The Problem With Homosexuality

[Eternal Mangekyo Sojobo]

I totally agree .

 

[Aim64C]

Homosexuality has been told to be the cause of chemical imbalance in the brain. While babies are being form, not when they come out. Studies have been done to prove this, even brain studies show how homosexuals have different brain wiring than a normal straight people.
There's so much data to support this

I see you're new to medical science.

There is very little in medical research, let alone neurological research, that is 'proven.'

There is evidence that hormonal spikes during pregnancy can influence the sexual preference of a child - but, as always, neural plasticity returns to illustrate that there are no such things as absolutes in neurological development.

You must be registered for see links

"Doidge also tells of a woman whose sense of balance was destroyed by an antibiotic, making it almost impossible for her to walk. She regained her balance, however, with the help of the late University of Wisconsin neuroscientist Paul Bach-y-Rita, who devised a helmet that sent signals about the orientation of her head to a device on her tongue. By learning to keep the signals centered on her tongue, the woman trained her brain to recognize when her head was upright.

Until now, the evidence attributing such dramatic changes to neuroplasticity has been largely circumstantial, but fMRI is producing vivid images that show neuroplasticity in action. In 2005, for example, Swedish investigators used diffusion tensor imaging—a variation of fMRI done with the same equipment—to demonstrate distinct brain changes caused by extensive piano practice.

And Just plans to investigate further the type of brain changes he observed in the dyslexic children he studied. He believes fMRI evidence of neuroplasticity can be used to diagnose dyslexia and other brain problems, and to test proposed therapies.
- See more at:

You must be registered for see links

"

You must be registered for see links

"The Sea Gypsies, or Moken, are a seafaring people who spend a great deal of their time in boats off the coast of Myanmar and Thailand, have unusual underwater vision -- twice as good as Europeans. This has enabled Mokens to gather shellfish at great depths without the aid of scuba gear. How do the Moken do this? They constrict their pupils by 22 percent. How do they learn to do this? Is it genetic? Neuroscientists argue that anyone can learn this trick. Simply put, the brain orders the body to adapt to suite its needs. "

There is much we do not know about the brain and its development.

but then people like you exist. Who throw away this and stick to your ignorance.

Or, worse, people believe they are enlightened enough to be ignorant.

As I said, Homosexuality is found in other species, same *** reproduction too. Also

So is murder, fratricide, incest, and rape.

Just because my moral conscience finds no problem with the idea of disposing of individuals I deem to be a threat at the first opportunity does not mean society will find such actions tolerable.

Though, I'll be honest, I just don't like you and want to be difficult.

Bigot: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

You fit the definition of bigot. I'm not unfairly judging a "fair" opinion to begin with. What you have said is nothing but trash. Also you're the one strongly and "unfairly" disliking mine, plus hating on a group of people. Lol

The logic you are using to support your behavior is "I have more people who think my view is correct, therefor I'm going to call you stupid and a biggot for not tolerating the behavior of these people over here."

Now, I'm sure you'll insist otherwise. Educated stupidity is the worst variety of stupidity as it confuses itself with intelligence - but such is the world we live in.

As for radical, You fit it, not myself because you grew up believing something told by ignorant people, while I will not go into details about my personal life to why I have my own beliefs.

"You're a radical because you believe stupid people."

Well.

Can't argue with that logic.

A radical simply means someone who represents an uncommonly held belief or, in other cases, a very pure/intense adherence to a certain belief/idea. While our society typically condemns being a 'radical' - it is simply the instinct of the mindless mass to try and force people to be 'normal.'

Basically, it is the establishment of a doctrine of false tolerance that polices thoughts.

The only thing that is required of other people in terms of tolerance is to not do harm to each other. That is it. I don't have to like you. I may hate your guts and dance at your funeral - but so long as we live in this country, we agree to tolerate each other so as to not harm each other. You can hate me, I can hate you - just so long as we understand that we do not use force against each other.

Anyways, keep your opinion because at the end of the day it's simply wrong. I can throw you facts all day for the rest of your life and you will continue to believe your opinion. I wouldn't doubt if this made you even more attached to your belief.

And what opinion is that?

I was raised by a vietnam war veteran, my father. I was not allowed to blame other people for my problems, and I was not allowed to evade responsibility for my actions. Everything I did was because I chose to do it - and "he made me" was not acceptable.

My father did the best he could to pass on to us the lessons he learned from his father and from his emotional struggles through war (and the return to a normal society). One of the most crucial of those was the fact that no one 'makes' me feel or do anything. I allow them to influence my feelings or my behavior. I am ultimately in control of myself and am always fully capable of making my own decisions (and am always accountable to those decisions, even when I choose to not take control of myself).

