What Is This World Coming To? We Are Going Backwards....

[xtify]

 

Margee, I am very saddened by this too.  It brought a youtube video to mind on the issue.  I'm not sure if it has already been mentioned but here it is:

http://youtu.be/AUSwYpWB0LI

 

xtify, I could barley get through that video    but I know you feel the same way I do. It just shows me more and more that a lot of the human race is insane. I could get full of hate right now, but I am choosing to have a peaceful day instead, so that's all I'll say on this foolishness...

 

*hug*

 

Yes I do, Margee!

 

What 2 consenting adults do in privacy is their own business.  Lumping children and animals into this is just nonsense.  The issue here is CONSENT.  Most law abiding societies recognise that animals and children are unable to consent and so pedophilia and beastiality will continue to be illegal.  This is a completely different issue than whether LGBT people have the same rights to services and priveleges in our society moving forward.  And I do think that America is moving in the opposite direction on this issue.  It sickens me that all these resources are being wasted on marginalizing NORMAL people who want to live normal productive lives, instead of the church working to reduce human trafficking, child exploitation, starvation and slavery.  It just goes to show how christianity and the other monotheisms work against any progress made by the human rights movement.

 

As for what is happening in Uganda, like Thurisaz has mentioned, there may have already been a culturally based disdain towards homosexuality, but the recent civil uprising has been caused by the evangelical christian activity there.  The worst part of that video is when the pastor says that Ugandans are "better Christians" than Americans because they are willing to put homosexuals to death.  Shame on him!

[Overcame Faith]

 

. When gays have been enslaved, beaten, raped, killed, and sold like cattle for the past 300+ years (in this country ONLY!!!!) like African slaves have been, THEN AND ONLY THEN you can compare the gay rights movent to the black civil rights movement.

 

They have been CR.

 

Maybe not to the degree of 'slavery' in the past but these dear ones suffer tremendously all over the earth and for centuries have paid the price for being 'different'.

 

 

Margee  is so right!  Today, the persecution of gays is a bit more subtle, but can have deadly consequences.  Take a look at this Google search I did and anyone can see how at least some gays are persecuted so badly and brutally that they commit suicide.  How terribly sad.

 

https://www.google.com/#q=gay+teens+commit+suicide

[♦ ficino ♦]

The word "faggot" in older English literally means wood that you burn on a fire. Its application to gays goes back to when they were burned at the stake.

 

As has been pointed out above, death at the hands of others is a very present outcome for some gay people.

[RipVanWinkle]

Margee: i understand exactly what you are saying and why. And I agree----almost all of the time. Nevertheless there are people who are so bad I'd like to squash them like a bug. Hitler, for example. Even Mark Twain said that there are some people who just need to be killed. When you think of the worst of the worst and what they have done it is not had to understand. bill

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

I respectfully disagree with your point that homosexuality is natural,

There are other species besides just humans who practice homosexuality.  In fact, it is much more prevalent in nature than you might realize.  So prevalent, that one might consider it natural.

 

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx

[Thurisaz]

Will, granted that some seem to deserve death. If we had the perfect range of options though, I'd prefer treating them for the roots of their, well, evil.

 

Sadly we often don't have the choice. If, say, a pack of fascist scumbags are just preparing to light their Molotov cocktails to burn down the home of a foreigner family, there's hardly any time for talk or treatment. One first needs to stop them, then (if they're still alive) one may consider working on what makes them such fuckfaces.

 

But that would indeed be a perfect universe. As in, not ours.

[kolaida]

It's disturbing, but not surprising. A lot of Africa has been pretty saturated with some forms of Christianity (missionaries). 

 

Next stuff is mostly for CR if he's still around. 

I don't know why people would justify killing gay (or ANY) people today because another country enslaved a race a hundred years ago or so (and, yes, I know the civil rights movement didn't happen to the 1960s) but actual enslavement ended sooner. All countries could justify a LOT by that logic. 

