How does that work…? So, an 8 year-old boy IS human, right? I mean because he hasn’t gone through puberty, and therefore can’t be gay… But a few years later, he discovers he’s a homosexual and somehow loses his humanity?? 
It’s good that not everyone here thinks the same, but I still want to see you explain that… 
OK, rather than posting my thoughts on the second page of stuff, I’m going to start by replying to these replies.
nightowl: I, for one, do not appreciate that sarcastic list. I won’t take the time to respond to it, except for the first one, since it caught my attention. I don’t like polyester; I prefer wool, cotton, and other natural materials. I despise the idea of birth control. As far as eyeglasses, they are a tool to help the disabled, much like wheelchairs and hearing aids.
This is what I like to call bullshit. Scientific evidence has proven, quite conclusively, that homosexuals have chosen their orientation.
Blacks are an ethnic group, first of all. Reminder: “minority” and “ethnicity” are not synonymous.
Secondly, women did not choose to be women. And, even if we include blacks, they, likewise, did not choose. The comparison is irrelavent.
I think that you are misunderstanding me. I was trying to point out, mathematically, that it’s not definitely “over one-third,” unless 1512>n>1500, where n is the number of local newspapers in the U.S.A. Actually, n does not have to be greater than 1500, but you already said that it was, so it remains there. If, for example, there are 1550 local newspapers, then the 504 such papers are actually less than one-third.
Thankfully, my local newspapers are not in that list, though I detect the encroachment from nearby ones.
Actually, the very concept of homosexuality cannot be applied to worms, since they are hermaphroditic in nature. Some worms change throughout their lives, but, during each stage, they mate with those of the (currently) opposite sex. Some worms, on the other hand, live out their entire lives as hermaphrodites. These reproduce with others of their species (also hermaphroditic); HOWEVER, they are heterosexual because the opposite of hermaphroditicism is hermaphroditicism. It’s like how the opposite of 0 is 0, or the opposite of a photon is a photon, to give you some more examples around which to try to wrap your minds.
I find this both interesting and amusing. Firstly, you only consider me a radical because of the current situation. Modern society has been somewhat conditioned that homosexuality is somehow ‘OK.’ Just because it is logical to accept others who are different (different ethnicity, different gender, etc.) does not mean that everyone who is different should be accepted. I, for example, do not accept neo-nazis, homosexuals, or cannibals, just to name a few.
Secondly, I would not get more accomplished debating this with a brick wall, or other inanimate object. By debating with other humans, I can potentially convince them that homosexuality is in many ways wrong. The brick wall lacks an opinion in the first place, and is also incapable of hearing me or interpreting what I say. I hope that my time spent here can be of some aid to those out there who are of such blindness.
I believe that I made it clear that the lack of love between homosexuals is one of the main reasons that gay marriage should not be permitted.
I would prefer if we could avoid the random insults here. I know that it’s not my thread, but still, it seems a little…“childish.”
I think that the primary issue for the both of you, before you try to understand how homosexuals aren’t people, is your lack of understanding of a difference. Specifically, there is a difference between a HUMAN and a PERSON.
A human is any member of the genus Homo, as characterized by specific biological traits. Currently, there is only one species under the Homo genus left on the planet: Homo sapiens. I am a human, and so is a homosexual, and so is that fresh body laying in the morgue.
A person is another matter altogether, and includes various forms of life. I am a person, and so is the tree in my front yard, and so is my cat. My computer is not a person, nor is my ruler. Santa Claus is a person, even though he only exists as an egregore in the minds of children. My bamboo plants are people, even though they do fewer calculations per second than a supercomputer, which is not a person.
Now, I’m not going to try to argue why homosexuals aren’t people; that’s a personal opinion, and I somewhat understand why others might differ on this opinion. I also understand that trying to argue it is not going to go anywhere. I just wanted to explain the difference.
Now for a few brief responses to DreamAddict’s smilies:
Statement: Love, of course, is the combination of all emotions, and is unable to be felt by homosexuals.
