• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Surviving Gay...Barely[W:76]****

Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

What makes you think I would defend that?

Nothing, but rather, you won't attack it because you perceive it as a display of heterosexuality, which you've arbitrarily decided is more acceptable than homosexuality.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

And what would your ethnoreligious background be? Amazingly you've refused to answer this question three times.

What does that have anything to do with anything?

OK let see white as white can be Anglo-Saxons/German DNA blood line and family history of being Protestant with a grandfather on my father side who was a minister.

Rejected religion at around eleven or at most twelve as being silly and not logical and in fact a bible god that was evil after reading from the family king James Bible.

Why any of that matter on this thread I do not know but have fun with the information.

Footnote my childhood hero was Thomas Edison.
 
Last edited:
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

I can walk past a lingerie shop in any mall and see giant posters of women wearing less. What's the difference?

Well, I for one prefer pictures of women in lingerie than men. However, I don't freak out at preferences other than mine...
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Weird how the guy who wrote the article and actually lived the homosexual lifestyle apparently doesn't have a rational view of homosexuality.

I did not say that. Why the need to build straw men?

By the way, do you think your views of heterosexuality are the same as every heterosexual?
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Only a homophobe would object to children being exposed to this.

View attachment 67220049

That photo brings to mind three questions: First, whether this person liked Marlon Brando in "The Wild One;" second, whether a leash is an optional accessory for that outfit; and third, whether the person lifts his leg at fire hydrants.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Nothing, but rather, you won't attack it because you perceive it as a display of heterosexuality, which you've arbitrarily decided is more acceptable than homosexuality.

If most people throughout most of our history had not much preferred heterosexual acts to homosexual ones, there would be far fewer of us around to ponder the question. Some cultures may, overall, have preferred homosexual acts to heterosexual ones. But if so, it's likely the people in them did not reproduce well enough for those cultures to last very long.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

If most people throughout most of our history had not much preferred heterosexual acts to homosexual ones, there would be far fewer of us around to ponder the question. Some cultures may, overall, have preferred homosexual acts to heterosexual ones. But if so, it's likely the people in them did not reproduce well enough for those cultures to last very long.

Procreation is not the same as sexual orientation. Humans favour non-procreative sex acts, and always have. If we didn't, the population would be a hell of a lot higher. Speaking from the biological perspective you've brought, anal sex, oral sex, manual stimulation and sex acts by infertile people, or with women who aren't ovulating, are all equal, regardless of the sex of the participants.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Procreation is not the same as sexual orientation. Humans favour non-procreative sex acts, and always have. If we didn't, the population would be a hell of a lot higher. Speaking from the biological perspective you've brought, anal sex, oral sex, manual stimulation and sex acts by infertile people, or with women who aren't ovulating, are all equal, regardless of the sex of the participants.

If your inclination is to have sex with people of your own sex things like ovulation and infertility won't matter much unless you act outside of your attraction circle.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

If most people throughout most of our history had not much preferred heterosexual acts to homosexual ones, there would be far fewer of us around to ponder the question. Some cultures may, overall, have preferred homosexual acts to heterosexual ones. But if so, it's likely the people in them did not reproduce well enough for those cultures to last very long.

I do not think any one is trying to make homosexuality the majority, nor even more prevalent than it is. And thus your argument fails.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

If your inclination is to have sex with people of your own sex things like ovulation and infertility won't matter much unless you act outside of your attraction circle.

And acting outside of your attraction circle is something people routinely do in any number of situations.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Weird how you accept the testimony of no ex homosexual. Not a one.

EX homosexual???????

I suggest you might get some of the first Master and Johnson books released back in the fifties on their studies of human sexuality along with a math book that will explain bell curves to you that for example the sexuality of all humans fall onto.
 
You know it been eighty years since the first details and scientific studies on human sexuality had been available but you would never know it from reading some of the postings on this thread.
 
In this rather long article, we see the confessions and thoughts of a man who looks back on a life of homosexuality and reveals what is really going on. Below I highlight one of the tamer passages of a thoroughly explicit and horrifying essay.



Read the rest here:
Surviving Gay?Barely | http://josephsciambra.com

this thread is nothing more than TROLL bull**** .............................. can't believe the mod staff here allows this **** ...........
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

And acting outside of your attraction circle is something people routinely do in any number of situations.

