Flames at Pride reaction

[Red Potato Standing By]

Originally Posted by Serapth

Here is a shining example just seconds later:





Which is basically someone doing exactly that.

That is the problem with these kinds of conversations, when one side is full of people with the argument "you either agree or you are a bigot" and the other side actually has a lot of bigots, the internet doesn't have the nuance to have any sort of meaningful conversation.

No where in his rant did he say you have to support it or you are a homophobe.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Serapth

Here is a shining example just seconds later:





Which is basically someone doing exactly that.

That is the problem with these kinds of conversations, when one side is full of people with the argument "you either agree or you are a bigot" and the other side actually has a lot of bigots, the internet doesn't have the nuance to have any sort of meaningful conversation.

LOL now I'm a bigot because I don't want to have a 'meaningful conversation' with someone who comes up with ridiculous talking points that I frankly find laughable. I didn't say support it or you're a bigot, I said support it or shut up about it (or yes, I might think you're a homophobe). Most supporters of GLBTQ I know aren't interested in having asinine 'debates' with concern trolls and strawmen makers. Sorry my position isn't nuanced enough for you (as if your position has any depth or merit at all).

You aren't convincing me and I'm not convincing you, there is no room for debate with issues such as these. It's like trying to tell a Christian that I want to have a 'meaningful conversation' about the merits of their religion. You know how that's going to go, so what's the point? Oh yeah, for trolling purposes. 99% of these arguments are troll jobs and the 1% that aren't might get lost in the shuffle but I don't care, it's too exhausting to try to find that needle in the haystack so I'm going to take the shotgun approach. If that 1% is genuinely redeemable, they will likely get there on their own, they don't need me to debate with them, and I won't.

'Meaningful conversation' LOL, get over yourself. That is very, very rarely the intent with this issue and you know it.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

I can see that this post was directed at me. And you are more than welcome to be entitled to your opinion as I am too mine. I already stated previously that I feel people should be able to live their lives how they want and without discrimination. I'm unsure how my personal misgivings about such activities is considered discriminatory by your standards. Nor is the issue one I care enough about to debate you with further. I look at it more like there are people who choose to dress goth or grunge. Do I ever want to dress like that or live that lifestyle? Nope. Do I think they should be judged or oppressed for that lifestyle choice? Nope. Does this make me a gothophobe? If you can't see where there is that disconnect than I cant help you. Good day.

I'm afraid that this post simply confirms that you badly misunderstand human sexuality. It is not a "lifestyle choice". It is not a fashion choice. It is a deeply held and unchangeable (at least in the sense that one cannot deliberately or consciously change one's sexuality) personal characteristic. Your pithy "gothophobe" analogy was indeed absurd (as you clearly intended it to be) but not for the reasons you thought it was.

[Serapth]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

LOL now I'm a bigot because I don't want to have a 'meaningful conversation' with someone who comes up with ridiculous talking points that I frankly find laughable.

Reading comprehension; not your strong suit.

That you basically take an insulting tone with anyone with an opinion that differs from yours ( your last two (pre-edit) posts are very demonstrative ) makes "debating" with you further pointless.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I'm afraid that this post simply confirms that you badly misunderstand human sexuality. It is not a "lifestyle choice". It is not a fashion choice. It is a deeply held and unchangeable (at least in the sense that one cannot deliberately or consciously change one's sexuality) personal characteristic. Your pithy "gothophobe" analogy was indeed absurd (as you clearly intended it to be) but not for the reasons you thought it was.

Quite like comparing it to one of the most deadly diseases of all time you might say? Look, and for the last time, I cannot personally identify with being LGBT. There is no proof that it is purely a genetic or biological cause, albeit there are strong cases to support that it is. Wether it's a choice or imbedded in someone's genetic code it would not change my stance on it being something that is not meant to occur. One is a choice to go against the grain, another is a error in genetic coding. Regardless it's not something someone should be looked down upon over or be made to feel different over. But to ignore that it's not what our species is meant to do is ignorant as well. Sex between men and women is vital to our existence. It's the way it's meant to be. If people choose it or can't help it is irrelevant. And wether it's either one I still feel every single person should be treated the same.

[Antithesis]

Saying heterosexuality is "the way it's meant to be" definitely indicates that you do not consider homosexual individuals to be equal, given that, by extension, homosexuality would be 'not the way it's meant to be". Good grief. It's not even worth trying to have a discussion.