Response: overspannen (whatever that means)
Comment: I do not understand the what is apparantly confusion on your part. Since your response was just an emoticon, I’ll have to assume that you’ve never felt love before, for it is upon feeling love that one comprehends what it is.
Statement: First: opinion: homosexuals aren’t people.
Response: whatsthat
Comment: For the difference between humans and people, see above. Also note, as stated above, that I will not try to convince anyone of this; it is just my opinion.
Statement: I, for one, openly hate homosexuals.
Response: sadblauw
Comment: This should not sadden you. However, you have made apparant your position as a homosexual sympathiser; I suggest that you take a more logical path, for there is already plenty about which to be sad, without trying to support such individuals, as well.
One final comment:
Actually, you would not necessarily be displaying ignorance. For example, you can openly hate people that cut you off on the highway, which is a rude thing to do, and such hatred could be quite logical. If, on the other hand, you openly hate people that cut you off on the highway because they’re Jewish, then you are being quite ignorant, indeed.
You could also, for example, openly hate teachers because they teach. Why you hate that they teach is up to you; I, for one, don’t see much logic in it, but I haven’t thought about it that long, either. Anyway, it is stupid, however, to, say, hate all teachers because they can fly.
Similarly, I openly hate homosexuals because they are homosexual. Actually, I hate them because they’re homosexual; I openly hate them because there’s no point in secretly hating them.
I will see about commenting on the second page later.
Oops, it looks like I missed one.
Quickly, I will simply point out that he doesn’t “discover” that he’s gay; he chooses to be gay.
OK, I leave now.
…i’m speechless right now dreamscape… 
Can you PLEASE tell me why the hell someone would choose something that would invoke ridicule, the risk of being disowned by their family, and the whole sha-bang of why being gay sucks? Really, I want to know.
Show me, I want proof.
Ok, you know what. Im going to give you my life story. As a gay person myself, I did NOT choose to be gay. When I was little i did not even think about sexual orientation(why would any infant?) As I grew older, and the more girls i went out with(i’ve gone out with quite a few), the more I realized it just wasnt me. None of this crap “turned me on”. While i would be kissing a girl, or me feeling her up, or her sitting on my lap, I got nothing. No boner, no arousing, nothing. A girl could strip naked in front of me and the only thing that would come into mind was that I had some pie left in the fridge. I would rather watch paint dry.
I soon realized that I liked guys better. They were just more hot compared to girls for me. I didn’t know why and I tried to change that. I really did. I continued to go out with girls and flirting with girls(flirting is fun, no matter the gender 
) untill i knew i was sure because i truely didnt want it to be true. At one point of my life(which was not far), I decided that even though i was gay, I would just try to act straight, get married, have kids, etc. etc. I discovered that this wasnt fair for the family since i would probably never have sex with her again(after the kids) or please her in ANY sexual way simply because I am not turned on by her.
So, I didn’t choose to be gay. I have no choice. Sure, I could act straight for the rest of my life and get married with a women, but thats not very smart is it? I would be miserable for the rest of my life and I would most likely cheat on her with some guy even though I am against that whole thing(possibly suicide, but im heavily against that to, but time can change people). You cannot simply make a gay person straight in the same way you cannot make a straight person gay. There is NO way.
But please, if you know any way to make me straight and get turned on by girls, then tell me because i really want to know. Because being gay sucks when people like yourselves are walking around openly hating us. It’s like openly hating blacks. I mean there’s nothing I can do to change your mind on gays. If you hate gays, then by all means hate but havent you heard of “If you dont have anything nice to say, then dont say it?”. Dont rebuttal with the 1st amendment either please. I am aware of that, but by doing what you are doing, you are not contributing to society, just fueling the fire and adding on the never-ending negativity.
sigh I apoligize in advance If I attacked you directly or if I took this too personal, but what you said really hurt. Saying that I’m not a human being. It really did. 
also some of the stuff i said may be totally unrelated to what we’re discussing so dont me on that. I tend to stray from the topic
This is mostly directed toward nightowl, not the general public, just so that the verbal case in which I speak is clear.
