Thread: "Schoolchildren "Bombarded" With Homosexual References - Melanie Phillips

I think they should make all math problems in school gay themed

I don't care whether it's something to do with genes or not. Homosexuals are still people, and therefore should be given the respect they deserve. Who they love and what they do in their bedrooms is not any of my business, and they are certainly not causing any hurt to me. So why should I discriminate them? I just think that homophobic people need to get with the times.

And the only thing in my subjects that I'll be worried about is my exam results and whether I can understand parabolas (which I can't. Grr... )

Originally Posted by Raspberry

And the only thing in my subjects that I'll be worried about is my exam results and whether I can understand parabolas (which I can't. Grr... )

Oh, parabolas are fun. What isn't making sense about them?

Everything. Ha. My lack of maths skills.

Aww. Have you tried talking to your prof outside of class? They're usually more than willing to help.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Judging by some of the weird things you've said in the science forum, I have a feeling Aquanina understands evolution a hell of a lot better than you do.

What a snappy retort, where did that come from?

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

But that's all besides the point. The real point (and the point that I think that Aquanina was trying to make) is "Why should we give a fuck if we exist because we help genes replicate themselves? How does that make it \"our\" purpose to have offspring?" Saying that our purpose is to spread our genes is just falling into the naturalistic fallacy.

Indeed that was the point I was trying to make, albeit rather poorly.

@Rasberry, you should ask questions in the math forum. I can get weird but there are lots of people here that are good at explaining things simply.

Advice taken

Back on topic...

OK, personally, I am against moves to promote homosexuality, or to show that it is natural, but I will go ahead and give a further opinion.

Even as an anti-gay person, I still think they are making a semi-smart move. I don't think that people should be gay, I do not feel that it is natural or that we should do it, but I think that gay people shouldn't be discriminated or denied services that normal people have. They're people, so they should have the same rights as us. But I don't think it should be promoted as natural or OK, as it can easily spread around as the new cool thing, which can screw with birth rates and such, even with artificial insemination.

Less and less people are having kids, and when homosexuality becomes dominant (which I doubt it will), it will make it even less common since accidental pregnancies can't occur. With less population... well, with our current dilemma, it would be a good thing, but it would quickly turn worse. As the years go by without children, there will be less people to replace them each generation, so eventually our population may drop to a very low rate. You can see how that may turn into a problem.

Also, a point I missed: gays adopting children. I don't think so. As I said earlier, I think that gay behavior shouldn't be promoted, and this will obviously promote it on an indirect level, as the children will learn it from them, and continue many problems to come. I just disagree with any moves to promote homosexuality, but I am OK with people trying to stop discrimination and give them equal rights (yes, call me a hypocrite for the adoption thing, but I still stand by it).

I think it would be OK to put some kind of gay statistics/facts in social studies, math, or whatever, as long as it isn't overdone and doesn't promote it.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

I don't think that people should be gay, I do not feel that it is natural or that we should do it, but I think that gay people shouldn't be discriminated or denied services that normal people have. They're people, so they should have the same rights as us. But I don't think it should be promoted as natural or OK, as it can easily spread around as the new cool thing, which can screw with birth rates and such, even with artificial insemination.

you seem to be using the word "natural" here. I've heard a couple definitions, but the most commonly accepted is "found in nature". I'm not going to bring up the usual arguments, such as the one that other species have been shown to be homo/bi-sexual at times. Instead, I want to ask you how YOU define natural? not-human? are humans somehow separate from nature? how silly is that thought-process?
also

when homosexuality becomes dominant

wait what

They're people, so they should have the same rights as us.

you've also got this whole "us/them" mentality going on, don't you
there is exactly one difference between gays and not-gays.

Personally I don't think it would ever spread around as the "new cool thing". I think that being gay is something you are born as. It's always there. You either like the same sex or you don't. I really don't think that many people at all would sit and think "hmmm... well there's quite a few people becoming gay now so I guess I should too...". Maybe there would be some lesbian action during a drunken game of spin the bottle, but that's about as far as it would go I think.

I also think that it should be promoted as ok, because it really saddens me to think of people too frightened to tell other people about something that is just part of them, incase they are discriminated. I dunno... Like you are given chocolate milk and strawberry milk, and although you really really want the strawberry milk and can't stand the taste of the chocolate milk, you must drink the chocolate milk because otherwise people will hurt you, mentally or physically. And the your whole life, while you live off of chocolate milk, the strawberry milk is right there, in the fridge, staring at you in all it's pink, creamy glory!

