[John Q. Smith]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Please, stop posting.

people like you who have such strong feelings against gays probably are projecting your own insecurities onto others.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:
Simey is right. These are teaching opportunities for young kids. Kids ARE going to ask questions so I see it as a chance for a parent to teach a child a new lesson. And regardless, they WILL learn a lesson from the experience one way or another. They either learn something new and different about the world or they learn that there are certain topics that make their parents uncomfortable.

Right. To clarify where I think people don't understand, I am not saying that 7 year olds need to be given a sex education lesson. I don't think that is appropriate, or that it would be the right answer given the kind of questions that a 7 year old is likely to ask. They want to know who people are in relation to one another, not bedroom stuff.

It basically consists of telling them that the homosexual couple love each other the same way as a heterosexual couple -- preferably by the use of an examples from the child's life that the child can relate to. "Uncle John and Uncle Peter love each other and live together just like Aunt Patty and Uncle Fred." That is what I meant about an age appropriate explanation.

With my neices and nephews this probably took all of two minutes and maybe a couple more minutes for follow up questions. "Will Uncle John and Uncle Peter have children like Aunt Patty and and Uncle Fred?" "No, not unless they adopt a child, two men can't have children themselves." That kind of thing.

Kids don't seem to see this kind of discussion as a big deal. Its the adults who tie themselves in knots. Kids are learning all about the strange world anyway. One more strange detail is nothing new to them -- as long as they aren't being ********ted to. Seven year olds know that Santa doesn't exist, no matter what adults say.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by roam:
Why not? I mean, they're going to go out into society at some point and see that our world consists of straight, and gay relationshps.

Yes, but it's up to the PARENTS to teach them about such things. Not the schools to teach against what the parent teaches.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by John Q. Smith:
Why don't they have Scottish History Month? Like gays, the Scottish are socially unacceptable, stigmatized, and they do naughty things that most people wouldn't dream of (like eating fried mars bars). Perhaps a month devoted to pretending that Scottish history counts for something would make the English more tolerant!

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by John Q. Smith:
people like you who have such strong feelings against gays probably are projecting your own insecurities onto others.

The only person I see projecting here is you.

What are you insecure about?

[John Q. Smith]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
The only person I see projecting here is you.

What are you insecure about?

I'm trying to bother LBK, stay out of this!

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
I agree except I think 10 is still too young for kids to be thinking about relationships or sex. Why can't kids be allowed to have a childhood anymore? They're learning about this stuff at a much earlier age than they did a few years ago. Why? to compensate for the rise in teenage pregnancies? What a stupid way to go about dealing with the problem.

Absolutely.

[f1000]

Originally posted by John Q. Smith:
Like gays, the Scottish are socially unacceptable, stigmatized, and they do naughty things that most people wouldn't dream of (like eating fried mars bars).

I hear those fried Mars bars are a delicious way to an early heart attack.

I've got to try me one of those.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
I agree except I think 10 is still too young for kids to be thinking about relationships or sex. Why can't kids be allowed to have a childhood anymore? They're learning about this stuff at a much earlier age than they did a few years ago. Why? to compensate for the rise in teenage pregnancies? What a stupid way to go about dealing with the problem. Maybe if thongs and padded bras for 8 year olds weren't on sale in the shops such young kids wouldn't even be thinking about sex.

I'm of the same opinion whether we're talking about general sex education or 'gay history month'. So get bent 'John Smith', I think gay couples have just as much right to be miserable as everyone else.

LBK,

No one is talking about sex education for 7-year-olds. But if I go to the Zoo here in DC with my nephew there is a good chance we will see a same-sex couple. And if we go to Larry's Ice Cream in Dupont Circle during the trip--Dupont is DC's Greenwich Village--he will definitly see same-sex couples. (DC folks will know ALL about Larry's Ice Cream.)

Now, I can point my fingers and tell them how bad those people are or say nothing or tell him they are two people who love each other very much just like his Mom and Dad. I am NOT going to talk about anal sex, fisting or any other sexual acts stereotypically associated with same-sex couples. In fact, it would be inappropriate to have that discussion with a 7-year-old when discussing heterosexual couples.

It is all in the details. Do you see the difference?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes, but it's up to the PARENTS to teach them about such things. Not the schools to teach against what the parent teaches.