That’s not really any sort of evidence. People choose, for example, to become Satanic while raised by a Christian family, or to study magic while being raised in a stongly scientific community. Just because the choice could potentially result in such ridicule, etc., doesn’t mean that the choice is never made.
For now, I’ll just point to the statement that “homosexuality is not genetic,” above. I’ll have to find it again; no link for now.
Did you even read my latest post? “Human” and “person” are not interchangeable.
Solely for the purpose of being a jerk, I’ll inform you that your impotence does not concern me.
You may have just taken aspirin for polio, there. A common error in modern judgement is that flirting is normal or natural or fun or somesuch. The whole flirtation thing is just plain annoying, and actually serves as an obstacle.
OK, first of all, your plan, executed by homosexuals more often than most humans realize, was both devious and cruel. While it is good that you decided to abort said plan, I shall point out that you did so for the wrong reasons. It was really unfair because you would be living a lie, and lying to your mate and your spawn. Of course, you could be honest about it, but that still doesn’t fix the further problems. You would reproduce in a non-loving relationship, unable to feel love for your wife or children.
You are a human without hope. Even if I were to allow that you accidentally became gay, rather than choosing so, then I must still say that you haven’t tried hard or long enough. However, in a mind such as your own, you probably lack the willpower to correct yourself, anyway.
The best way to recovery, for you, at least, would appear to come in the form of workings with random belief. Specifically, you can be made to be turned off by males, and then turned on by females. However, I doubt that you would be the sort of individual to actually go to the bother to try.
If you ever make such a comparison in relation to me again, I will find you and ensure that your eventual death is slow and painful.
Also, to rebute, I hate you and your kind for your beliefs and actions, not for your genes or how much melanin you have in your skin.
On the contrary, what I have to say is actually quite the nice contribution. I fuel the fire of truth, not of hate (even if I do hate you, the two do not directly imply each other). I am actually not causing negativity.
The following is my very personal opinion, and shall not be argued:
As a final note, I shall point out that you are, as I said, a human and an entity, with a mind. You are, however, not a person, have no soul, and are incapable of feeling love.
EDIT: Edited this and my previous post to fix “quote” coding.
… -_-
Im just going to stop. I no longer wish to associate myself with you. May us never meet again. I wont be returning to this topic ever again(not even to come back to see what you say) and will completely avoid it from now on. So goodbye.
On to page two:
This is an apparantly-common logical fallacy. Individuals can also choose to be republicans in a democratic community, or christians in a community of muslims. Just because the choice is both poor and unpopular does not mean that it will not be made.
It is apparant that the homosexual, in this case, ceased to use proper verbal channels first. Flattered? Why? Are you homosexual, too?
Also, you fail to mention what’s wrong with beating a homosexual.
That’s not what was said at all. In fact, race and religion are irrelavent to the situation.
That reference doesn’t even make sense. Perhaps you’re thinking of a different Thomas Jefferson.
However, the relavent definitions of prejudice are as follows:
An adverse judgement or opinion formed without knowledge or examination of the facts.
The act or state of holding unreasonable preconcieved judgements or convictions.
Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.
None of these apply here. Your statement of prejudice is irrelavent to the point of being off-topic.
In all likelihood, this hasn’t really been brought to the attention of anyone around here. For example, I rarely hang out in the “lobby” or “hang out” or “pub” or such sector of forums; in fact, I don’t even recall going to the lobby back at DreamViews; I mostly hung out in the dream journal and beyond lucidity sections.
Don’t understand how peeps could stand to have sex with their own sex? I hear you loud and clear. The very concept is quite disgusting.
Real love between two minds: You neglect two important factors:
I have to agree with you on this one, though I know that you won’t like it: civil unions for homosexuals are incorrect; homosexuals shouldn’t even get that.
Did you consider other religions AT ALL? Plenty of religions realized long ago that marriage is between a man and a woman. What about Judaism? What about witchcraft? What about Paganism?
