Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
I don't see alcholism or anorexia as existential threats to our culture. I do see misguided liberal social policy as such.
This is a political blog on which I comment as a post interests me. It is the Stranger Blog, not 'Dan's Blog.' That is unless all the other commenters are sock puppets for Savage, and you know this to be true.
I enjoy debating politics with people whose ideas I don't share. I also enjoy talking about rational politics with friends whose ideas I do share. If this is a problem for you, I don't know what to tell you.
As for what my friends think of this diversion, I don't ask their permission for my opinions or actions. If you check your opinions with liberal friends before airing them, all I can say is that's truly pathetic.
I own my business. While I do have a great deal to catch up on after a few months off, I also get to set my schedule. At any rate, I spend about a third of my day online with vendors, clients, doing research on products and so on. A little liberal baiting makes this bearable.
Biologically, homosexuality is a denial of every function of human sexuality. This says nothing about the derangement of being a 'man trapped in a womans body' or vice versa, which is clear insanity (as being an inability to recognize objective reality.) Yes, my faith calls it a sin, or an abomination, but it does this for the reason it proscribes adultery or murder. They are not actions or behaviors conducive to the ultimate good of the person or those around him or her.
However, I will again write that this belief has no bearing on public policy. Gays should be free of violence or discrimination as any citizen is. When they ask for special priviledges based on their choices is the only point at which I object.
Really? Try reading my post at #89. It may change your mind. But then again, time won't change you and money won't change you, so I haven't got the faintest idea; everything seems to be up in the air at this time.
@107: "homosexuality is a denial of every function of human sexuality."
Really? I always thought that the functions of human sexuality were:
-Strengthen an intimate social bond between two people.
Homosexuality fulfills the second but not the first. Did you really think that you were correct in writing that?
Oh wait, I left off the first word of the sentence. "Biologically, homosexuality is a denial of every function of human sexuality."
Biological functions of human sexuality:
Yup, homosex provides the second but not the first. You're batting .500 here, Seattleblues, which would be good if only we were playing baseball.
"They [adultery, murder, and homosexuality] are not actions or behaviors conducive to the ultimate good of the person or those around him or her."
I'll give you adultery and murder, but can you give me any evidence that homosexuality is inherently detrimental to those bearing its trait? The only inherent downside to homosexuality that I can think of is that, due to the relative rarity of the trait, it's harder to get a date.
"When they ask for special priviledges [sic] based on their choices is the only point at which I object."
Gays only want the right to marry the consenting, adult, unrelated person of their choice, a right already given to straights. What's that, Lassie? Gays can already get married to people of the opposite gender if they want to? Well, gays don't usually want to. And if gay marriage is legalized, then it's not as if gays would be getting any special privileges; straights, too, would be allowed to get hitched to the same-sex partner of their choice. How about it?
1. "Biologically, homosexuality is a denial of every function of human sexuality."
You say "every" function of human sexuality, but as far as i know the only function of human sexuality that is specifically not possible in homosexuality is production of offspring. Granted, that is an important function of human sexuality, but is it the only one? (I'm guessing that you must have other functions in mind because you use the plural "every" rather than the singular "only" in your statement above.)
2. " ... They are not actions or behaviors conducive to the ultimate good of the person or those around him or her."
How is homosexuality not good for homosexuals? And how does the homosexuality of a person (negatively) affect those around him/her?
Dear Seattleblues, it's a free country. You are entitled to your opinion. I will defend to my death your right to free speech.
I get to have an opinion too. To me you are an ignorant uninformed stupid bigotted prick. In my view you are dead wrong about a whole host of things around this issue.
Have a good evening.
Go to bed now.
" A little liberal baiting makes this bearable." You seriously think this is a liberal site, or did you get kicked off of the Think Progress, Best of the Left and Citizen Radio forums?
You forgot to preface this with "In my opinion...".
I notice you ignore requests to cite facts and instead consistently treat your opinions as though they were facts. You can deny that your religion is the basis for your prejudice all you want but your unwillingness to back up what you believe with evidence makes it quite clear that your opinions are faith-based.
"As for what my friends think of this diversion, I don't ask their permission for my opinions or actions."
I didn't say you should get permission. I asked whether they know. Meaning, do they know that
i) You post frequently on this blog - so frequently that, for example, there are more words on this page by you than there are words by Dan Savage.
ii) You're not doing it to 'troll the liberals' - because you don't comment on liberal blogs in general, you comment on posts about 'alternative' sexuality in particular.
iii) You're not 'trying to talk some sense into the liberals' - for the same reason as above (and because it's obvious that you're not, in fact, changing anyone's mind).
My suggestion is that they don't know, because you don't tell them.
"did you get kicked off of the Think Progress, Best of the Left and Citizen Radio forums? "
I'd suggest that he didn't, because he was never on those sites in the first place, because they don't interest him.
His interest isn't in liberalism, it's in 'alternative sexuality'.
"I don't see alcholism or anorexia as existential threats to our culture. I do see misguided liberal social policy as such."
There's no evidence that you have an interest in liberal social policy in general. Your interest seems to be in Savage Love in particular.
That interest is big enough that you come here for long periods of each day, and comment at such length that you would have more words here than many of the paid writers.
I'd stay out of the psychological fields. You're really poor at reading people.
I like your attempt at subtlety. 'Not saying you're a fag, but...'
If I'm gay it's a singularly unusual form of that mental disorder. I feel no sexual attraction whatever to male friends, co-workers and other acquantances. Being a healthy male I'm fully capable of appreciating female beauty, but I'm married with kids. Not that it's your business but I have a healthy sex life. With my wife. (Thought I should clear that up since the term 'healthy sex life' gets some mighty odd usages here.) So, if I'm gay I'm a gay man who's not sexually attracted to men and is very much so to women and is happily married to a woman. Kind of defeats the definition, don't you think, Jimmy boy?
Nice to know that you're adding up the number of words I write. Have fun with that, if that's what you consider fun. Me, I have better things to do. But if that's all you've got in your life, I'm glad to be of service. Now if you could get some grasp of reading comprehension you'd be in business, young fellow.
>posts all day on a blog where nobody likes him, listens to him, or respects him, spouting arguments based purely on his opinions
Wishful thinking that everyone shares your predilections doesn't make it so. However, you can read whatever you like into my comments. That's your perogative and it certainly does me no harm. Truth is what it is, not what someone wishes it to be.
I use this site for the same, since I found Mahjong fairly boring. It requires little thought to counter the arguments here and reminds me how much smarter conservatives are as a group. Thanks.
are you aware that 20% of practicing homosexuals get, and give, HIV?
and even greater percentages get, and give, a host of other STDs.
are you aware that homosexuals have greatly elevated rates of suicide?
do you find AIDS and suicide to be detrimental?
Are you also aware that the elevation in the rates of depression amongst homosexuals is explained IN FULL by the amount of societal persecution?
The more you know...