Well, a school, no matter what it teaches, will be teaching against something a child has learned at home.

What point are you objecting to? Schools teaching children about the existence of homosexuality or the content of the message being taught?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:
(DC folks will know ALL about Larry's Ice Cream.)

The "Icecream Nazi." (A la Seinfeld)

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
The "Icecream Nazi." (A la Seinfeld)

Exactly!!!

Great ice cream and a floor show to go along with it.

(Although the last time I was in there one of the guys
was asking some women--wth an amazing chest--
about her breasts, and she was obviously uncomfortable.
That seemed a little uncool to me. But still . . . damn
good ice cream.)

[Bluebomber21XX]

I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with the majority of you in this thread that condone homosexuality.

And before you pro-homo zealots start flaming me, I am 100% hetero in a very fulfilling STRAIGHT relationship.

Kids do not need to be taught that gays are "ok" or normal. It's a deviant lifestyle, that is NOT okay. Sorry, but someone has to say it. Gays aren't normal.

Whether you think that it's a hormonal imbalance, a choice, a preference, or they just don't have enough game to attract members of the opposite sex, its your call. In any case, it's wrong, and I for one, am GLAD our kids in America aren't force-fed this crap.

Don't get me wrong, however. I don't go around fag-bashing, or trying to interrupt the lives of homos. I don't beat up gays, or yell names when I see some flaming queer walking down the street in San Francisco. They can do whatever they want. I'm not the one that has to live that screwed up lifestyle. But just because not everyone agrees with the way they act doesn't make us heterosexuals wrong.

I'm sure someone is going to call me "intolerant" or "homophobic" or worse just because I can't see what is normal about a dude banging another dude. It's just not right.

It's sad because whenever someone like myself has the cojones to actually speak about how gays aren't normal and why we shouldn't be giving these social deviants rights such as letting them get married and adopting kids (which is a wholly different topic for another thread), I am decried as nontolerant.

BULLSHlT. I believe in God's word and the Bible. Homosexuality is wrong, and if you are gay and reading this, you need to check yourself into a hospital and get treatment to turn back into a normal member of society.

[OldManMac]

Another one who can't express himself in any way except sexual, "about a dude banging another dude's ass."

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with the majority of you in this thread that condone homosexuality.

And before you pro-homo zealots start flaming me, I am 100% hetero in a very fulfilling STRAIGHT relationship.

Kids do not need to be taught that gays are "ok" or normal. It's a deviant lifestyle, that is NOT okay. Sorry, but someone has to say it. Gays aren't normal.

Whether you think that it's a hormonal imbalance, a choice, a preference, or they just don't have enough game to attract members of the opposite sex, its your call. In any case, it's wrong, and I for one, am GLAD our kids in America aren't force-fed this crap.

Don't get me wrong, however. I don't go around fag-bashing, or trying to interrupt the lives of homos. I don't beat up gays, or yell names when I see some flaming queer walking down the street in San Francisco. They can do whatever they want. I'm not the one that has to live that screwed up lifestyle. But just because not everyone agrees with the way they act doesn't make us heterosexuals wrong.

I'm sure someone is going to call me "intolerant" or "homophobic" or worse just because I can't see what is normal about a dude banging another dude's ass. It's just not right.

It's sad because whenever someone like myself has the cojones to actually speak about how gays aren't normal and why we shouldn't be giving these social deviants rights such as letting them get married and adopting kids (which is a wholly different topic for another thread), I am decried as nontolerant.

BULLSHlT. I believe in God's word and the Bible. Homosexuality is wrong, and if you are gay and reading this, you need to check yourself into a hospital and get treatment to turn back into a normal member of society.

when you point the finger of sin at someone else remember that 3 fingers of your own hand are pointed back at yourself.

[Bluebomber21XX]

Thats why I point all my fingers at them.

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally posted by KarlG:
Another one who can't express himself in any way except sexual, "about a dude banging another dude's ass."

exactly.. you know what is going thru his mind when he is.....

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
Thats why I point all my fingers at them.

like this?