 

Also, black gay people exist! A good friend of mine is black and gay and he's awesome! 

 

Everyone's on their own journey, though. 

[Guest Marty]

 

 

I respectfully disagree with your point that homosexuality is natural, on the basis that if it truly is natural, then why aren't more humans homosexual than the paltry percentage of humanity that is homosexual?

 

By that logic, having red hair is unnatural.

 

If homosexuality was so natural, then why do most of them feel a need to force acceptance and tolerance of their lifestyles (ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who oppose their lifestyle for WHATEVER reason) down the general public's collective throat?

 

If having dark skin is so natural, then why do most blacks feel a need to force everyone to allow them to eat at the same lunch counters, drink from the same water fountains, use the same restrooms, and attend the same schools as everyone else? (Ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who wish to deny them civil rights for whatever reason.)

Sir, you're comparing apples to tomatoes here. I should be offended by your statement, but I'm not. You're basically trying to imply that the black civil rights movement is equal to the gay rights movement. Sorry, that is totally false. You can hide being gay, but being black is something that can NEVER be hidden. I'm a black man, and when I go out in public, people will automatically know I am black. However, if I were gay, the only way people would know is if I personally told them. When gays have been enslaved, beaten, raped, killed, and sold like cattle for the past 300+ years (in this country ONLY!!!!) like African slaves have been, THEN AND ONLY THEN you can compare the gay rights movent to the black civil rights movement.

 

 

1) You also compared apples to oranges when you compared homosexuality to beastiality.  The two are completely different and you display a vast amount of bigotry and ignorance by making that comparison.  Not that I should have to explain the difference, but one involves consenting adults and the other does not.

 

2) Why should someone have to hide who they are?  Because you don't like it?  How is that different from some people not liking dark skin?  Those with "offending" skin color maybe cant hide that fact but they can sure be marginalized and segregated.  You do not have to personally tell people you are gay.  It can be deduced by who you are walking down the street holding hands with, etc.  Hiding the fact you are gay is hiding a lot about that person's identity.  A person being gay affects no one else at all, there is no reason anyone should feel or be compelled to hide it.

 

3) Gay people may not have been enslaved but they absolutely have been beaten, raped, and killed because they are gay.  Look up Mathew Shepard for starters.  Beaten, tortured, and tied to a fence in the desert and left to die…Black people do not hold the patent on brutal insensitive treatment.

 

4) African slavery was not limited to this country, and Im not sure why you would insist on it being so, or holding the conversation to that.  America may have held on to it longer than Europe, and may have been more brutal in its practice, but we are not the only slave holding country in history.  

 

I don't think the gay rights movement is a100% accurate comparison to the black civil rights movement, but there are a considerable amount of valid parallels and the arguments against it are very similar to the point of it being a very fair comparison.  People have a right to live their life and be free in who they are.  That goes for gay people as well as for people of color.  Civil rights should not be defined by whether or not you can hide something from the general public.  

 

Religion, personal beliefs, political leanings, these can all be hidden from the general public.  Do you really want to open that can of worms?

[Tollo]

How is it wrong to not want to be ostracized, outcast, and told we are unnatural and should not exist? No, I'm not going to accept with outstretched arms people who are assholes to me because of what gender I date. But it's f*cking ridiculous to suggest I don't "tolerate" Christians and other homophobes. Close to 100% of the people at my job who I serve daily are Christian homophobes. I live with them. I keep my mouth shut. I don't tell them they are wrong or refuse to provide them goods and services. Virtually all gay people do this. There are so very few jobs we can have where we won't be required to serve and yes, tolerate, homophobes. And not just tolerate their disapproval, we have to tolerate their slurs, their loud opinions, and for me, I'm obligated to act like I'm a homophobe too, because I'm still stuck working for a Christian organization (I quit, but my contract isn't up).

 

I can't f*cking believe that an atheist or ex-Christian of non-fundamentalist spirituality would be a homophobe I'm just f*cking astounded right now, sorry for my language but I always thought of this forum as a safe space. *headdesk* I don't even know.

