Bully Issue Followup from general

Page: 1 2
ID:193482
 
Jan 4 2002, 10:16 am
The topic didn't belong in general and plus the thread was getting huge.

Deadron wrote:
I was bullied my entire life in school for my name ("Ronald McDonald!") and for reading a lot. Sometimes I was bullied very seriously -- including having four guys pick me up and ram my crotch into a metal pole.

Should I have changed my name or stopped reading? Should my parents have pulled me out of school?

Being bullied because your parents are gay is just One More Reason people get bullied...the bullies are the problem here, not the people being bullied.

Well that's all fine and dandy that we have come to the conclusion, it's the bullys' fault that he bullies people, but either way, kids get bullied. Whose fault it is doesn't really matter, because it is still going to happen.
Jan 4 2002, 10:31 am
Ebonshadow wrote:
Well that's all fine and dandy that we have come to the conclusion, it's the bullys' fault that he bullies people, but either way, kids get bullied. Whose fault it is doesn't really matter, because it is still going to happen.

Yes it is...it's going to happen whether your parents are gay or not. So being gay has very little to nothing to do with it and shouldn't influence many decisions and certainly shouldn't encourage homophobia.
Jan 4 2002, 10:42 am
In response to Deadron
Deadron wrote:
Yes it is...it's going to happen whether your parents are gay or not. So being gay has very little to nothing to do with it and shouldn't influence many decisions and certainly shouldn't encourage homophobia.

Yes but at this point in time, there is a lot of peer pressure against gays. You could get killed for being gay around the wrong people. That's settled down quite a bit but you've heard stories about it. How often do you hear of a boy being killed because he was too fat, too ugly, or anything else kids get made fun of for? You probably know more about the prejudicy towards gays then I do though(not ment to be an offensive statement or anything). It wont encourage homophobia, in fact after a while it would probably cause it to die down because these children of the couples would then pass down their beliefs to their children-eventually elliminating homophobia. I have basically become neutral on my position about gay couples having children, but the couple should take into consideration that the child will be made fun of more than the average kid. I know, I know, everybody else seems to think differently and that the child would be made fun of anyway. What I am trying to say is that not only would there be more bullying, I think it would be a lot more hurtful to the child because instead of being insulted about something silly like reading, they're whole family would be getting insulted (kinda like a really bad yo' momma' joke =).
Jan 4 2002, 10:54 am
In response to Ebonshadow
Ebonshadow wrote:
Deadron wrote:
Yes it is...it's going to happen whether your parents are gay or not. So being gay has very little to nothing to do with it and shouldn't influence many decisions and certainly shouldn't encourage homophobia.

Yes but at this point in time, there is a lot of peer pressure against gays. You could get killed for being gay around the wrong people. That's settled down quite a bit but you've heard stories about it... I have basically become neutral on my position about gay couples having children, but the couple should take into consideration that the child will be made fun of more than the average kid.

There was a time here when you could get killed for going to a school while being black. Certainly you would get more than your usual share of harrassment.

Should black parents have stopped having children?
Jan 4 2002, 10:54 am
In response to Ebonshadow
I will cease my views on this topic because of the social cluster i know as my friends, the majority of them have unlicensed Guns which they use to terrorise homosexual people with. From my appearance Gay people fear me. i am only 16 and 5'9 and have very large muscular build and my facial fetures make me look agressive; and due to the gropu i hang around with. This Topic has made me feel guilty but non the less i remain homophobic.
Jan 4 2002, 10:57 am
In response to Deadron
No, beacuse it was from a process which we evovled. Of Male and Female reproduction. If we were ment to be Gay would we not have been A sexaul?

We evolved male-female reproduction and bonding and we are the dominant species. If we were Gay we would have not got past the ape stage of evolution.
Jan 4 2002, 11:08 am
In response to Deadron
Deadron wrote:
There was a time here when you could get killed for going to a school while being black. Certainly you would get more than your usual share of harrassment.

Should black parents have stopped having children?

Ofcourse not, that's why im neutral on this situation. You know how long it took us to evolve through the civil rights movement. Well, this would probably be a long and drawn out thing too. It's not something you just jump into and say yes without thinking about what is going to happen along the way.
Jan 4 2002, 11:37 am
In response to Ebonshadow
Well, you do have something of a point with regards to the movement, but if everyone (like you) says that they won't accept it until it becomes a long drawn out process for acceptance, then it never WILL become accepted because everyone is waiting until it is.

The more people that are tolerant (not supportive, mind you, but tolerant) the better off the world is.