[John Q. Smith]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
yada yada yada BULLSHlT. I believe in God's word and the Bible. Homosexuality is wrong, and if you are gay and reading this, you need to check yourself into a hospital and get treatment to turn back into a normal member of society.

quite big, by the looks of it

[John Q. Smith]

Originally posted by NYCFarmboy:
snip

like this?

oh no, you have involuntarily invoked Godwin's law! this thread is now dead!

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.� There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress.

[Bluebomber21XX]

Originally posted by John Q. Smith:
oh no, you have involuntarily invoked Godwin's law! this thread is now dead!

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.� There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress.

Right on John Q.!

I wouldn't have even brought this up had I not seen this thread already posted.

NYC: Why am I the one in the wrong, when you fags are the ones that are going around sodomizing each other. I don't go around thinking about fags, unless the topic comes up, in which case, I'd have to think about what fags are all about. That's right, sodomy!

Fag are wrong. End of story. If you can't deal with it, maybe you should commit suicide.

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
Right on John Q.!

And to the guy who posted the fag picture, this is just what I mean. You guys rail on me for bringing up a nasty thing that fags do, then you post a picture of a fag. Obviously, I'm not the one with fags/gayness on his mind.

I wouldn't have even brought this up had I not seen this thread already posted.

this series of preceding quotes has been priceless!!!!!!!!

[Mithras]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
Fag are wrong. End of story. If you can't deal with it, maybe you should commit suicide.

Well I think that's the topper.
You know, I still do believe that homophobes will be in 40 years what segregationists are now. But I forget sometimes what a long and hateful road that is. Do hearts change, or do people just learn to keep crappy sentiments to themselves, or do we just have to wait for a generation to die off?

[John Q. Smith]

ze thread, she is becoming so gay!

[Mithras]

That's my favorite "argument" for the immorality of homosexuality -- the gross-out argument. "Eww, that's disgusting! Just think about it! Ewww!"

I would submit:
* heterosexual sex
* childbirth
* defecation
* eating
* heterosexual sodomy
* nursing

as all quite disgusting if you think about it.

[Bluebomber21XX]

Originally posted by Mithras:
Well I think that's the topper.
You know, I still do believe that homophobes will be in 40 years what segregationists are now. But I forget sometimes what a long and hateful road that is. Do hearts change, or do people just learn to keep crappy sentiments to themselves, or do we just have to wait for a generation to die off?

*sigh*

I don't get why anyone that is opposed to the homo lifestyle choice is considered a "homophobe". Maybe I should call you a heterophobe, because you're too scared to be normal, like 99% of the rest of the world.

What's to be scared of? Tight pink shirts and lisps? It's not a fear. Being phobic would imply a fear of homosexuals. It has nothing to do with that.

It has everything to do with the fact that the Bible says IT IS WRONG TO BE GAY. IT IS NOT NATURAL OR RIGHT.

That's all I'm saying.

[chris v]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
*sigh*

I don't get why anyone that is opposed to the homo lifestyle choice is considered a "homophobe". Maybe I should call you a heterophobe, because you're too scared to be normal, like 99% of the rest of the world.

What's to be scared of? Tight pink shirts and lisps? It's not a fear. Being phobic would imply a fear of homosexuals. It has nothing to do with that.

It has everything to do with the fact that the Bible says IT IS WRONG TO BE GAY. IT IS NOT NATURAL OR RIGHT.

That's all I'm saying.

The bible proscribes all sorts of stuff that Christists do every day, like eating Cloven-hooved animals, and 100 other examples. Do you enjoy shellfish? You're committing an abomination.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
What's to be scared of? Tight pink shirts and lisps? It's not a fear. Being phobic would imply a fear of homosexuals. It has nothing to do with that.

Don't worry, nobody thinks it's other homosexuals you are scared of.

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
I don't get why anyone that is opposed to the homo lifestyle choice is considered a "homophobe".

That one's easy.
You must like everyone. If you don't you must have an irrational fear of them. "Everything's good", as they say.
It's simple linguistic mind programming by the lefties (note that the homosexualists aren't to be classed as lefties - as Simey demonstrates - although the term homophobe was probably first coined by a leftie thinking it her duty to defend the minority).
Another recent example would be "Islamophobe" - coined by the lefties yet again - for anyone who doesn't like the mohammedans.