 

ETA: everybody who responded is awesome and the one persons bigotry doesn't drown out the majority acceptance. I appreciate you guys a lot.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

*Hugs* Tollo.

[xtify]

I'm really sorry, Tollo.  Bigotry sucks.  I just hope one day this will no longer be an issue.

[buffettphan]

I can't f*cking believe that an atheist or ex-Christian of non-fundamentalist spirituality would be a homophobe

 

 

Yeah, I can't believe it either.  Hopefully CR gets the message that he is waaaaaay out of line and that all bigotry is flat-out immoral. I'm so sorry you have to deal with such shit.  Big hugs to you.  Also, in case you're not getting notifications, I sent you a PM.

 

 

 

 

 

[Margee]

How is it wrong to not want to be ostracized, outcast, and told we are unnatural and should not exist? No, I'm not going to accept with outstretched arms people who are assholes to me because of what gender I date. But it's f*cking ridiculous to suggest I don't "tolerate" Christians and other homophobes. Close to 100% of the people at my job who I serve daily are Christian homophobes. I live with them. I keep my mouth shut. I don't tell them they are wrong or refuse to provide them goods and services. Virtually all gay people do this. There are so very few jobs we can have where we won't be required to serve and yes, tolerate, homophobes. And not just tolerate their disapproval, we have to tolerate their slurs, their loud opinions, and for me, I'm obligated to act like I'm a homophobe too, because I'm still stuck working for a Christian organization (I quit, but my contract isn't up).

 

Tollo, I want to give you a huge hug. My son is gay and I know what it's like.......I watched what he went through at school....I stood by as people stared at him....Him and I have been through great pain together... and now he is doing fine.

 

I helped him 'come out' at 14 years old. Even as a Christian, I knew I was going to have to face this. I  can't even talk about this...the whole goddamned topic makes me want to throw up that people in 2014  are still stuck in ancient, tribal beliefs...... 

 

Hold your head up high sweetheart. Stand strong. Sometimes ya just gotta keep quiet for your own sanity. That's what I told my boy. And that's what I do as a non- believer..I keep quiet because the world is tooooo close minded for me and I don't have the energy to fight.

 

I'm glad you're here with us and you are very right when you say that the majority of the people on EX-c are very open minded and accepting.

 

Big *hug*

[ExCBooster]

CR: how about no amount of prejudice and oppression is okay? Zero Tolerance. It's not a "suffering contest" - that the people who have suffered the most "win" the Righteous Victim status. By pointing out the fact that Group A is being denied basic civil rights, doesn't deny the struggles or very real and hellish oppression of Group B. Rather, fighting prejudice, wherever we see it, helps everybody:

 

In fact, doesn't it make sense that the tactic of people in positions of privilege and power is "divide and rule?" It's not like the phrase - "whatever happens, we have got the Maxim Gun, and they have not" - holds true, or ever really did: the enchantment with technological supremacy is part of the myth of white superiority. Africa, for example, wasn't directly colonized until the 1880s, because African civilizations were far too strong militarily for European ones to take them on, until then. (Let's also note that Ethiopia was never colonized, and remained independent - hence the Rastafarians - because they kicked Italy's face in, in two straight-up wars.) Heck, North and South America were only colonized, because of Smallpox, basically. It's a lot easier, if your civilization rolls in after 90% of the original population drops dead, and their own societies lie in tatters. Seriously, 30 conquistadors did NOT just take out the Aztecs, all on their own, with no help from lethal viruses, or several thousand angry ex-subjects of the Aztec Empire.

