[Sergio Tapia]

I've been thinking recently about the persecution homosexual people in general receive in the US, especially near the Bible Belt as it's called, and it's a damn shame.

I have a gay uncle and he's just a regular dude. His personal sexual preferences don't really change who he is towards other people and it doesn't make him a bad person. I have to wonder what the religious people are thinking when they hurt people by chanting hate in front of them.

Then there's another issue. Gay people in general want to be accepted and have the same rights any other person has, why shouldn't they? But do you think these flamboyant cross dressers and chapless pants wearing gays make their campaign towards equality suffer?

Couples want to be able to adopt kids easily, have the same rights and be able to wed, but do you think this behavior hurts them as a whole?

Here in Bolivia the majority of gay people are the lisping, promiscuous, skipping fairy type gays.

It reminds me of this article, which as always, seems the truth instead of a parody.
http://www.theonion....eptance-of-gays,351/

[skyhawk133]

Everyone has a gay uncle. Just sayin'

[Sergio Tapia]

Hahahaha, is that so?

[blutrane]

If you go in the bathroom and look above the sink on the wall you'll see him probably

[modi123_1]

I am understanding that being gay is okay as long as they are not in your face about it? Man I wish that worked with other groups as well. Hipsters, hippies, trendsters, goths, emo punks, hasidic jews, and police officers. No strike that, I would like to know a cop is there so the uniform stays.

Quote

But do you think these flamboyant cross dressers and chapless pants wearing gays make their campaign towards equality suffer?

In short, no. Why would it suffer? It only seems to tick off the ultra conservatives so one fringe element making another fringe group mad? What eva.

I am at a loss - why *would* this hurt them or their cause? Are you now the fashion police of Boliva? Hell I am confused now. How do you separate the colorful gays from the rest of your population? (That's a joke there)..

... and now picture time to drive that joke home!

[Kilorn]

skyhawk133 is my gay uncle.

[Sergio Tapia]

modi123_1, on 03 November 2010 - 10:35 AM, said:

*

Let's keep the personal attacks to a minimum please. You post pictures of the natives because that's the first thing that comes up on Google image search, am I right? If you ever visit Santa Cruz, Beni, Tarija; you'll see that there are millions of people who aren't all indians. But that's off topic! Also: Wrestling cholas fucking rule!

Quote

I am understanding that being gay is okay as long as they are not in your face about it?

I have a little concern over the over-the-top homosexuals who want to adopt children. Do you think it's a good environment for a child to be raised in when the care taker dresses in all leather with whips and other things, please answer that.

This post has been edited by Sergio Tapia: 03 November 2010 - 08:46 AM

[Choscura]

without reading arguments:

YES ABSOLUTELY because they make it impossible for anybody to take gay people seriously. the statistics on sexual preference actually track gay males as being two categories of sexuality: "gay" (in the closet or out, doesn't matter) and what they call "MSM" or "men who have sex with men" because there is a very large part of the gay population that dislikes prancing fairies as much as the beer drinking baptist idiots in the bible belt.

Some very effective people in history have had atypical sex lives. Julias Caeser was known to have cemented political relations with sexual acts- including homosexual acts- with various political leaders. Alexander of Macedonia was so gay that he died of a broken heart when his boyfriend died. the spartans of greece were nearly all bisexual- they would actually rape men in the armies they defeated after a large battle as part of a psychological warfare campaign to say "don't fuck with us" which, while that detail of it seems to have faded from our collective memory in society, worked so well that even now- thousands of years later- we're still making (homoerotic) movies about them, or at least 300 of them.

after reading some of what people here had to say:

I don't have a gay uncle. I don't have any gay blood relatives that I'm aware of, although I'm sure they are in my family tree somewhere. maybe somebody's in the closet.

[Sergio Tapia]

Funny you mention 300.

"Cartledge writes that he enjoyed the film, although he found Leonidas' description of the Athenians as "boy lovers" ironic, since the Spartans themselves incorporated institutional pederasty into their educational system."

[Shado3225]

"Are flamboyant gay people a detriment to their cause?"

No, I think its more a case of ignorant, unaccepting, closed minded idiots that are a detriment to their cause.