And this is something I have personally experienced to be true. The research also supports this same lesson.

Therefor - when I see someone arguing "I was born a homosexual" - I don't buy it for a second. They allow themselves to be a homosexual in the same sense that I allow myself to be a heterosexual. They may not have full control over everything that attempts to influence their life - but they are ultimately responsible for allowing it to influence who they are.

Now - that is their decision (whether they understand that they are making it, or not - the number of people who do understand self-control is less than one in a thousand in our society... so the odds are against their being cognizant of their choices). I can judge that decision as right or wrong. Wise or unwise.

Just as I judge your decision to commit adultery, ingest a drug, or impregnate your unwed girlfriend as wrong.

It doesn't mean I'm going to hold myself superior to you because of that decision. We all make mistakes. But I still see you as accountable for your actions and there's nothing you're going to do to change that view. No one makes you do anything. No one makes you feel anything.

We live in a society that attempts to scrub us of our identity. It insists that there is always some other cause of our problems. There is an endless cycle of blame and we (the individual) are never a part of it. It tells us that we are born to be certain ways. It convinces us that happiness and pleasure are the same thing. It tells us to live in the moment as opposed to live as who we choose to be.

There's really a simple test to determine if people are self-aware and have truly developed an identity.

A person who has failed to develop an identity will chase comments with emotions like an animal acting on instinct. The easiest to provoke them with is anger. The second easiest to provoke them with is sympathy. You can lead a person without an identity around all over the place - 'trolling' the living shit out of them and getting them to react with nearly endless amounts of anger.

Pretty much describes most of society - though some of them eventually hit a wall.

A person with an identity will only rarely react in the manner human instinct would suggest they would. They react according to how they see their reaction - to how they see their person and character. They are masters of their own decisions.

That doesn't mean that acting according to instinct is always wrong - but that someone who is so easily goaded by their instinct has no character - no identity.

That is an environment beneficial to politicians - warlords. They convince people that there is an enemy and rally them to destroy that enemy. They blame problems endlessly on some other group or person - never address that the individual might have problems. And if you think about it - once you hold the individual accountable and decree him/her responsible; the politician has very little power. If people are accountable for their own decisions, then they are to be responsible for their own decisions and the outcome thereof. The politician has a more difficult time convincing people that following their lead will produce a desired outcome.

It's actually funny - because that is the precise meaning behind Infinite Tsukuyomi. It represents the 'sleeping' state of the 'divine self.' The day-to-day 'grind' and 'lull' causes the self to waver into sleep where their identity is scrubbed and erased. The circle (moon) represents Tsukuyomi - the god who rules over the mind when we are asleep. The square (sun) represents the goddess Amaterasu who rules over the waking state. The triangle (stars) represents Susano'o - the swirling tempest whose shimmering lights in the sky guide the way back to wakefulness (from when stars were used as navigation).

You must be registered for see images

The moon is the circle (spiral) at the center. This also represents the action of Taiji and Wuji to create the cycling of Yin and Yang within Taoism. This produces the Four Movements (Shao Yin, Tai Yin, Shao Yang, Tai Yang) - which produce the Eight Trigrams, Bagua, or the eight elemental phases.

There's actually some deep shit in Naruto.

I don't watch tv, I don't like politicians or the Media, I don't base my judgement on their shit. My mind is much more complex to accept bullshit, but yours isn't.

Perhaps once you learn how to speak, I'll take you a bit more seriously.

The true mark of intelligence is the realization that you take, on faith, the validity of your own observations.

In short - it means that you accept the possibility that you may be basing your own conclusions off of merely another variety of bullshit.

"Oh, well that means you can be full of bullshit!"

Yes. I appreciate your concern for my ability to apply introspective thought to my own statements, though. We can all be full of bullshit. Like I said - we don't have to like each other. We just have to agree not to whack each other over the head or dig in each others' pockets at gunpoint.

 

[Scooby Doo]

Spoiler

Isee you're new to medical science.

There is very little in medical research, let alone neurological research, that is 'proven.'

There is evidence that hormonal spikes during pregnancy can influence the sexual preference of a child - but, as always, neural plasticity returns to illustrate that there are no such things as absolutes in neurological development.

You must be registered for see links

"Doidge also tells of a woman whose sense of balance was destroyed by an antibiotic, making it almost impossible for her to walk. She regained her balance, however, with the help of the late University of Wisconsin neuroscientist Paul Bach-y-Rita, who devised a helmet that sent signals about the orientation of her head to a device on her tongue. By learning to keep the signals centered on her tongue, the woman trained her brain to recognize when her head was upright.