My personal favourite is "Britneyspearsophobe", which describes me perfectly - in leftie speak. Not that I actually have an irrational fear of her, you understand - just that I don't think she can dance. However, exercising my freedom of choice in not thinking that someone can dance is against the leftie philosophy - I'm supposed to "confront my fears" - it makes it easier for them to ride roughshod over your liberties if they can get you to like and accept everything.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
*sigh*

I don't get why anyone that is opposed to the homo lifestyle choice is considered a "homophobe". Maybe I should call you a heterophobe, because you're too scared to be normal, like 99% of the rest of the world.

What's to be scared of? Tight pink shirts and lisps? It's not a fear. Being phobic would imply a fear of homosexuals. It has nothing to do with that.

It has everything to do with the fact that the Bible says IT IS WRONG TO BE GAY. IT IS NOT NATURAL OR RIGHT.

That's all I'm saying.

What I would suggest for you is that you worry more about what you do that is wrong, and try be the best Christian that you can, instead of worrying about what people that you don't even know are doing, and who's actions and beliefs don't affect you in any way (unless you let them). Your graphic language, sexual descriptions, and stereotypical, but false, imagery of homosexuals clearly indicate that you do have an inner fear.

As to your statement that the Bible says what you claim, that's an ambiguous statement at best. If you really want to learn something about something you know nothing, or little, about, read A Church at War; Anglicans and Homosexuality, by Stephen Bates, or Why Marriage Matters; America, Equality, and Gay People's Right To Marry, by Evan Wolfson. You might then be able to make a more significant contribution to a discussion, including plausible explanations for your biblical references, other than calling people "fags," or making asinine statements about "flaming queers," which show exactly how little you know, and how much irrational fear you in fact have.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by KarlG:


Young people deserve honest answers, whether they're seven or 12. Those who don't want to give them honest answers avoid the issue because of their own discomforts in talking about something that is an innate part of every human's being, and they haven't yet figured out how to deal with the issue themselves.

and what is the honest answer? Your version or mine?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by John Q. Smith:

quite big, by the looks of it

That is the thing. Gays want to present themselves as asexual, good and common human beings...yert the truth lies in ads like these that highlight homosexual perversion and their sexually driven minds.

[John Q. Smith]

Originally posted by dcolton:
That is the thing. Gays want to present themselves as asexual, good and common human beings...yert the truth lies in ads like these that highlight homosexual perversion and their sexually driven minds.

like straight people aren't perverted at all.. ever seen tubg1rl?

[SimeyTheLimey]

What a strange black and white world some people live in. Kids must either be lied to and told that gays and lesbians don't exist, or you have to show kids the centerfold of Honcho? There is no middle ground, no allowance for what is appropriate to tell a child. Sh1t, no allowance for common decency even among adults. After all is only thing that defines any couple their bedroom habits? I think not.

I have no problem with telling kids that some people disagree with homosexuality at the same time as telling those kids that other people don't have any problem with two adults falling in love. That would be balanced, and age-appropriate. It's the anti-gay side who (once again) seem to want to reduce everything to sex. A sad and creepy obsession indeed.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by dcolton:
That is the thing. Gays want to present themselves as asexual, good and common human beings...yert the truth lies in ads like these that highlight homosexual perversion and their sexually driven minds.

Did you happen to glance into the Hot Girls thread in the Lounge? If so you would have seen all sorts
of "good and common human beings" engaging in heterosexual perversion. So, is it OK for hetero's to be
sexual and perverted but not homo's? Or are we back to the "anything hetero is normal but anything homo is deviant" crap?

Me, I liked looking at all those picture of Anna Kournikova, no doubt about it. And if some guy likes
looking at pictures of another guy, so what? Is the mere acknowledgement of gay men's sexuality
somehow a threat to me? I don't think so. Is it a threat to you?

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
What a strange black and white world some people live in. Kids must either be lied to and told that gays and lesbians don't exist, or you have to show kids the centerfold of Honcho? There is no middle ground, no allowance for what is appropriate to tell a child. Sh1t, no allowance for common decency even among adults. After all is only thing that defines any couple their bedroom habits? I think not.

