Poop gate has been overpooped

[Lizard Of Oz]

Well I don't really see why it becomes an issue. Most of the issues you've described such as medical power of attorney could be solved by only giving that right to the first spouse to marry that individual.

Still this is all really besides the point. The gay marriage issue is one about social change, hence why domestic partnerships don't solve the dispute. Polygamy is completely different. Those practicing polygamy in the US don't care about social change or legal rights. They wouldn't care if the state recognizes it or not. They just don't want to go to jail for practicing it.

Polygamy is used as a "slippery slope" argument against homosexual marriage. That's why I mention it.

As to your argument about the first spouse receiving greater "rights" than the apparently lesser second, third, forth, etc... spouse. Well, I'd hate to live in that house.

 

[[GU]elmur_fud]

Needed some time. Didn't feel like dealing with subject for completely personal reasons. Most likely you don't care and many of you will probably curse my return to the thread. Oh well, it happens.
Everything has been chopped for relevance and for the sake of decency to my fellow forumers.

@Dr Stephen Falken
You asked me to respond and I always do my best to keep my word.

...
So you are saying that your problem is that the people with only personal opinion have stopped endlessly repeating themselves?

Or is your problem that when the people who like to discuss politics with actual backing of their points and arguments began massing in this discussion all of the people who don't have backing of their points and arguments, thus revealing those points and arguments, to be mere opinion, either bogged off or began posting... crap?

I am saying that the number of conflicting opinions expressed are decreasing. And that those who berate others for there different views are becoming more verbally abusive of there peers that have said conflicting opinions. In other words the flaming is more rude and mean then it used to be and some people just avoid saying anything.

Click These:
Wiki: Biology and sexual orientation: Brain structure If you have the time to find their online counterparts the sources are good.
Article: Homosexual brain resembles opposite sex Basically, if "queers" are "broken" then so are women.
...

These links deserve more reading but in the first paragraph of the first link from wiki.

combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences,

I seem to recall saying similar. Except I have been focusing more on 'environmental influences'. I have admitted a possibility of other influences from the outset merely maintained that my observations suggested to me said 'environmental influences' and said that perhaps they all were this way simply without evidence we had found. That still could be the case but I admit that it isn't necessarily so. I also admit that the weight of evidence points else wise. I don't think it wise to dismiss it as there are multiple possibilities that have yet to be fully explored. For instance what if there is a genetic/biological predisposition that is environmentally triggered?

There was no misinterpretation or misrepresentation. You equated homosexuality and zoophilia. You used gays and horse-****ers in the same sentence. Now you realise your mistake and, for some odd reason, can't admit you were wrong.

You used gays and horse-****ers in the same sentence also. Who cares that is irrelavent. They were both in the same sentence but the contrast was to them both being attractions to something that as a life form is out of place in the rhythm or pattern of life. The result of some outside impetus , be it on a emotional level or a biological one. The causality of this anomaly is what curiousitates me. I was compairing the 2 on the basis of the target of the affection. The context was that they classify these 2 "unnatural attractions" as mental disorders because they are "unnatural attractions" why not this 3rd? I just felt there should be uniformity or better definition of the classifications. As there are cases for those who are homosexuals that have a 'environmental influences' which is evidence that they claimed then didn't exist. However I now look at it from the perspective of that homosexuality isn't the disorder but the result of a disorder or some trauma.

"Judge ye not lest ye be judged thyself" yeah? Everyone knows what that means, yeah? So why the hell are you judging the homosexuals to be sick and twisted when all evidence is to the contrary?

I am not. It is every1 Else's messed up assumption that disorder means something negative. Even the founding member of the movement to remove this classification agrees with that statement. Remember what I quoted

Kameny identified homosexuality's classification as a mental illness as the major stumbling block for gay rights because "an attribution of mental illness in our culture is devastating."

A good question to ask yourself would be why is it so negatively viewed? Is there a good reason? My answer for myself was no. Some disorders are bad, but not all, so to me the term is simply a classification for a specific grouping of mindsets. No more negative then canine is to dog. Or homosexuality vs. heterosexuality.

It isn't a big enough deal to me to have it classified as such and as a result place people under needless persecution. I thought we had grown past holding such stigma's as a society is all.

