Predator_05 Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 If nature intended for males to screw each other, wouldn't males have reproductive organs too ? Whichever way you look at it, sodomy is just completely un-natural. Even if you don't agree with that point, surely you would be concerned by the high percentage of AIDS victims within the homosexual community ? Why is it that gays account for almost 70% of all HIV cases amongst males in the United States ? The fact is that there is nothing even remotely acceptable about gay lifestyle. The only thing this horrendous lifestyle promotes is a high level of promiscuity coupled with deviant sexual behaviour - hence the high % of AIDS victims within this community. There is no way in hell that these people should be given the same rights as normal citizens when they are doing nothing but spreading disease and promoting a lifestyle which isn't just unhealthy but dangerous. not questioning his right to free speech... just questioning his ideology... Idealogy...:hysterical: It's just an opinion. If you don't like it or if you don't agree with it, don't reply.
vroomfondel Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 hehe, this thread feels like a time warp: we need a big banner that says 'welcome to the 90's' bigotry against women, against race, all have (mostly) died natural deaths. The strategy for bigots has been the same: identify or fake genetic/behavioral tendencies that make it an 'us vs. them' debate. Eugenics, mood-swings, and sexual depravity -- all are arguments against equal rights. But, alas, satyamev jayate and all that. The homo/hereto debate will become irrelevant soon. Homosexuality is not a modern 'disease', nor is a fashion statement. There were ancient greek homos, persian f@gs, and yes, even ancient indian twinks. This 'disorder' has afflicted such pioneers as Da Vinci, Alexander (jisne porus ki maari thi :winky:), Alan Turing, Newton (I mean, honey, have you seen his wigs?). As for India, I think the Vishwanath temple in Khajuraho is enough evidence about how homosexuality was treated in India. Those great victorian prudes were the ones who outlawed buggery in India, and we persist with it even as the conquerers have given up on it -- much like cricket. But I've hardly researched this. This is just common sense and bits of gay-friendly liberal media I've been exposed to. I'd be happy to bend over to a more authoritative take on the subject :winky:
vroomfondel Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 If nature intended for males to screw each other' date=' wouldn't males have reproductive organs too ? .[/quote'] there's a study around that establishes a darwinian basis for male homosexuality. females with the homo X gene are more fertile. edit: so the study says.
vroomfondel Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 ... high percentage of AIDS victims within the homosexual community ? Why is it that gays account for almost 70% of all HIV cases amongst males in the United States ? The fact is that there is nothing even remotely acceptable about gay lifestyle... AIDS spread like crazy because of promiscuity, unprotected sex, and buttsex. The good doctors here will confirm (or deny) that the rectal lining is thinner than vaginal lining, leading to better viral transmission. so your crusade is really against buttsex? and lesbians are ok, right? can they have equal rights? we'll leave the twinks out to die of AIDS, but there's nothing wrong with a few dykes right?
kumble_rocks Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Quite a few homophobes in this message board ! It's a pity !
Predator_05 Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 AIDS spread like crazy because of promiscuity, unprotected sex, and buttsex. The good doctors here will confirm (or deny) that the rectal lining is thinner than vaginal lining, leading to better viral transmission. so your crusade is really against buttsex? and lesbians are ok, right? can they have equal rights? we'll leave the twinks out to die of AIDS, but there's nothing wrong with a few dykes right? We're getting into other issues now, ie; the effects of raising kids in an openly gay environment, etc. concering equal rights. Stuff that i don't care enough about to discuss at length. Feel free to enlighten me. I'd make exceptions for lesbian porn stars since they are good entertainment
fineleg Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 From someone who thinks that Indian women are ugly' date= I really don't have any regard for their ideology, open-mindedness or tolerance. Ah, he holds that view too, does he? (I must have missed some earlier posts) Why am I not surprised? Narrow mindedness showed through in parochial posts and regionalistic taunts on cricket forum. Same narrow mindedness is seen in other topics. No surprises.
vroomfondel Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 We're getting into other issues now' date=' ie; the effects of raising kids in an openly gay environment, etc. concering equal rights. Stuff that i don't care enough about to discuss at length. Feel free to enlighten me. I'd make exceptions for lesbian porn stars since they are good entertainment[/quote'] We'll get to the kids if you make that argument. I was talking about the dirty gays and their AIDS. We agree on unprotected buttsex being the root of all evil then? They are the ones accidentally protected by law in India. Gay men aren't. the unnatural sex acts law bans oral sex. I mean, come on, it's just a bj. How many people on this board are guilty...or wish they were.