 

If you represent a tiny minority, keeping down the vast bulk of humanity, wouldn't it make more sense to set them against each other? Otherwise, things end up like Haiti did in the 1700s - a teeny-tiny class of Big White land-owners keeping down a UNITED front of everybody else on the island? They didn't have a chance. Seriously, any time you see a small minority keeping down the majority, it's because they're setting them against each other, throwing some a social bone, to set them against the others. And, long story short, that's the kind of thing that leads directly to things like the Rwanda Genocide. After the Dutch were gone, the hatred lived on, and inevitably got leveraged for political struggles.

 

I don't have anything to add to the brilliant rebuttals above, other than to note, in light of the 300 sequel out now, that the Ancient Greek Movie I really want to see made is one about the Sacred Band of Thebes... I think it would rock.

[Guest ThereIsNoGod]

Ok look, I'm sometimes "offended" whenever I see an ugly looking creepy crawly and want to squash it. I suppose if I was the President of some country I'd say "Hmmmm, what if I made it law to squash all those nasty looking bugs on sight?".

 

I think thats what homophobia boils down to. Someone being made uncomfortable by the sight of two guy together. All the bullshit about "The Bible says it's wrong" or "It's against nature" are just attempts to justify and dress-up what is basically a fear of creepy crawlies. If one of these leaders told the truth....."Homosexuality makes me uncomfortable, therefore I think it should be outlawed" he would lose his credibility.

 

The other issue is, some people who fiercely oppose homosexuality do so to try and make their own homosexual feelings, which they are ashamed of, go away. Can you imagine a leader saying "I have homosexual feelings which I am ashamed of and in order to rid myself of these feelings, I've decided to oppose homosexuality by outlawing it in this country" ?

[Idontevenknow99]

 

 

 

I respectfully disagree with your point that homosexuality is natural, on the basis that if it truly is natural, then why aren't more humans homosexual than the paltry percentage of humanity that is homosexual?

 

By that logic, having red hair is unnatural.

 

If homosexuality was so natural, then why do most of them feel a need to force acceptance and tolerance of their lifestyles (ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who oppose their lifestyle for WHATEVER reason) down the general public's collective throat?

 

If having dark skin is so natural, then why do most blacks feel a need to force everyone to allow them to eat at the same lunch counters, drink from the same water fountains, use the same restrooms, and attend the same schools as everyone else? (Ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who wish to deny them civil rights for whatever reason.)

Sir, you're comparing apples to tomatoes here. I should be offended by your statement, but I'm not. You're basically trying to imply that the black civil rights movement is equal to the gay rights movement. Sorry, that is totally false. You can hide being gay, but being black is something that can NEVER be hidden. I'm a black man, and when I go out in public, people will automatically know I am black. However, if I were gay, the only way people would know is if I personally told them. When gays have been enslaved, beaten, raped, killed, and sold like cattle for the past 300+ years (in this country ONLY!!!!) like African slaves have been, THEN AND ONLY THEN you can compare the gay rights movent to the black civil rights movement.

 

 

CR1987,

 

First, Ravenstar is from Canada, not the U.S.  

 

Second, I don't know who's been feeding you what, but black people aren't being enslaved, beaten, raped, killed, and sold like cattle here in the U.S. anymore.  Blacks in this country got a shitty deal in the past in certain places, and no one is going to argue that point, but things are different now.  Have you seen the current President of the United States? I think he sucks, but that's politics, and for all I know, it might be his white half that's so crappy. 

 

What ticks me off isn't the color of one's skin, or what two consenting adults do with whatever they find in their loved one's underbritches. It's when one wears their cause on their sleeve and demands that everyone one accepts them, to the point of using force, however it might be applied. 

That's why I dislike Black History Month, because there is no White History Month. I suppose the Asians and the Hispanics would like their own history months too, where are those? 

 

Wouldn't it be nice and fair and all if blacks could just be themselves and be regular people? What? They can? Yes they can, and except for I suppose isolated pockets of idiocy, they are.   You can't hide your blackness, but why would you?

 

All the "gays" are looking for is the same thing.  While I am so very tired of people wearing their blackness on their sleeve, as if that makes them somehow special (if skin color doesn't matter, or at least if it doesn't really matter to you, then STFU about it). I am equally sick of "gay" people wearing their "gayness" on their sleeves. 