The bible also says that women are the source of all evil in the universe.
The bible also says that we have dominion over all things on earth.
I'd go on, but my point is that the bible as we know it today was written, censored, and edited by greedy, selfish, ignorant, mortal men some 2000 years ago, and one should probably follow the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law.

Uhm sorry no it doesn't, it says that the love of money is the root of all evil. It does imply causality upon eve for eating the forbidden fruit but she and Adam had a choice. though it refers to that specific case ambiguously several times it's always speaking of a specific person not women in general. As far as dominion ... yeah thats pretty factual we humans dominate everything we can and attempt to dominate the rest. We are a controlling species. Indeed I agree with spirit vs. letter to a point but I have come to the thought of What does this have to do with homosexuality and prop 8 anymore? Nothing.

It was said that God hates homosexuals, I pointed out that that claim was a mis quote or misunderstanding. I also pointed out that if you are gay and a bible thumper starts harassing you over it you have several verses that say they can STFU and GTFO 'cause their own belief system says it's none of their business.

1) Believe what to be divinely inspired? Is this connected to the next bit or the last?

2) No offence, but what kind of anti-homosexual are you then?

1)'It' meaning the Bible. I.E. if you believe in the Christian/Jewish god you probably believe at least part of the bible to be divinely inspired.

2)I am not a bible thumper or anti-homosexual. I am a fair minded individual and made my comments regarding the bible to correct some misrepresentations. If we are going to insist on being correct and factual the street goes both ways. You don't have to believe in what it says to agree that that those are the words on the page.

Kudos on deciding to tackle your fear... although how you'll do that without a doctor is beyond me.

Well I may catch hell for this but in all honesty I take the same aggressive stance with fear as I do with anything unknown I seek to understand it and I confront that fear head on. As I child afraid of the dark I would take walks at night and would keep one hand in contact with a surface at all times because I am night blind. The empowerment of taking charge of the situation allowed me to rationalize my fears realize they were baseless and get past them. I am doing the same thing with needles in a way. My wife likes guys with tattoos and piercings, so I started by setting out to pierce my own nipple. I first read up on it and practiced on other objects like fruit and meat) I looked at videos of piercings online. And I milled my own needles to test bending breaking and dulling factors as well as look into sterilization. When comfortable with that I purchased the necessary tools and materials from a reputable online site and did exactly that. When I caught 1 on my wedding ring in the middle of the night and tore it clean out, I let it heal properly dug down and pierced it again. My next step is tattoos and turning over the reigns to sum1 else. I have taken much similar presteps and have even been designing my own tattoos. So I get just what I want.

If they date back to 1973 then anything either side has in the form of backing has long since been obsoleted.
Again; 1973 = way old.
Again; Homosexuality as a mental illness? See links, up there ^^.

"Time not important only life important"

You can't have been looking very hard, then. I googled my "evidence", if you will, in about five minutes.

After looking at what you googled I would say I googled the wrong things.

If you are referring to the "psychological trauma" that I think you're referring to, then it seems you are confusing homosexuality and paedophillia.
It causes "power" issues, which have nothing to do with sex.
And sometimes "victim" issues, for example "I am a paki and deserve to be bashed". Horrible, but it does happen.

No. Though in the case of subject A extreme paedophillia was involved the result was not power issues but an aversion to males as sexual partners and a general distrust of most males in general as a eventual outcome after further trauma.

I cannot accept what you are saying because you are not saying "What is the reason for homosexuality" you are saying "This is the reason for homosexuality".
I don't buy the random chance argument either.
There are many theories as to the cause, but at the moment they are just that; Theories. This is why I take scientists over zealots; Scientists admit "We don't have all the answers, and maybe we never will, but we'll keep looking", Zealots insist that "We already know everything, we already have the answer, and that answer is [insert deity here]".

I am saying this is the reason as I have observed it. Yes there may be others. I suspect an interconnection. perhaps I am wrong about any such interconnection and perhaps it's a 'only sometimes' scenario. It is simply my view and I am not calling it fact. I am saying looks factual to me.

Judging by the shift in your typing; You've really started thinking about this, haven't you?

Can I ask; What are your observations?

There hasn't been that much of a shift in my thoughts, more crystallized overall, changed slightly here and there but really the same notion. I keep repeating myself as I feel like there is some communication gap when horrific accusations are thrown back in my face.

that's the worst excuse I have ever heard for anything.