Normally they do not however. In fact, most people never do.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Procreation is not the same as sexual orientation. Humans favour non-procreative sex acts, and always have. If we didn't, the population would be a hell of a lot higher. Speaking from the biological perspective you've brought, anal sex, oral sex, manual stimulation and sex acts by infertile people, or with women who aren't ovulating, are all equal, regardless of the sex of the participants.

Did you get that notion from Karl Marx? Just curious.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

And acting outside of your attraction circle is something people routinely do in any number of situations.

If by "acting outside your attraction circle" you mean engaging in sex acts with people you do not find sexually attractive, that is the norm for prostitutes. The money they get makes up for the pleasure they usually do not get. But it is not easy to see why anyone else would do that at all, let alone do it "routinely in any number of situations." Why would anyone bother, unless there were some gratification to be had?
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being gay. Absolutely nothing.

I'm not going to back the OP because I find these recurring topics tiring and to be honest I'm for good or ill I'm indifferent to what most people do. I'm so selfish I worry mostly about my own soul. Albeit, I do at times remember some people that have passed on from this world, in my prayers. I used to--when I prayed the rosary--dedicate two beads on my rosary, in prayer, to two female porn stars that were popular in porn videos at the time.

But I'm not posting to defend you either. Irrespective of what you say I know homosexual attractions, committed to pursuing that, are addictions. Like gambling or pedophiles attracted to children. Actually, heterosexual sexual attractions are addictions. What the Bible terms "passions" (which meant or could be translated in part as "addictions"). And like alcoholics that give up drinking alcohol, or boy lovers like the married Sandusky, we know bona fide homosexual men can marry women and have children with their wives. Which requires erections. And ejaculation requires they were sexually stimulated by the woman's wet vagina.

But people can do--and will do--as they want. I don't really care. If you're having sex with some 7 year-old child then I would have a problem with that.

But I post for this reason. One few Catholics consider. One few anyone considers. In fact, I doubt most people are aware of it.

That being Jesus makes some statements in the New Testament that sin must happen. But He says something very interesting. He says, and I paraphrase, "But woe to him who leads one of my 'little ones' into sin." The term "little ones" seemed to have at least two meanings, at least according to the commentary in my New American (Catholic) Bible. One meaning of course was children, as in in very youthful age. The other meaning seems to have been grown adults who like children (a prerequisite to obtain the kingdom of heaven) follow him.

I think Jesus then says it would be better such people (who led his little ones to sin) have a huge stone tied around their neck and are thrown in the ocean. For he insinuates the punishment they will receive via damnation in hell will be great.







So, what am I saying? I'm saying the gay male porn star might by God's grace, God understanding their addiction (Theologically, a Catholic priest has argued to me addiction, at least drug addiction, eliminates free will and therefore one can not commit what Catholicism terms "mortal sin" in those instances. I'm not saying that is true or false. I'm just pointing out some might debate a person addicted to homosexuality acts with free will.), enter heaven and live in bliss for all eternity.

On the other hand you or at least those that aren't homosexual but lead people into it like a serpent in a tree, or the mother that is IV heroin addicted telling her son to let her shoot him up with heroin because, "It's not bad, it's perfectly fine," such people might be damned to hell for all eternity. The pain of roasting in a fire. Hatred because everyone in hell hates and/or feels despair.

It's a possibility.

Acting with kindness and friendship and treating homosexual people totally cool does not mean one has to promote and justify what they do, if in fact God considers it wrong. Contrary to what Americans think: No King, Queen, President, or majority vote in a democracy rises above Jesus Christ himself.

My two cents. Take it or leave it. Because at the end of the day I don't care if the lot of you burn perpetually in hell. Enjoy your ride now, because it will come to an end. That's true for us all. :peace
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

I'm not going to back the OP because I find these recurring topics tiring and to be honest I'm for good or ill I'm indifferent to what most people do. I'm so selfish I worry mostly about my own soul. Albeit, I do at times remember some people that have passed on from this world, in my prayers. I used to--when I prayed the rosary--dedicate two beads on my rosary, in prayer, to two female porn stars that were popular in porn videos at the time.