Until now, the evidence attributing such dramatic changes to neuroplasticity has been largely circumstantial, but fMRI is producing vivid images that show neuroplasticity in action. In 2005, for example, Swedish investigators used diffusion tensor imaging—a variation of fMRI done with the same equipment—to demonstrate distinct brain changes caused by extensive piano practice.

And Just plans to investigate further the type of brain changes he observed in the dyslexic children he studied. He believes fMRI evidence of neuroplasticity can be used to diagnose dyslexia and other brain problems, and to test proposed therapies.
- See more at:

You must be registered for see links

"

You must be registered for see links

"The Sea Gypsies, or Moken, are a seafaring people who spend a great deal of their time in boats off the coast of Myanmar and Thailand, have unusual underwater vision -- twice as good as Europeans. This has enabled Mokens to gather shellfish at great depths without the aid of scuba gear. How do the Moken do this? They constrict their pupils by 22 percent. How do they learn to do this? Is it genetic? Neuroscientists argue that anyone can learn this trick. Simply put, the brain orders the body to adapt to suite its needs. "

There is much we do not know about the brain and its development.



Or, worse, people believe they are enlightened enough to be ignorant.



So is murder, fratricide, incest, and rape.

Just because my moral conscience finds no problem with the idea of disposing of individuals I deem to be a threat at the first opportunity does not mean society will find such actions tolerable.

Though, I'll be honest, I just don't like you and want to be difficult.



The logic you are using to support your behavior is "I have more people who think my view is correct, therefor I'm going to call you stupid and a biggot for not tolerating the behavior of these people over here."

Now, I'm sure you'll insist otherwise. Educated stupidity is the worst variety of stupidity as it confuses itself with intelligence - but such is the world we live in.



"You're a radical because you believe stupid people."

Well.

Can't argue with that logic.

A radical simply means someone who represents an uncommonly held belief or, in other cases, a very pure/intense adherence to a certain belief/idea. While our society typically condemns being a 'radical' - it is simply the instinct of the mindless mass to try and force people to be 'normal.'

Basically, it is the establishment of a doctrine of false tolerance that polices thoughts.

The only thing that is required of other people in terms of tolerance is to not do harm to each other. That is it. I don't have to like you. I may hate your guts and dance at your funeral - but so long as we live in this country, we agree to tolerate each other so as to not harm each other. You can hate me, I can hate you - just so long as we understand that we do not use force against each other.



And what opinion is that?

I was raised by a vietnam war veteran, my father. I was not allowed to blame other people for my problems, and I was not allowed to evade responsibility for my actions. Everything I did was because I chose to do it - and "he made me" was not acceptable.

My father did the best he could to pass on to us the lessons he learned from his father and from his emotional struggles through war (and the return to a normal society). One of the most crucial of those was the fact that no one 'makes' me feel or do anything. I allow them to influence my feelings or my behavior. I am ultimately in control of myself and am always fully capable of making my own decisions (and am always accountable to those decisions, even when I choose to not take control of myself).

And this is something I have personally experienced to be true. The research also supports this same lesson.

Therefor - when I see someone arguing "I was born a homosexual" - I don't buy it for a second. They allow themselves to be a homosexual in the same sense that I allow myself to be a heterosexual. They may not have full control over everything that attempts to influence their life - but they are ultimately responsible for allowing it to influence who they are.

Now - that is their decision (whether they understand that they are making it, or not - the number of people who do understand self-control is less than one in a thousand in our society... so the odds are against their being cognizant of their choices). I can judge that decision as right or wrong. Wise or unwise.

Just as I judge your decision to commit adultery, ingest a drug, or impregnate your unwed girlfriend as wrong.

It doesn't mean I'm going to hold myself superior to you because of that decision. We all make mistakes. But I still see you as accountable for your actions and there's nothing you're going to do to change that view. No one makes you do anything. No one makes you feel anything.

We live in a society that attempts to scrub us of our identity. It insists that there is always some other cause of our problems. There is an endless cycle of blame and we (the individual) are never a part of it. It tells us that we are born to be certain ways. It convinces us that happiness and pleasure are the same thing. It tells us to live in the moment as opposed to live as who we choose to be.

There's really a simple test to determine if people are self-aware and have truly developed an identity.

A person who has failed to develop an identity will chase comments with emotions like an animal acting on instinct. The easiest to provoke them with is anger. The second easiest to provoke them with is sympathy. You can lead a person without an identity around all over the place - 'trolling' the living shit out of them and getting them to react with nearly endless amounts of anger.

Pretty much describes most of society - though some of them eventually hit a wall.

A person with an identity will only rarely react in the manner human instinct would suggest they would. They react according to how they see their reaction - to how they see their person and character. They are masters of their own decisions.

That doesn't mean that acting according to instinct is always wrong - but that someone who is so easily goaded by their instinct has no character - no identity.