I have no problem with telling kids that some people disagree with homosexuality at the same time as telling those kids that other people don't have any problem with two adults falling in love. That would be balanced, and age-appropriate. It's the anti-gay side who (once again) seem to want to reduce everything to sex. A sad and creepy obsession indeed.

The problem is, as far as I can see, that one can't discuss such matters without talking about sexuality. This is mainly because the kid, being a kid, will ask something to the effect of: "so why do those two guys like each other and not women?"
How do you answer that without having to discuss sex and sexuality? You have to start talking about people fancying each other to explain this. How do you explain people fancying each other to a 7-year-old?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:
Did you happen to glance into the Hot Girls thread in the Lounge? If so you would have seen all sorts
of "good and common human beings" engaging in heterosexual perversion. So, is it OK for hetero's to be
sexual and perverted but not homo's? Or are we back to the "anything hetero is normal but anything homo is deviant" crap?

Me, I liked looking at all those picture of Anna Kournikova, no doubt about it. And if some guy likes
looking at pictures of another guy, so what? Is the mere acknowledgement of gay men's sexuality
somehow a threat to me? I don't think so. Is it a threat to you?

Was the women grabbing her genetalia like this guy is grabbing his johnson?

[Kodachrome]

i.e. the above post: (which has now been editied somewhat)

Moderators, what are the guidelines on posting graphic sexual remarks?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Sherwin:
The problem is, as far as I can see, that one can't discuss such matters without talking about sexuality. This is mainly because the kid, being a kid, will ask something to the effect of: "so why do those two guys like each other and not women?"
How do you answer that without having to discuss sex and sexuality? You have to start talking about people fancying each other to explain this. How do you explain people fancying each other to a 7-year-old?

Of course you can discuss relationships without discussing sexuality. When little kids see the prince and the princess marry and live happily ever after, the fairy tale doesn't include a detailed discussion of what the prince and princess did in bed on their wedding night. That would not be age appropriate.

A discussion of love is not a discussion of lust.

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Of course you can discuss relationships without discussing sexuality. When little kids see the prince and the princess marry and live happily ever after, the fairy tale doesn't include a detailed discussion of what the prince and princess did in bed on their wedding night. That would not be age appropriate.

A discussion of love is not a discussion of lust.

You're missing the point I think (probably my fault for not being clear).

Kid: Why doesn't the prince want a princess?
Adult: He prefers other princes.
Kid: Why?
Adult: Because he does.
Kid: Why?

How does one answer that without going into an explanation of sexuality?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Sherwin:
You're missing the point I think (probably my fault for not being clear).

Kid: Why doesn't the prince want a princess?
Adult: He prefers other princes.
Kid: Why?
Adult: Because he does.
Kid: Why?

How does one answer that without going into an explanation of sexuality?

You don't need to. Seven year olds get "because" or "some people just do" as an answer all the time. Think about it: A kids grandmother dies. The kid asks why did she die. Parent replies it was because she was old. Kid asks why do people get old? Parent replies "it's because entropy runs downhill."

Is that very likely? Or is it more likely that the parent will reply with some variation on "because?" There is time for the full answer later when they are old enough to understand it.

Besides, if you take a child to a wedding, do you start explaining to the kid that the couple "fancy" one another? I hope not. You probably tell them that they love each other. That's the right answer, whether the couple is straight or gay.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by dcolton:
and what is the honest answer? Your version or mine?

The honest answer is the one that is appropriate for the age group one is addressing. In the case of seven year olds, you tell them that, for some reason unknown (which is the truth) certain people prefer people of the same sex, and take it from there.

In your case, the following scenario would be easy to envisage:

7 year old; "How come Bill and Ken are holding hands?'
You; "Because Bill likes to put his schlong in Ken's butt."
7 year old; "Why?'
You; "Because they're sick, disgusting perverts, and they'll do the same to you, so stay away from them. I don't want to talk about it anymore!"

Sadly, some people are so one-dimensional that they are unable to distinguish between love and lust. That one-dimensionality also is quite evident when they open their mouths to speak, because all that comes out is the graphic language that represents their inner fears, or in some cases, their inner longings.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:
LBK,

No one is talking about sex education for 7-year-olds. But if I go to the Zoo here in DC with my nephew there is a good chance we will see a same-sex couple. And if we go to Larry's Ice Cream in Dupont Circle during the trip--Dupont is DC's Greenwich Village--he will definitly see same-sex couples. (DC folks will know ALL about Larry's Ice Cream.)

