NEWS: Teen Sent To Gay "Treatment" Camp Against His Will, page 9

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:18 PM

link

BadMojo
What's your argument again? BTW I'm one of those people who perceives the world in shades of gray, and I've gotta tell ya', I'm 100% positive that the definition, focus, and detail of my vision has improved since I was a child and had no choice but to see things in black and white.

As far as I can tell, you're the one with an unsupported argument.

IMPerial

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:19 PM

link

Originally posted by IAF101

Originally posted by Odium
But there is one major difference. Homosexuality does not harm anyone nor does anyone have to die for it to happen

So necrophillia is acceptable then? As a person has already died so no one has to die, the deed has already been done!
So if someone chooses to be cannibalized then it is okay?

Um, yes actually, in some countries. As long as it does not lead to the death of the one choosing to be cannibalized.
And again, necrophilia, is a desecration of a corpse, that actually is harmful to someone. How about the family of the deceased? Just because someone is dead, doesn't mean they are wiped from existance, that is, you can say John is a good man. You can John was a good man. He maybe physically gone, but he is still known. What happens may no longer really affect him, but it can affect those that knew him and are still living. That was just supposed to show you that necrophilia DOES harm people, so your argument towards homosexuality is again... bunk.

IAF101

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:27 PM

link

Originally posted by Odium
I like the way you jump to an extreme to back up your view. Let me put it like this:
Person A and B are both adults, they are both of the same sex, they have sexual relations, that's none of our businesses because nobody gets hurt.

Again you dwell merely on the physical, what about the spiritual hurt? What about the collective spiritual hurt inficted on the many?

Going around eating people, killing people or having sexual relations is wrong. It's fairly simple to understand the large difference between the two of these. However with the case in Germany where the person wanted to be eaten - I really am un-decided on such a thing. They were adults, they decided that's what they wanted to do, I don't think I can really tell them they were wrong to do that - even if I do find it some-what sickening.

You admit to find it sickening but you also feel that homosexual realtions even though consented as in the similar cannibalsim case is welcomed by you, I ask, why the double standard?
No one needs to get physically hurt with consentual cannibalism as well, their are a good many number of tranqulisers that would make the process painless to the "victim" .
What about necrophillia? Who gets hurt their ? No body gets physically hurt in that instance as well so why do you/society feel so strongly about that and not homosexuality?
If Consent can be obtained for anything, why is execution a problem?

None of us our God, none of us can tell someone how to live their life as long as they don't harm anyone else . As soon as they harm someone then what they are doing is wrong.

Very true! But as I said consent is easily obtained and so is pain relieved so what prevents society from allowing cannibalsim or necrophillia?
I don't find that my views are extreem, i find cannibalism, necrophillia and homosexuality all the same! Also consentual is only the excuse that homosexuals hide behind, I can get consent for many things and can also assure that nobody feels a thing, so why is society so averse to "consentual" cannibalism but not to "consentual" homosexulaity?

IAF101

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:33 PM

link

Originally posted by IMPerial

Um, yes actually, in some countries. As long as it does not lead to the death of the one choosing to be cannibalized.

care to name a few? I would really like to know? Also why should the death of the victim be anybody else's concern nobody else gets hurt?

And again, necrophilia, is a desecration of a corpse, that actually is harmful to someone. How about the family of the deceased?

So is homosexuality! it desecrates my faith, my society's values and presents a distorted image of the world to my children all of which affect not only me but my whole society, which is living, so it gets more presidence than that of the dead!
What about the spiritual anguish caused to many people over the personal acts of two?

Odium

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:37 PM

link

Originally posted by IAF101
Again you dwell merely on the physical, what about the spiritual hurt?

Problem is none of us can proove that it involves any spiritual hurt. Because as I've stated before what you might think as spiritually right could in fact be wrong.

Originally posted by IAF101
You admit to find it sickening but you also feel that homosexual realtions even though consented as in the similar cannibalsim case is welcomed by you, I ask, why the double standard?

I see them as two very different things. I guess to me I am not a fan of ending life, no matter what the cost is? I'm also not the biggest fan of people "sleeping around" as it can lead to a lot of harm. But I see no problem with two adults deciding to have sexual relations with one another. I also think it would be a lot better for society for homo-sexuals to be open about it. By forcing it to go "under-ground" it would only create more problems for Society.