 

The difference is, gay people sometimes do have to hide in public, and that is wrong.  

 

That is also, I believe, the point of Margee's post. I don't really know anything about you CR1987, but I'd like to know who you are in love with. I am The State, and unless I approve, the way you show your love to the one you are in love with is of utmost importance to me, as it might under the law cause you or all of us harm, and you must be punished for it.

 

 

Duderonomy, I think you were on to something until I noticed that you mentioned when "one wears their cause on their sleeve." I think this assumption is totally problematic, and I'll try to explain why. Marginalized groups have a right to be proud about their heritage, their culture, their history. It just means that their people have depth. It has absolutely nothing to do with one race trying to outshine the next one. Too often it is seen as bigotry when it is not. Unfortunately, "why isn't there a White History Month?" is a popular response to this sort of thing, and yes, it is racist. 

 

I am in no way agreeing with Mr. CyberRaider. I don't believe in comparing the two - you just can't. LGBTQ rights are civil rights. As I've said before, I think it is appropriate for marginalized groups to come together and celebrate what makes them unique. That means being able to openly discuss marginalization and oppression without comparing one struggle to the other. Also, please don't assume that there's only just Black History Month! If you had did your research, you would have found that there is:

 

• National Hispanic Heritage Month (September 15- October 15)
• Carribean American Heritage Month (June)
• Native American Heritage Month (November)
• Polish American Heritage Month (October)

Furthermore, consider St. Patrick's Day, which is widely accepted as a national holiday and many, many people of the Irish diaspora proudly celebrate it. Please, please, please consider doing more research instead of voicing your opinion on these issues. It only creates more unnecessary tension. Patricia Hill Collins' book, "Black Sexual Politics: African Americans, Gender, and the New Racism" puts this faulty argument into perspective. Not only does it deal with the erasure of the black LGBT community, she also talks about "colorblindness" as a disregard for characteristics of people of color. But I digress, just because enslavement of black people isn't happening anymore in the United States, it does not mean U.S. is living in a post-racial society. 

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

If homosexuality was so natural, then why do most of them feel a need to force acceptance and tolerance of their lifestyles (ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who oppose their lifestyle for WHATEVER reason) down the general public's collective throat?

 

Maybe it's because they're so sick of being treated as subhuman and told that they're sick abominations who need to be corrected because they don't think, feel, or behave like the vast majority of people, regardless of whether their behavior harms anyone or not.

 

If I was a gay person and was forced to hide who I am for years, but finally grew sick enough of hiding and fearing mistreatment, hatred, and/or violence to speak up about it, I'd probably have a difficult time showing tolerance to people who oppose a lifestyle that comes natural to me and harms no one, as well.

[Guest ThereIsNoGod]

CYBERRAIDEN SAID:

 

"I'm If homosexuality was so natural, then why do most of them feel a need to force acceptance and tolerance of their lifestyles (ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who oppose their lifestyle for WHATEVER reason) down the general public's collective throat?"

 

After this I can pretty much call whatever you say a load of homophobic follow on, not worth taking seriously. I mean come on this is just total fucking bullshit. Try looking the other way when you see two guys kissing. You don't have to squash the fucking spider just cause it gives you the heebie jeebies.

 

[duderonomy]

 

 

 

 

I respectfully disagree with your point that homosexuality is natural, on the basis that if it truly is natural, then why aren't more humans homosexual than the paltry percentage of humanity that is homosexual?

 

By that logic, having red hair is unnatural.

 

No, I said that

If homosexuality was so natural, then why do most of them feel a need to force acceptance and tolerance of their lifestyles (ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who oppose their lifestyle for WHATEVER reason) down the general public's collective throat?

 

If having dark skin is so natural, then why do most blacks feel a need to force everyone to allow them to eat at the same lunch counters, drink from the same water fountains, use the same restrooms, and attend the same schools as everyone else? (Ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who wish to deny them civil rights for whatever reason.)

