+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Social (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Current Events (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=55)
+--- Thread: Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school (/showthread.php?tid=42792)
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - White - 2011-06-08
Sarah Wrote:So since you believe homosexuality is wrong, did you try it just to rebel or what?
Yes, I was rebelling. I did a lot, still do in fact. I try not to revel in it though.
Eosian Wrote:The point was you're confusing concepts, terribly.
Homosexual sex is the manner in which intimacy is expressed among homosexuals, not the cause of it.
The feelings for another man/woman exists regardless of whether sex itself occurs.
The only basis for your point of view is "I don't like therefore it must not be natural".
I disagree with you because your viewpoint is purely limited to your own feelings and assumes that everyone feels, or is capable of feeling, the exact same way you do it. It's narrow, shallow and egocentric to espouse that you're unequivocally the final word on how any part of the universe works.
Ultimately what does it matter to you if it's right or wrong? It's not for you, that's nice, stop trying to force yourself to do it and move on. That doesn't give you any right, moral or otherwise, to try to dictate what is right or natural for anyone else as long as they're not causing harm to themselves or others and can clearly demonstrate consent between all parties.
I guess, and i'm zooming out a bit here, that I believe in concrete truths. I believe there is indeed a right and there is also a wrong. I don't believe truth is relative. Lead that to it's natural conclusion if you want.
Absolute truth dictates that there is natural and unnatural, and that's where i'm coming from.
Panacea Wrote:One:
This, to me, is a contradiction. Clarify.
Outside stimulus: acid reflux and a general decline in health prompting healthier eating.
Panacea Wrote:Two:
When I said to provide support for you claims, I meant just that: "We are all born heterosexually." Eos already pointed out that it can be interpreted two ways, and if I interpreted it wrong (ie. We're all born straight, but through nature vs. nurture, are no longer straight because they "choose" to go gay) let me know.
Provide support for the statement that we are all born heterosexually. Wow. I actually find it sad that i'm being asked to justify that viewpoint. I don't think I can really do that without pulling religious material into the issue, and I highly doubt that it'll be deemed as valid from that point on.
Panacea Wrote:Three:
What foods you are "attracted to" or "repulsed by" are not a choice you make, but just who you are. My tongue is not fond of carrots, not because of my own will, but merely because they just don't appeal to me.
Ok. Some are more predisposed to liking carrots and others aren't as much.
octopusprime Wrote:Aha Ha ha ha. History would like a word with you. Most of your ideas/values, even the very old ones, were once progressive unless you're rocking some kickass pre-Abrahamic moral codex. What i'm saying is that 80% of this argument is just putting your foot in your mouth. Christ was a progressive my friend.
I put 'progressive' in miniquotes because of the connotation.
Yes, they were progressive at the time, and how many of them just slid in without any fight or upsets? Upsets and sometimes change, not always. I don't see where History should have a word with me.
octopusprime Wrote:also as a note on this, are you attempting to strong arm people into giving a pineapple, particularly in a subject that isn't of any vital concern to them? Excuse me, but what ground are you standing on?
Strong arm? No, lol. I don't care at all who responds to my responses. If someone has an opinion about what i'm saying, feel free to say so. The paragraph you quoted of mine was me saying that I get frustrated by people that are wishy washy about their views. If someone disagrees with me, that's totally fine. I'd prefer them to voice those disagreements in a calm and not overly aggressive way but if they choose to voice their feelings angrily, that's not my issue.
What ground am I standing on to voice my opinions in a calm and reasonable fashion on a public forum in a public thread about a news article regarding a catholic church's decisions considering a fundraiser? I am a member of this board and am not breaking the rules.
EDIT: How did this turn about me?
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Eos - 2011-06-08
White Wrote:Absolute truth dictates that there is natural and unnatural, and that's where i'm coming from.
Yes, but what gives you the authority to make assumptions on where that line is, or try to draw that line based on your own limited interaction with the universe?
If it exists within nature, by definition it's natural.
All you can honestly say is that homosexual attraction does not come naturally to you.
Anything else is outside the scope of your capacity to measure or realistically state and makes you look like an ass for trying to dictate what other people can/will/do feel as if you have some control over it any more than they do.
White Wrote:EDIT: How did this turn about me?
The minute you admitted using yourself as your test case for what everyone else felt you made it about you and the flaws in your logic.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Flonne - 2011-06-08
White Wrote:I squeaked by with an A in Bio 1 and Bio 2. Among the things I learned, I also learned that homosexuality isn't something a person is 'born with'.Very rarely do I geniunely laugh at the expense of others, but damn, you are adorable.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Panacea - 2011-06-08
Responses in respective order again.
One:
You mocked Eos because you disagreed with him implying that trying something a few times will eventually lead to you liking it, when you actually said the same thing with the anecdote of your dad. (I think you failed to see Eos' sarcasm, though.)