While I’m on it, just because a religion believes in something doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be enforced. Christianity also says to not kill and not steal. So, laws against murder and against theft should be abolished, right?
Moving on…
DreamAddict started ranting and said:
Spouse’s decisions supercede those of anyone else? Shouldn’t you be leaving that up to the individuals involved?
OK, marriage isn’t directly an institution for procreation. Mating is the biological method for procreation, and is impossible between two of the same gender. However, marriage is an institution for proper, long-term mating and dedication.
Gays adopt. This is just an unfortunate fact of society. It should be hoped that, someday, proper background checks can be established and utilized to protect the children, but, for now, we’ll have to settle for them at gunshops only.
re-quoting, for clarity:
You seem to be confused. Homosexuality has everything to do with sex and nothing to do with love. Homosexuals are in it for the pleasure. Also, as I have said many times before, homosexuals are incapable of feeling love.
You’re kidding, right? A homosexual hitting on someone is like someone telling another, well, I’m not big on insulting people, but insulting him very strongly, while adding that he hates him and all of his people. These are, effectively, “fighting words,” and are likely to get the insulter (or hitter-on) beaten to a pulp.
This is another point that everyone seems to be missing. Homosexuals are not truly “happy.” They are basically getting pleasured, and that’s it.
Oh, hey, I reached the end. I guess that it’s a good thing.
Of course, I expected this one to take less long, since several posts were off-topic (where are the Oklahomans, petiphilia, bestiality, etc.).
While I’m typing, I’ll reply to the most recent post:
I can’t say that I’m sad to see him go. Well, I could say it, but then I’d be lying.
Grammar: it’s “may we never meet again.”
I second that: nightowl, you’re an uncaring bastard, and I never want to encounter you again.
EDIT: Edited “quote” coding.
That is the biggest bullshit i have ever heard!
Actually recent studies shows that there are actually some physical differences in the brain of homosexuals. A gay person does not choose to be gay…
You can even see the issues in alot of young gay kids, that they actually act/behave like their opposite sex.
Alot of gay people wish they were not born gay.
Edit:
After reading rest of your replies in this thread, i have come to the conclusion that you are so narrowminded, that i wont even bother wasting time discussing this with you.
I will just ignore you from now on 
Same here, although I will continue to read over this topic. This person’s uncivil manner, immature attitude, irrational hatred, and advocating violence is appalling. Writing words on a message for board for him to interpret is a total waste of time.
goes off to debate this with the brick wall
To Tomas and DreamAddict:
I find your irrational closedmindedness unsettling, though not unexpected.
You see me as being well, to quote you two:
Tomas:
DreamAddict:
However, you do not consider the situation in full. I have many times attempted to see the situation from both sides. I looked at why one would dislike homosexuals, and why one would allow, or even promote, their behavior. In the end, the educated conclusion was reached that homosexuality is quite wrong, in any rational light.
I will now refute your slanderous statements.
Tomas wrote:
Technically, no one is born with a sexual orientation. Before sexual maturity, there is no concept of sexual pleasure, so they cannot be heterosexual nor homosexual.
Besides, many individuals regret what they have done, but that does not make their decisions right.
DreamAddict blasphemed:
Actually, I have gone about this in as civilized of a manner as possible. The lot of you, on the other hand, become overly emotional in defense of a highly arbitrary ideal.
DreamAddict blasphemed:
Again, my attitude has been quite mature. If anyone has been immature, it has been nightowl, as well as Tomas and DreamAddict. nightowl forfeit the very idea of discussing the issues, and has left the thread altogether. Tomas and DreamAddict have now chosen to ignore what I have to say, and have gone about with their name-calling, as though that would solve anything.
DreamAddict blasphemed:
Actually, my hatred toward homosexuals is entirely rational and justified. I would also like to point out that perhaps you should feel greater anger toward those who are secretly hateful, and who do not speak their minds.
DreamAddict blasphemed:
Actually, I have not yet advocated violence.
It would be better, for the general health of the debate, if you stopped making things up about me.
