About 50 people killed at gay nightclub in Florida

[peter12]

I believe there are certain group selection benefits to homosexuality. Basically, free protection. Gay relatives still look after their immediate relatives due to kinship-based altruism but don't have any of their own.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by T@T

That sir is not even close to the truth, you don't have to be religious to believe that a male should partner up with a female, I've been an atheist for over 40 years and while I have softened my views and even accepted my friends relationships who are gay with open arms they know a big part of me still finds it "un-natural" for people of the same sex to have sex with each other.

When I say un-natural i'll put it this way, imagine early man in a cave (before religion) now imagine how long a man would live if he put the moves on another man in those days.

And trust me I'm not alone in thinking this way but I'm a minority who'll admit it openly.

There are lots of examples of homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom. Men have been having sex with men that we know of back to ancient Greece (and probably beyond, not sure the research past that). I would not be surprised at all if "cave men" who had gone on a month long hunt comforted each other and engaged in sex. This isn't a new concept, and it wasn't always shunned and forced in the closet like it was due to religion. In many ancient cultures it was just as natural as hetero sex.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by T@T

When I say un-natural i'll put it this way, imagine early man in a cave (before religion) now imagine how long a man would live if he put the moves on another man in those days.



And trust me I'm not alone in thinking this way but I'm a minority who'll admit it openly.

Wait, do you think males coupling up or having sex with each other is a new thing? Or reserved solely for modern society?

There are tribes that exist today where you have to perform fellatio on another man before you're considered one yourself.

I don't think you understand the role of sexuality prior to modern society. Men have been having sex with each other since men existed.

[peter12]

Homosexuality has probably never been so controversial as it has become in our era.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

This isn't a new concept, and it wasn't always shunned and forced in the closet like it was due to religion. In many ancient cultures it was just as natural as hetero sex.

True, with the proviso that it didn't interfere with a man's (or woman's) duty to marry, raise children, and carry on the family line. And in some cultures (like the Hellenic and Roman cultures, and in the medieval Arab world) it was considered okay to play around when you were a young man, and maybe take the dominant sexual role as an adult, but shameful and very low to be the one on the, uh, receiving end.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

True, with the proviso that it didn't interfere with a man's (or woman's) duty to marry, raise children, and carry on the family line. And in some cultures (like the Hellenic and Roman cultures, and in the medieval Arab world) it was considered okay to play around when you were a young man, and maybe take the dominant sexual role as an adult, but shameful and very low to be the one on the, uh, receiving end.

The term homosexual didn't even gain prominence until the late 19th century in America.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

There are lots of examples of homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom. Men have been having sex with men that we know of back to ancient Greece (and probably beyond, not sure the research past that). I would not be surprised at all if "cave men" who had gone on a month long hunt comforted each other and engaged in sex. This isn't a new concept, and it wasn't always shunned and forced in the closet like it was due to religion. In many ancient cultures it was just as natural as hetero sex.

Yup it wasn't a good day for the Roman Emperor unless he went out with the boys and plowed some lowly stable boy and then went home and took a tour through his concubines.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Buster

The polling data on Muslim intolerance of LGBT communities is overwhelming in Islamic countries. Among Muslims in western countries, it is closer to 50/50.

This is a completely unacceptable situation.

So, I would hesitate to blame this crime on "extremism" as the environment of intolerance for gays in Muslim communities is mainstream, not extreme. This action would perhaps not be conducted by all Muslims, but the the community as a whole is certainly culpable on account of the environment of intolerance.

Is America really all that much more advanced? Just last year there was a proposed "Sodomite Suppression Act" (which was struck down, obviously). But regardless, there are still people who live in the US who were attempting to make it legal to murder people for being gay. There are 300 million Americans, and a tiny number think it's okay to murder gay people (though I guess they at least realized they needed a legal way to do it first). There are a billion Muslims, and a tiny number think it's okay to murder gay people.

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Man it feels like I'm living in a dream world. The U.S just recently passed a law that was fought in court just to give homosexuals equal rights did they not? The United States government is coming around, lets now hope the citizens follow suit as their is still clearly 40% of Americans who don't agree homosexuals are equal. Sure they're not throwing them off roofs but there is still hatred in at least 100 million Americans toward gays.

The US passed a law to allow gay people to marry, yes. However, gay people still aren't a protected class of people in many states--including Florida--when it comes to non-discriminatory practices regarding housing, employment, etc. For example--if one of the survivors of the Pulse shooting was outed, and their employer was anti-LGBT? He could be fired, the next day, and he would have absolutely no recourse, because in the state of Florida, it's legal to fire someone solely for being gay.

Within two days of spouting on social media how they were "behind the LGBT community and Orlando," Republicans in the House blocked a vote that would prevent LGBT discrimination by federal contractors.

The US might not be in the business of actively murdering people for being homosexual, but they're not concerned if said homosexuals have somewhere to live, a place to work, safety to go about their everyday lives, etc.

We're more advanced as a nation in that we don't actively advocate for the murder of them, but make no mistake, the anti-LGBT rhetoric in this country is still pretty potent.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The term homosexual didn't even gain prominence until the late 19th century in America.

