught this, from mauvepink's link, the very first sentence,..now pay attention!......"This question asks for scientific explanations rather than religious or moralistic answers.
Unfortunately, there is not yet a conclusive study which tell us exactly what causes homosexuality."

Isn't that EXACTLY WHAT I SAID???!!!

And to Ake, Homosexuality refers to sex with the SAME gender, either male to male or female to female...not exclusively to men.

Okay, We are having some company arriving very shortly. Being as the thread is now 'discussing the issues a little deeper, and delving into the moralistic, religious, psychological, and the scientific aspects of this, getting back on, will be among my top priorities!! Because there is a lot more to share with you, and hopefully you may all be receptive, because somebody's missing something, by just looking at one aspect!!..Remember the story I posted, of the 'Blind Men and the Elephant'!!...If not, re-read that post carefully...and hopefully understanding,and open mindedness will prevail.....because if WE, as musicians fall into the trap that has everyone squabbling, we are no better, and have NOTHING to say. It wasn't always that way. Years before, it was the musicians and particularly the 'folkies' that had a LOT to say, and we made a difference! We can't just fall back, remembering those times, and think that we still do, just because WE ONCE DID!! There was a time that we were the thinkers, not the followers.Perhaps we should 'wise up' and be the thinkers, once again, and stop chanting symptomatic mantras of disinformation and politics, that limit science, instead of expanding it!!!...or co-opting it!!!!
With Much Regards,and Hope,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:35 PM

I guess this person, referred to as 'Mr. Snide' cross posted. Don, lighten up, you might miss something.........AGAIN!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:43 PM

well Ake, I was going to provide a definition of homosexual, but that's already been provided acurately. However some other terms might be useful. Gay is now generally used to mean male homosexuals however in it's original use in connection with homosexuality it was used to refer to all of it...much as one could use the word "queer" nowadays, although some people find that offensive. for the record when I say "gay" I mean anything _not_ heterosexual.

I was thinking about the question of male promiscuity...the most obvious thing that can be drawn form this is that men are, in general, mnore promiscuous. It is also more acceptable for them to be. They might be called a player possibly...but no one will really accuse them of sleeping around or any of the unpleasant names that come with that. So it stands to reason that in a lot of situations two men will not form a permanent relationship, because it is more natural for them not too. However there are some permanent relationships, possibly because of the more feminine side present in a lot of gay men.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:57 PM

Apologies... I never put my name on so I guess the previous will dump itself at some point?

Here it is again....


Thanks for that Bill. I think there is a great deal in what you say as sometimes having a male partner to a function does cut down on attentions. It makes perfect sense and, of course, gay men often love mixed company in any case :-)

Elspeth, I have heard all sorts of arguments about bi men and women. Being greedy, fence sitters, can't make their minds up, etc etc. But what people do not realise is that for those whose bisexuality is not all about sex (and most genuine relationships are of the heart and not just sex) then they face the same obstacles as straight people. Finding the 'right one' no matter the gender. Being bi often means being a person lover in that you do not care what genotals a PERSON has as long as they have something that is good between the ears and in their hearts that each can relate to. What most people forget is that bi folk, while maybe doubling a chance of a relationship, also double the chance of getting their heart broken :-(

akenaton... loving the same gender is homosexuality, no matter the gender, but over time homosexual seems to have become to mean exclusively male. In fact it is male or female. Thus...

homosexual [,hEUmEU's*lksjUEl or ,hQm-] noun
    1 a person who is sexually attracted to members of the same sex

adjective
    2 of or relating to homosexuals or homosexuality

    3 of or relating to the same sex Compare heterosexual

Lesbian, on the other hand, is exclusively female. Before then they were tribades or friccatrices.

Hope this helps

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 06:16 PM

thank you mauvepink! I agree exactly with that statement about being bisexual! so many people don't realise that for the majority of people that are truly bi, it is indeed all about the person. But gees, the number of time I got called greedy was _almost_ funny. Particularly as when I came out at 15 I had only really dated one boy and one girl and never slept with anyone. Ignorant people are so capable of cruelty.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 06:27 PM

""What you say about Christians is quite right too. And other 'people of religion' (other religions). Most just want to practice their faith without being vehement or upsetting anyone else on various topics.""