I understand where you are coming from but the spiritual aspect of me, is different to you. That's the major problem. To me I see homosexuals as doing no harm to Society, each other or to anyone else. But things like murder, canabillism, I see as harming people and what my norms and values are. Which is what this boils down to. I am fairly tolerant of people, their race, sexuality, etc, etc.

IMPerial

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:41 PM

link

I was referring to the incident in Germany, trying to go on memory.
And as far as "desecrating your faith"... so I figure eating cows should be outlawed too eh? It is a desecration to peoples faith, is it not? In fact, it is MORE of a desecration to the faith of the people who see these animals as so great, than homosexuality is to you.

I have only just realized how impossible it is to argue with you however. You like to take everythign on a generalization rather than look at any detail, as evident in the cannibalism/necrophilia/homosexuality idea. Your reasoning could be used here also...

"I don't like oranges, but I like peaches."

You:"Well they are both fruit, why don't you like both or neither?"

"Because, I don't. They aren't the same really, sure you can make connections between the too if you try, but that doesn't make them close enough to be considered in any way the same."

You:"But they are both fruit---"

And so on you go, with the same argument. Because you can find abstract connections (which if you tried, you could probably throw in how Nazi's were like homosexuals too, go ahead, how about liking them to bookshelves also?) you believe they are the same, which is really sad...

IAF101

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:42 PM

link

Originally posted by Odium[/i
They don't at all. You pick to talk to homosexuals, to watch homosexuals on television or in movies.

They do! If i don't talk to them I face a desrimination suit and I never asked them to hold rallies or to hijack my neighbourhood school to promote tolerance, i didn't ask them to what they were, they choose to tell and I dont want to know so it is they who are the ones that generate the anguish on us and not the other way around!

The whole "subjecting" people to "their" morals was used to promote segregation in the 1800's...

So the corruption of the morals that many hold dear is acceptable but not the compramise of the few! This fails democratic logic! Why do the many suffer for the devience of the few! They choose to live in my society and expect me to change to them! Thats absurd! They also refuse to be segragated and continue to inflict their spiritual assault on my community! Is that acceptable!
Can I desecrate your surroundings by opening a brothel next to your house and deliberately hold rallies infront of your house against mistreatment!

BadMojo

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link

My side of the discussion, wyrde, is that homosexuality is wrong, but the parents in this particular case are handling the situation incorrectly. The parents should be the ones to speak with their child. If they cannot help their child, the parents should seek help on guidance for their child, not send them away to have someone else do it...

You say your "definition, focus, and detail" has improved, but you say that there are gray areas. This a sharp contradiction...

[edit on 18-6-2005 by BadMojo]

Odium

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link

Originally posted by IAF101
They do! If i don't talk to them I face a desrimination suit and I never asked them to hold rallies or to hijack my neighbourhood school to promote tolerance, i didn't ask them to what they were, they choose to tell and I dont want to know so it is they who are the ones that generate the anguish on us and not the other way around!

As a law student that's a bull. They can't sue you or force a descrimination suit on you because you refuse to talk to them. You have the right to refuse to talk to anyone, you just don't have the right to punish someone due to their choices in life. Which is fair enough to me. You pick who you talk to in your private life. Also you have the right to speak to the teachers, etc, at the School and make a legal case to remove such protests from School grounds if you can proove it is harmful.

Originally posted by IAF101
So the corruption of the morals that many hold dear is acceptable but not the compramise of the few! This fails democratic logic! Why do the many suffer for the devience of the few! They choose to live in my society and expect me to change to them! Thats absurd! They also refuse to be segragated and continue to inflict their spiritual assault on my community! Is that acceptable!

I'm taking a guess at which bits are questions by the way.

Firstly, you assume the majority of people are behind you without any facts. If you look at the only public referenfum about such events which was Switzerland (Switzerland Voters Approve Partnership Law) the majority of the people were on the side of the homo-sexuals not the other way around.

Secondly, they don't expect you to change. They just don't want people to inflict harm upon them because of their choice of lifestyle. They do you no harm, you do them no harm. It's fairly simple. If you think being gay is spiritually wrong, don't be gay and when you go on to your after life you won't be punished. It's that simple.