He was quoting me. My guess, he forgot to highlight/hit the quote button. It was a mashup of Justin bieber, Britney spears, and a badly done doo wop song cover. 2 songs were 4/4 time and 1 was 3/4. That and they sped the doo wop up to much to match the BS and BJ(JB) songs, It's distorted discordant rhythms and unharmonious sound turned a headache into a migraine. I listened to the whole thing cause he made it and asked for my opinion. It may have been his version of a rick roll, though musically a rick roll would have been an incredible improvement.

Then you read too much into that statement, i am not saying that people have to be less intelligent to be relegious, that is demonstrably wrong, Albert Einstein was a man of faith and i don't think anyone here is qualified to say he was a stupid man.

I made the assumption based off the typical view and treatment I have received here for said religious beliefs in the past. And the assertion that Christians could offer no viable input on science outside of being Guinea pigs.
I apologize if I misinterpreted your intentions. The next paragraph speaks of predetermined views which can be present anywhere and is not specific to religion.
It seems to me that your perception is that my belief is based on religion and so since my statement that it is not contradicts your perception you reject it.

Then first of all, you need to understand what Homosexuality is, because it is NOT the act of "having sex with someone of your own gender", that is just a common symptom of Homosexuality, it is not what defines it.

That is common knowledge (or it should be if actually isn't).

Concerning the rest of your post some is borderline irrelevant while other parts though factual are misleading.

My whole point was that something seemed to steer those people to wards being gay and it seemed psychological. Now your trying to tell me that since you can find a reason they are gay that they aren't... that's the way it looks to me anyway.

Homosexuality and heterosexuality are terms that define your sexual orientation. They don't discriminate about how you got there.

My apologies for the length of this post.

 

[Firefly]

[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dPcUXqZ3cA[/M]
[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCZa3teqC3w[/M]

time for society to move on.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

IMAGINE YOKO ONO!

 

[[GU]elmur_fud]

IMAGINE YOKO ONO!

I'd rather go prematurely blind from Retinitis Pigmentosa then imagine anything about that crustation.

 

[Adelheid]

@Dr Stephen Falken
You asked me to respond and I always do my best to keep my word.

Righto.

I am saying that the number of conflicting opinions expressed are decreasing. And that those who berate others for there different views are becoming more verbally abusive of there peers that have said conflicting opinions. In other words the flaming is more rude and mean then it used to be and some people just avoid saying anything.

That, and most of the people on here are just trolls. Even one of the administrators openly admits that they are a troll.
Anyone noticed that the ignore button has vanished?
[SCREENSHOT]http://a.imageshack.us/img809/4382/46231177.gif[/SCREENSHOT]

These links deserve more reading but in the first paragraph of the first link from wiki. I seem to recall saying similar. Except I have been focusing more on 'environmental influences'. I have admitted a possibility of other influences from the outset merely maintained that my observations suggested to me said 'environmental influences' and said that perhaps they all were this way simply without evidence we had found. That still could be the case but I admit that it isn't necessarily so. I also admit that the weight of evidence points else wise. I don't think it wise to dismiss it as there are multiple possibilities that have yet to be fully explored. For instance what if there is a genetic/biological predisposition that is environmentally triggered?

Then I'm still right.
It can't work without a bilogical, structural, or genetic predisposition towards that end result.

You used gays and horse-****ers in the same sentence also. Who cares that is irrelavent. They were both in the same sentence but the contrast was to them both being attractions to something that as a life form is out of place in the rhythm or pattern of life. The result of some outside impetus , be it on a emotional level or a biological one. The causality of this anomaly is what curiousitates me. I was compairing the 2 on the basis of the target of the affection. The context was that they classify these 2 "unnatural attractions" as mental disorders because they are "unnatural attractions" why not this 3rd? I just felt there should be uniformity or better definition of the classifications. As there are cases for those who are homosexuals that have a 'environmental influences' which is evidence that they claimed then didn't exist. However I now look at it from the perspective of that homosexuality isn't the disorder but the result of a disorder or some trauma.

And you're still wrong.
People who are "made" or "become" homosexual as a result of being bum-raped as a child, or through daddy not giving them any love because daddy thinks that will make them gay, or some other weird trauma, are the exception rather that the norm.
Most homosexuals are born.