Which of course is exactly what most homosexuals would want, and what they should be able to do, were it not for the interference occasioned as a result of fundamentalists trying to relegate them to some lesser status than themselves.

I never cease to marvel at the number of different fears that seem to afflict religious zealots, but, given the choice of allaying their fears, or protecting the civil and legal rights of those they fear.....well, I've made my position plain.

I have no truck with bigots of whatever stripe. I look down on no man, and I look up only to a carefully chosen few.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 06:59 PM

""The fundamental purpose of marriage is to encourage mothers and fathers to maintain stable families for the children they create. It would be a mistake to undercut that purpose by redefining marriage, whatever the take-up rate for same-sex unions. Yet, for those receptive to arguments for same-sex marriage, the case for this reform would be greatly weakened if it turned out that only a few gays actually marry.""

Once again a comment which is not germane to the issue.

1. Exactly how would permitting same sex marriage "undercut" the nature or function, or the "fundamental purpose" of heterosexual marriage?

That statement is arrant nonsense.

2. The number of marriages so far taken up is immaterial. Civil rights are not granted on the basis of how many citizens suffer discrimination, but rather on the basis of ensuring that no citizen suffers discrimination.

In point of fact, the small number of same sex marriages might quite well be due to the short time for which this has been possible, and quite likely the opposition of many churches to celebrating such unions.

In the USA specifically, it is unclear whether it will even be possible to marry, as there is doubt, even in the States which are for this reform, whether it will be overturned.

For gays, a policy of "Wait and See" might be wise, given that permission may be rescinded by the veto of one man, mayor or governor.

Whatever, I don't think the figures of gay marriages to date can be considered significant, as an indicator of the long term position.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 09:31 PM

By "Mr. Snide," I was not referring to you, GfS, but if you want to put the shoe on and announce loudly to all that it fits, be my guest.

And I haven't missed a thing.

Don Firth

P. S. The question remains unanswered.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 10:13 PM

"Mr.Snide", is no way to convince your intended reader, that you wish to raise him 'up'(?) to your understanding. Let's do this as a way to bring this to a symbiotic conversation, rather than trying to vindicate ourselves, to be 'recognized', as being 'right'. Truth to tell,most all your points have either been in error, or limited...Fair enough?...No slam or slur intended, in the least,..but WE can do, and BE better than that. The lesbians think they have a corner on being 'right', the male homosexuals think the same, those opposed, think they do, so on and so forth. Those who are, have all the reasons they are, those opposed, do so, because they do not like the effect that they see, and don't like it for one reason or another..both can be 'RIGHT', from their perspective, but, instead of beating each other over the head, UNDERSTANDING, at this point, may be in order....wouldn't you say?..unless all you want, is people to understand, that you should be acknowledged, and worshiped, for your political stand......which has NOTHING TO DO with CAUSE OR EFFECT...its just your political stand..okay? I would rather we talk to each others hearts, and minds, to understand, and to be understood, than play politics, just to placate each other...wouldn't you?
Let's give it a shot....and get somewhere, where others CAN'T!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 12:47 PM

GfS, where the snideness comes in with you and Ake is that you two were the first to try to refute those who did not agree with you by attempting to denigrate them by insulting them on a personal level, calling them "stupid," calling them such things as "liberal fascists," and generally trying to lump them (us) into some fictional political movement dedicated to promoting homosexuality when that is not the case at all. The primary concern is the matter of civil rights (which is not a political issue, it's a human rights issue), which you and Ake simply refuse to recognize.

Recently Ake listed a few names of people whom he regarded as sufficiently stupid and contemptible that he would no longer bother to answer them. The fact, of course, is that these were the people who were asking the difficult questions—questions that he either could not answer or was afraid to answer honestly for fear of revealing too much about his prejudices and motives.

And you tried to undercut my credibility by building a whole fictional scenario about my being morally remiss and, hence, emotionally disturbed because of a relationship of mine that I happened to allude to on another thread, that occurred over forty years ago, and about which you know absolutely nothing. That, GfS, is fighting dirty. And I didn't start it. You and Ake did.

Neither you nor Ake seem to be willing to discuss this matter in reasonable terms without resorting to insults, so your attempts at "reconciliation" here (if that is, indeed, what it appears to be) tends to ring hollow.