But I'm not posting to defend you either. Irrespective of what you say I know homosexual attractions, committed to pursuing that, are addictions. Like gambling or pedophiles attracted to children. Actually, heterosexual sexual attractions are addictions. What the Bible terms "passions" (which meant or could be translated in part as "addictions"). And like alcoholics that give up drinking alcohol, or boy lovers like the married Sandusky, we know bona fide homosexual men can marry women and have children with their wives. Which requires erections. And ejaculation requires they were sexually stimulated by the woman's wet vagina.

But people can do--and will do--as they want. I don't really care. If you're having sex with some 7 year-old child then I would have a problem with that.

But I post for this reason. One few Catholics consider. One few anyone considers. In fact, I doubt most people are aware of it.

That being Jesus makes some statements in the New Testament that sin must happen. But He says something very interesting. He says, and I paraphrase, "But woe to him who leads one of my 'little ones' into sin." The term "little ones" seemed to have at least two meanings, at least according to the commentary in my New American (Catholic) Bible. One meaning of course was children, as in in very youthful age. The other meaning seems to have been grown adults who like children (a prerequisite to obtain the kingdom of heaven) follow him.

I think Jesus then says it would be better such people (who led his little ones to sin) have a huge stone tied around their neck and are thrown in the ocean. For he insinuates the punishment they will receive via damnation in hell will be great.







So, what am I saying? I'm saying the gay male porn star might by God's grace, God understanding their addiction (Theologically, a Catholic priest has argued to me addiction, at least drug addiction, eliminates free will and therefore one can not commit what Catholicism terms "mortal sin" in those instances. I'm not saying that is true or false. I'm just pointing out some might debate a person addicted to homosexuality acts with free will.), enter heaven and live in bliss for all eternity.

On the other hand you or at least those that aren't homosexual but lead people into it like a serpent in a tree, or the mother that is IV heroin addicted telling her son to let her shoot him up with heroin because, "It's not bad, it's perfectly fine," such people might be damned to hell for all eternity. The pain of roasting in a fire. Hatred because everyone in hell hates and/or feels despair.

It's a possibility.

Acting with kindness and friendship and treating homosexual people totally cool does not mean one has to promote and justify what they do, if in fact God considers it wrong. Contrary to what Americans think: No King, Queen, President, or majority vote in a democracy rises above Jesus Christ himself.

My two cents. Take it or leave it. Because at the end of the day I don't care if the lot of you burn perpetually in hell. Enjoy your ride now, because it will come to an end. That's true for us all. :peace

Guess what, Fastpace: Nobody is telling you that you can't believe in this stuff, as crazy as we find it.

But the minute you try to push this crap onto our society, you can rest assured that there is going to be fierce pushback. See, when we set healthy boundaries, you conservative Christians struggle to respect those boundaries. It is y'all's disrespect for those boundaries that causes the strife.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

I do not think any one is trying to make homosexuality the majority, nor even more prevalent than it is. And thus your argument fails.

Of course I never suggested that anyone was trying to make homosexuality more prevalent than it is. You have not refuted anything I said, and I stand by all of it. In any culture that survives for long, it is likely that homosexual conduct is an aberration rather than the norm. If it were ever the norm in a culture, probably too few children would be conceived to maintain the population.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Of course I never suggested that anyone was trying to make homosexuality more prevalent than it is. You have not refuted anything I said, and I stand by all of it. In any culture that survives for long, it is likely that homosexual conduct is an aberration rather than the norm. If it were ever the norm in a culture, probably too few children would be conceived to maintain the population.

The point you are missing is the norm is not inherently good, better, or anything other than more numerous.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Guess what, Fastpace: Nobody is telling you that you can't believe in this stuff, as crazy as we find it.

But the minute you try to push this crap onto our society, you can rest assured that there is going to be fierce pushback. See, when we set healthy boundaries, you conservative Christians struggle to respect those boundaries. It is y'all's disrespect for those boundaries that causes the strife.

Is it supposed to be ironic that liberals are always pushing boundaries that were already set before they were born? :lol:

Also, I don't think Fastpace is a conservative.
 
this thread is nothing more than TROLL bull**** .............................. can't believe the mod staff here allows this **** ...........

Actually, I saw a video of the guy on youtube some years ago. A video of him sitting beside former *female* porn stars. All of them were a part of some group or something, or at least some discussion, about the emotional harm and physical harm that comes with doing porn and living a wild sex life over time. Particularly with the anus.