Edit: Spelling.

[edit on 18-6-2005 by Odium]

IMPerial

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link

Odium couldn't have said it any better in his last post. Much better than I do getting a wee bit annoyed at the "righteous"

IAF101

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link

Originally posted by Odium
Problem is none of us can proove that it involves any spiritual hurt. Because as I've stated before what you might think as spiritually right could in fact be wrong.

If i get a signed memorandum from the majority of my community that it causes them spiritual harm can I then say that homosexuality harms this "society" and thus should be vanquished from this area?

I see them as two very different things. I guess to me I am not a fan of ending life, no matter what the cost is? I'm also not the biggest fan of people "sleeping around" as it can lead to a lot of harm. But I see no problem with two adults deciding to have sexual relations with one another.

You see them as acceptable compared to cannibalism and I don't see them acceptable as i find cannibalism acceptable, we have two different views and our views as you say are realtive then my opinion that cannibalism is acceptable carries the same weight as your homosexuality is acceptable.
I see cannibalism as a cullinary desire of a few which since consentual is not of any harm to me but the consentual act of two same sex adults having a sexual relation is seen by me as desecration of my faith and my morals!
So as you say if our views are realative then how come my view that homosexualtiy is reprihensible is met with staunch and vilifing opposition while your opinion is met with acceptance even though my opinion has a majority?

Enkel

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:00 PM
link

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
well, from a spirtual standpoint(christian anyway) gays live in sin. Thats the way christianity views gays. now from another standpoint i really doubt this camp could change the kid and if anything may repress him to the point of suicide. The spirituality aspect i think can be forgiven by God. Better for him to live happily than live miserably and eventually kill himself IMO. now adays anyway gays are given special status so i doubt he will really feel like he is an outsider. As i said live happily, if your an honest human being who does not commit crimes i doubt God will damn you.

A couple of thoughts come to mind here.
1. Isn't it interesting that the New Testament is absolutely strident and uncompromising in its condemnation of hypocrisy, and yet Christians have no "re-education camps" for hypocrites. Could it be that the parents would have to enroll themselves if there were?
2. Why is it that the most "religious" among us are almost always the most vicious? Just asking...

Odium

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link

If you could get the majority of America (U.S.A.) to vote on an issue and they voted your way, I would have no problem as long as it did not force people to change. I would have no problem with homo-sexuals loosing the right to demonstrate in Schools, etc, but you can't fully remove them from Society as it has been proven to be as natural as ethnicity.

Also I am fairly sure it would go my way, on such an issue as every poll I've ever seen and every vote so far has actually agreed with me. If you live in any of these states; " Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington and Wyoming" you can attempt to implement a law through referendum so go for it.

Also just because you don't agree with something does not mean it has to harm you, why are you not safe in the knowledge that you will go to heaven and they won't?

IAF101

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link

Originally posted by Odium
You have the right to refuse to talk to anyone, you just don't have the right to punish someone due to their choices in life. Which is fair enough to me. You pick who you talk to in your private life. Also you have the right to speak to the teachers, etc, at the School and make a legal case to remove such protests from School grounds if you can proove it is harmful.

That is not the point!
The point is they inflict spiritual harm on me and my society yet they go scott free even though my society is peacefull. Why do they go free when they hurt spiritually and radically attack others who only vocally oppose them?
Another point is if homosexulaity is acceptable then why isn't CONSENTED cannibalism and necrophillia? [ made bold to stress upon!]
You have merely said that "YOU" feel that they are bad and "YOU" feel that homosexuality is acceptable/good. YOU feel its okay so I feel the same about cannibalism do you think it is possible that they will allow cannibalism if they can allow homosexuality!

Firstly, you assume the majority of people are behind you without any facts. If you look at the only public referenfum about such events which was Switzerland

I live in the USA where by common knowledge it is known that homosexuality is not enchouraged
I haven't seen any results/polls doen in the US but this is pretty certain.
Also of the worlds 8,5 billions I am sure no less than 6 billion will support my stand that Homosexuality is not to be enchouraged! No i hven't counted but I am pretty sure that this is true!