Show good faith by refraining from the insults and pigeon-holing (e.g., such things as accusing us of a "political stand," which you used in your most recent post) and give straight answers when they are asked of you and we might have a basis for rational discussion.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 02:15 PM

Don, Okay, you stated your position...are you done with that yet?...so we can move on???

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 02:47 PM

See what I mean, folks?

GfS has no intention of discussing anything in good faith. Insults and brow-beating is all s/he has in his/her repertoire.

And the best Ake can come up with is to try to insult someone by dinking around with the spelling of their name.

Bloody childish!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 03:31 PM

Does GfS ever post about anything other than homosexuality and men bumming each other?

I haven't noticed anything but homosexual posts from GfS myself. GfS is into Homo discussions - but this is a Folk discussion board. So, does GfS belong on a Folk discussion board, or on a Homosexuality discussion board? Go figure?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 03:56 PM

You've got it, Crow Sister. In his/her last 200 posts, GfS has posted only four times on music threads. The vast majority of posts have been dedicated to the trying to quell the same-sex marriage issue.

Ake's history is pretty similar. His posts tend to deplore homosexual practices, implying they actually create the AIDs virus, and seem to dwell on the lurid details of anal intercourse.

What's the word? Obsession? Fixation? Fetish?

I think that about says it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 04:47 PM

As these posters are obviously only interested in homosexual chat, maybe GfS & Co' could take their personal (and no doubt fascinating?) preoccupation with "Men putting their willies into other men's bum holes" interests away from a err supposed *Folk Music* board, and on to a more focused Homosexual/Gay/Lesbian discussion board, where it might be better appreciated?

Just a thought?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 04:49 PM

Sad bastards, get a life.
If you've nothing to say dont say anything.
Have either of you posted any positive information or ideas to this thread?
Aren't you ashamed of your vitreolic abuse....not even saved by a modicum of wit.....and you wonder why no one responds to you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:37 PM

Well, there we have it again! What is Ake's post of 21 Dex 09 - 04:49 p.m. if not a perfect example of the vitriolic abuse that he complains of?

Right again, Crow Sister. They should get their own forum. Or, perhaps, move in together.

Don Firth - has left the building.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:53 PM

"Have either of you posted any positive information or ideas to this thread?"

Err, yeah: how about taking your obsession with men bumming each other elsewhere! Even the most pro 'gay rights' peeps I know don't bang on about gay gay gay stuff as relentlessly as you two!

You go *on and on and on* about it. Man, thinking about men bumming each other must take up every bloody waking moment of your life!
It's OBVIOUS to everyone that you are utterly OBSESSED with gayness/bumming/mens willies & bum-holes/err etc.

Do something else for a change, take a break, find another obsessive hobby like trains or bird spotting or something..
For everyone's health & peace of mind! Jeeze man!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:57 PM

No one responded to them? Ake, you responded within TWO MINUTES! lol

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 06:07 PM

Don, stop 'recruiting'. We were on a good roll, exchanging good information, and every time you're caught, accusing, and usurping the thread, you resort to the same, worn out tactics, instead of moving forward, and thereby hijacking the thread to focus on only your point of view....which has been proven, either inconclusive, or divisive, just to steer the attention to you. May we go on??...with your imperial permission..or do we have to endure more of your off topic meanderings?

You've stated your political stance...ok..You've posted links, that come to no conclusion, as said in those links....you've gathered 'support' of those who think that non bigoted, dissenters, are bigots and haters...and brought nothing new to understanding the CAUSE, of what you so ignorantly champion. Just take a rest, and let's see what may come out, that may INFORM you...instead of spouting your non-supported opinions....and this time let them, or us speak, without jumping down our throats. YOU MIGHT LEARN SOMETHING....God forbid! ....not to mention, there may be something of interest to OTHERS.....unless, of course, keeping people uninformed is your method of control. You have offered NOTHING,except your link, which was not authored by you. Why don't you ALLOW a discussion on that link, which is what was being done. Perhaps, you did not even read the entire link, yourself, or understood the ramifications of what they were saying. Forget character assassinate Ake, or myself, or anyone else disagreeing with you. You're wasting time and space, in doing so. Now, I'll get around to your question, when I'm finished with Amos', though I think in answering Amos' questions, yours would be answered as well!!