CC1981 Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 If nature intended for males to screw each other, wouldn't males have reproductive organs too ? Whichever way you look at it, sodomy is just completely un-natural. Even if you don't agree with that point, surely you would be concerned by the high percentage of AIDS victims within the homosexual community ? Why is it that gays account for almost 70% of all HIV cases amongst males in the United States ? The fact is that there is nothing even remotely acceptable about gay lifestyle. The only thing this horrendous lifestyle promotes is a high level of promiscuity coupled with deviant sexual behaviour - hence the high % of AIDS victims within this community. There is no way in hell that these people should be given the same rights as normal citizens when they are doing nothing but spreading disease and promoting a lifestyle which isn't just unhealthy but dangerous. If you are so concerned about what 'nature intended' (which is a non-sequitur by the way- we dont talk to nature- all this 'nature intended this' is individual opinion/slant of their own perception), then i hope you don't engage in blowjobs, handjobs, kissing etc. Nature didnt intend the hand to be a jerk-off tool, it didnt intend the mouth to be a kissing or sucking tool. So now what ? where do we draw the line and why ? As per high % of AIDS- what is the prevalence of AIDS in homosexual western communities vs heterosexual indian people ? you will be surprised to find that the latter case is higher. I am not denying that anal sex is risky (and in my PERSONAL opinion, kinda gross, but i am not arguing strictly from my own personal preferences here) but it isnt very risky if it is a monogamous relationship- which it is in majority of cases ( most gay people I have come across - and Vancouver certainly has many- are old couples or quasi-pedastric couples and their sexual habits are similar to those of heterosexual couples). Plus you act as if heterosexual couples dont engage in anal sex, when i know for a FACT that the majority of people have tried it or actively engage in it. And how is homosexuality more risky than your average junk-food eating, couch-potato person ? You wanna bet which lifestyle has higher risk factors associated with it ? And who is a normal citizen ? define 'normal' for me, please. If risky behaviour and spreading desease is your major concern, maybe you should lock up all the teachers in the world : teachers (school, highschool, kindergarten, university,etc) are the BIGGEST contagion carriers in the world and infect FAR more people in the world than entire sexually transmitted deseases put together...so now what ? Sorry, your criterias seem to be made up to hide a deeper agenda/bias. Discriminating people on basic rights issues simply on the basis of their sexual preference (a preference that satisfys the golden rule) is not only insane, it is absolutely dictatorial and is absolutely unujustified.
fineleg Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 We'll get to the kids if you make that argument. I was talking about the dirty gays and their AIDS. We agree on unprotected buttsex being the root of all evil then? the unnatural sex acts law bans oral sex. I mean, come on, it's just a bj. How many people on this board are guilty...or wish they were. In which country is it illegal? (banned?) India?
punjabi_khota Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Ah, he holds that view too, does he? (I must have missed some earlier posts) Why am I not surprised? Narrow mindedness showed through in parochial posts and regionalistic taunts on cricket forum. Same narrow mindedness is seen in other topics. No surprises. Hahaha...sab bandiyon ki jal gayi is forum pe. :giggle:
punjabi_khota Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 We're getting into other issues now' date=' ie; the effects of raising kids in an openly gay environment, etc. concering equal rights. Stuff that i don't care enough about to discuss at length. Feel free to enlighten me. I'd make exceptions for [b']lesbian porn stars since they are good entertainment :hatsoff:
Predator_05 Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I am not denying that anal sex is risky (and in my PERSONAL opinion' date=' kinda gross, but i am not arguing strictly from my own personal preferences here) but it isnt very risky if it is a monogamous relationship-[/quote'] Even if a gay person's sexual activity is on the same level as that of a straight person, they will still be more likely to contract an STD or AIDS. You can't refute that. Gays are at more risk because this is the ONLY form of intercourse that they have. And besides, how many gays pursue monogamous relationships anyway ? It's a culture of promiscuity, and if it wasn't then the AIDS rate wouldn't be so high. I don't know how you can defend people who pursue such a lifestyle And how is homosexuality more risky than your average junk-food eating' date=' couch-potato person ? You wanna bet which lifestyle has higher risk factors associated with it ?[/quote'] Junk food eating and being a lazy bum are by and large, not encouraged. Nobody in their right mind is ever going to tell you that it's OK to stuff yourself and turn into a fat f ***. That's why we have fitness clubs, personal trainers nutritionists, so that these people can get some help and change their ways. What's happening here is that people are fine with the public promotion a lifestyle which does nothing but spread disease, acting as if it's perfectly acceptable. Just as i would advise a fat "couch potato" to do some exercise every now and then, I would advise gays to either get sex changes (thereby making them less susceptible to becoming disease vessels) or get themselves to a shrink who can talk them into becoming straight.