Tomas blasphemed:
Again, I would like to point out that I have taken great care to weigh both sides of this issue before coming to any conclusion. I am also ensuring that I consider perspectives presented here. Unfortunately, no one has yet provided any new information, so it may appear that I am giving little to no consideration, simply because I know the problems with the homosexually-sympathetic arguments.
I would also like to point out that it seems that my views are very unappreciated. Earlier in the thread, it seemed that some were disappointed that no one was presenting a contrary view to that of those who are homosexual, are bisexual, or who support homosexuality while not being homosexual themselves.
When you (Tomas, DreamAddict, and potentially nightowl) decide to grow up and debate this issue like ladies (or maybe gentlemen, though I doubt it), I will still be here.
And yes, that was a shot.
Dreamscaper’s arguments are impossible to prove false because they are based on religion, which in itself is illogical. Saying homosexuality is a choice is bullshit that people say to make themselves feel better about their homophobia. No non-biased independant reasearch has ever concluded that homosexuality is a choice.
See this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_sexual_orientation
I think it would be good for your general health to remember the words you type here:
This is what I define as “uncivil” and “advocating violence.”
Calling you irrational is not nearly as “blasphemous and slanderous” as someone calling Gay’s “not people” and “uncapable of love.”
This is what I define as “irrational.”
You call people in your first reply here “feeble minded” and a 2nd time in another thread.
This is what I define as immature.
Instead of debating with us personally, why don’t you tell us what your ideas of homosexuality are? What is wrong with it? What is the harm gay people cause?
If it’s “not right” … then what is the alternative solution other than understanding and care? Beating them? Murdering them? This is what the Nazi’s thought about Jew’s and retarded people. Are you a Nazi?
Do you think “gay ness” is a disease that is contagious? have you met someone that caught this “disease?” Have you met someone that’s been cured?
Gay people are here, so how should we react to that?
OK, now it seems that you’re all just out to get me. Going in order:
baconmastermind said:
On the contrary, my arguments are completely unrelated to religion. I have never once cited religion in my arguments, except as an outside party.
Also, religion is not intrinsically illogical, although many religions are.
Also, your link fails to state that it is a non-choice. While there are many factors to affect the probability, the final decision remains a choice.
I would also like to point out that, unlike you implied, I am not a homophobe. To clarify: homo-: a prefix indicating, in this case, something related to homosexuality; -phobia: a suffix indicating a fear. I do not fear homosexuals.
DreamAddict said:
Actually, I do not advocate violence in that statement; rather, I simply point out that it was not mentioned. Also, I see nothing uncivil about it.
DreamAddict said:
Now you’re just being opinionated. Also, I mentioned repeatedly that I wouldn’t argue the non-people part of my statements; that’s an opinion. As far as their being incapable of love (and it is “incapable,” by the way), I suppose that that could be construed as a conjecture based on the fact that no homosexual has ever been known to love anyone or anything.
You also fail to say why my statements are irrational; they are very much logical and thought through.
DreamAddict wrote:
OK, I’m sorry about that small bit of name-calling. It is just rather upsetting to see:
DreamAddict wrote:
OK, this is getting quite bothersome. I hate some humans for their beliefs and actions, and I am suddenly equated to someone who hates them for their genetic heritage (though the “retarded people” one is new). There is quite a difference, if anyone would take the time to bother to look.
DreamAddict wrote:
Well, it seems that it has come down to a one-on-many debate.
As far as your other questions, I’ll try to get to them later (it’s late when I’m posting this; maybe tomorrow morning).
One more thing:
baconmastermind, you seem to be acting very spiteful and childish about this. Every post that you make seems to be a targeted response intended to arouse the ire within those reading/posting here. It would probably be better if you just “spoke” in normal tones.
Also, I see that a mod edited my post on how I don’t know how to quote; I’ll try to repair my quotes later, now that I know how.
I’ll jump on the bandwagon:
Responses To Dreamscaper:
I didn’t know you could call a tree a person. I really do think person pertains only to a human being.