This is real life.

Just as a woman talking about her years spent on the streets of Berlin or Moscow or Las Vegas as a street prostitute is real life. It may not be your life nor a part of your biography. But that does not mean its not a reality someone else experienced.

Life is not all cotton candy.

Even in the sciences they are aware from the statistical data that homosexual men (not lesbians) have far more sexual partners than heterosexual men. Why? Nt because heterosexual men are more virtuous but because heterosexual women act as brakes on the sexual lives of heterosexual men. I mean by that women aren't as prone to sexual flings with strangers as men are.

Not due to virtue but due to fear from the HIV/AIDS epidemic decades ago, homosexual men as in the "gay community" started pressing down on the brakes of their "free" sex lives they were having in the 1970s gay bath-houses. Again, this is real life. The gay men in those bath-houses were having sex with 5, 10, 20 men in a single night. And a lot of them were going back day after day. Now you figure out the math on that.

Another part of medical reality you may not want to accept is that their exists medical specialists called proctologist.



Proctologist - definition of proctologist by The Free Dictionary

proc·tol·o·gy (prŏk-tŏl′ə-jē)
n.
The branch of medicine that deals with the diagnosis and treatment of disorders affecting the colon, rectum, and anus.



I'm hazarding a guess you never read any of Iceberg Slim's books? He is popular in the Hip Hop world. He died a while ago I think though. I read at least 2 of his books. Pimp: The Story of my Life and the one about a black family from the South in the ghettos of Chicago in the 1930s or '40s I think it was set in. Been a long time since I read the book. But one of the main characters in the book was a black gay man in that family. Wow. Iceberg was one gritty writer. He told reality raw. He supposedly had a high IQ too. I think his IQ was in the genius range. But he used it to pimp (later to compose books with words that colored pages like a paintbrush) instead of becoming a medical doctor.

I bring this up because one could accuse Iceberg of "trolling" if by modern sensibilities they read his books today.
 
Re: Surviving Gay...Barely

Guess what, Fastpace: Nobody is telling you that you can't believe in this stuff, as crazy as we find it.

But the minute you try to push this crap onto our society, you can rest assured that there is going to be fierce pushback. See, when we set healthy boundaries, you conservative Christians struggle to respect those boundaries. It is y'all's disrespect for those boundaries that causes the strife.

Conservative Christian? I'm fiscally liberal and don't attend Mass. I'm looking to convert to the Orthodox Church but will need to find an ethnic one that fits me. And I've got other things going on.

I'm a huge sinner. That includes sexual sins. But I'm not American about this. I'm not even "modern Catholic." I treat my sins just like I treat my incident of getting shot 3 times by a cop. I accept my responsibility in it. So, I don't know if by today's modern standards that's considered being an ancient Jew or 12th century African Christian or what. But I'm cognizant it's un-American.

So, I cast no stones, at homosexuals as Jesus would remind me of my sins by writing in the dirt. In fact, likely my list of sins are hundreds of lines longer than most active homosexuals. I've engaged in so many sins I even doubt I'll ever enter heaven.




As for "healthy boundaries," they were already set in the West in marriage between man and woman. Crack cocaine smoking was illegal not drinking alcohol or being a male womanizer or having gay sex like Obama likely did in Chicago with his murdered black choir friend whom the mother of insinuated Obama was lovers with. None of that was illegal.

But I'm not stopping gay marriage. And if two gay people are happy in a civil marriage with one another that is cool beans. Again, I worry more about my soul. And I'm not just saying that. I literally worry nearly everyday about whether I will end up in hell. I'm so selfish I don't ever think about whether Elton John might go to hell. And I'm aware he and his husband have an "open marriage." So, they screw other men. Because "marriage" was soooo important to them. It's all about "looooooooove." As opposed to blatant lusts and infatuations. Don't see them "porking" any fat women do you. What... fat women aren't "people"?
 
Another part of medical reality you may not want to accept is that their exists medical specialists called proctologist.



Why are you inserting Colorectal surgeons into the discussion? Where are you heading with this?

You do know that Colorectal specialists treat many diseases and conditions such as irritable bowel disease and deadly colorectal cancers. To name just two.
 
Back
Top Bottom