No, I believe it is you who is confusing my arguments. My point was that people are considering homosexuality immoral, and through such assigned values they're reinforcing discrimination. I'm not necessarily just talking about the issue of marriage, I'm talking about many forms of less overt discrimination.

Not at all, the same thought process is taking place. I'm not saying that homophobes are in some sense of equal value as racists or anti-semites (which I think you're seeing in my arguments), but rather just that similar rationalizations are being used in the attempt at justifying injustice. That is all.

Perhaps, though I think you'd be surprised. I'm pretty sure insecurity has a lot to do with it; usually people who are insecure with themselves are the first to point our errs and attempt to control others rather than openly practice self examination.

I was almost expecting this response. I always get it when I step into the domain of someone's 'single issue'.

You may fill it was at no avail,but it has halped us here that are trying to chip away at that brick wall.If more like you posted with intelagence insite this form would be more what it was created to be.Not a form for sex.

So you are equating the situational "looking at a woman in lust" with a sexual urge that compels a human to have sex with another of their same gender?

To use the idea presented in the other thread, I can turn away from a woman and repent, can you quit loving your "wife"? Good luck wit dat. Cause I couldn't quit loving "MY" wife any more than I'm gonna get out of this chair and go take a piss. Good thing the Bible didn't say, thou must take a piss each morning to relieve thyself, or I'd be ass out huh?

You my dear are the one being ridiculous in denying what I'm saying.

I could go so many directions with this post, I'm gonna let it slide for just being too easy.

Somebody should tell Tristan that insulting people from behind an "ignore wall" is sad and makes him look mentally weak and immature. Not that we needed any MORE proof of that fact.

If this were the first time I've seen you give up in this manner I'd be surprised. But last time you resorted to name calling and stomped off like Tristan. I expected it this time as well.
I respect your deeper posts on other topics, but this one ain't all that deep. You can philosophize all day on it, but gay is still gonna be just as abnormal at the end of your speech as it was at the beginning.
That's why even the APA can't justify it. It just "is" and you better "accept" it. And to anyone with an ounce of common sense, that's BS and it ain't gonna fly.

Additionally, whether I actually believe what I say can also be up for discussion. But this IS a debate forum. I ain't here to agree. I'll argue with anyone, even Gary when it's convenient. But quitting, throwing a couple of insults, and running away ain't no fun at all.

Which OSU. If it's Oregon State, did you know my brother, Kyle Jeffers, he played on the Basketball team. He graduated last year.

I'm curious, what time was that? And I'm not aware of any name calling. Name calling implies an unwarranted labeling from without; if it is 'homophobe' you're worried about, then you have applied that identity to yourself through your actions and words, and anyways, I wasn't speaking directly toward you when I was saying "the homophobe", it was a more general statement.

Like I said before, I always get this comment when I talk about someone's 'single issue'. Consequently, I think I get this comment on nearly every topic I debate because with every topic there is someone who takes that issue to heart, or at least believes they have an unshakable knowledge in that field. So I'm not sure whether to take it as a comment or an insult, because on the one hand it implies that I post deep on other topics, but usually someone says my opinions aren't worth anything on nearly every topic I debate.

Even abnormalities, Fx, are biological. People are born with their sexuality, and to hold their own natures against them is wrong in my opinion. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule, but don't treat those exceptions as the rule. And even if they did "learn" to be homosexual, wouldn't it still be apart of their nature in some sense? And anyway it still wouldn't be any of your damned business.

I'm quitting because it is an exercise in futility, and to me, this issue is pretty irrelevant; I'm not gay, and beyond minding my own damn business, I shouldn't take any other position. I have no authority to tell someone who they can or cannot love.

Ohio State of course!

Nevermind then.

i wholeheartedly agree with you...........

In all areas of life there are extremists......... it is unfortunate to the gay community as a whole that the few have spoiled it for the many........ i have many gay friends around the world and there is a common factor betwen them all....... we wish only to have our union legalised. The few who are demanding marriage have made a big mistake, the UK got it right we fought for civil unions, if the US contingent had got it right there would still have been an uproar from some but it would have been readily acceptable to to the majority. I think a basic rethink is what is needed by the US government. Leave the word marriage and religion out of the equation give gays civil union options and let us all get on with living the way we feel we each need to.

You really need to go away now. If everyone shared your point of view, I'd have nothing to argue against.

No one would ever know how "abnormal" I am, even though my POV or worse is shared by a majority of the world.