That is an environment beneficial to politicians - warlords. They convince people that there is an enemy and rally them to destroy that enemy. They blame problems endlessly on some other group or person - never address that the individual might have problems. And if you think about it - once you hold the individual accountable and decree him/her responsible; the politician has very little power. If people are accountable for their own decisions, then they are to be responsible for their own decisions and the outcome thereof. The politician has a more difficult time convincing people that following their lead will produce a desired outcome.

It's actually funny - because that is the precise meaning behind Infinite Tsukuyomi. It represents the 'sleeping' state of the 'divine self.' The day-to-day 'grind' and 'lull' causes the self to waver into sleep where their identity is scrubbed and erased. The circle (moon) represents Tsukuyomi - the god who rules over the mind when we are asleep. The square (sun) represents the goddess Amaterasu who rules over the waking state. The triangle (stars) represents Susano'o - the swirling tempest whose shimmering lights in the sky guide the way back to wakefulness (from when stars were used as navigation).

You must be registered for see images

The moon is the circle (spiral) at the center. This also represents the action of Taiji and Wuji to create the cycling of Yin and Yang within Taoism. This produces the Four Movements (Shao Yin, Tai Yin, Shao Yang, Tai Yang) - which produce the Eight Trigrams, Bagua, or the eight elemental phases.

There's actually some deep shit in Naruto.



Perhaps once you learn how to speak, I'll take you a bit more seriously.

The true mark of intelligence is the realization that you take, on faith, the validity of your own observations.

In short - it means that you accept the possibility that you may be basing your own conclusions off of merely another variety of bullshit.

"Oh, well that means you can be full of bullshit!"

Yes. I appreciate your concern for my ability to apply introspective thought to my own statements, though. We can all be full of bullshit. Like I said - we don't have to like each other. We just have to agree not to whack each other over the head or dig in each others' pockets at gunpoint

.

And why couldn't they choose to be homosexual? If you say it's wrong, aren't you just trying to force them to be normal?

And if someone can't suppress his/her sexuality, they have no identity? Alright.

If you are so full in control of yourself, please choose to be homosexual from now or refrain from posting.

 

[slimreaper]

If you truly know right from wrong, then you should know that there is nothing wrong with anything you do that does not adversely effect others in any way. Your sexuality is yours and yours alone and it is wrong for anyone to pass judgement on you because of it. And as for your 'clear argument':

1.) Are you saying that nature makes mistakes? Homosexual people do not exist outside of nature, do they?
a.) Immortality is a privilege, not a duty
b.) The **** cavity both lubricates itself and stretches during defecation, I'm sure it would do that during **** ***, too
c.) What if the female simply does not want to be with a man? That's wrong because you don't agree?

And as for force-feeding, nobody seems to complain about all the Christian and Catholic overtones in mainstream media. Christmas specials, Easter specials, WWJD, and so on. This has been going on much longer than the "Gay is normal" campaign and those who didn't like it simply changed the channel (back when there were way less to choose from than today). Your opinion is your opinion, and there's nothing wrong with it; just so long as you remember that.

Are you saying racism isn't wrong? Racism doesn't adversely affect anyone, yet it is widely reguarded as wrong.

And before you say it does, the word you are thinking of is discrimination, not racism.

I do however like your respect for differing opinions unlike certain others here

 

[kuchiyosenojutsuironmaidn]

Are you saying racism isn't wrong? Racism doesn't adversely affect anyone, yet it is widely reguarded as wrong.

And before you say it does, the word you are thinking of is discrimination, not racism.

I do however like your respect for differing opinions unlike certain others here

Racism is not wrong. It does not hurt people at all. But, like you said, discrimination is. The problem

is that people want to think for others. Kinda like the way you assumed that I wouldn't know the

difference between racism and racial discrimination. No worries, though. I just believe if we let others

think for themselves, we'll have more mind-power focusing on our own betterment. Racist comments

may be considered verbal assault, which does adversly effect others, but having racial-oriented views

is harmless until they dictate your actions. Homosexuality; just the same. There are guys who would

literally kill to keep their sexual orientation a secret, but does that accurately sum up the tendencies

of all men who openly or secretly desire men? Nope. To assume otherwise would be discrimination.

 

[kuchiyosenojutsuironmaidn]

So much bs I'm not even gonna go into detail. I'll just tell you that Christianity isn't overtoning anyone but it's just the opposite. Christianity is being bombarded on all sides by media. Those specials you're reffering to are also a part of that but then again you're too blind to read between the lines in them.