Every one has the right to be what they want, believe in what they want and have an opinion on what ever subject they want. The problem comes in when people do not respect others rights. Just because someone is/thinks/behaves different does not mean they have less rights to be who they are and the sooner more people start respecting the differences in each other the better.

So hug the nearest flamboyant gay guy you can find I mean after all we tolerate racist, ignorant red necks regardless of their believes

[baavgai]

In order to be a personal attack, you would have to be in one of those pictures...

Sergio Tapia, on 03 November 2010 - 09:19 AM, said:

Here in Bolivia the majority of gay people are the lisping, promiscuous, skipping fairy type gays.

Doubtful. A gay guy that sets off the fire alarm draws your attention and you assume being gay is being flaming. Every group has its drama llamas.

There are straight exhibitionists and when you see them you know it. You don't assume all straight folks are willing to be lewd and lascivious in public, because you know enough that aren't. Maybe you just know yourself.

You see someone gay do the same thing and you connect the behavior with the group as a whole. Because you don't allow for variation within the group.

People are people. While sex is a big part of being human, the orientation of it does really impact anything. Most people just want someone to call a partner and share the joke with.

And most folks aren't real keen on sharing the intimate part of their lives others. When was the last time a straight friend in a serious relationship went into graphic detail about their love life with you? Most gays are the same way. There are a ton of gay people around you that you wouldn't notice any more than anyone else.

[Atli]

Gay people are awesome. Fanatics are not.

But I do think over-the-top gay people are kind of annoying, and indeed make it harder for people to accept them.
(YOU'RE GAY, we get it! Now take the leather off please, it stinks.)

P.S.
Not everybody has a gay uncle. Some of them *are* the gay uncle

[Sergio Tapia]

Shado3225, on 03 November 2010 - 11:08 AM, said:

*

Completely agree. +1

baavgai, on 03 November 2010 - 11:10 AM, said:

Doubtful. A gay guy that sets off the fire alarm draws your attention and you assume being gay is being flaming. Every group has its drama llamas.

Yeah you're right. I guess I'll rephrase that to the vast majority of gay people I see on street are flamboyant and over the top.

[AlbuquerqueApache]

Sergio Tapia, on 03 November 2010 - 07:19 AM, said:

I've been thinking recently about the persecution homosexual people in general receive in the US, especially near the Bible Belt as it's called, and it's a damn shame.

I have a gay uncle and he's just a regular dude. His personal sexual preferences don't really change who he is towards other people and it doesn't make him a bad person. I have to wonder what the religious people are thinking when they hurt people by chanting hate in front of them.

*warning this is a religious conversation ahead*

Well, I do consider myself a Christian (I don't believe the world is 5,000 years old as some Christians say and I think Christ's message about God gets over looked in arguing about such things).

However, if you are referring to the Christian aversion to homosexuality, lets be straight here (no pun intended). In Leviticus it states that to "lie with a man as you would a woman is detestable" in the sight of God. So, it is assumed that this is a sin against God.

(also, this is of the law which God gave to the Israelites or the old covenant. The whole point of this was for God to show humanity it could not follow His laws. Therefore He formed a new covenant with humanity which is not based on the law).

So let's get to the core of Christian philosophy and theology. All of mankind is flawed and is born into sin. That which is of the flesh is weak. Man is of the flesh.

Therefore we are all sinners and cannot avoid that in this life. Redemption is through Faith in Christ.

So, in short....

some Christians are hypocrites. They say "Don't do this" and "Don't do that" because it is wrong. Should we avoid sin if possible? Absolutely. However, we are all of the flesh and are therefore prone to sin and will commit transgressions against God. Nothing we can do about it.

Ok, to get back on track. Most Christians do not approve of homosexuality and find it a deviant behavior. However, this in and of itself is not "hate speech". It's just a statement of belief.

"Hate speech" would be using derogatory comments which is against what Christ teaches.

Christians accept that humanity is flawed. That God, through his grace saw fit to redeem humanity and that, while we sit on our rear ends, he has given us a golden ticket called Jesus Christ.


/rant

This post has been edited by AlbuquerqueApache: 03 November 2010 - 09:20 AM

[Sergio Tapia]

Not all religous people are like the GOD HATES FAGS camp, I get that.

So what you're saying is that religious folk tend to stay away from homosexuals because what they do is a sin in your religion?