Two:
Using religion as "proof" for your statements is rather silly in and of itself since it's all controversial.
Three:
Hopefully you now see the analogy I am making.
I get this feeling that I'm getting lost in who says what and how they say it, since tone is sometimes a bit difficult for me to pick up on over the internet. I'm getting tired of debating this all the same, however.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - White - 2011-06-08
Eosian Wrote:Yes, but what gives you the authority to make assumptions on where that line is, or try to draw that line based on your own limited interaction with the universe?
If it exists within nature, by definition it's natural.
If you followed what I said earlier to it's natural conclusion you'd know that i'm not making assumptions or claims on my own authority at all. I don't have authority on this issue.
Eosian Wrote:The minute you admitted using yourself as your test case for what everyone else felt you made it about you and the flaws in your logic.
I see, thank you for clarifying.
Panacea Wrote:Responses in respective order again.
One:
You mocked Eos because you disagreed with him implying that trying something a few times will eventually lead to you liking it, when you actually said the same thing with the anecdote of your dad. (I think you failed to see Eos' sarcasm, though.)
I didn't mock anyone. Rofl. Disagreeing with Eos isn't mocking.
Panacea Wrote:Two:
Using religion as "proof" for your statements is rather silly in and of itself since it's all controversial.
Which is why I didn't bother with it at that point.
Panacea Wrote:Three:
Hopefully you now see the analogy I am making.
I get this feeling that I'm getting lost in who says what and how they say it, since tone is sometimes a bit difficult for me to pick up on over the internet. I'm getting tired of debating this all the same, however.
As am I. Also feeling a bit singled out and, as is prone to happen with controversial topics, the bleeding between different issues eventually leading back to religion is about to complete.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - octopusprime - 2011-06-08
Oh this topic. We need satellite back. He and white were made to argue with each other.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Eos - 2011-06-08
White Wrote:If you followed what I said earlier to it's natural conclusion you'd know that i'm not making assumptions or claims on my own authority at all.
Your lack of quantifiable evidence to back up your opinion on the matter and the fact you repeatedly keep claiming it as an absolute fact rather than an opinion would beg to differ.
White Wrote:Homosexuality is wrong.
I won't beat around the bush, I won't preface that with with "I believe". That's not my attempt at flaming nor an attempt at insulting any specific individuals. The actions associated with homosexuality are not normal or natural, and that's that.
White Wrote:I don't have authority on this issue.
Your contradictions, of which there have been more than one, lead me to believe you are in this thread purely for trolling and drama and as one of the few people who can legally make that accusation, I am doing so and asking you to stop or be removed.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Corn - 2011-06-08
Plus Eos is pretty pissed that, y'know, he's gay and he had no choice in that matter.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Eos - 2011-06-08
Corn Wrote:Plus Eos is pretty pissed that, y'know, he's gay and he had no choice in that matter.
It's not my fault they put the sign up sheet for the heterosexuality on a wednesday in the middle of the school day. Asses.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Connor - 2011-06-08
Wow, Halton Catholic District School Board was mentioned in the article. My elementary/high school was in that district.
I remember when a priest in training came to our religion class to answer questions we had about religion. One girl asked what the Church thought about gay people and he said something along the lines of, "we don't hate gay people, but it's when they have intercourse that they are sinning because God wanted intercourse to be between a man and a woman only."
Not something I agree with. In fact, I don't really agree with the Catholic Church. Who are they to say being gay is wrong and you must live your life either celibate with your partner or "force" yourself to be with the opposite sex when you are not even sexually attracted to them. We're taught that God loves everyone equally and we're all created in his image but the Church contradicts this a lot. I call myself Catholic and went through Communion and Confirmation but I prefer to listen to the good teachings of the Bible rather than the forced opinions of the Church. Besides, I don't really take priests seriously when there have been so many child molestation cases from them.
Also, I find it amusing people actually believe being gay is a choice. There are animals that have homosexual intercourse. Who is to say it's unnatural? I may be a heterosexual and a Catholic but I won't ever discriminate against someone because they were born to like the same sex.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Moonlapse - 2011-06-08
Quote:One, nice ultra conservative board that school has. :|
This. I don't see the logic in banning something that naturally occurs in nature. Although the article did not make one thing clear; Were they banning the rainbow itself, or just the rainbow flag? The former case is absurd. The latter case, however, seems justified. With parental consent, a school can instill whatever values they want in their kids within reason.
Another thing I would like to add is that we should disavow this notion of homosexuality being a "choice", because the notion of choice I believe is incompatible with a naturalist worldview (I find this significant because I assume Southperry mostly believes in naturalism). In naturalism all you have is nature and nurture. Going with that, I would say that although there is some evidence for a physiological basis for homosexuality, we do not yet know the exact physiology of homosexuality. In my opinion it is a combination of nature and nurture.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - SaptaZapta - 2011-06-09
I know very little of biology, so am not qualified to judge the aforementioned studies or White's objections to them.