I see what the problem is, you are assuming that Christianity was distorted by mainstream media. I will not patronize you, but know this: there is no orthodox christianity. It was always thus. The very book it is based on is a shining example of Man playing God.
Think about it: Did God make man, or was it the other way around? "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." The true Creator of all things would have no gender, because it has no equal counterpart. But that's a discussion for a different thread. Neither you, nor I, are blind. So start using your eyes and I'll continue to use mine.

 

[Aim64C]

And why couldn't they choose to be homosexual? If you say it's wrong, aren't you just trying to force them to be normal?

Not at all.

I can believe something is wrong all I want to. I can believe it is wrong for you to wear short sleeves. I can believe it is wrong for you to believe certain things, to think certain ways, etc.

But there's a difference between what I think is wrong and what I am going to try to stop you from doing. I'm not going to try to stop someone from being homosexual anymore than I'm going to try to stop someone from binge drinking. I might let them know that I think they're doing something wrong - but they are adults and can make their own decisions. They can tell me I'm full of shit (as you just did) and go on their way doing things I think are wrong.

And if someone can't suppress his/her sexuality, they have no identity? Alright.

That is not what I said in the slightest. I said that someone who responds to situations purely upon instinct has no identity.

Now, if that describes someone's sexual behavior - then I would argue that he/she at least doesn't have a sexual identity. But that doesn't mean you can't be homosexual.

If you are so full in control of yourself, please choose to be homosexual from now or refrain from posting.

Now why would I do that?

I wish to communicate - therefor I will.

I also wish to have children and to raise a family - therefor it would behoove me to find the female body attractive.

You see, this is what happens when you have no strong sense of self. The presence of conflicting opinions is intolerable and insulting - so you attempt to make them stop.

When you don't know who you are, you define yourself according to what you think or the opinions you currently have. A catholic with no individual identity gets enraged when someone rebukes the tenants of Catholicism. He has no solid self to work from when presented with information or views that conflict with his own - so he gets pissed and reacts purely on raging instinct.

It's the same, here.

Since you have no individual identity, you cannot be content in allowing a different opinion - so you want to make it stop.

 

[Scooby Doo]

Not at all.

I can believe something is wrong all I want to. I can believe it is wrong for you to wear short sleeves. I can believe it is wrong for you to believe certain things, to think certain ways, etc.

But there's a difference between what I think is wrong and what I am going to try to stop you from doing. I'm not going to try to stop someone from being homosexual anymore than I'm going to try to stop someone from binge drinking. I might let them know that I think they're doing something wrong - but they are adults and can make their own decisions. They can tell me I'm full of shit (as you just did) and go on their way doing things I think are wrong.



That is not what I said in the slightest. I said that someone who responds to situations purely upon instinct has no identity.

Now, if that describes someone's sexual behavior - then I would argue that he/she at least doesn't have a sexual identity. But that doesn't mean you can't be homosexual.



Now why would I do that?

I wish to communicate - therefor I will.

I also wish to have children and to raise a family - therefor it would behoove me to find the female body attractive.

You see, this is what happens when you have no strong sense of self. The presence of conflicting opinions is intolerable and insulting - so you attempt to make them stop.

When you don't know who you are, you define yourself according to what you think or the opinions you currently have. A catholic with no individual identity gets enraged when someone rebukes the tenants of Catholicism. He has no solid self to work from when presented with information or views that conflict with his own - so he gets pissed and reacts purely on raging instinct.

It's the same, here.

Since you have no individual identity, you cannot be content in allowing a different opinion - so you want to make it stop.

@bold: I didn't say that

I don't want to change your opinion, there you go Lol But just because you think something is wrong, it doesn't mean it really is.
I asked you to refrain from posting to see if you could suppress the urge to write another wall of text- seems you couldn't.
Also it's you who would erase a whole religion so it's you who tries to force your opinion on others and not let them differ. You can have your opinion but keep such opinions to yourself as they are indeed offensive. Freedom of speech has a limit, even on this site rules of which you accepted when you joined.

You can say I have no identity, it's just your opinion. When you are making judgements of someone else's character in a debate thread, without even knowing them, that's when I won't debate with you. From now you're on my ignore list as I don't care about what you have to say, so don't bother posting a long reply,as it won't show up to me. :vision: Have a nice day :bye:

 

[Universal Man]

ahm ahm I only wish more guys were gay, so I can have all the girls to myself :|

 

[Joker]

I see you're new to medical science.

There is very little in medical research, let alone neurological research, that is 'proven.'

There is evidence that hormonal spikes during pregnancy can influence the sexual preference of a child - but, as always, neural plasticity returns to illustrate that there are no such things as absolutes in neurological development.

