If you believe that adults can give consent, which is the very basis for why sex with anything else is a crime, then there is a huge canyon between homosexual relationships and everything else that you are talking about. Sex between an adult and a child and an animal is not just horrifying because society has set an arbitrary standard. Society (mostly) has decided that these people cannot possibly give consent, so it's rape plain and simple.
That's not the case between two consenting adults. Where is the moral hazard?
#408284 - 01/17/0901:17 AMRe: Gay marriage
Proud MacBabe. Happy everything to everybody.
Loc: B.C. Canada
Funny how those who profess devotion spend most of their time ranting and raving about the "sins" of others.
Said it before and I'll say it again; the bible alludes to homosexuality once and speaks at great lengths about poverty at least 26 times! For the luvofgawd, why don't these people go volunteer and help the poor. I'll live with one barb about gays if they go fight poverty 26 times, one barb, 26 times, one barb 26 times.
If that is too difficult then get the f**k out of my bedroom.
Loc: Long Beach, CA
There are times when I utterly despair over any potential for enlightenment in many self-righteous, fundamentalist dark corners.
Bigotry is bigotry is bigotry... and often couched in the most sugar-coated manner from basically 'good' people.
"Who me?"... "Why some of my best friends..." "I'm only telling you what is best for you." "Your freedom must not stand in the way of my freedom to practice discrimination." "If God had intended..." etc., etc. etc.
The fact that in CA Prop 8 passed... not *just* because of corrupt influence from powerful, moneyed blocks from the far right... but also because of the deep-felt feelings (that are nevertheless discrimination by any sense of the word) from people who should have known better based on their own "road"... the fact that it passed (albeit by an extremely narrow) is testament to the power of hatred of "the other." For, make no mistake, this was not really about simply gay marriage. It was another chapter in the long-standing pattern of a psychological "need" to stamp out that which is different.
Contrary to the lies about stuff like sex with animals, multiple wives, etc., the struggle for equality for those of us who are gay is a struggle for acceptance... and not "forced" acceptance either (as some would deceitfully maintain)... acceptance that would allow all of us to rejoice in the variety of humankind, its infinite differences, its infinite possibilities.
Certainly, there are outlandish extremes. To ask for equality does not mean condoning debauchery. Yes, there are limits. Funny, though, that so often the finger is pointed at the gay community without acknowledging the "log" in the eye of the self-righteous accuser. It's "OK" to have brothels, harems, child "brides," forced prostitution, even murder of a woman who has brought "shame" on her family,... all this and more... and yet... God forbid any show of homosexuality which offends one's sense of the-way-it-ought-to-be.
Well, I'm not so naive as to imagine that what I say here is going to change the mind of anyone. And, yes, I despair. But change *is* coming... probably not in my lifetime, but then I never thought I'd see this country elect a black president either. One need only look at the historical precedent, the taboos of antiquity which have been re-considered and cast aside. And to acknowledge that does *not* mean throwing in the towel to complete licentiousness. That is an argument only the rigid puritans (of whatever cultural stripe) make.
The degree to which a society tolerates/accepts nudity varies a lot. I thought I'd respond to Waleed's comments by posting links to things like nude biking and strip poker playing--all done nicely in public. But as I was looking for links I found so many that it became obvious that it was superfluous to do the linking. At the same time, I agree with Lester . . . never have I seen any nudity at gay pride parades. A lot of strutting and fretting, to be sure, but no nudity. In any case, I can't accept the idea that the reason homosexuality is to be abhorred is because some homosexuals are exhibitionism. I don't need to point out how many heterosexuals are equally or more exhibitionistic.
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
Perhaps you do, though. After all, clearly a double standard is in play.
Live and let live, man.
Anyway, I've witnessed a few pride parades, having encountered them on bike rides across town... never saw any full frontal nudity - strange, that! - no, just some frisky men and women frolicking up the street in some fairly revealing attire - but no more so than what you'd encounter at a typical beach in North America.
BTW, thanks for posting that retro gay marriage vid... hilarious.
Funny old business - nudity on a beach is somehow very different from nudity in the context of sexuality, i.e. even a pride march. The Public's response to a crowd of nude cyclists is often very different from their response to a crowd of nude homosexuals - context is everything.
Of course, in a culture where nudity in general is unacceptable, for sure it wouldn't make any difference what someone's sexual orientation was.
Personally, I'm more freaked out by overtly sexual clothing/behaviour in either men or women than I am by nudity. As I've been saying in another thread, we're dealing (even within a single culture) with a manifold standard, never mind double - music videos these days are mostly just simulated sex and very sexually explicit dress, but that's more acceptable because it's targeted at heterosexuals. Society at large has become very sexualised, and so a lot of behaviour that isn't necessarily about sex is perceived as sexual - such as marching nude in a pride march, where it's just as likely just to be an expression of 'at last, I'm allowed to be visible, what a relief'. If you don't like it, don't look. If you have to look, look more closely and look at people's faces - maybe the most significant thing going on is that they're happy, not that they're naked.
Edited by padmavyuha (01/17/0901:00 PM)
_________________________ If it's brokenless, don't suffix it...
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.