Here's a view on homosexuality for you... (page 6)

cofty

I don't disagree that repressed same-sex attraction might be an explanation in some instances but I doubt it explains more than a small percentage. It's not unreasonable for a hetrosexual man to feel a negative response to the sight of physical displays of affection between gay men. Of course gay men should be free to kiss in public and it is nobody's business to object. Live and let live.

On many porn websites there are dozens of niche categories. Everybody could identify a number of these that they would never click on because they find the images repelling rather than arousing. We are all wired differently. It doesn't mean that they are secretly harbouring repressed sexual desire for the types of images they avoid.

The important thing is that nobody's character should be judged on the basis of their sexual preferences as long as they are not harming others.

Landy

Fisherman: you are, quite frankly, f-cking delusional.
stop disobeying your Governing Body by trolling Exjw websites and piss off

I disagree. Fisherman is most welcome here.

He serves as a useful marker against which we can measure how far we've all come.

TimeBandit

Live and let live. Homosexuals, from what I have seen are peaceful people who just want to live their lives. How many wars were started by homosexuals? How many were started by straight people in the name of religion? In my mind war and killing is a much bigger issue.

TB-

Zoos

fulltimestudent
The Christian argument, as perhaps first posited by Paul in Romans 1:26.27, is that same sex sexual activities are, "contrary to nature."

I'm pretty sure Paul's "contrary to nature" comment was directed specifically toward those who had an established inclination, "natural use" toward the opposite sex. Paul did not say homosexuality was contrary to nature. He said that violating your own sexual orientation so as to engage in other sexual activity was contrary to nature.

If you read the entire context of this passage, you find that all the things listed, including unnatural sex acts, were being performed as religious rites.

This was not a broad condemnation of HOMOSEXUALS, rather, it was a condemnation of a bunch of perverted HETEROSEXUALS.

slimboyfat

A homosexual worked in a store that helped my wife test and purchase some products. The honest truth, he was one of the nicest people I met. We talked and I was fine with that. Again, treating him well, does not endorse the behavior. I don't have to make it my focus. It is not my concern.

The idea that what others do in private requires or is any way interested in your "endorsement" is not only bizarre. It's actually what I would call perverted or abhorrent.

bohm

The idea that what others do in private requires or is any way interested in your "endorsement" is not only bizarre. It's actually what I would call perverted or abhorrent.

I am thinking about including my endorsements into every-day conversations, they are a biographical fact I don't think people can do without:

"Despite you and your wife both being quite fat, Sir, I must say you are both very fine people. I will allow for you to carry out sexual acts even though I cannot endorse them"

Here's a view on homosexuality for you...