(I am currently drinking chocolate milk. A literal glass of chocolate milk.)

Also, homosexuals really are a minority compared to hetrosexuals. I doubt that the birth rate will drop to the rate you describe just because more people are accepting homosexuals. The birth rate is getting higher, what with medicine and such.

If straight couples can raise gay children, can gay couples not raise straight children? If being striaght truely is "natural" then what does it matter? Because then, homosexuality would stick to a minority, and therefore we have nothing to worry about.

But I'm glad you don't discriminate people just because of which sex they are attracted to, which let's face it, we can't help who we love, right?

Oh yeah, and my dog (who is male, and the cutest thing ever xD) tries to hump males instead of females so I guess it is found in nature

Originally Posted by Snowboy

But I don't think it should be promoted as natural or OK, as it can easily spread around as the new cool thing, which can screw with birth rates and such, even with artificial insemination.

LOL WUT
What is this I don't even
FYI, approximately 1-3% of the US population is estimated to be openly gay. People can't just magically turn gay. It doesn't work that way. What you're proposing is a massive, unified shift in sexual orientation. This is simply impossible. To prove it, I offer you a test. Sit down, and contemplate another man. Now tell me...do you feel ANY sexual attraction for this man? No? So what makes you think anyone else is so different? People don't just wake up and go "Oh, I think I'll be gay today."

Less and less people are having kids, and when homosexuality becomes dominant (which I doubt it will), it will make it even less common since accidental pregnancies can't occur. With less population... well, with our current dilemma, it would be a good thing, but it would quickly turn worse. As the years go by without children, there will be less people to replace them each generation, so eventually our population may drop to a very low rate. You can see how that may turn into a problem.

Holy slippery slope, Batman! This is quite the extreme leap from saying something is okay to assuming it will become hugely mainstream. And what's wrong with a declining birth rate, anyway? It happens in all modern societies. Japan, which is far more punishing of homosexuality than America, has an astoundingly low birth rate compared to America. Gay people aren't going to be responsible for any significant decline. They aren't going to become 97%+ of the population, leaving only 3% of breeding Americans. What you're proposing is absolutely ludicrous.

Also, a point I missed: gays adopting children. I don't think so. As I said earlier, I think that gay behavior shouldn't be promoted, and this will obviously promote it on an indirect level, as the children will learn it from them, and continue many problems to come. I just disagree with any moves to promote homosexuality, but I am OK with people trying to stop discrimination and give them equal rights (yes, call me a hypocrite for the adoption thing, but I still stand by it).

It has been shown, time and again, that being raised by gay parents doesn't automatically make you gay. Doesn't even improve your odds of being gay. Now consider the stressed adoption system in place already. We need parents, and gay people are just as competent at parenting as straight people.
Let's go back to artificial insemination a moment. What if a lesbian couple have a baby? Are you going to take it away from them, for fear it may turn out gay? You treat homosexuality as some sort of disease.

Originally Posted by no-Name

Instead, I want to ask you how YOU define natural?

wait what

1) As in, humans aren't supposed to reproduce in that way.

2) When I say that I mean when gays become more common than straights.

Originally Posted by Raspberry

Personally I don't think it would ever spread around as the "new cool thing".

I also think that it should be promoted as ok,

I doubt that the birth rate will drop to the rate you describe just because more people are accepting homosexuals. The birth rate is getting higher, what with medicine and such.

we can't help who we love, right?

1) People are influenced by their surroundings. Let's use smoking pot to help me explain this. Well, it's possible to start on your own, but many people start because of peer pressure and people recommending it to them. Smoking pot is considered cool nowadays (that is, among the people not associated with the law), and since people want to be cool, they will do what the smokers do. It's the same thing. People become gay, they are seen as cool because they are gay, people want to mimic them to become cool, so they become gay. How can it not be spread around in this manner?

2) So, are you saying that people should become gay? I think you are trying to say we should accept them into society, and I agree, but I also think they should be encouraged to become straight or asexual.

3) Please read my previous argument. And I didn't say it would be because homosexuals are accepted, I'm saying it's occurring in an imagined situation where most people are gay.