You must be registered for see links

"Doidge also tells of a woman whose sense of balance was destroyed by an antibiotic, making it almost impossible for her to walk. She regained her balance, however, with the help of the late University of Wisconsin neuroscientist Paul Bach-y-Rita, who devised a helmet that sent signals about the orientation of her head to a device on her tongue. By learning to keep the signals centered on her tongue, the woman trained her brain to recognize when her head was upright.

Until now, the evidence attributing such dramatic changes to neuroplasticity has been largely circumstantial, but fMRI is producing vivid images that show neuroplasticity in action. In 2005, for example, Swedish investigators used diffusion tensor imaging—a variation of fMRI done with the same equipment—to demonstrate distinct brain changes caused by extensive piano practice.

And Just plans to investigate further the type of brain changes he observed in the dyslexic children he studied. He believes fMRI evidence of neuroplasticity can be used to diagnose dyslexia and other brain problems, and to test proposed therapies.
- See more at:

You must be registered for see links

"

You must be registered for see links

"The Sea Gypsies, or Moken, are a seafaring people who spend a great deal of their time in boats off the coast of Myanmar and Thailand, have unusual underwater vision -- twice as good as Europeans. This has enabled Mokens to gather shellfish at great depths without the aid of scuba gear. How do the Moken do this? They constrict their pupils by 22 percent. How do they learn to do this? Is it genetic? Neuroscientists argue that anyone can learn this trick. Simply put, the brain orders the body to adapt to suite its needs. "

There is much we do not know about the brain and its development.



Or, worse, people believe they are enlightened enough to be ignorant.



So is murder, fratricide, incest, and rape.

Just because my moral conscience finds no problem with the idea of disposing of individuals I deem to be a threat at the first opportunity does not mean society will find such actions tolerable.

Though, I'll be honest, I just don't like you and want to be difficult.



The logic you are using to support your behavior is "I have more people who think my view is correct, therefor I'm going to call you stupid and a biggot for not tolerating the behavior of these people over here."

Now, I'm sure you'll insist otherwise. Educated stupidity is the worst variety of stupidity as it confuses itself with intelligence - but such is the world we live in.



"You're a radical because you believe stupid people."

Well.

Can't argue with that logic.

A radical simply means someone who represents an uncommonly held belief or, in other cases, a very pure/intense adherence to a certain belief/idea. While our society typically condemns being a 'radical' - it is simply the instinct of the mindless mass to try and force people to be 'normal.'

Basically, it is the establishment of a doctrine of false tolerance that polices thoughts.

The only thing that is required of other people in terms of tolerance is to not do harm to each other. That is it. I don't have to like you. I may hate your guts and dance at your funeral - but so long as we live in this country, we agree to tolerate each other so as to not harm each other. You can hate me, I can hate you - just so long as we understand that we do not use force against each other.



And what opinion is that?

I was raised by a vietnam war veteran, my father. I was not allowed to blame other people for my problems, and I was not allowed to evade responsibility for my actions. Everything I did was because I chose to do it - and "he made me" was not acceptable.

My father did the best he could to pass on to us the lessons he learned from his father and from his emotional struggles through war (and the return to a normal society). One of the most crucial of those was the fact that no one 'makes' me feel or do anything. I allow them to influence my feelings or my behavior. I am ultimately in control of myself and am always fully capable of making my own decisions (and am always accountable to those decisions, even when I choose to not take control of myself).

And this is something I have personally experienced to be true. The research also supports this same lesson.

Therefor - when I see someone arguing "I was born a homosexual" - I don't buy it for a second. They allow themselves to be a homosexual in the same sense that I allow myself to be a heterosexual. They may not have full control over everything that attempts to influence their life - but they are ultimately responsible for allowing it to influence who they are.

Now - that is their decision (whether they understand that they are making it, or not - the number of people who do understand self-control is less than one in a thousand in our society... so the odds are against their being cognizant of their choices). I can judge that decision as right or wrong. Wise or unwise.

Just as I judge your decision to commit adultery, ingest a drug, or impregnate your unwed girlfriend as wrong.

It doesn't mean I'm going to hold myself superior to you because of that decision. We all make mistakes. But I still see you as accountable for your actions and there's nothing you're going to do to change that view. No one makes you do anything. No one makes you feel anything.

We live in a society that attempts to scrub us of our identity. It insists that there is always some other cause of our problems. There is an endless cycle of blame and we (the individual) are never a part of it. It tells us that we are born to be certain ways. It convinces us that happiness and pleasure are the same thing. It tells us to live in the moment as opposed to live as who we choose to be.

There's really a simple test to determine if people are self-aware and have truly developed an identity.

A person who has failed to develop an identity will chase comments with emotions like an animal acting on instinct. The easiest to provoke them with is anger. The second easiest to provoke them with is sympathy. You can lead a person without an identity around all over the place - 'trolling' the living shit out of them and getting them to react with nearly endless amounts of anger.