Now, I can point my fingers and tell them how bad those people are or say nothing or tell him they are two people who love each other very much just like his Mom and Dad. I am NOT going to talk about anal sex, fisting or any other sexual acts stereotypically associated with same-sex couples. In fact, it would be inappropriate to have that discussion with a 7-year-old when discussing heterosexual couples.

It is all in the details. Do you see the difference?

I understand the difference, but I think it is the parents who should be making the ultimate decision about the depth of knowledge a child is given about any relationship.

The age at which people think kids are old enough to learn about relationships is obviously subjective. I don't like the idea of schools deciding when it's appropriate to teach children about such matters. Relationships shouldn't even be on the mind of a 7 year-old child, focussing whole class lessons on such issues is bound to make the child more inquisitive about it.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by Sherwin:
You're missing the point I think (probably my fault for not being clear).

Kid: Why doesn't the prince want a princess?
Adult: He prefers other princes.
Kid: Why?
Adult: Because he does.
Kid: Why?

How does one answer that without going into an explanation of sexuality?

There are SO many questions like this a parent has to answer. Here are some hypothetical answers to the above question of "why?"

Parent: People like different things. And some men like other men better than they like women. (give one of the following examples)
Example A: You know how some people like dogs more than cats?
Example B: You know how Uncle Bob REALLY likes basketball but doesn't watch baseball with us?
Example C: You know how Mom/Dad and I drive a small car while some people drive big cars?
Parent: It's kinda like that. Not everybody likes the same things.

The kid says "Oh, OK" and goes on to ask a million other different questions.

[John Q. Smith]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
I understand the difference, but I think it is the parents who should be making the ultimate decision about the depth of knowledge a child is given about any relationship.

The age at which people think kids are old enough to learn about relationships is obviously subjective. I don't like the idea of schools deciding when it's appropriate to teach children about such matters. Relationships shouldn't even be on the mind of a 7 year-old child, focussing whole class lessons on such issues is bound to make the child more inquisitive about it.

maybe if you had been taught about gays at an early age, you wouldn't be so backwards and homophobic (awaiting comeback starting with "maybe if..")

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by John Q. Smith:
maybe if you had been taught about gays at an early age, you wouldn't be so backwards and homophobic (awaiting comeback starting with "maybe if..")

Dude, why are you being such a d!ck. LBK is NOT homophobic. All her questioning has not been about the "rightness" of teaching kids about homosexuality, they have been about the appropriateness of teaching it in a school setting as opposed to teaching it in the home.

Pay attention.

[Bluebomber21XX]

Originally posted by KarlG:
What I would suggest for you is that you worry more about what you do that is wrong, and try be the best Christian that you can, instead of worrying about what people that you don't even know are doing, and who's actions and beliefs don't affect you in any way (unless you let them). Your graphic language, sexual descriptions, and stereotypical, but false, imagery of homosexuals clearly indicate that you do have an inner fear.

KarlG, I do that every day. I'm always trying to better myself. I've got to ask, what is false about what I've said? The fact that you disagreee with my beliefs on gay people? There are others who have similar opinions as me and use far worse language than I have here. However, I apologize if my choice of words offends you or makes you come to the conclusion I have a fear of you. I'll try to be more "professional" in the words I'll use from now on.

I do find it humorous however that you mention MY "graphic language and sexual descriptions", and then from your own post here, I find this:

Originally posted by KarlG:
7 year old; "How come Bill and Ken are holding hands?'
You; "Because Bill likes to put his schlong in Ken's butt."
7 year old; "Why?'
You; "Because they're sick, disgusting perverts, and they'll do the same to you, so stay away from them. I don't want to talk about it anymore!"

Sadly, some people are so one-dimensional that they are unable to distinguish between love and lust. That one-dimensionality also is quite evident when they open their mouths to speak, because all that comes out is the graphic language that represents their inner fears, or in some cases, their inner longings.

I'm not unable to distinguish between love and lust. This topic has nothing to do with a homosexual relationship that is lustful or loving. It's wrong either way.