(I'll admit that I'm not supportive of homosexuality by any means, but if someone is gay, that's what they are and there's nothing wrong with them.)
Jan 4 2002, 12:04 pm
In response to Spuzzum
Spuzzum wrote:
Well, you do have something of a point with regards to the movement, but if everyone (like you) says that they won't accept it until it becomes a long drawn out process for acceptance, then it never WILL become accepted because everyone is waiting until it is.

I never said I don't accept it. I am just saying most others wont.

(I'll admit that I'm not supportive of homosexuality by any means, but if someone is gay, that's what they are and there's nothing wrong with them.)

That is my position as well. I used to be kinda homophobic but that was because of this really strange incident that happened while on break when I worked at a sports bar type of thing. I really don't like to talk about it though. lol.
Jan 4 2002, 12:21 pm
In response to Super saiyan3
Super saiyan3 wrote:
No, beacuse it was from a process which we evovled. Of Male and Female reproduction. If we were ment to be Gay would we not have been A sexaul?

We evolved male-female reproduction and bonding and we are the dominant species. If we were Gay we would have not got past the ape stage of evolution.

That's a thoroughly faulty argument--for starters, what our society is doing now has very little to do with evolution. By finding treatments or even cures for many diseases and hereditary disorders, creating a society where obtaining the necessities of survival is no longer based entirely on individual performance (and is, supposedly, taken care of regardless), and practicing family planning and birth control (well, some people, anyways), nature has little power to select for or against many traits. Homosexuality, due to its nature, might remain one of those traits--but not many homosexuals are exclusively homosexual throughout the whole of their life span. One fling with a heterosexual partner could be enough to pass on the trait... except for that homosexuality is not a particularly hereditable trait, although some genetic correlation has been shown. Most studies I've read about on incidence rates and conditions tend to imply that to a large degree, homosexuality is a concious lifestyle choice that emerges on its own more often than not and is usually not "passed down" either from biological parents or adoptive homosexual parents.

And so what? People may decide to abstain from sex altogether--is celibacy some sort of aberration against nature which must be purged from society? Even short of complete celibacy, couples are tending to delay marriage and children and limit family sizes, and birth control is freely practiced with minimal social stigma. If these practices had existed as humans were evolving, then we might very well all be running around on our knuckles and living in trees to this day--evolution just really doesn't figure into the way we live anymore, and survival of our species really doesn't depend on couples having as many children as humanly possible (or at least we had better hope it doesn't, or otherwise we're already screwed a hundred times over by the aforementioned practices). Homosexuality has existed for thousands of years, and as it doesn't much seem to have done much damage to our species' chance of survival in that time, I'm guessing it definitely won't now when we're able to control reproduction to a much greater extent than ever imagined back then.
Jan 4 2002, 12:46 pm
In response to Super saiyan3
Super saiyan3 wrote:
No, beacuse it was from a process which we evovled. Of Male and Female reproduction. If we were ment to be Gay would we not have been A sexaul?

We evolved male-female reproduction and bonding and we are the dominant species. If we were Gay we would have not got past the ape stage of evolution.

In the hopes of not starting some flame war, im going to refrain from replying to this remark, I am however disturbed by it. Its this kind of view that has caused thousands of homosexuals to be ruthlessly killed, through crusades, riots, blame for illness, babies who were born DOA, etc.

I refuse to judge people due to sexual preference, and I havent the slightest against homosexuals, I know a few myself. I do object to this kind of saying however, which is more because I cannot comprehend how you can put yourself in this...state of mind. Im guessing most of it comes from parents, and some religions(Christianity comes to mind, I am not so educated as to what is said in Christian books, but I seem to recall the Christian Bible saying that being homosexual is wrong/evil/a sin)

Thats just my 2c
Alathon
Jan 4 2002, 1:23 pm
In response to Alathon
Alathon wrote:
And some religions(Christianity comes to mind, I am not so educated as to what is said in Christian books, but I seem to recall the Christian Bible saying that being homosexual is wrong/evil/a sin)

Yep ur right, my parents have always told me I'd got hell if I was gay. But you know what? If we go by everything the bible we're ALL prolly goin to hell anyways. Adultry is an easy one, everytime you look at a chick the wrong way ur sinning. Vainity, everytime you look in the mirror to make sure your hair is alright you sinning. With those two alone, I am going to spend all eternity in hell :-/.
Jan 4 2002, 1:27 pm
In response to Alathon
Im guessing most of it comes from parents, and some religions(Christianity comes to mind, I am not so educated as to what is said in Christian books, but I seem to recall the Christian Bible saying that being homosexual is wrong/evil/a sin)

It does. It also says heterosexual contact outside of marriage is wrong/evil/sinful (mentions it a lot more frequently, in fact). It also says a whole bunch of other things are sinful: gossip, drunkenness, envy, pride, you name it. So, there it is, right?