I am not. It is every1 Else's messed up assumption that disorder means something negative. Even the founding member of the movement to remove this classification agrees with that statement. Remember what I quoted A good question to ask yourself would be why is it so negatively viewed? Is there a good reason? My answer for myself was no. Some disorders are bad, but not all, so to me the term is simply a classification for a specific grouping of mindsets. No more negative then canine is to dog. Or homosexuality vs. heterosexuality.

In 1973.
A disorder is abnormal functioning. Some can be turned to your advantage, but that does not negate the cost.
Homosexuality is not a disorder, and you have no proof of otherwise.
What you think proves that homosexuality is a disorder is actually proof of the power of "daddy issues", or the end result of this trauma you're hanging on to, and the failure to deal with said trauma.

It isn't a big enough deal to me to have it classified as such and as a result place people under needless persecution. I thought we had grown past holding such stigma's as a society is all.

And yet without this classification, which has been proven to be wrong simply by studies of physical brain structure, which I have previously linked to, your argument falls apart.
It's not a disorder.
It's not a mental illness.
But, there are things out there that look like homosexuality, just like there are things out there that look like heterosexuality, for example: PAEDOPHILLIA.

Bet you didn't see that one coming, did you?

Uhm sorry no it doesn't, it says that the love of money is the root of all evil. It does imply causality upon eve for eating the forbidden fruit but she and Adam had a choice. though it refers to that specific case ambiguously several times it's always speaking of a specific person not women in general. As far as dominion ... yeah thats pretty factual we humans dominate everything we can and attempt to dominate the rest. We are a controlling species. Indeed I agree with spirit vs. letter to a point but I have come to the thought of What does this have to do with homosexuality and prop 8 anymore? Nothing.

What it has to do with is your using the bible in your posts. Don't. You can see how I regard the bible, so you can see how I will not accept arguments based on it.
Theology is not reality.

1)'It' meaning the Bible. I.E. if you believe in the Christian/Jewish god you probably believe at least part of the bible to be divinely inspired.

No. The original "bible" was 300 books long. It was written in hebrew. It has been mistranslated. What we have today is the end result of 2000 years of edits, censorship, and chinese whispers.
The only part, in my opinion, any christian of any denomination should trust to be straight from god, is the part where it basically says "Only god can cast judgement for only god is wise enough, only god knows.

2)I am not a bible thumper or anti-homosexual. I am a fair minded individual and made my comments regarding the bible to correct some misrepresentations. If we are going to insist on being correct and factual the street goes both ways. You don't have to believe in what it says to agree that that those are the words on the page.

Yet your posts sound very anti-homosexual. Your posts seem to say that homosexuality must be a disorder, that it must be a mental illness.

Well I may catch hell for this but in all honesty I take the same aggressive stance with fear as I do with anything unknown I seek to understand it and I confront that fear head on. As I child afraid of the dark I would take walks at night and would keep one hand in contact with a surface at all times because I am night blind.

That wasn't fear, that was self preservation, and what you did was a little dumb. It was like a child who suffers from fainting fits playing atop a tall building, or some long stairs.
I'm still afraid of heights to this day.... guess why?
Some fears are there for a reason, and it you suffer from night blindness then maybe your fear of the dark is something you should listen to?
Just my opinion.

The empowerment of taking charge of the situation allowed me to rationalize my fears realize they were baseless and get past them. I am doing the same thing with needles in a way. My wife likes guys with tattoos and piercings, so I started by setting out to pierce my own nipple. I first read up on it and practiced on other objects like fruit and meat) I looked at videos of piercings online. And I milled my own needles to test bending breaking and dulling factors as well as look into sterilization. When comfortable with that I purchased the necessary tools and materials from a reputable online site and did exactly that. When I caught 1 on my wedding ring in the middle of the night and tore it clean out, I let it heal properly dug down and pierced it again. My next step is tattoos and turning over the reigns to sum1 else. I have taken much similar presteps and have even been designing my own tattoos. So I get just what I want.

What the smeg is wrong with going to a proffessional?

"Time not important only life important"

Which has what to do with you using crap from 1973 in what seems like an attempt to prove that homosexuality is a mental illness?

No. Though in the case of subject A extreme paedophillia was involved the result was not power issues but an aversion to males as sexual partners and a general distrust of most males in general as a eventual outcome after further trauma.