 

Sir, you're comparing apples to tomatoes here. I should be offended by your statement, but I'm not. You're basically trying to imply that the black civil rights movement is equal to the gay rights movement. Sorry, that is totally false. You can hide being gay, but being black is something that can NEVER be hidden. I'm a black man, and when I go out in public, people will automatically know I am black. However, if I were gay, the only way people would know is if I personally told them. When gays have been enslaved, beaten, raped, killed, and sold like cattle for the past 300+ years (in this country ONLY!!!!) like African slaves have been, THEN AND ONLY THEN you can compare the gay rights movent to the black civil rights movement.

 

 

CR1987,

 

First, Ravenstar is from Canada, not the U.S.  

 

Second, I don't know who's been feeding you what, but black people aren't being enslaved, beaten, raped, killed, and sold like cattle here in the U.S. anymore.  Blacks in this country got a shitty deal in the past in certain places, and no one is going to argue that point, but things are different now.  Have you seen the current President of the United States? I think he sucks, but that's politics, and for all I know, it might be his white half that's so crappy. 

 

What ticks me off isn't the color of one's skin, or what two consenting adults do with whatever they find in their loved one's underbritches. It's when one wears their cause on their sleeve and demands that everyone one accepts them, to the point of using force, however it might be applied. 

That's why I dislike Black History Month, because there is no White History Month. I suppose the Asians and the Hispanics would like their own history months too, where are those? 

 

Wouldn't it be nice and fair and all if blacks could just be themselves and be regular people? What? They can? Yes they can, and except for I suppose isolated pockets of idiocy, they are.   You can't hide your blackness, but why would you?

 

All the "gays" are looking for is the same thing.  While I am so very tired of people wearing their blackness on their sleeve, as if that makes them somehow special (if skin color doesn't matter, or at least if it doesn't really matter to you, then STFU about it). I am equally sick of "gay" people wearing their "gayness" on their sleeves. 

 

The difference is, gay people sometimes do have to hide in public, and that is wrong.  

 

That is also, I believe, the point of Margee's post. I don't really know anything about you CR1987, but I'd like to know who you are in love with. I am The State, and unless I approve, the way you show your love to the one you are in love with is of utmost importance to me, as it might under the law cause you or all of us harm, and you must be punished for it.

 

 

Duderonomy, I think you were on to something until I noticed that you mentioned when "one wears their cause on their sleeve." I think this assumption is totally problematic, and I'll try to explain why. Marginalized groups have a right to be proud about their heritage, their culture, their history. It just means that their people have depth. It has absolutely nothing to do with one race trying to outshine the next one. Too often it is seen as bigotry when it is not. Unfortunately, "why isn't there a White History Month?" is a popular response to this sort of thing, and yes, it is racist. 

 

I am in no way agreeing with Mr. CyberRaider. I don't believe in comparing the two - you just can't. LGBTQ rights are civil rights. As I've said before, I think it is appropriate for marginalized groups to come together and celebrate what makes them unique. That means being able to openly discuss marginalization and oppression without comparing one struggle to the other. Also, please don't assume that there's only just Black History Month! If you had did your research, you would have found that there is:

• National Hispanic Heritage Month (September 15- October 15)
• Carribean American Heritage Month (June)
• Native American Heritage Month (November)
• Polish American Heritage Month (October)

Furthermore, consider St. Patrick's Day, which is widely accepted as a national holiday and many, many people of the Irish diaspora proudly celebrate it. Please, please, please consider doing more research instead of voicing your opinion on these issues. It only creates more unnecessary tension. Patricia Hill Collins' book, "Black Sexual Politics: African Americans, Gender, and the New Racism" puts this faulty argument into perspective. Not only does it deal with the erasure of the black LGBT community, she also talks about "colorblindness" as a disregard for characteristics of people of color. But I digress, just because enslavement of black people isn't happening anymore in the United States, it does not mean U.S. is living in a post-racial society.