However, it also says that all have fallen short of the glory of God; that a man is defiled by what comes out of him, not what goes into him; that men should judge not, lest they be judged; and that men are justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law. And hundreds of other quotable quotes along the same lines.

Well, I'm running out of steam here and I have stuff to do tonight. But I will say that, though I think it's unlikely that Jesus would have given his imprimatur to any kind of sex outside a traditional marriage, it's almost inconceivable to me that he would have wanted his disciples to "go ye forth and beat up some queers."
Jan 4 2002, 1:47 pm
In response to Gughunter
It does. It also says heterosexual contact outside of marriage is wrong/evil/sinful (mentions it a lot more frequently, in fact).

For that matter, much of it implies that any intercourse for reasons other than procreation is wrong/evil/sinful, though they've never been really heavy on sticking to that one.
Jan 4 2002, 2:03 pm
In response to Gughunter
Gughunter wrote:
Im guessing most of it comes from parents, and some religions(Christianity comes to mind, I am not so educated as to what is said in Christian books, but I seem to recall the Christian Bible saying that being homosexual is wrong/evil/a sin)

It does. It also says heterosexual contact outside of marriage is wrong/evil/sinful (mentions it a lot more frequently, in fact). It also says a whole bunch of other things are sinful: gossip, drunkenness, envy, pride, you name it. So, there it is, right?

Don't forget wearing cloth of different kinds of fibers, and other such classics!

(I may not have that exactly right, but there's some real fun stuff in there...)
Jan 4 2002, 2:11 pm
In response to Super saiyan3
I guess you don't think there are any gay apes...

You obviously believe in some version of evolution, however warped, so let me bring this to your attention: we as a species are born with the capacity for homosexuality. I hear a lot of talk like this, variations about how homosexuality is obviously wrong because men and women are "designed" to fit together one way... well, um, I hate to burst anybody's bubble... but women and women also fit together just fine in a variety of ways, and if what I hear is true, then so do men and men.

If an occassional homosexual individual didn't serve a purpose according to whatever force guided our creation (whether an intelligent designer, or evolutionary need)... homosexuality wouldn't be wrong, it would be impossible. The human body simply wouldn't work in the necessary fashion, and I can assure you, it does. No matter how much affection I might feel toward my partner (and would I even be able to feel that? Feelings are biological, too.), I would have no means to express them. Without going into the gory details, suffice it to say that I do have such means.

Saiyan, if your "belief" (which I would call more a feeling or inkling than a belief, since a belief must be articulated) in the inferiority of homosexuals is truly based on evolution and reproductive need, then I assume you and your neanderthal friends also enjoy terrorizing the users of protection and contraceptives, and unless I'm grossly misinformed about human anatomy, anybody who has what Clinton would argue isn't technically sex is also an evolutionary slacker...

Hey, I just realized something funny... you started this thread by saying that gays aren't fit to have kids. Now you're saying that the reason that gays are unfit is because they don't have kids!

Gosh, do you always talk out of that orifice?

Jan 4 2002, 2:15 pm
In response to Deadron
In deference to my Hebrew ancestors, I follow my own strict interpretation of Mosaic dietary law... by time I eat any animal, it's no longer on cloven hooves or in a shell.
Jan 5 2002, 2:37 am
In response to Lesbian Assassin
Lesbian Assassin wrote:
Gosh, do you always talk out of that orifice?


Well to be honest it is very difficult for me to write without expressing my true views on this as i have been supressing my offencive languange, and my more harsh views.

As i read through the whole of the topic it was said that evolution is not much a factor now days. I am doing A Level Biology and actaul at the rate "man" is doing things we will not be around for very much longer. Natraul Selection is a topic we did and this came up. Ummm you were saying that i said that gay's should not have children and should/are outcast beacuse they are unable to?

Well sort of Natraul Selection involves the process of male and female. If male-male *shudders* female-female nothing happens so in "most" species there is no homosexuality at all. We due to our "large" brains and broad views actaully have it in society. My religeon of Sikhism teaches that it is not my job to say anything to gay/any other people's beliefs as it is up to God what shall be done to them. But it is very difficult to follow as it effects my life and people that i know, mixing with people who aren;t on my happy list.
Jan 5 2002, 6:16 am
In response to Super saiyan3
Super saiyan3 wrote:
male-male *shudders* female-female

This strikes me as slightly funny, no *shudder* to lesbianism?(If that is a word, anyways.)

Alathon
Jan 5 2002, 6:20 am
In response to Alathon
Being a male i can't possibly think of a guy and a guy, thats who my mates terrorise just guys.
Page: 1 2