Look at this quote from you..."GfS has posted only four times on music threads. The vast majority of posts have been dedicated to the trying to quell the same-sex marriage issue.

Ake's history is pretty similar. His posts tend to deplore homosexual practices, implying they actually create the AIDs virus, and seem to dwell on the lurid details of anal intercourse.

What's the word? Obsession? Fixation? Fetish?"

You actually went through the forum COUNTING OUR POSTS...THEN ACCUSE US OF BEING OBSESSED???????? Look who is calling the kettle black!
(and BTW, your count is wrong).
Chill out. When I get back, and have the time, I'll post, what I did before, and lost.......jeez!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 07:48 PM

ok...I know this is going to seem a little bit off topic (seeing as the current topic appears to be verbally kicking the shit out of eachother) but on the healthcare/education side of things: Don't you find the whole obsession with male gay sex quite worrying? What I mean is, in sex ed it get banged on and on and on about...and lesbians don;t even get a mention. Just a thought that if people are going to be educated about the ins and outs of peoples sexual preferences surely it should run across the board? From a purely educational and safe-sex perspective it is surely important to cover all of it? For instance, stop obsessing over condoms for STI prevention in gay and straight sex without so much as mentioning dental dams and suchlike.

Now I know that is somewhat off topic...but it seemed an interesting point to me, and it might be something related to talk about that gets away a bit from the gay men obsession and the personality clashes, at least for a little while.

What are your thoughts?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 07:51 PM

"if people are going to be educated about the ins and outs of peoples sexual preferences"

Interesting turn of phrase . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 07:57 PM

You're getting a bit funny in your desperation, there GfS.

No, I didn't go "through the forum" counting your posts, you idiot my dear fellow. It's a pretty easy tally to get if you know how, and it only took me about twenty seconds.

You're getting a bit frantic, it would appear. You and Ake have long since been rumbled as a pair of trolls. Has nothing to do with anyone other than the two of you trying to highjack the thread.

There is no serious discussion here. You two have rendered that impossible, as you will undoubtedly attempt to do on any future thread touching on this subject.

The interesting part is that both of you have chosen this subject as a wall to tag, like a couple of juvenile delinqents with cans of spray-paint. Speaks volumes about you two.

TTFN

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:28 PM

Although I disagree with both GfS and Ake on this issue, I see nothing that makes either of them trolls, Don, no offence intended to anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: curmudgeon
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:36 PM

Did anyone else notice that Ake just posted to a music thread (the Big Boys)? Coincidence?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:38 PM

hi 999, yes...I rethought that particular phrase somewhat, but only after posting XD. Nevermind, it's accurate I suppose.
Shame my offer of slightly alternative conversation hasn't been taken up...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:48 PM

It was not me who first identified them as such, 999. I thought about it some and came to the conclusion that my informant had a sound theory. The behavior is typical:   take an "anti-" position, keep repeating the same things, don't answer reasonable questions, and use lots of insults and personal abuse, especially commenting on the stupidity of people who obviously have the facts. They've done it, both together and separately, on a number of threads now.

As long as I'm here,

This is the sort of thing that homophobia encourages.

The Story

Wait for the sarcasm. It'll be right along.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:57 PM

Yeah, I can't say I've ever thought of Ake and GfS as trolls. I really think they believe what they're saying - warped though their thinking may be....
I don't like the idea of people calling other people trolls in the first place. It tends to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Recently, I've been corresponding with a guy who was a friend of mine when we were students in a Catholic seminary. At the time we were in school, I think people would have called him a "liberal intellectual." He left the seminary and was in a homosexual relationship for a number of years. More recently, he became a conservative and then married a woman, and he says he's been happily married for a number of years. To me, his political and religious views are distressingly conservative (and he thinks mine are distressingly liberal), and he is staunchly anti-homosexual. He's the first "reformed homosexual" I've known; and frankly, I don't know what to think. He certainly seems sincere.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 09:24 PM

Well Joe, the only response I have to your comment is the old yorkshire saying:

"there's nowt as queer as folk!"