And no, you aren't entitled to an opinion such as that. Such an opinion is flat out wrong.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

Saying heterosexuality is "the way it's meant to be" definitely indicates that you do not consider homosexual individuals to be equal, given that, by extension, homosexuality would be 'not the way it's meant to be". Good grief. It's not even worth trying to have a discussion.

And no, you aren't entitled to an opinion such as that. Such an opinion is flat out wrong.

Someone with a genetic condition such as hemophilia is also not the way it's "meant to be". And same as someone who is homosexual they are no lesser or greater than me in value. I've already stated I'm for gay rights, the pride parade and equal treatment. Yet because I won't completely fold to your side of beliefs I am being labeled a bigot and not entitled to my opinion. I'm not sure if you see the irony in that. Regardless this thread has gotten derailed and I am just as guilty of that as anyone else. The issue at hand is the flames prescense at the pride parade and like the people I wound up debating I'm happy they went and proud that they are conveying the message of equal rights.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Serapth

Reading comprehension; not your strong suit.

That you basically take an insulting tone with anyone with an opinion that differs from yours ( your last two posts are very demonstrative ) makes "debating" with you further pointless.

Oh please, tell me what didn't I "comprehend". You stated that I said: "you either agree with me or you're a bigot", which I clearly didn't say. Sounds like you're the one with reading comprehension issues.

It is hilarious that you called me a bigot and are now accusing me of taking an insulting tone. No one said you had to respond to my initial post. Perhaps the tone in that was insulting but I find the whole notion of this 'debate' insulting so I guess it fits. You were the one who escalated it by responding at all with your insinuation of me being a bigot.

It's almost like I don't want to engage in the 'debate' at all, imagine that. I'm just pointing out how stupid I think this 'debate' is, i have no wish to actually participate in it. In my opinion it's not a debate at all, it's just disguised as one by people like you so you can skirt the line and troll people.

[Minnie]

Serapth you've quite missed the forest....

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Quite like comparing it to one of the most deadly diseases of all time you might say?

No one has suggested that homosexuality is similar to cancer. People have suggested that both gay or bisexual or transgender (these are clumsy terms but whatever) people (especially young people) and people who suffer from cancer may be vulnerable and in need of support. I'm not sure why you are struggling with that idea.

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Look, and for the last time, I cannot personally identify with being LGBT. There is no proof that it is purely a genetic or biological cause, albeit there are strong cases to support that it is. Wether it's a choice or imbedded in someone's genetic code it would not change my stance on it being something that is not meant to occur.

I agree that we can't conclusively say that sexuality is determined by genetics. I'm sure it is all far more complex than that. However, we can conclusively say that it is not a choice.

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

One is a choice to go against the grain, another is a error in genetic coding. Regardless it's not something someone should be looked down upon over or be made to feel different over. But to ignore that it's not what our species is meant to do is ignorant as well. Sex between men and women is vital to our existence. It's the way it's meant to be. If people choose it or can't help it is irrelevant. And wether it's either one I still feel every single person should be treated the same.

If we are all meant to be strictly heterosexual, how does one explain the persistent presence of homosexuals throughout human existence?

I would also note that so far it appears that homosexuality has not threatened or endangered the continued existence of the human species (all 7 billion of us).

[jayswin]

This hurts bad. I find it fascinating the difference in these discussions between the off topic and hockey forums on cp.

Reading an lgbt related thread in the foi forum in 2015 is like reading an lbgt thread in the off topic forum from 2005. The difference is astounding.

[Serapth]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

It is hilarious that you called me a bigot and are now accusing me of taking an insulting tone.

This is exactly what I mean, and why I mentioned your reading comprehension.

Where did I call you a bigot? Please, quote me, I'll wait here.

The closest you can possibly come is:

That is the problem with these kinds of conversations, when one side is full of people with the argument "you either agree or you are a bigot" and the other side actually has a lot of bigots, the internet doesn't have the nuance to have any sort of meaningful conversation.