4) Yes, you can. It is easy (on some level) to become straight. Obviously it will take some time and pain, but it is possible.

I remember reading a post by dannon somewhere where he said maybe the reason there are so many gay people on earth is because it is natures intent to cause genetics to make gay people, to help lower the population.... naturally

Originally Posted by Snowboy

OK, personally, I am against moves to promote homosexuality, or to show that it is natural, but I will go ahead and give a further opinion.

Even as an anti-gay person, I still think they are making a semi-smart move. I don't think that people should be gay, I do not feel that it is natural or that we should do it, but I think that gay people shouldn't be discriminated or denied services that normal people have. They're people, so they should have the same rights as us. But I don't think it should be promoted as natural or OK, as it can easily spread around as the new cool thing, which can screw with birth rates and such, even with artificial insemination.

Less and less people are having kids, and when homosexuality becomes dominant (which I doubt it will), it will make it even less common since accidental pregnancies can't occur. With less population... well, with our current dilemma, it would be a good thing, but it would quickly turn worse. As the years go by without children, there will be less people to replace them each generation, so eventually our population may drop to a very low rate. You can see how that may turn into a problem.

Also, a point I missed: gays adopting children. I don't think so. As I said earlier, I think that gay behavior shouldn't be promoted, and this will obviously promote it on an indirect level, as the children will learn it from them, and continue many problems to come. I just disagree with any moves to promote homosexuality, but I am OK with people trying to stop discrimination and give them equal rights (yes, call me a hypocrite for the adoption thing, but I still stand by it).

I think it would be OK to put some kind of gay statistics/facts in social studies, math, or whatever, as long as it isn't overdone and doesn't promote it.

Great post bro, you really nailed the problem at its core.

People like you.

Originally Posted by Marvo

Great post bro, you really nailed the problem at its core.

People like you.

Wait, are you calling me gay, or are you saying that I'm the problem?

Originally Posted by Snowboy

People become gay, they are seen as cool because they are gay, people want to mimic them to become cool, so they be-

I hope to sweet jesus lord almighty that this happens.
When/if it does, being gay will be so popular that it becomes passé to be gay, and everyone faking will just stop.
This is an infinitely better than other options that could happen. I hope you are correct, fortuneteller.

ps your pot analogy is stupid

4) Yes, you can. It is easy (on some level) to become straight. Obviously it will take some time and pain, but it is possible.

just saw this
why are you terrible

Originally Posted by Snowboy

1) As in, humans aren't supposed to reproduce in that way.

You still need to define what natural is. Everything considered, natural is a completely meaningless term. The word you're looking for is "unusual".

2) When I say that I mean when gays become more common than straights.

This will never happen.

1) People are influenced by their surroundings. Let's use smoking pot to help me explain this. Well, it's possible to start on your own, but many people start because of peer pressure and people recommending it to them. Smoking pot is considered cool nowadays (that is, among the people not associated with the law), and since people want to be cool, they will do what the smokers do. It's the same thing. People become gay, they are seen as cool because they are gay, people want to mimic them to become cool, so they become gay. How can it not be spread around in this manner?

Because it's not the same thing. In one case you're talking about sticking your dick up another guy's ass having sex with people of the same sex and in the other case you're talking about smoking a plant. It's an absolute shit analogy.

2) So, are you saying that people should become gay? I think you are trying to say we should accept them into society, and I agree

By letting gay people know that it's okay to be gay, they will be able to lead a less stressful life with less worries and concerns all the time.

but I also think they should be encouraged to become straight or asexual.

Fuck you.

3) Please read my previous argument. And I didn't say it would be because homosexuals are accepted, I'm saying it's occurring in an imagined situation where most people are gay.

No. Just no.

4) Yes, you can. It is easy (on some level) to become straight. Obviously it will take some time and pain, but it is possible.

No it isn't. Your sexuality is an important part of your personality that will only in extremely rare situations affect the people around you badly. Attempting to change that will only damage your self.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Holy slippery slope, Batman! This is quite the extreme leap from saying something is okay to assuming it will become hugely mainstream. And what's wrong with a declining birth rate, anyway? It happens in all modern societies. Japan, which is far more punishing of homosexuality than America, has an astoundingly low birth rate compared to America. Gay people aren't going to be responsible for any significant decline. They aren't going to become 97%+ of the population, leaving only 3% of breeding Americans. What you're proposing is absolutely ludicrous.