Neither did heterosexual. I think you could torture logic into believing homophobia has nothing to do with same sex marriage opposition. But the true test is whether you believe homosexuality is a sin or not. No getting around that bigotry.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The term homosexual didn't even gain prominence until the late 19th century in America.

People used all sorts of euphemisms before that to refer to their bachelor uncle, or those old maids who lived together. It's not as though no distinctions were drawn.

The point I'm trying to make is that while same-sex sex acts may have been more widely tolerated historically, openly living with another man instead of having a traditional family was another thing altogether. What you did for kicks was your own business, but your role as a husband and father was a public concern in pretty much every society in history. And not just for religious reasons. Marriage has always concerned itself with property, legitimacy, and inheritance, and states have always had an interest in ensuring a supply of new farmers, soldiers, and taxpayers.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Neither did heterosexual. I think you could torture logic into believing homophobia has nothing to do with same sex marriage opposition. But the true test is whether you believe homosexuality is a sin or not. No getting around that bigotry.

Of course there is. As a Christian, I believe that homosexual promiscuity is just as sinful as heterosexual promiscuity. You could find lots of homosexuals who agree with me that the depravity of the bath-houses lead to the long-term decay of their community by putting bodily satisfaction over social obligation.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

People used all sorts of euphemisms before that to refer to their bachelor uncle, or those old maids who lived together. It's not as though no distinctions were drawn.

The point I'm trying to make is that while same-sex sex acts may have been more widely tolerated historically, openly living with another man instead of having a traditional family was another thing altogether. What you did for kicks was your own business, but your role as a husband and father was a public concern in pretty much every society in history.

Maybe.

James Buchanan was a likely homosexual and was basically accepted as such while he was the President of the United States. It wasn't a secret. He lived with another man.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by peter12

Of course there is. As a Christian, I believe that homosexual promiscuity is just as sinful as heterosexual promiscuity. You could find lots of homosexuals who agree with me that the depravity of the bath-houses lead to the long-term decay of their community by putting bodily satisfaction over social obligation.

There are some wonderful bathhouses in Vancouver.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by peter12

Of course there is. As a Christian, I believe that homosexual promiscuity is just as sinful as heterosexual promiscuity. You could find lots of homosexuals who agree with me that the depravity of the bath-houses lead to the long-term decay of their community by putting bodily satisfaction over social obligation.

But that's not what I'm talking about is it? Is a monogamous homosexual relationship sinful? Because if you think it is you're a bigot.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by peter12

Of course there is. As a Christian, I believe that homosexual promiscuity is just as sinful as heterosexual promiscuity. You could find lots of homosexuals who agree with me that the depravity of the bath-houses lead to the long-term decay of their community by putting bodily satisfaction over social obligation.

What is their social obligation?

[Zulu29]

I find the rationale of "I don't like gays marrying or having sex with each other" completely ridiculous. I'd tell anyone who doesn't like it to mine their own f'ing business. Maybe it's because I have gay relatives but I just don't see the issue.

[CliffFletcher]

It's also worth pointing out that Julius Caesar fiercely denied allegations of same-sex affairs made against him, in particular that he had 'played the woman' to the eastern king Mithridates. That wouldn't have been necessary, and his enemies wouldn't have promoted the rumours in the first place, if there wasn't politically-damaging shame attached to it. The Romans regarded boy love as a foreign Greek habit, more proof that they weren't cool with hit.

So no, public sanctions against homosexuality aren't a recent or a peculiarly Christian practice.

[MRCboicgy]

I could also argue that the marginalization forced places like bathouses, truck stops, dark room sex clubs, etc.
The fact is getting married and settled down for many gays wasn't even an option because they had only one place they could go - and it was seedy. This is a generational change, gay kids today have more options in front of them in how they can live their lives. Even me, only a decade out of college and barely in my 30s now, still can vaguely remember where just being able to get with another guy was an accomplishment, never mind dating, settling down, etc.

Yes the promiscuity still exists, and yes, there's still a big cultural part of that - but this will change because we aren't being forced into the closet by people hiding behind their religion or whatever. By people who only think that being opposed to gay marriage is a right of theirs and that they can dictate how we - how I live.

I can tell you, get out of my bedroom, get out of my life. What I do does not affect you and if God does judge me, that's up to him not you.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

But that's not what I'm talking about is it? Is a monogamous homosexual relationship sinful? Because if you think it is you're a bigot.

Oh get over using the b-word, and get off your high horse.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

I could also argue that the marginalization forced places like bathouses, truck stops, dark room sex clubs, etc.
The fact is getting married and settled down for many gays wasn't even an option because they had only one place they could go - and it was seedy. This is a generational change, gay kids today have more options in front of them in how they can live their lives. Even me, only a decade out of college and barely in my 30s now, still can vaguely remember where just being able to get with another guy was an accomplishment, never mind dating, settling down, etc.

Yes the promiscuity still exists, and yes, there's still a big cultural part of that - but this will change because we aren't being forced into the closet by people hiding behind their religion or whatever. By people who only think that being opposed to gay marriage is a right of theirs

I can tell you, get out of my bedroom, get out of my life. What I do does not affect you and if God does judge me, that's up to him not you.

If you go back, and read what people like Larry Kramer were saying in the 1980s, you will see that this isn't really true.