No. Her abuser had the power issues, she just had an understandable reaction to what I know to be a terrible experience.

I am saying this is the reason as I have observed it. Yes there may be others. I suspect an interconnection. perhaps I am wrong about any such interconnection and perhaps it's a 'only sometimes' scenario. It is simply my view and I am not calling it fact. I am saying looks factual to me.

You are presenting 5 cases, some of whom I feel are just weird rather than gay, drawing your own conclusions based on your own misunderstanding of what is involved, based on your own ignorance of how things work, and dumping them on all cases.
You don't have enough of anything to draw what conclusions you have drawn, from my point of view.

There hasn't been that much of a shift in my thoughts, more crystallized overall, changed slightly here and there but really the same notion. I keep repeating myself as I feel like there is some communication gap when horrific accusations are thrown back in my face.

It's because you clearly don't "get" the subject in hand, or the fact that your arguments are baseless, or the fact that FACT ruins your arguments and the conclusions you are drawing, conclusions which are based on nothing but this weird insistence of yours that homosexuality is a disorder, a mental illness, a sickness.
Given that, can you really blame anyone for getting tired of you and just throwing nasty words at you?

He was quoting me. My guess, he forgot to highlight/hit the quote button. It was a mashup of Justin bieber, Britney spears, and a badly done doo wop song cover. 2 songs were 4/4 time and 1 was 3/4. That and they sped the doo wop up to much to match the BS and BJ(JB) songs, It's distorted discordant rhythms and unharmonious sound turned a headache into a migraine. I listened to the whole thing cause he made it and asked for my opinion. It may have been his version of a rick roll, though musically a rick roll would have been an incredible improvement.

You messed with the quote system, added your own words after the = and it confused the forum a little. I fixed it by changing the []'s to {} or something like that.

....

This is me done.
You can either accept the fact that homosexuality is not a mental sickness, and that you just don't "get" it (because you have all you need to truly trst your hypothesis), or you can learn to love the heat, y' get me?

 

[FuLLBLeeD]

Elmer_fudd how many times on a daily basis do you have to stop yourself from thinking about cock?

 

[[GU]elmur_fud]

...
And yet without this classification, which has been proven to be wrong simply by studies of physical brain structure, which I have previously linked to, your argument falls apart.
It's not a disorder.
It's not a mental illness.
But, there are things out there that look like homosexuality, just like there are things out there that look like heterosexuality, for example: PAEDOPHILLIA.

Bet you didn't see that one coming, did you?

No I didn't see that at all. FYI if I was jerk I might say you used PAEDOPHILLIA, heterosexuality, and homosexuality in the same sentence. Apparently your saying then by you previous logic that you used against me that that all people are paedo's.

What it has to do with is your using the bible in your posts. Don't. You can see how I regard the bible, so you can see how I will not accept arguments based on it.
Theology is not reality.

Then here is a thought, ignore them. I have every right to post it and will continue to do so unless an admin says otherwise. Ordering me not to just makes me want to all the more.

...
Yet your posts sound very anti-homosexual. Your posts seem to say that homosexuality must be a disorder, that it must be a mental illness.

Even if they were saying that, how would that make them anti-homosexual? If I say blindness is a physical disability I am not anti-the-disabled.

I am saying that to me it looks like some cases, (like the ones I listed,) which would fall under the 'environmental influences' (environmental meaning something that happened to change them mentally or physical during development), the term disorder is correct by the current structure of the terminology perhaps not for the homosexuality aspect itself as a disorder but more what caused it.

That wasn't fear, that was self preservation, and what you did was a little dumb. It was like a child who suffers from fainting fits playing atop a tall building, or some long stairs.
I'm still afraid of heights to this day.... guess why?
Some fears are there for a reason, and it you suffer from night blindness then maybe your fear of the dark is something you should listen to?
Just my opinion.

Dumb no. There is a difference between a healthy fear of something and a irrational fear. Mine was more the latter. Being night blind means extra poor visibility at night generally (as is my case) not totally blind. To be exact I was afraid of the darkness encroaching into my world. A little fact about RP, it is a progressively worsening genetic (usually) disorder, I didn't start out night night blind, it developed over a year or 2 pre-puberty. Since then it has gotten worse as it will do till I loose my sight entirely. ETA till lights out... Doctors give me 20ish years. I hope for robotic implants by then. Silly yes. But I want a zoom feature.