... oops ... there goes another can of worms ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 09:37 PM

As far back as Kinsey, but more recently others as well have hypothesized a sort of "grey area" in which gender orientation is somewhat wavery. Not quite the same as "AC/DC" perhaps, but where the person can swing either way. Here, a "cure (?)" may be possible. But I posted a link on the Prop 8 thread (can't find the post where the link is right now, but I'll keep trying) to an article about a thoroughly peer-reviewed attempt to cure homosexuality through psychotherapy. It involved counseling, along with a lot of aversion therapy (electrically shocking the subject when they viewed "inappropriate" sex objects).

Results? I don't remember the exact figures, bit the study included 202 self-proclaimed homosexual men who, incidentally, said they wanted to be cured (self-selecting sample, perhaps?). Anyway, after treatment, the recidivism rate was something like 68%, some like 20% gave up sex entirely in favor of celibacy, none entered a heterosexual relationship, a substantial percentage of them (including some overlaps) became clinically depressed or developed other psychological problems, and six of them committed suicide.

The experiment was declared an abject failure.

I'll keep searching for the link (even if that is interpreted as my being "obsessed," but truly open, inquiring minds do want to know).

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, in my checkered but long career, I've met two people, one who said he had been gay, and another "ex-lesbian," who both claimed they were now cured ("being Saved" had something to do with it). If you think that ex-smokers are rabidly opposed to smoking, you ought to have met these folks! They absolutely raged and screamed and frothed at the mouth if the subject of homosexuality ever came up!

What was that Shakespeare quote about protesting too much?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 02:30 AM

Well, good God! You, (Joe, and even Don), are now sounding like me! My biggest contention was that, yes, it is reversible....and look at all the 'back-biting' that has gone on! ..and Don, you argued adamantly that they couldn't change, and you knew two who had, all along! So, pardon me, if I seemed to get a little,..umm,...irritated at you. So very strongly, you argued on behalf of a lie! Okay, enough said about that(I hope).

Now, to answer Amos,...actually, in light of the post, in which Don claims he knows of two that have, Joe knows one, I posted a link in which a doctor, was, but is not now, and offers therapy to those(Dr. Cohen), I know two ex-homosexual males and three ex-lesbians, plus the last of the article Don posted, I think its safe to say, YES, it is reversible....BUT, what could be the CAUSE, if it is not genetic, but apparently people are, in fact, born that way?.......Let's take a stab at it, because no research, that I know of, has pursued this possibility(read:probability).

Just follow me through this, if you will....it won't hurt!(wink)

Being as the interests of homosexuality are concerns of the 'religious', psychological, scientific, and sociopolitical communities, somewhere lays a bridge of understanding that speaks to all their 'concerns'.

For those born, from the womb, homosexual:
Let's start with some basic facts, that we know...'Energy can neither be created nor destroyed'..right?(Einstein)....So, does that include our own very life force? Perhaps, when that life force, some say 'God'(as the giver of live), some say, the collective conscientiousness, you might argue, a bunch of chemicals re-acting randomly, but somehow, that life begins to take shape, in the womb. That energy, or conscientiousness, grows, and is nourished from the mother, and basically, is one with the mother, or at least certainly attached, right? Whether or not, you want to argue for what it is, or is not, or when in becomes 'a person', as the pro-life, or pro abortion folks do, is not the issue, right now..ok? The fact is, mama's blood is his or her blood, from the same place....so are the electrical impulses, that run the neurological system too. ..Still with me?.. Those are the little impulses that take messages to the receptors in the brain...matter of fact, they help set up the receptors, sorta like programming a hard drive, from one computer to another...ok? So far, simple enough.

When the life's force began, it is a blank slate, as far as we know, unless you want to argue that it came from a collective    conscientiousness, such as what people might consider 'God', but nonetheless, it is a blank slate, not knowing, or even having a concept of right, or wrong, or good, or bad, or up or down, etc, etc.

Now, we have all heard of babies being addicted to certain substances, such as crack, or heroin, or whatever, if the mother was using, during her pregnancy..the child is born already addicted, because the receptors have been chemically set up to need whatever substance the mother was taking...right?