Look, I said it would be OK for a quick decline in birth rate, but with enough time it might turn into a problem.

And for your saying that it won't spread, check my stupid pot analogy to see how it potentially could spread.

Originally Posted by no-Name

ps your pot analogy is stupid

I was trying to help you understand how it could spread. I'm not going to make a better one just so that you can approve of it.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

1) People are influenced by their surroundings. Let's use smoking pot to help me explain this. Well, it's possible to start on your own, but many people start because of peer pressure and people recommending it to them. Smoking pot is considered cool nowadays (that is, among the people not associated with the law), and since people want to be cool, they will do what the smokers do. It's the same thing. People become gay, they are seen as cool because they are gay, people want to mimic them to become cool, so they become gay. How can it not be spread around in this manner?

Yes, they are influenced to an extent. But smoking pot is not something you are born as, but something you can do on and off. You are not gay if you just follow a crowd. That is just gay-action until you eventually stop, which if you are straight you will, because you are straight. If all my friends suddenly turned to me and said they were all gay, would that make me gay? No. Would that make you gay? Probably not.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

2) So, are you saying that people should become gay? I think you are trying to say we should accept them into society, and I agree, but I also think they should be encouraged to become straight or asexual.

You cannot "become" straight, because you are gay. It's like trying to make blonde hair grow from your head when your hair is brown. Yes, you can bleach it blonde, but in the end it's fake, and when your hair grows out it'll still be brunette.

And asexual is something that happens in plants. You mean bisexual right? And in that case, again, you are born that way. Therefore your hair is red, a kind of in the middle. You still cannot change it.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

3) Please read my previous argument. And I didn't say it would be because homosexuals are accepted, I'm saying it's occurring in an imagined situation where most people are gay.

Therefore there is no reason to worry about it.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

4) Yes, you can. It is easy (on some level) to become straight. Obviously it will take some time and pain, but it is possible.

So were you gay and became straight? If so please share your experience. If not, the person who "became straight" is most likely faking to please others.

Originally Posted by Snowboy

And for your saying that it won't spread, check my stupid pot analogy to see how it potentially could spread.
I was trying to help you understand how it could spread. I'm not going to make a better one just so that you can approve of it.

I did check your analogy. Your logic and critical thinking skills are absolutely horrid. What you proposed will never happen. If it does, so the fuck what? Even lesbians have maternal instincts, and gay people can donate all the sperm they damn well please. Not that it matters, since IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Originally Posted by Raspberry

Yes, they are influenced to an extent. But smoking pot is not something you are born as, but something you can do on and off. You are not gay if you just follow a crowd. That is just gay-action until you eventually stop, which if you are straight you will, because you are straight. If all my friends suddenly turned to me and said they were all gay, would that make me gay? No. Would that make you gay? Probably not.

You cannot "become" straight, because you are gay. It's like trying to make blonde hair grow from your head when your hair is brown. Yes, you can bleach it blonde, but in the end it's fake, and when your hair grows out it'll still be brunette.

And asexual is something that happens in plants. You mean bisexual right? And in that case, again, you are born that way. Therefore your hair is red, a kind of in the middle. You still cannot change it.

So were you gay and became straight? If so please share your experience. If not, the person who "became straight" is most likely faking to please others.

1) OK, maybe not when you are older and you have already developed your sexual orientation, but maybe if you are younger you can be influenced in this way. The younger population is still figuring out their sexual orientation, so that would be the time to strike.

2) Homosexuality can be learned, but hair color isn't, so I'm just going to wait for a better argument.

3) There are some humans that aren't sexually attracted to anything. And yes, that is found in plants.

4) Refer to #2.

Originally Posted by Mario92

I did check your analogy. Your logic and critical thinking skills are absolutely horrid. What you proposed will never happen. If it does, so the fuck what? Even lesbians have maternal instincts, and gay people can donate all the sperm they damn well please. Not that it matters, since IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

What, so you're saying homosexuality can't be learned? Explain.

EDIT: Also, because of the growing awareness of homosexuality and being taught about it, what's to stop little children from thinking that is how everything is supposed to work and going along with it? That just adds some slight support to how it can spread.

ROFL at these posts