No need to be an asshole about it. Sorry, that really was a cheap shot to DA.
EDIT: Ohmygosh I never knew this forum had a filter, hehe
Come on come on, let’s see who wins. I love debates.
This is confusing? You don’t fear homosexuals? You said:
If you really believe that homosexuality is a “pollution” … then you are in fact by definition a Homophobe. You are “afraid” that Homosexuality is spreading and contagious. However, I get the idea that you are too chauvinistic to ever agree that you “fear” anything.
This is what is illogical and irrational, you are presenting your opinions as facts. What facts do you have of Gay’s being unable to love? I know a few Gay people with children that would be very offended by that comment. Are you saying they “can’t” love their own children? The problem with that statement is that love can’t be put in a bottle and tested. You can never say this as fact.
Also, someone that seems filled with so much hatred is rarely a good representation on what true love is.
same here, it is upsetting to see:
We are more similar than you’d like to imagine.
So, are you saying if homosexuality was genetics it would be “ok?”
One could easily argue that EVERYTHING is about genetics. The food you like, the cars you prefer, the colors you like to wear … could all be based on your genes.
Have you ever noticed how some gay men act very feminine. They can’t change this, it is the way they are. Have you ever met a lesbian with a moustache? Some do, and some are more manly than some straight men. Why? because it’s of genetics.
So yes, you are equal to those that hate others because of one’s genetic heritage. Or, you are hating something about someone that they cannot change.
If you know how to turn gay people straight, then I’m wrong. Please tell us how. Have you ever met anyone to turn “straight” … well, if you have, you will learn that these “ex-gays” never lose their attraction to the same sex. It is a daily struggle. They are living a lie because of similar attitudes as your own … for fear of losing their rights or being beaten to a pulp.
Is that the right thing to do? no!
How about people that are born with no sex, or intersexed? Government, laws, and society force them to be either “male” or “female” … however, they can’t be labeled as either … and current laws force them to be labled as male or female … and then they face hurdles with marriage issues because some paper says they are a gender of which they are not.
Face reality. It’s not all black and white. Humanity is a large spectrum of variance, and homosexuality is a consensual agreement between two people. Why should anyone else be involved in that decision?
Must… not… mock… whoops
[mock]
I call this: The case for cheese (or… Why Lactose Intolerant people are evil and should be punished)
Dreamscaper! You’ve made me see the light, your baseless accusations and conspiracy theories have won me over! But are you aware of an even MORE sinister plot than homosexuality? Following your exact logic pattern I picked it up - Lactose intolerance.
Sure they SAY that its not a lifestyle choice and that its genetic, and I have scientific proof to back it up - people (if you could even CLASS them as that) choose to not eat tasty cheese, and they deserve to be beaten for it.
Just look at the definition!
Sure, it SAYS its congenital - but thats just a product of the immoral political bias of the cheese hating dictionary writers. I’d rather use my own definition - I know better than everyone else!
Are you aware that most countries don’t even persecute these vile beings? I used to like these countries, but I don’t think I can stand to support a society that accepts lactose intolerance to widely. I can’t wait for the politics of the world to be repaired!
Lactose intolerant “people” have been telling me that they have a right not to eat milk-products as it keeps them happy (and alive). But I say they cant be happy - they’re just deluded. I’m sure you see the logic here? No need to argue it any further people have a knack for not accepting my baseless accusations. Crazy!
I mean, I really don’t get why cheese-haters can live in this society. Isn’t it clear that cheese was MADE for the mouth? It’s blaspheming (and disrespectful to all those starving people) to turn it away from its rightful place.
Just think, if we let people CHOOSE not to eat cheese… what next? They might CHOOSE to murder people! They might CHOOSE to murder YOU!
Sure, you might not see too many people with my opinion, but thats 'cause the cheese haters have poisoned everyone psychically.
[/mock]
Ok I got bored. Its fun what you can do with NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. Please present actual arguments except waving around baseless accusations.
In fact we don’t need to start with stuff as difficult as that.
