Rise of the "HomoCon"

[Annihilia]

Liberty for all*!


*Excluding:
Drug users
Alcoholics
Young people
Homosexuals
The unchaste
Prostitutes
Atheists
Agnostics
Women
Muslims
Pagans
Jews (especially)
Hindus
Blacks
Latinos
Bankers

 

[Keller1967]

Liberty for all*!


*Excluding:
Drug users
Alcoholics
Young people
Homosexuals
The unchaste
Prostitutes
Atheists
Agnostics
Women
Muslims
Pagans
Jews (especially)
Hindus
Blacks
Latinos
Bankers

lol I'm like 7 things on that list

 

[MelissaWV]

In this thread you may feel like you are on the defensive but in society people who don't particularly like casual sex are on the defensive, called gay, laughed at, etc.

People are asking others to come clean about how if they are against casual sex are the a virgin? Certainly if they live true to their beliefs they should be?

The thing is being a virgin is a mark of shame now, it is the new scarlet letter, why would they would to say that?

Nah. I know plenty of virgins. Of course, calling you "gay" only has power if you care... You said earlier you aren't that into it. There are plenty of people like that. Hell, there are people that don't like ice cream. It'd be hypocritical to not accept that some people just aren't into the same things I am.

I'm not trying to convince sofia, or you, that I'm some angelic holy person... but as I posted earlier, sofia's post was full of logical inconsistencies/ommissions. I do the same thing to everyone presenting that kind of argument, even when they agree with my point of view

I have a friend who answers the "OMG you're still a virgin? Ha!" comments with "Yeah. I haven't found someone really worth it yet." then they look the rude person up and down, and continue "Nope, I still haven't."

 

[MelissaWV]

lol I'm like 7 things on that list

Woohoo I'm only four!

 

[NoHero]

I have a much bigger problem with the violence in pop culture and media. Jason Statham movies, UFC, and gangsta culture are much more degrading to society than the Bravo channel. Kids cannot turn gay, but they can become violent if its socially acceptable. People seem to have no problem with their kids watching watching countless violent programs, though I am sure there is a correlation between these aspects of society and the militant, gung ho for war mentality of this country. Consensual sex between adults results usually with only happiness.

 

[Annihilia]

lol I'm like 7 things on that list

No surprise. You sure reek of a filthy young drug-abusing homosexual black Hindu banker who moonlights as a prostitute.

 

[Keller1967]

Nah. I know plenty of virgins. Of course, calling you "gay" only has power if you care... You said earlier you aren't that into it. There are plenty of people like that. Hell, there are people that don't like ice cream. It'd be hypocritical to not accept that some people just aren't into the same things I am.

I'm not trying to convince sofia, or you, that I'm some angelic holy person... but as I posted earlier, sofia's post was full of logical inconsistencies/ommissions. I do the same thing to everyone presenting that kind of argument, even when they agree with my point of view

I have a friend who answers the "OMG you're still a virgin? Ha!" comments with "Yeah. I haven't found someone really worth it yet." then they look the rude person up and down, and continue "Nope, I still haven't."

I agree to a certain point, but eventually I become isolated because of it. I can deal with being an outcast, it's still not something enjoyable.

 

[Keller1967]

I have a much bigger problem with the violence in pop culture and media. Jason Statham movies, UFC, and gangsta culture are much more degrading to society than the Bravo channel. Kids cannot turn gay, but they can become violent if its socially acceptable. People seem to have no problem with their kids watching watching countless violent programs, though I am sure there is a correlation between these aspects of society and the militant, gung ho for war mentality of this country. Consensual sex between adults results usually with only happiness.

I agree, I don't like the mass violence either. When you combine my distaste of casual sex and violence I pretty much hate going to the movies or watching TV just because of those two issues.

 

[Krugerrand]

Of course people should be free to steer their lives how they want. I;m not saying any type of coercion should be used to bring about a moral society.

Most people are followers. Most people shape their actions based on the opinion of others. If more people were standing up and saying divorce is unacceptable in all but the most extreme situations, then others would be less likely to get a divorce because they wouldn't want their community to have a negative opinion of them.

A number of posts have touched on the approach I will now take - and that is problems with public schools. (There are some good threads in the education forum that discuss how the public school system is designed to breed acceptance and tramp down the will to protest. A good highlight is Peg Luksik's talk posted in this thread.)

Consider years back (and not necessarily all that many). People were ostracized and often ridiculed for behaviors such as promiscuity and homosexuality. Regan was almost dropped as a candidate because he was divorced. Even in the last election divorce was discussed as a strike against a candidate. Generally, men got more of a free ride on the promiscuity side of things ... but not entirely.

The ultimate crime in a public school now is to bully somebody. I'm not trying to condone the bullying, ridicule and ostracizing of anybody. Nor would I condone a violation of another person's liberty. Still, I do believe that these were NATURAL human develop techniques that helped maintain a social framework beneficial to human society.

Dogs are pack animals. They have instinctive traits because of that. Those traits can be very useful from a pet perspective. Those traits can also be dangerous. It's not good - it's not bad ... it's what dogs are. Humans are social animals, too. I see childhood bullying like two dogs fighting for the alpha role. It's just human.

Yes, much of what people claim today as evidence of social decay have also happened for a long time in human history. However it was kept in check by social norms and pressures. What is different is the erosion of social norms and pressures. I'm not advocating these be established by government decree. In fact, I think government decree is the prime force in their erosion - as early as public grade school.