Originally posted by KarlG:
As to your statement that the Bible says what you claim, that's an ambiguous statement at best. If you really want to learn something about something you know nothing, or little, about, read A Church at War; Anglicans and Homosexuality, by Stephen Bates, or Why Marriage Matters; America, Equality, and Gay People's Right To Marry, by Evan Wolfson. You might then be able to make a more significant contribution to a discussion, including plausible explanations for your biblical references, other than calling people "fags," or making asinine statements about "flaming queers," which show exactly how little you know, and how much irrational fear you in fact have.

Ambiguous, you say? They seem pretty concrete to me. Where shall I begin? How about we start with Romans and continue down the line? I have conveniently highlighted in red the Bible verses I spoke of earlier for your convenience. I suggest you read some of these instead of trying to condone homosexuality by a couple of books written by the above authors.

Romans 1:26-27 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.

Leviticus 18:22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

Leviticus 20:10 If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor-- both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

This looks to me as if homosexual relationships, and adultery between heteros to be equally as repugnant.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

The Greek word from which the King James Bible gets the word �effeminate� is malakos, which literally means something soft to the touch, but is used as a negative metaphor to refer to a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man. The �abusers of themselves with mankind� are those men who engage in unnatural sexual relations with other men � homosexuals. That is also how the NASB, the NKJV, and the NIV translate that verse. Also in the New Testament is verse 7 from the book of Jude, defining exactly why Sodom and Gomorrah were punished � homosexuality. The quote is below, but let me know if you'd like more clarification on why S&G were taken out.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Let me put it this way: Have you ever heard the phrase "Love the sinner, hate the sin?" Look, I don't hate anyone. I don't hate gays, either. Just because I post my beliefs and discuss how I feel them to be wrong (and back it up with actual reasons, not just writing "GAYS ARE TEH DUMB", or something equally stupid), doesn't mean I hate gay people. Nor am I "afraid" of them as some of you like to point out.

Gays are living a morally and socially (in most parts of the world) unacceptable lifestyle. I'm not here to judge them because that's not my job. God will love homosexuals even though they are gay and going against His word, just like He loves all sinners. It's part of our nature to sin, but it doesn't mean it's all over just because we are sinners. It's up to them to make a change for the better, and ask for forgiveness so they can change.

This is a great article on homosexuality and being able to change: http://www.probe.org/docs/ex-gay.html

Edit: Added Jude 1:7

[Bluebomber21XX]

Originally posted by dcmacdaddy:
There are SO many questions like this a parent has to answer. Here are some hypothetical answers to the above question of "why?"

Parent: People like different things. And some men like other men better than they like women. (give one of the following examples)
Example A: You know how some people like dogs more than cats?
Example B: You know how Uncle Bob REALLY likes basketball but doesn't watch baseball with us?
Example C: You know how Mom/Dad and I drive a small car while some people drive big cars?
Parent: It's kinda like that. Not everybody likes the same things.

The kid says "Oh, OK" and goes on to ask a million other different questions.

Simply because someone likes something different than anyone else, does this make it right? I mean, there are murderers out there that like to kill people. There are rapists that like to rape, adulterers that like to cheat, and gays that like the same sex. The Bible condemns all of these things. Should everyone be expected to just let everyone run about doing their own thing, based on the statement, "we're all different, let's accept everyone as they are?"

Just a thought.

[John Q. Smith]

there's a lot of confusing stuff on the bible:

don't eat shellfish
don't have sex outside marriage
don't have impure thought
don't wear clothes of two threads
and so on

to gain proper perspective, you should probably focus more on the ethical teachings of jesus, which encourage us to treat each other as equals.

[Bluebomber21XX]

Originally posted by John Q. Smith:
there's a lot of confusing stuff on the bible:

don't eat shellfish
don't have sex outside marriage
don't have impure thought
don't wear clothes of two threads
and so on

to gain proper perspective, you should probably focus more on the ethical teachings of jesus, which encourage us to treat each other as equals.

None of the things you listed are confusing. Since there are so many things that I probably do wrong in the eyes of God every day, and you too, this is why I ask forgiveness every day. Read my above post. I don't hate gays, but their lifestyle is wrong, and I think they need to be told so they have a chance to repent and live a better life. It's not too late.