Why not just tell us:
-Why homosexuals are bad (and don’t qualify as people)?
-What gives you the moral high ground to judge?
-What makes you ignore all evidence to the contrary?
Remember “because I say so” doesn’t count. And if you do find evidence, try not to get it from something dating pre-1990. Medicine/science only gets better as we go on afterall.
-spoony
That’s an incredibly cheap way of trying to avoid my arguments.
Why is homosexuality (chosen or not) wrong?
Also, if you had a child who was a homosexual, wouldn’t you want him/her to have all of the same rights that you do?
It seems that all of your arguments are basless and and all you do to support them is show irrelevant comparisons (i.e. a homosexual is a person, but so is a dead body). I mean, come on!
sigh
Here we go again. I’m rebutting against the 4 posts after my latest one (I mention this because it looks like it will take so long that someone else will post in the meantime).
Why does everyone keep bringing this up? I have said repeatedly that my opinions relating to what a “person” is are not up for debate. I did try to clarify them, but I’m not making an effort to justify them. It is really off-topic.
I know that. I was just making a quick reply, which is faster than going through “edit.” I have a life outside this thread, unlike some individuals here; I had to go do something.
Actually, I would like to point out that you misquoted me. You put my comment about homosexuality as a choice immediately before, and in the same statement as, my “threat.”
While I’m at it, I’ll point out that some of you are probably interpreting this as a death-threat. It is nothing of the kind. Rather, it is a promise that, when his death comes, given that the conditions are satisfied, it will be ensured that the death is as slow and painful as possible, though not to the point of saving his life.
Furthermore, you do not strike me as the type who would consider any threat to be “mature,” so your statement is rather meaningless. Even if that’s not the case, I really don’t care.
Finally, someone agrees with me on something here.
Actually, I didn’t specifically say that it was OK to harass them. Of course, I don’t think that it really matters what any of us think on that; individuals harass each other for lesser things than that.
Actually, I’m not “afraid” of any such thing, though it does bring me much sorrow. I currently believe that pollution scenario to be, in all probability, the case, though it is not a firm belief. Note that I said that it is likely, not definite.
Also note that I said that I wasn’t going to argue the point.
Now, I can see why you think that I’m chauvanistic, but I’m not going to deebate that with you, either. I will point out, however, that any such chauvanism on my part, real or implied, is irrelavent to whether I fear anything.
Furthermore, I would like to point out that I rid myself of fear quite a long while ago.
I’m starting at the end here:
I am not “filled with” hatred, as you put it. While I hate homosexuals and a very few other things, I am not filled with hate. My hatred for homosexuals arises directly for my caring for most other things.
Now, about the homosexuals’ loving “their children”:
Love, as I said previously, is created by a mixture of all of the other emotions. However, homosexuals have only ever shown signs of hatred. Hence, with this gaping void where the other emotions should be, there is insufficient emotion to generate love.
Also, with your last sentence (again):
I do not serve as a representation of what love is. If you want a representation of love, I’m sure that I could find some deities to reccomend to you.
OK, now you’re just trying to piss me off.
It’s only an infliction because you resist so much. This would be much easier if you would just gain an understanding of the nature of things.
Also, I ask that you think of this as “tough love;” we’re doing this for your own good.
OK, I have acted quite rationally here. I am only a “radical,” as you put it, because I’m against the majority. Also, I don’t adopt the same practices as the Nazis.
I can’t read your minds! Of course, the way that you think, I’m not sure that I’d want to. If you want to say something, then I’ll need you to say it.
You are mixing ideas that are intrinsically separate.
Then DreamAddict starts to rant for a while…
Most women with facial hair are heterosexual, just like how most women are heterosexual. What’s your point?
Plenty of heterosexual women act more many than straight men. What’s your point?
You haven’t even supported that statement logically. You suppose that everything is caused by genetics, but you don’t prove it.
Also, it is something that they CAN change. You seem to have stopped listening at this point.
OK. Next, let’s ask a buddha to “tell” us how to reach enlightenment.