Pretty much describes most of society - though some of them eventually hit a wall.

A person with an identity will only rarely react in the manner human instinct would suggest they would. They react according to how they see their reaction - to how they see their person and character. They are masters of their own decisions.

That doesn't mean that acting according to instinct is always wrong - but that someone who is so easily goaded by their instinct has no character - no identity.

That is an environment beneficial to politicians - warlords. They convince people that there is an enemy and rally them to destroy that enemy. They blame problems endlessly on some other group or person - never address that the individual might have problems. And if you think about it - once you hold the individual accountable and decree him/her responsible; the politician has very little power. If people are accountable for their own decisions, then they are to be responsible for their own decisions and the outcome thereof. The politician has a more difficult time convincing people that following their lead will produce a desired outcome.

It's actually funny - because that is the precise meaning behind Infinite Tsukuyomi. It represents the 'sleeping' state of the 'divine self.' The day-to-day 'grind' and 'lull' causes the self to waver into sleep where their identity is scrubbed and erased. The circle (moon) represents Tsukuyomi - the god who rules over the mind when we are asleep. The square (sun) represents the goddess Amaterasu who rules over the waking state. The triangle (stars) represents Susano'o - the swirling tempest whose shimmering lights in the sky guide the way back to wakefulness (from when stars were used as navigation).

You must be registered for see images

The moon is the circle (spiral) at the center. This also represents the action of Taiji and Wuji to create the cycling of Yin and Yang within Taoism. This produces the Four Movements (Shao Yin, Tai Yin, Shao Yang, Tai Yang) - which produce the Eight Trigrams, Bagua, or the eight elemental phases.

There's actually some deep shit in Naruto.



Perhaps once you learn how to speak, I'll take you a bit more seriously.

The true mark of intelligence is the realization that you take, on faith, the validity of your own observations.

In short - it means that you accept the possibility that you may be basing your own conclusions off of merely another variety of bullshit.

"Oh, well that means you can be full of bullshit!"

Yes. I appreciate your concern for my ability to apply introspective thought to my own statements, though. We can all be full of bullshit. Like I said - we don't have to like each other. We just have to agree not to whack each other over the head or dig in each others' pockets at gunpoint.

Not about to answer all this shit 'cause I really don't give a ****, but, you can't say they choose to be homosexuals because you are not in their shoes. I want you to be attracted to men for a day, get a stiffy when you see a dude walk by you, and if you can't, it's not a choice. So, save that shit for a toilet, 'cause ain't nobody wanna see it.

-Don't write a large amount of text in response, because I won't read it.

 

[Jazzy Stardust]

That's more of an issue with society and the media than homosexuality.

 

[Conspirator.]

Well, this got ugly fast. Putting down homosexuals in the 21st century ... still boggles my mind. Goes to show that humans will forever remain bigoted and petty, afraid to embrace change.

I have to agree with that.

 

[~Sky~]

-Don't write a large amount of text in response, because I won't read it.

Then why reply to him? Seems odd that you'd argue his point and then go on to say you won't read his response.

 

[Joker]

Then why reply to him? Seems odd that you'd argue his point and then go on to say you won't read his response.

I said don't write a long-ass response, it's called summarizing the main point, if he can't do that then he doesn't need to reply, point, blank, period.

 

[China IL]

I thought this thread would be closed by now...

 

[Haizaki]

[video=youtube;454YqPqX_CE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=454YqPqX_CE[/video]

Starr is a clown lmaoo. He bashes everyone.

Being Homo is abnormal to me and also not something from birth IMO but I won't insult or harass someone because of that. You do you and I do me. It is what it is.

 

[Aim64C]

@bold: I didn't say that

Do not think you can obscure your thoughts through semantics.

I don't want to change your opinion, there you go Lol But just because you think something is wrong, it doesn't mean it really is.

Morality is largely subjective.

Ethics are constrained to objectivity. It is unethical to murder people because a society that goes around killing people all the time will ultimately be unable to function.

I may find it immoral for you to have a foursome, and I may think it is wrong.

It is, however, unethical for me to try and police what goes on in your bedroom. If I start digging around through your bedroom to tell you what you can and cannot do - then someone will do the same to me, and by time we all get done digging in each others' lives, no one will be able to do anything.

Ethics focus on functionality of society while morals focus on individual preference and choice.

This is a distinction you would do well to learn.

I asked you to refrain from posting to see if you could suppress the urge to write another wall of text- seems you couldn't.

You aren't a very good lawyer, are you, buddy?

"Why don't you just resist the urge to breathe?"

The basis of communication is just that - communication. You're in an internet forum based upon text. The only presence I can hold is one of responses to your statements.

