Is homosexuality "normal"?

All the comments you reiterated, remind me well of the reasons I posted them.

So be it.

- - - Updated - - -

Most people realize and accept that 'homosexuality' is normal.

 

Here they are again. My comments villifying gays, according to you.

 

Yes we do. Every community does.

And those conditions, those laws of the community, are not mine. I neither established them nor endorse them, I am pointing out they exist.



​

 

My tune hasn't changed and I am neither reasoning nor negotiating these laws with you. I am observing they exist. If you honestly believe that neighbor has the same right as the community as a whole, I suggest you take that point of law to court.

Point out the law which gives you the right to demand I serve you my dinner and exercise it. Until you do, I plan on ignoring your claim that such a right exists and eating my own dinner. You are equally welcome to also ignore the claim that the community has a right to prohibit you from denying public accommodations to people because they are gay.

I believe my understanding of the law is better than yours. And I am effectively betting $135,000 on my belief. Feel free to do the same.



​

 

What, dixon? Not sure what you're getting at.

BTW, homosexuality is normal.

 

Read the previous posts related to my post, I am rebutting the claim that because a business uses the streets, utilities, etc that the business is a "community asset" and the community has input into how it is run and has an ownership stake.

 

No, you are argueing that the community has a role in ownership of the business. That is not true, and its not fair. Unless you share in the costs and risks of the business - unless you are a full partner - then you and the community have no role in running the business.

 

Reread your previous series of posts, you are arguing that since a business owner uses the streets, utilities, etc. that the community has a claim to his property. You are making the Elizabeth Warren "you did not build that" argument.

Under that exact same logic - you use the infrastructure just like the business owner - the community has a claim to your property, including your dinner.

 

Does not give them the right to break the law. Period.
And you ignored me about what % of gays are causing business owners who break the law grief. 0.0005%? Can you offer up how big a problem this really is?

 

*shrug* Every community limits how businesses within that community may operate. I'm not arguing it, I don't need to. It's simply true.




​

 

The number of agitators or the percent of the total is not relevant, what is relevant is the amount of agitation they generate. There are 1.5 Billion Muslims in the world, nobody cares about them because they are silent, but the 150,000 islamic jihadist fanatics are driving the world crazy despite their small numbers.

I'm sure there is a tight core of LGBT zealots, but they agitate far beyond their numbers and have gathered a huge following inside and outside the LGBT community.

And you once again confuse the "law" with what is Constitutional, what is right, and what is moral. Slavery was once the law, would you support it so zealously as you support the eradication of religious people?

 

Can you ever post without being so dramatic and emotional?
I never hear about these stories of yours and the gay mafia type, just on these emotional message boards. So it's not a big issue, except to those who make it that by being all emotional and dramatic.
And you post the ever famous lie about eradicating religious people. Yet another unjustified emotional response. Garbage actually.

 

I don't think they can. Their position is completely unreasonable their claims are fraudulent, and their beliefs are radical. They are progressive by every definition of the word. They are also attempting to hide that reality to claim to be conservative.

People that argue for this position cannot be rational. They want freedom of speech silenced when it belongs to their detractors.

They even make up fake conspiracies and remain completely unable to name names, it's just anonymous contempt for their existence by people that don't even know who they are.

These far fetched scenarios need to exist so their statements can be correct.

This is the most pathetic form of existential angst there is. There has to be a malevolent force unknown to most attacking their way of life just because they feel attacked. Even if nothing happened to them.

These people cannot be reasoned with, you should mock them. They aren't dangerous if they aren't taken seriously.

 

Then you have nothing to worry about, do you? So why bother replying to my posts? Just go about your business and let the rest of us who are educated deal with the problems.

 

Homosexuality is 'normal'.

People have their personal views and moral values about it, but being gay is both common and normal.

 

So you're going to say that supporting the right for gay American Citizens to get married is the equivalent to slavery and/or the
genocide of all religious people.

You know there is no Academy Award for best melodramatic post on the internet?

 

No, that's your intentional misinterpretation of what my position is and has been in the many posts of mine you have read - you should know better by now.

If gays want to express their emotions to each other and get "married" in some fashion then I do not care. If gays want equal treatment from the govt regarding tax status, social security, etc., then that's fair. I have said that for 2 years - you should know by now.

If gays want to harass, threaten, and intimidate, a person and her family because she does not endorse the gay lifestyle, then I oppose that. When gays want to drive a company out of business, harass the customers and suppliers and employees, force business owners into hiding out of fear for their lives, then I oppose that as well. Obviously you don't have a problem with gays harassing people.

 

Ben Carson says crazy things like that too. (Yet, he's popular. Go figure.)

 

I don't see you posting from a point of being educated. I see you post from a point of emotion and drama. So that's why I bother replying to your posts, on occasion.
I don't have any thing to worry about, and neither do you. Have you personally been impacted by anything gay related?
When folks use things like trying to eradicate religion, that is complete BS and needs to be pointed out.

 

To say it's not a choice, is like saying it is not a choice to murder someone, but rather I was born that way. Just because a person finds themselves attracted to someone or something, does not mean they should act on it. It may be difficult to extract oneself from such attraction's, but not impossible.

 

Very seldom does your posting style show you are only upset with those that threaten, harass, or intimidate. Most everyone is against anyone doing that.
When you say things like gays want to eradicate religion, it doesn't fit with what you stated above. Perhaps if you kept the emotion out of posts, it would come across as you intend. Unless, the emotion is your intent.
For very few want to eradicate religion.
There are radicals in every walk of life.

- - - Updated - - -

Nor should they have to, just because you don't like it. If both people are ok with the attraction to each other, what concern is that of yours.
That you equate it to murder is ridiculous.

 

It's a hard topic, and I didn't equate it to murder, but rather an analogy to the question at hand. And the question is, Is it a choice? The question was not, if both people are attracted to each other what concern is that of mine?
I do not judge people for their sins, for I sin as well.

My opinion to the question is that, yes it is a choice. One could be attracted to a warm piece of pie, that doesn't mean you act on it. The movie American Pie is where I got that analogy. Which is the one I should of used seems how your so quick to jump to conclusions.

 

It's an anonymous message board. I don't know you or your thoughts. So when you write something and then use murder as a for instance, what is one to assume?
And again, so what, if 2 adults are attracted to each other, so what.
Have you ever seen men who are very masculine and high testosterone? How about very effeminate looking? Do you see a difference in the masculinity of men? Is that by choice? No.
And if one is attracted to a piece of pie, why can't they act on it? If they like to eat pie, should they avoid pie their entire life?

Having met people who are gay, having seen people and their actions, I say, NO, it is not a choice. Just like a man's level of masculinity is not a choice.
The world has many many shades of gray.

 

Everything in life is a matter of choice. If a man wants to be masculine he simply hits the gym hard and heavy. If a man wants to be feminine he takes action for the result. Please do not use a high level of education to distort the fact that everything is a choice.

 

Why is normality so fundamentally important to you? Are you saying that anything that is not typical is somehow 'wrong'?