I don’t necessarily “know” how to correct them. However, there are innumerable possibilities; the homosexuals just don’t try.
First of all, if they still have their attraction to their same sex, then they are not truly straight. Also, they can easily be “ex-gay” and still be attracted to their own gender if they are bisexual. This is a lesser problem that could potentially also be corrected.
Actually, the correct thing to do would be consider them to be what they are: no-gendered or two-gendered. In this case, the two-gendered individual could logically be attracted to either gender, since they themselves have both. The no-gendered individual, on the other hand, could also be attracted to either gender, though that would arise from a redundant instinctual nature causing them to be so.
Besides, this is really off-topic. The closest thing to a same gender for those with no or two genders would be another of the same, which is almost never encountered, anyway.
Think of it this way, if it helps you: An impotent man can still be attracted to a woman, right? Well, then a neuter human could also still be attracted to someone. The transexual applies the same logic.
That really depends on what you mean. Homosexuality, as in the decision to be homosexual, is the choice of one individual. Homosexual sexual misbehavior is frequently a consent, though you neglect rape, etc. Homosexual civil unions (or marriages, in some areas) are almost always consent, with exceptions whenever you would find them as exceptions for marriages (“shotgun weddings,” etc.).
OK, I’m splitting this into 2 (or maybe more) posts because:
Remember: There are so many of you that it’s as though one of you was spending several hours at a time here, and asking me to do the same.
I have a life, you know. I’m on a quest, I’m getting an education, I’m trying to lucid dream (I’m trying to not forget the function of the ld4all forum), and I’m trying to gain power, just to name a few time-consuming things.
Sheesh
Dear Dreamscaper: (excuse my english it is not my first language)
First of all, let me point out that this post is not ironical.
I am sorry to announce to you that you are gay. Yes, you read well. I think it is time to quit typing arguments that only make you feel accepted by a society that has surely harmed you phsycologically.
I have met hundreds of people like you. I dont hate you nor I want to attack your arguments, because I know why youre doing this. I truly care about you. This is not irony.
You enjoy the life of an alternative reality (internet) where you can act like a straight guy (at last, right?) and feel, just for a few moments that you have “your place under everyone’s sun”. I understand you. However, please quit, because everyone here knows what you are - even you, without accepting it.
I know you would want to hang out with guys, drink beers, talk about chicks and stuff without holding yourself not to kiss them, right? I can imagine how it feels, but once you kiss a guy and find your true self, trust me, you will forget all the games you like to play here 
You are fantaboulous my friend. Accept that you are gay and stop posting these lies to feel better. Many gay have done this. It doesnt do any good for you nor it leads anywhere. You are great! So, LIVE.
Instead, put on “I will survive” and dance like there’s no tomorrow! I am sure you will feel better, and discover your true self (because, lets face it, we all know you are a hidden gay person)
Kissess everywhere!!! xxxxxxxx
P.S. Making witty remarks about the typos or grammatical errors in my post will not do anything for me sweety 
OK, now you’re actually trying to hurt me. However, I would like to point out that I, long ago, ceased to care what others thought of me. Note that this doesn’t mean that I don’t care what others think - were that the case, then I wouldn’t be trying to make the lot of you see what’s right.
Alex C:
Your sarcasm is not appreciated. You’re bad at it, too: much of what you said sounded serious. I would prefer if you stuck to straight arguments, rathern than trying to slander me.
These are what I mentioned earlier as “fighting words.”
Note that I wish you an agonizing, non-prosperous life, ending with a dishonorable death.
I’ll give you another chance to argue with me, if you can keep it real. If you make such false accusations against me again, I’ll be forced to mostly ignore anything else that you have to say here.
Your enemy forever
-Dreamscaper
EDIT: I just wanted to point out that I WAS going to put up the second part of my multi-part post up. However, you’ve upset/angered me too greatly. I’m taking a break to go for a walk now. Perhaps I’ll post after I come back and get other stuff done. If not, it will have to wait until tomorrow.