What the smeg is wrong with going to a proffessional?

Do you mean a professional tattoo artist? Because I intend to. Maybe you referred to the piercing thing. I needed to be in control @ that point. Plus I trust my own cleanliness more. Or maybe you refer to professional help for the mind... For a fear of needles? I did rather go have acupuncture (exaggeration probably but I am cheap) then pay $200.00+/hour to talk about my problems to some1 who is most likely going to tell me things I can figure out for myself.

Which has what to do with you using crap from 1973 in what seems like an attempt to prove that homosexuality is a mental illness?

Data is always relevant. Science doesn't go out date. Facts don't come with a 'best when used bye' label. If they haven't been proved wrong they are still right. Though I think the original fact was that a homosexual who led the movement to have it stricken as a mental illness said that the biggest reason was that people miss viewed the term and mistreated homosexuals because of it. I was stating my agreement with his comments.

So your taking this personally and have your mind already made up beyond the point of rationally considering any counter point of view? That's what that sentence feels like anyway. Sure makes me want to continue this discussion. Would also make sense of why you have so often seemingly read more into what I said then was there.

It's because you clearly don't "get" the subject in hand, or the fact that your arguments are baseless, or the fact that FACT ruins your arguments and the conclusions you are drawing, conclusions which are based on nothing but this weird insistence of yours that homosexuality is a disorder, a mental illness, a sickness.
Given that, can you really blame anyone for getting tired of you and just throwing nasty words at you?

While your pointing your finger at me, pls notice the four pointing back at you. I have in the last few posts posted plenty of basis for my arguments. Much of it factual. There is never a good reason to be abusive.

You messed with the quote system, added your own words after the = and it confused the forum a little. I fixed it by changing the []'s to {} or something like that.

....

I understood that when you first posted it th first time. I was letting Jacks:SmirkingRevenge know he was harassing the wrong person.

 

[FuLLBLeeD]

dude its ok to be gay, quit fighting it, come to terms with your sexuality

 

[Firefly]

[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dPcUXqZ3cA[/M]
[M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCZa3teqC3w[/M]

time for society to move on.

 

[Capt.Toilet]

Actually this thread can be locked as well.

 

[Adelheid]

No I didn't see that at all.

Glad that's out of the wa-

FYI if I was jerk I might say you used PAEDOPHILLIA, heterosexuality, and homosexuality in the same sentence. Apparently your saying then by you previous logic that you used against me that that all people are paedo's.

...oh... it's not out of the way.
Right...

You didn't only use them in the same sentence. You used them in a piss poor attempt to back up your sick ****ing opinion, which has no basis outside of your own warped, sick little mind, that homosexuality is a mental ****ing sickness.

5mt: http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?p=2457899#post2457899

10mt: http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?p=2457823#post2457823

16mt: http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?p=2457612#post2457612

BOOM BOOM BOOM

Now.
One of us has a position. One of us has an opinion.
One of us has evidence. One of us has pages torn out of a book that has spent the last 1800 years being mistranslated, misinterpreted, edited, and censored.
One of us accepts defeat. One of us would rather play wordgames in, what I can only assume to be, an attempt to hide from the fact that they have been openly, undeniably, defeated.
Whom do you suppose is whom?

Then here is a thought, ignore them. I have every right to post it and will continue to do so unless an admin says otherwise. Ordering me not to just makes me want to all the more.

Theology is not evidence.

Even if they were saying that, how would that make them anti-homosexual? If I say blindness is a physical disability I am not anti-the-disabled.

One is a statement of fact, one is an excuse to kerb-stomp queers.

I am saying that to me it looks like some cases, (like the ones I listed,) which would fall under the 'environmental influences' (environmental meaning something that happened to change them mentally or physical during development), the term disorder is correct by the current structure of the terminology perhaps not for the homosexuality aspect itself as a disorder but more what caused it.

More ****ing wordgames!
Yes, yes, yes, Subject A was raped horribly by a man so she "decided" she was gay rather than have to deal with MEN, therefore homosexuality is a mental sickness, a disorder, like paedophillia, zoophillia, necrophillia, etc...
We heard you the first time.