What if she was not taking any substances, BUT she(the mother) was very upset, and/or distraught emotionally. Would that set up, the receptors in the child????...from the neurological impulses she is sending throughout her body???? From all indications (and studies), YES!...Now we're getting somewhere!.....What if>>>>>>>

What if the focus on her being upset/distraught, was the man who impregnated her, justifiably or not,..or just perception, real or imagined(not the issue), or even another man in her life, or just men, in general? It could be a frustration, disappointment, a feeling of self inadequacy, guilt...anything...wouldn't you say those receptors are now getting programmed?..and could inhibit male traits in the fetus' neurological system to be affected?? ..and thereby cause a 'short-out' in other systems being formed, in the child?

Okay, I was going to go on further, but I didn't want to have a giant post. Maybe little doses of new things to consider, and the possibilities of ramifications, set in motion.

If you want, we can expound, and take it deeper, as to the psychological traits, and/or set up, and the 'why's', and inherent outlook that the child is going to be born with, and the frustrations, he may encounter with his father, that develops in the formative years.

But first, we can talk about it INTELLIGENTLY, and calmly, and I'd love to, but not to a crowd of contentious opinionated people. Keep an open mind. Just what I posted here, so far, should give pause to some serious thought...might even break open some new doors of perception. How 'bout it??....Let's get heavy! Ask more if you want more...but let's not argue, let's discover together?

GfS

P.S. PBS also had a program, dealing with the same thing, for what its worth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 04:33 AM

I have been away for a week (on holiday with my partner - being gay all week in another country, doing REALLY GAY things like visiting museums and eating in restaurants and sitting by the beach and even looking around cathedrals with not one single bolt of lightning hitting us) and this thread is STILL high on the first page???

You people really ought to give it up.....but as you clearly can't or won't, and I am one of the very very few who write on this topic here who is happy to declare their homosexuality, here are two more thoughts to digest.

Firstly: GfS' contentions about 'reversible' sexuality, and all the accompanying gubbins, starts from what is to me an utterly false premise: namely that same-sex attraction is a 'condition', the 'causes' of which need identifying as a prelude to their eradication. Whatever the attempted niceities of the argument, those with GfsS' mindset have a vision of an ideal world where everyone is straight. Needless to say, I do not think that would be ideal.

Secondly: if sexual orientation can be changed, as is thought in some quarters, should we not be seeking to change (at least) some unhappy heterosexuals into happy homosexuals ? There is at least one precedent for this - in the 1970s feminist movement there were a minority of women who found heterosexual sex so at odds with their political views (they were, in their own eyes, sleeping with the enemy) that they ended their couplings with men and formed lesbian relationships instead.

That particular historical moment is an issue which many contemporary feminists prefer to downplay, as it feeds into stereotypes of feminism equalling 'man hating', but it did happen, even if only in a tiny number of cases. Interestingly, and pleasingly perversely, this strikes me as directly comparable to the man Joe Offer knows, who has 're-trained' himself to live a heterosexual life because he could not equate his ideology with his established sexual desires.

I would be interested to know what others addicted to this thread make of these points. The name-calling (and yes, I know I am guilty of this too) won't take the discussion anywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:35 AM

Smedley,

It isn't the name calling that worries me, Its the brazen Museum Visiting, meal eating, beach siting and cathedral exploring that horrifies me.

Sickening!!

How do you live with yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:36 AM

Welcome home Smedley :-)

I do not think it is reversible as I do not think it is a condition. I do think some people's sexuality is 'fluid, but bisexuality has that covered generally. As I said much earlier in the thread, of course gay people still marry opposite genders. It's not really rocket science that they have and do. Lots' of people try to 'conform' to the het stereotype and it impossible to to do, eventually letting their own trues sexuality through. Some stay in the closet, Some kill themselves.

To those who think a person can change sexuality then why do people kill themselves rather than become something else? If it were that simple I am sure they would just change. Change is better than death. I postulate they do not change because they cannot change. So why should they be expected to or need to?

Yes, some people are unhappy with their own sexuality but I further postulate that the unhappiness is far more environmental/cultural than it is intrinsic. Politics are not involved, liberalism, idealism, feel-gooding sisterhoods or anything. It's a humanity issue. Let people be who they are and keep your nose out of their affairs. Look after your own more and the rest will fall in place. It's really quite that simple with sexuality.