Now, if we were in the 'real world' and you were to punch me in the face and tell me to resist the urge to punch back - then the case could be made that my continued presence coupled with a lack of action represents restraint.

Also it's you who would erase a whole religion so it's you who tries to force your opinion on others and not let them differ.

There is a sound logic behind my deduction.

It is also, admittedly, a very gruesome and unfair deduction.

But you make a logical fallacy. I have no problem with the Hindu. I have no problem with the pagans. I have no problem with the Shintoists.

The reason I deduce that one particular religion is a perpetual hazard is the same reason I have found murdering warlords to be a perpetual hazard.

Let's say you're a Serb who owns a farm. You grow things - it's what you do. You trade your produce every harvest season for a modest income that allows you to survive and maybe have enough to dress your daughter up well so she can marry a good husband somewhere.

Now, some guy comes along and decides he is protecting you. Alright - whatever - no skin off your back.

But then he shows up every harvest season to see what you've harvested so he can assess how much you should pay him for his protection services. Having not been raided by bandits, lately, you're okay with it (and he doesn't ask too much).

But, one year, you have an early harvest and he doesn't feel you were properly assessed before you paid him. You try to offer an honest amount - even a generous amount - but he insists you're trying to deceive him. So he helps himself to your savings with the help of his hired muscle, breaks some things, and leaves.

A few more years go by with you making sure he sees your crops before you do anything with them... until one year... he doesn't come.

Days... weeks - your food is starting to rot. So, you and your fellow villagers do what you need to do in order to carry out the functions of life - you trade, barter, etc.

Then he shows up and razes your village to the ground, takes your daughter to be used as a *** slave, and leaves you with pretty much nothing.

Welcome to the Ottoman Empire.

If I were to tell you that people like that are intolerable - that those who would lord over you and seek to control your life are an intolerable evil that must be destroyed... you might not be so quick to reject my deduction.

If I were to tell you that socialism - the 'labor parties' - breed that type of mentality ... you'd quirk your eyebrow at me (because it conflicts with your cultural perception).

And, of course, if I were to tell you that Islam pretty much commands people to behave that way ... you'd call me a bigot and all kinds of other things.

I don't care how people view their God or what God(s) they choose to worship.

I do care, however, when their religion essentially commands its followers to do anything and everything necessary to force others into submission to a system of laws they do not want. Such a religion is inconsistent with free people and, ultimately, cannot be tolerated within a free society with equal laws and protection thereof.

You can have your opinion but keep such opinions to yourself as they are indeed offensive.

This is why I said you have no character - no identity.

So what if someone has an offensive opinion?

Are you somehow incapable of choosing to have your own thoughts and opinions because I have expressed mine?

Freedom of speech has a limit, even on this site rules of which you accepted when you joined.

I always have the right to say whatever I want - that can't be taken away (short of cutting out tongues, cutting off fingers, and/or killing me). I do not have the right to avoid the natural and legal consequences of the things I say - but my decision to say them is something that can't be taken away.

You can say I have no identity, it's just your opinion. When you are making judgements of someone else's character in a debate thread, without even knowing them, that's when I won't debate with you. From now you're on my ignore list as I don't care about what you have to say, so don't bother posting a long reply,as it won't show up to me. :vision: Have a nice day :bye:

You'd actually be surprised how much I know about you simply from the context of your approaching me (which is how I know you'll eventually read this).

You need to let her go.

 

[N o i r]

Therefor - when I see someone arguing "I was born a homosexual" - I don't buy it for a second. They allow themselves to be a homosexual in the same sense that I allow myself to be a heterosexual. They may not have full control over everything that attempts to influence their life - but they are ultimately responsible for allowing it to influence who they are.

I was originally intending to reply to everything you've said, but I realize you're no different than any other homophobic bigot. You don't choose to be straight or gay, I'd think someone who talks big like yourself would know this or would have at least figure out that you can't choose your sexuality. Research has been done, new indeed and more and more evidence still indicates that homosexuality isn't a choice, as I told the other idiot before. I don't intent to get into personal info about my belief, but learn this fact: "Homosexuality isn't a choice"

Compare it to adultery, rape, incest, pedophilia. Surely, there's a vast difference between all that repulsive shit and homosexuality and if you insist otherwise. #Facepalm

It really is sad but true:

people believe they are enlightened enough to be ignorant.

^You've replied to your whole argument.

You'd actually be surprised how much I know about you simply from the context of your approaching me (which is how I know you'll eventually read this).

You must feel like a god. Oi, start a new kingdom, you can take on the name Joffrey.

 

[RasenUchihaChaos]

I don't care if your gay or lesbian I won't march with you but if your attacked I will help you