If that's the one, I recommend you read it... then re-read it again. Then perhaps one more time for good measure. Again, I'll wait here.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Someone with a genetic condition such as hemophilia is also not the way it's "meant to be". And same as someone who is homosexual they are no lesser or greater than me in value. I've already stated I'm for gay rights, the pride parade and equal treatment. Yet because I won't completely fold to your side of beliefs I am being labeled a bigot and not entitled to my opinion. I'm not sure if you see the irony in that. Regardless this thread has gotten derailed and I am just as guilty of that as anyone else. The issue at hand is the flames prescense at the pride parade and like the people I wound up debating I'm happy they went and proud that they are conveying the message of equal rights.

The bolded was never an issue, it was a thinly veiled attempt at trolling IMO

As to the first part of your post I have to say (at the risk of being labeled a bigot by Serapth): If you think it's a choice to be gay, or if you liken it to a 'condition' or a 'disease'... you are being homophobic. Hopefully that tone was not too insulting for Serapth.

[Serapth]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

The bolded was never an issue, it was a thinly veiled attempt at trolling IMO

As to the first part of your post I have to say (at the risk of being labeled a bigot by Serapth): If you think it's a choice to be gay, or if you liken it to a 'condition' or a 'disease'... you are being homophobic. Hopefully that tone was not too insulting for Serapth.

In other words, you did misunderstand exactly what I said, or attributed something to me that I didn't in fact say, you've realized it but you aren't man or woman enough to own that mistake.

I'll take the sarcasm as an apology as I don't fathom ever receiving a real one from you.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Serapth

This is exactly what I mean, and why I mentioned your reading comprehension.

Where did I call you a bigot? Please, quote me, I'll wait here.

The closest you can possibly come is:



If that's the one, I recommend you read it... then re-read it again. Then perhaps one more time for good measure. Again, I'll wait here.

You insinuated it. You said this directly after quoting my post:

Originally Posted by Serapth

That is the problem with these kinds of conversations, when one side is full of people with the argument "you either agree or you are a bigot" and the other side actually has a lot of bigots, the internet doesn't have the nuance to have any sort of meaningful conversation.

What did you mean by the bolded? Are you actually going to claim you weren't, at least partially, directing that at me?

[jayswin]

Can anyone seriously answer how having an issue with the flames being in the pride parade can possibly be anything but homophobia? I'm racking my brain trying to figure it out but haven't been able to think of anything.

[Red Potato Standing By]

So if they chose the lifestyle does that mean they were at one point heterosexual?

[Serapth]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

You insinuated it. You said this directly after quoting my post:



What did you mean by the bolded? Are you actually going to claim you weren't, at least partially, directing that at me?

and the other side

Think about that for a minute or two. I firmly lump you in the "you either agree or you are a bigot" camp.

Understand now?

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Serapth

In other words, you did misunderstand exactly what I said, or attributed something to me that I didn't in fact say, you've realized it but you aren't man or woman enough to own that mistake.

I'll take the sarcasm as an apology as I don't fathom ever receiving a real one from you.

Let's deconstruct exactly what I said

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

The bolded was never an issue, it was a thinly veiled attempt at trolling IMO

As to the first part of your post I have to say (at the risk of being labeled a bigot by Serapth): If you think it's a choice to be gay, or if you liken it to a 'condition' or a 'disease'... you are being homophobic. Hopefully that tone was not too insulting for Serapth.

The first part, you didn't bring up the whole idea of the Flames not participating (that was Illuminaughty) so I'm thinking you don't have an issue with this. Not sure how this opinion could be construed as "you did misunderstand exactly what I said, or attributed something to me that I didn't in fact say". You probably said something about it along the way but I was giving my opinion on one of the topics of the thread, so please don't take that as an attack.

The second part I did reference you because I legitimately believed there was a chance you were going to jump all over me for calling him out. You've literally accused me of having a insulting tone and insinuated that I'm a bigot, I just wanted to clarify to you that I wasn't either as I opined on Flaming Homer's post.

[Serapth]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

You've literally accused me of having a insulting tone and insinuated that I'm a bigot, I just wanted to clarify to you that I wasn't either as I opined on Flaming Homer's post.

The first I certainly did, and pre edited post was certainly much more insulting. It's neither here nor there in the end, I'm not particularly insulted and I am assuming you aren't either, so we can let sleeping dogs lie if you wish.

On the later point, I didn't insinuate that you were a bigot. I said that what makes these conversations incredibly hard to have is the fact that the opposing side ( not yours, those you oppose ) often is full of bigots. Essentially what I was saying is, one side believes their point is the one true point, while the other side is full of bigots, making any meaningful conversation pointless.