I, too, have heard of people 'reforming' their sexuality.... but I jave not believed it for a minute. And, even if such phenomena exist I think it must be extremely rare. In sexuality no-one should look down on anyone. We ALL have more more in common with each other than we do not. Those differences are often what makes life interesting and relationships worth having (at all sorts of levels)

This is just my opinion when all said and done. It does not matter that I have to be right. It does not affect me. But being open minded about homosexuality with never do me any harm either (except from the insults I may have to suffer for daring to allow gay folk breath!)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:40 AM

Lox... please refrain from architcturalism. They really cannot help liking buidlings! I thinks it's in the bricks ;-)

(I love sitting in empty churches personally)

Time we had a light note on here :-)

lol

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:59 AM

I just want to say hooray for Smedley.
Primarily for posting something that didn;t involve any name calling =) I'm sincerely interested in the topic of this thread if the name calling etc could just stop!
And secondly it's nice to see someone out, and humourous about it (I'm liking the cathedral visiting- I find it particularly enjoyable myself, along with not being smited that is =D)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 11:12 AM

You know Elspeth I actually think that a lot of people begrudge homosexuality becaues it's 'sufferers' really know how to have a great time! Gay people know how to have a fantastic time and not take themselves too seriously. I am almost sure jealousy plays a part in some dissenters thinking often...

I prefer to miserable than gay ;-)

But seriously: I too respect those who are openly out but not throwing it in people's faces. Wearing sexuality on your sleeve can be very unattractive but being proud of who you are should never be put down.

I'll shush a while now. I have posted three times in the last hour!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 11:36 AM

A few thoughts here:

Somebody implied that Don F is alone on this site. I want everyone to know that is not the case at all. It is just that he speaks very well, for me and probably for others.

It also occurs to me that if sexuality were that easy to turn, does that imply that straight people can be talked out of hetereosexuality? I can't quite picture a straight person being subjected to 'aversion therapy' so that s/he becomes gay. I can understand that the person could be turned into celibacy!

How about it, GtS and ake? Want to try a little aversion therapy? Think it'll work?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' WIllie
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 12:33 PM

You know, in the time this thread has been waffling...

They could have given the Act Presidential assent, hung a few and repealed the ruddy thing by now!

I think one way of drawing it to a conclusion is to thin out the contributors a bit;

If you have stated that you do not understand homosexuality, then -
a) If you have no wish to try to understand the lifestyle choice then STOP POSTING
b) IF you don't understand but have empathy for the disgusting actions of so called Christians then KEEP POSTING

If you think you understand homosexuality then -
a) If you are not gay then STOP POSTING (what exactly do you understand then?)
b) If you are gay then KEEP POSTING (about the role of these so called Christians, not about asking people to understand your lifestyle. Start another thread if you must.)

Oh, heck, 99% of opinions would disappear. I would be told I am limiting free speech and this thread would continue as an excuse for discussing gay issues....


When, forgive me if I am wrong, we should be discussing the role of so called Christian sects in promoting death sentences for things they don't understand.

ZZZZZZZZZZZ

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 12:46 PM

GfS, once again you are trying to put words in my mouth.   (PTUI!!!).

Reread what I posted at 21 Dec 09 - 09:37 p.m. I describe an thoroughly peer-reviewed experiment at "curing" homosexual subjects that totally failed to effect verifiable cures and resulted in a high percentage of recidivism, the next highest percentage simply choosing a life of celebacy, many of them developing psychological problems including clinical depression, and six of the subjects committing suicide.

And as for the two people that I mention (one "former" gay and one "former" lesbian), it was pretty obvious that there was no cure at all. From the time they were "saved" (i.e., "accepted Christ"), they denied their homosexuality vociferously and abstained from sexual activity entirely. Now, you may call that a "cure," but most reasonable people would not. It is a simple case of denial, and if you are any kind of competent counselor, you would see that.

Don't try to make it look like I am agreeing with you when I am not!

Don Firth

P. S. And again you cite Cohen, the "reformed" homosexual, whose method of treating his homosexual subjects is to cuddle and caress them and assure them that they are loved! He has long since been shown to be an exploiter and a charlatan.