One example to cite is the pressure for an unmarried pregnant couple to marry. Years back (heck, there's a key biblical example), there was pressure for a man to marry the girl if she was pregnant. [Some will point to examples where that did not turn out so well. I'm not really trying to argue that every instance of pressure to conform to social norms is the best answer. Still, I do know many shotgun weddings that led to very happy healthy families.] That social norm has been seriously eroded. Government influence has been key to that erosion. That erosion starts in the public school system.

Why is homosexuality is a political issue? (Rhetorical, read on for the answer) It's the government force for society to be accepting of it. The danger is not a behavior that is new to human society now. The danger is the destruction of the ability of society to impose social norms. That danger is sponsored and implemented by the force of government.

 

[constituent]

2. & 3. Moral standards that were in place for thousands of years? Monogamous marriage for emotional reasons certainly isn't one of those. Marriages were about economic security for children, power plays for families, and spreading one's seed. Promiscuous, polygamous unions were all the rage, including sex out of wedlock (wives and concubines were both common within households), and the only difference was the legal and social status of the woman in question.

yea, where all the concubines at?

wtf kinda sorry excuse for a degenerate society is this anyway?

 

[constituent]

Woohoo I'm only four!

I wonder if he meant currently?

 

[zach]

Whew, I was getting worried about not having another gay morality thread...

However, the op has quite an interesting subject to discuss.

 

[johngr]

A number of posts have touched on the approach I will now take - and that is problems with public schools. (There are some good threads in the education forum that discuss how the public school system is designed to breed acceptance and tramp down the will to protest. A good highlight is Peg Luksik's talk posted in this thread.)

Consider years back (and not necessarily all that many). People were ostracized and often ridiculed for behaviors such as promiscuity and homosexuality. Regan was almost dropped as a candidate because he was divorced. Even in the last election divorce was discussed as a strike against a candidate. Generally, men got more of a free ride on the promiscuity side of things ... but not entirely.

The ultimate crime in a public school now is to bully somebody. I'm not trying to condone the bullying, ridicule and ostracizing of anybody. Nor would I condone a violation of another person's liberty. Still, I do believe that these were NATURAL human develop techniques that helped maintain a social framework beneficial to human society.

Dogs are pack animals. They have instinctive traits because of that. Those traits can be very useful from a pet perspective. Those traits can also be dangerous. It's not good - it's not bad ... it's what dogs are. Humans are social animals, too. I see childhood bullying like two dogs fighting for the alpha role. It's just human.

Yes, much of what people claim today as evidence of social decay have also happened for a long time in human history. However it was kept in check by social norms and pressures. What is different is the erosion of social norms and pressures. I'm not advocating these be established by government decree. In fact, I think government decree is the prime force in their erosion - as early as public grade school.

One example to cite is the pressure for an unmarried pregnant couple to marry. Years back (heck, there's a key biblical example), there was pressure for a man to marry the girl if she was pregnant. [Some will point to examples where that did not turn out so well. I'm not really trying to argue that every instance of pressure to conform to social norms is the best answer. Still, I do know many shotgun weddings that led to very happy healthy families.] That social norm has been seriously eroded. Government influence has been key to that erosion. That erosion starts in the public school system.

Why is homosexuality is a political issue? (Rhetorical, read on for the answer) It's the government force for society to be accepting of it. The danger is not a behavior that is new to human society now. The danger is the destruction of the ability of society to impose social norms. That danger is sponsored and implemented by the force of government.

I don't see why you people are so interested in what me and my dog do in the privacy of my own home. I'm am tired of all you theriophobes discriminating against me and not allowing me a platform at conservative venues.

But you just wait. After the right people have done enough agitating on our behalf, we theriosexuals are going to have "pride" parades, a constitutional amendment stopping all the discrimination against us, guaranteeing us government jobs, and making it a hate crime to hurt our feelings and a seat at any political table we want to be represen....

Oh, wait a minute. Wrong thread.

 

[Annihilia]

I don't see why you people are so interested in what me and my dog do in the privacy of my own home. I'm am tired of all you theriophobes discriminating against me and not allowing me a platform at conservative venues.

But you just wait. After the right people have done enough agitating, we theriosexuals are going to have "pride" parades, an amendment stopping all the discrimination against us, guaranteeing us government jobs, and making it a hate crime to hurt our feelings and a seat at any political table we want to be represen....

Oh, wait a minute. Wrong thread.

If your dog is a consenting human being, then I see no issues.

 

[__27__]

If your dog is a consenting human being, then I see no issues.

I agree. I have no problem what two consenting beings do, I'd like to see how you can prove that an animal with a lack of rational thought gave their consent. If there is no consent, it's an initiation on your behalf on an unwilling participant.

 

[__27__]

That said the frothing homophobia displayed by some in this thread only furthers the sad feeling that RPF is drifting closer by the day to mainline GOP.

 

[squarepusher]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Pinyan

 

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

I agree. I have no problem what two consenting beings do, I'd like to see how you can prove that an animal with a lack of rational thought gave their consent. If there is no consent, it's an initiation on your behalf on an unwilling participant.

Oh, I'm sure someone will claim their mutt gave them a 'come hither' look. Just remember folks, Mutts before Sluts!

 

[JamesButabi]

So whos god is the right god again? Which rules are the right rules? Which people should I hate that dont harm others? This religion thing can get so confusing!

 

[MelissaWV]

I forgot to add that what we consider incest was rather common in that "thousands of years" of superior morality. Hell, King Tut was the product of 2-3 generations of brother/sister marriage, and married his sister.

Consult the nearest Bible for all sorts of nice examples.