Do you mean a professional tattoo artist? Because I intend to. Maybe you referred to the piercing thing. I needed to be in control @ that point. Plus I trust my own cleanliness more. Or maybe you refer to professional help for the mind... For a fear of needles? I did rather go have acupuncture (exaggeration probably but I am cheap) then pay $200.00+/hour to talk about my problems to some1 who is most likely going to tell me things I can figure out for myself.

Your contributions to this thread, and your increasingly desperate attempts at re-validating your arguments through wordplay rather than evidence suggests to me that you should not figure anything out for yourself.

Data is always relevant. Science doesn't go out date. Facts don't come with a 'best when used bye' label. If they haven't been proved wrong they are still right. Though I think the original fact was that a homosexual who led the movement to have it stricken as a mental illness said that the biggest reason was that people miss viewed the term and mistreated homosexuals because of it. I was stating my agreement with his comments.

[borg]Your data is irrelevant. Your science is irrelevant. Your facts are irrelevant. They have been disproven. Resistance is futile[/borg]

So your taking this personally and have your mind already made up beyond the point of rationally considering any counter point of view? That's what that sentence feels like anyway. Sure makes me want to continue this discussion. Would also make sense of why you have so often seemingly read more into what I said then was there.

So you're taking this personally, and have already made up your mind, beyond the point of rationally considering any evidence? That's what your posting feels like anyway. Sure makes me want to nuke this discussion.
Would also make sense of why you have to play with words in order to make it appear as though I have read more into what was said than was actually said.

See I can play with words too.

While your pointing your finger at me, pls notice the four pointing back at you. I have in the last few posts posted plenty of basis for my arguments. Much of it factual. There is never a good reason to be abusive.

I was not abusive, I merely pointed out that nobody here wants to play word games, that's what scrabble is for. I also merely pointed out that you have no argument, no position, just a personal opinion which you are continuing to defend even though there is no way you can publicly defend it.
If you don't like people, facts, science, and reality conflicting with your personal opinions then keep them to yourself.
And your stories, however tragic, are not a basis for arguments as 1) they cannot be proved, and 2) they have nothing to do with your publicly indefensible personal opinion that medical science is wrong and homosexuality is a disorder

I understood that when you first posted it th first time. I was letting Jacks:SmirkingRevenge know he was harassing the wrong person.

*sigh*

 

[SkaarjMaster]

I guess this is what I get for going to Alaska. I completely missed this thread. Anyway, I'm glad it was overturned as it was a silly proposition anyway.

 

[Al]

I wanna go to Alaska

 

[Adelheid]

Ding: http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showpost.php?p=2461846&postcount=332

Whether you want to admit it or not, this discussion is over. Your arguments have been disproven. Your theory has been proven wrong. You have nothing left to base your personal opinion on other than ignorance, prejudice, bigotry and fear.

You, sir, are either in denial or you are a homophobe, and that can only mean one thing:

 

[[GU]elmur_fud]

Today is my birtday falcon. On this day more then any other I wear a proverbial mental armor to make me indiferent to whatever crap life throws at me on august 25th. Tommarrow I may take you seriously and give your posts some thought. Today though I don't give a crap. Here is all the words your worth.

 

[Adelheid]

Today is my birtday falcon. On this day more then any other I wear a proverbial mental armor to make me indiferent to whatever crap life throws at me on august 25th. Tommarrow I may take you seriously and give your posts some thought. Today though I don't give a crap. Here is all the words your worth.

You care so little about what I have to say that you go out of your way, on your birthday, to tell me so?
Riiight.
Oh, and it's its Falken. F A L K E N. I have overlooked your childish spelling and grammar, however that does not mean you can get my name wrong, you illiterate tit.

 

[[GU]elmur_fud]

I was acknowledging I saw it. When I didn't comment for a week you went to the length of pm-ing me. I figure I would save you the trouble of wondering if I missed it or was ignoring you by posting that I hadn't missed it. As for ignoring you well time will tell.

The falcon/Falken thing was an honest mistake, seems to me like you just wish to attack me for some reason. Hardly something to freak out about.

 

[Larkin]

Lol, Falken you haven't proven jack. Keep believing you have.

 

[Firefly]

Ding: http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showpost.php?p=2461846&postcount=332

Whether you want to admit it or not, this discussion is over. Your arguments have been disproven. Your theory has been proven wrong. You have nothing left to base your personal opinion on other than ignorance, prejudice, bigotry and fear.

That's religion for you.