 

What I said was...

 

"What ticks me off isn't the color of one's skin, or what two consenting adults do with whatever they find in their loved one's underbritches. It's when one wears their cause on their sleeve and demands that everyone one accepts them, to the point of using force, however it might be applied.

 

"That's why I dislike Black History Month, because there is no White History Month. I suppose the Asians and the Hispanics would like their own history months too, where are those?"

 

There is a big difference between history and heritage, and if you are going to quote me, please at least use my words in full. "It's when one wears their cause on their sleeve and demands that everyone accepts them, to the point of using force, however it might be applied" is what I said.

[Mike D]

 

 

Sadly it's old news... has been on the forums here before. And I seem to recall that the US jebus taliban pushed this agenda in Uganda quite a bit. "Missionary work" I guess.

 

Doesn't make it any better of course.

I'm sorry, I must have missed that thread altogether or was so busy deconverting that I didn't notice that this was on the board.

 

I'm just beyond myself to think that in this day and this age, they would make homosexuality 'Illegal??? Years of imprisonment because of this natural state for some people?? I do bang my head up against the wall........

 

I respectfully disagree with your point that homosexuality is natural

 

Margee stated that homosexuality is a natural state for some people. This is a fact, not an opinion. It may not be a natural state for you, but that doesn't mean that it isn't for others.

 

It never ceases to amaze me when people who aren't gay seem to be experts on the subject. I can kind of understand a religious person since they don't typically think for themselves, they let bronze-age books or their leaders do that for them. But for a non-religious, supposed free thinker, I don't get it.

 

Whatever - to each his own.

[Mike D]

 

 

I respectfully disagree with your point that homosexuality is natural, on the basis that if it truly is natural, then why aren't more humans homosexual than the paltry percentage of humanity that is homosexual?

 

By that logic, having red hair is unnatural.

 

If homosexuality was so natural, then why do most of them feel a need to force acceptance and tolerance of their lifestyles (ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who oppose their lifestyle for WHATEVER reason) down the general public's collective throat?

 

If having dark skin is so natural, then why do most blacks feel a need to force everyone to allow them to eat at the same lunch counters, drink from the same water fountains, use the same restrooms, and attend the same schools as everyone else? (Ironically, they show much less tolerance and acceptance to those who wish to deny them civil rights for whatever reason.)

 

Sir, you're comparing apples to tomatoes here. I should be offended by your statement, but I'm not. You're basically trying to imply that the black civil rights movement is equal to the gay rights movement. Sorry, that is totally false. You can hide being gay, but being black is something that can NEVER be hidden. I'm a black man

 

Sorry to butt in here, but the black civil rights movement and the gay rights movement are similar in the sense that they are two marginalized groups of people. Legally marginalized.

 

Let me ask you this - if you as a black man wanted to date and/or marry a woman outside of your race, do you think you should have that right? I am sure I don't need to remind you that plenty of people think that relations with anyone outside your own race is unnatural. Even a sin. (And especially when it is a black man and a white woman - lets not even get into that one). You might even think so yourself. But do you think it's ok to dictate who two consenting adults should or should not be able to date, fall in love with and/or marry if they so choose? Why or why not?

[Dhampir]

First of all, CyberRaiden, being black CAN be hidden, it's called "passing", a practice not frequently engaged in anymore, but one which some saw as vital to prosperity, among those that could in fact pass. You might say that passing only worked for a small percentage of the black population, but even for those, discovery of their blackness, at a time when being black was as bad as being gay, was detrimental. Some gay people CAN hide that they have homosexual interests, but others cannot hide that they do. They need to be able to take advantage of the provisions set aside for couples in the law. They need to be able to show their faces in public. They need to be able be truthful about their predilections. They need to be able to make medical decisions for their SO, or decisions about their estates. They need to be able to satisfy their needs while serving openly for their country.