CC1981 Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Even if a gay person's sexual activity is on the same level as that of a straight person, they will still be more likely to contract an STD or AIDS. You can't refute that. Gays are at more risk because this is the ONLY form of intercourse that they have. And besides, how many gays pursue monogamous relationships anyway ? It's a culture of promiscuity, and if it wasn't then the AIDS rate wouldn't be so high. No, i refute that and i will refute that. There is no difference between gay people and hetero people who are active on same sexual levels as to catching STDs. If the gay man boned just one guy through his life, his risk of getting std are near zero, just like any hetero couple. As per your notions about gay relationships - how many gays do you know or socialize with ? With your attitude, i cant think many which is why you have this strange notions about gay people. Yes, there are promiscuous ones but so are hetero people as well. And just like how there are faithful hetero people, there are faithful gays too - 100s come here every day to get married in gay marriage - there is no questioning that their commitment level is just the same as hetero people of similar disposition. As for the 'only form of intercourse' - you are, sadly, mistaken. FYI, the most common form of sex between gay people is oral (this seems to be the universal consensus amongst gays i've talked) and as i said - there are plenty more hetero people - orders of magnitude greater- who are into anal sex than gays. If your issue is anal sex,hetero community is far bigger culprit than homo community. I don't know how you can defend people who pursue such a lifestyle Because as i said, its none of MY or YOUR business what two grown up adults (or two minors) are doing behind closed doors, as long as its consentual. I don't discriminate against people based on what stimulates them sexually, as long as the golden rule is satisfied- because beyond the golden rule, our views on sexuality are purely arbitary. If i dont get upset over a guy taking a girl up the *****, why would i be upset if its two guys doing it ? My philosophy of sex is simple : so long as its consentual and so long as you are both minors/majors or on the cusp, do whatever you want that you two find stimulating. Doesnt even have to be two- 3,4,whatever number floats your boat, go for it. And your idea that a shrink can talk them into being straight is laughable- it shows a basic lack of understanding of homosexuality from your part. You can talk a gay guy into straightness no more than you can talk me into considering Brad Pitt's package to more titillating than Angelina Jolie's jugs- it just doesnt work that way. Some are confused, true, but some are born that way. And IMO, a country like India could use a bit more gays - we breed like rats too much anyways and its one big cesspool of overpopulation.
Predator_05 Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 No' date=' i refute that and i will refute that. There is no difference between gay people and hetero people who are active on same sexual levels as to catching STDs. If the gay man boned just one guy through his life, his risk of getting std are near zero, just like any hetero couple.[/quote'] Dude, the likelihood of contracting AIDS or any STD is far greater thru the backdoor than it is through regular vaginal sex. You cannot refute the irrefutable. Look at one of vroomfondel's posts - he even gave you a biological explanation. Your hypothetical situation is also a very far fetched one. As per your notions about gay relationships - how many gays do you know or socialize with ? With your attitude' date=' i cant think many which is why you have this strange notions about gay people. Yes, there are promiscuous ones but so are hetero people as well.[/quote'] Notions ? What notions ? I am just stating facts. I don't need to hit gay clubs and talk to 12 different flamers in order to know that homosexuals make up 70% of the AIDS cases in the United States. This has already been proven in numerous studies by the US Department of Health and Human services, yuo can look it up yourself. Why don't gay people just get themselves sex changes ?
Chaos Posted August 19, 2008 Posted August 19, 2008 man this is efffin DISGUSTING, how can 2 men, put that weiner in them. YUCK YUCK YUCK. SICK B*stards should be shot dead.
vroomfondel Posted August 19, 2008 Posted August 19, 2008 Daily show makes fun of people waay better than I do. So here's to you kids: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=177585&title=dont-ask,-dont-tell-hearing
vroomfondel Posted August 19, 2008 Posted August 19, 2008 with respect to the actual point of the thread: kudos, but I expect violent repression from shiv-sena types as soon as they figure out what the **** a pride parade is.
Aditi Posted August 19, 2008 Posted August 19, 2008 Why don't gay people just get themselves sex changes ? Have you asked a gay person that lately?
Recommended Posts