I do know several people who grew up in very religious or otherwise "sheltered" homes, and who did not know anything about homosexuality until it happened to them. When they started having feelings about a teacher or classmate of the same gender, they did not know what was wrong with them. When they finally learned it has a name and is a sin, they tried to change, in many creative ways. They failed. Some tried to kills themselves, and failed (The ones that succeeded, I never got to know).
If it is a choice, it is definitely not a conscious one.
One might argue that they did overhear something about homosexuality, or read something they didn't consciously comprehend at the time, but later on their subconscious made this "choice" as a way to attract attention or out of a perverse self-destructiveness.
To which I can only respond: if it's so deep in the subconscious that a person fails to change despite desperately wanting to, to the point of killing oneself over it, it might as well be hard-wired.
And also: if it becomes as accepted as being left-handed*, people will no longer make the subconscious "choice" to be gay because it will not gain them attention or justify their self-hatred. Hence, if you believe homosexuality to be the result of subconscious rebellious choice, accept it, and it will lose popularity.
* the selfsame Church used to see left-handedness as a sign of demonic possession or "a sinister nature" (the very word "sinister" comes from the Latin for "left") and bind up children's hands to force them to use their right hands.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Stereo - 2011-06-09
Eosian Wrote:It's not my fault they put the sign up sheet for the heterosexuality on a wednesday in the middle of the school day. Asses.
That's ok, I put your name on it.
on-topic: Whatever causes homosexuality, I'm pretty sure it's not refracted light by water droplets in the atmosphere. Or pictorial representations of said.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Satellite - 2011-06-09
White Wrote:I'm a bit of a black or white thinker. So pardon me if i'm being a bit obtuse. If there's no 100% proof that homosexuality is based on genetics, wouldn't that, by default, make it a choice?Sorry. I'm a bit of a black or white thinker. So pardon me if i'm being a bit obtuse. There isn't even 1% proof that God exists or that any of the miracles in the Bible happened, wouldn't that, by default, make Religion false?
When you say that there's no 100% proof, you should understand that there actually isn't ANYTHING, ANYTHING in world with 100% proof. This is because it's all based on imperfect humans senses.
There is way more evidence for Homosexuality being natural than that it's a choice. You can "choose to be gay", but even then you are probably just a stupid kid trying to get attention in internet.
We don't choose to like women instead of men, do we?
KhainiWest Wrote:Also consider reading the bible so you look less..silly with your opinions.I've read it in Finnish. Now what?
Not from cover to cover, but the most important stuff of it. I've also studied religion in school for 10 years and I'm still part of "Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland". It is, however, way more reformist(women can be priests and the gaymarriage is coming). This is also why the church doesn't require me to do anything with my religion. The fee will come next year when I'm 18. That is when I will resign.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Daku - 2011-06-09
Corn Wrote:Hey Southperry gays (I'm looking at you, Eos, Daku, and friends) did you choose to be gay?
[/end thread]
Yes I did.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - 2147483647 - 2011-06-09
Eosian Wrote:you can't forcibly change who / what gender you're naturally attracted to.
Then what is bisexuality? Is it not just flipping the switch over and over again?
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Rick - 2011-06-09
More holding the switch in the middle.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - SaptaZapta - 2011-06-09
More like being born with the switch in the middle.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - Eos - 2011-06-09
2147483647 Wrote:Then what is bisexuality? Is it not just flipping the switch over and over again?
SaptaZapta Wrote:More like being born with the switch in the middle.
Middle actually implies off (attracted to neither).
In their case it's more like having the switch at both ends simultaneously.
They have it easier because in theory they could just ignore half of what they want and appear normal (whereas gays have to not only ignore what they want but force themselves to be with something they don't to accomplish the same thing) and harder because being attracted to both comes across as greedy, whorish, confused and similar to the ignorant who can't think beyond how they themselves are wired.
Rainbows banned at Mississauga Catholic school - KhainiWest - 2011-06-09
Satellite Wrote:I've read it in Finnish. Now what?
Not from cover to cover, but the most important stuff of it. I've also studied religion in school for 10 years and I'm still part of "Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland". It is, however, way more reformist(women can be priests and the gaymarriage is coming). This is also why the church doesn't require me to do anything with my religion. The fee will come next year when I'm 18. That is when I will resign.
Now what? lol. You don't have much foresight do you? The entire purpose of my comment was that you didn't read it because you were ignorant of the intentions of the religion, its reasoning for its teachings, and frankly previous comments showing an illogical intolerance towards religion. Now what you've told me is that you've read it and couldn't comprehend it, clearly. I think the latter is more offensive.