Secondly, they don't expect you to change. They just don't want people to inflict harm upon them because of their choice of lifestyle.

Their very exsistence harms me and my community so they do harm me!
they harm me i don't harm them, they expect dignity why should I condescend to treat them fairly!
BTW the fight now for equall treatment not against abuse!

IAF101

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link

Originally posted by Odium
If you could get the majority of America (U.S.A.) to vote on an issue and they voted your way, I would have no problem as long as it did not force people to change.

I am sure the majority of America would vote the same way i would as you can infer from the strong religious sentiment that eminates from America.
Also if such a referendum were to be passed then the gays will have to change as they have changed our society and so to compensate gays will also have to undergo change, if they are to live normally along with the rest of us.
If not they will most likely be seperated from society!

Also just because you don't agree with something does not mean it has to harm you, why are you not safe in the knowledge that you will go to heaven and they won't?

I honestly do not believe in heaven! So it does not matter, i have just taken a side to present my point!

Odium

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:29 PM
link

You allow them to harm you due to the fact you think they are immoral.

You should know that you will be going on to a better place and that they are in the wrong you should be able to leave it at that.

There are only about 6Billion people in the World.

Go and get a State Referendum on this issue and see what it shows. So far the only one goes in favour of the Homo-sexuals and against you.

Simple fact is, you are allowing it to harm you. You are the one thinking they are harmnig you and if a Nation voted on allowing cannibalism then it is not my right to say what they voted is wrong because that is their morals not mine. We are meant to live in a democracy, yet so far all I've seen bigotted harmful views and to be truthful, your arguements are childish.

You allow them to harm you and come off as though it is their fault. Why? It has been shown that homo-sexuality can be due to their "brain" so it is "natural" not "artificial".

But that's it, I'm done with you. You won't change your view and you won't attempt to change things through your rights and powers. If you dislike it, do somthing about it. It is clear the majority of the people on this forum can see homosexuality does not harm you but you allow it to harm you. They can see it does not harm society but people allow it to harm themselves.

If you can debate this with any facts rather then feelings please do, but I am still attemtping to find instances when;
Homo-sexuality have ruined society.
When the act of two adults in their private lives having sex has harmed society.
Or when the majority of people do not agree with it and wish homosexuality to be illegal...

IMPerial

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link

Originally posted by IAF101

That is not the point!
The point is they inflict spiritual harm on me and my society yet they go scott free even though my society is peacefull. Why do they go free when they hurt spiritually and radically attack others who only vocally oppose them?
Another point is if homosexulaity is acceptable then why isn't CONSENTED cannibalism and necrophillia? [ made bold to stress upon!]
You have merely said that "YOU" feel that they are bad and "YOU" feel that homosexuality is acceptable/good. YOU feel its okay so I feel the same about cannibalism do you think it is possible that they will allow cannibalism if they can allow homosexuality!

I live in the USA where by common knowledge it is known that homosexuality is not enchouraged
I haven't seen any results/polls doen in the US but this is pretty certain.
Also of the worlds 8,5 billions I am sure no less than 6 billion will support my stand that Homosexuality is not to be enchouraged! No i hven't counted but I am pretty sure that this is true!

Their very exsistence harms me and my community so they do harm me!
they harm me i don't harm them, they expect dignity why should I condescend to treat them fairly!
BTW the fight now for equall treatment not against abuse!

Firstly, when did homosexuals radically attack you or someone else for vocally disagreeing with them? Really, I would like to see some proof to that there.

Secondly, I strongly doubt that is correct... you actually believe such a vast majority of American citizens are that strongly against homosexuals existance?

Anyone else notice he has gone from simply talking about the spirituality of people and its regards to homosexuals... to now saying that homosexuals harm him and his community (which, if true, must consist of only himself) just by existing?

BadMojo

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:46 PM
link

Here's one, imp...

www.baptistpillar.com...

Give me a little time to dig more...

Here's a good one...

www.renewamerica.us...

[edit on 18-6-2005 by BadMojo]

IMPerial

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:57 PM
link

Originally posted by BadMojo
Here's one, imp...

www.baptistpillar.com...

Give me a little time to dig more...

Here's a good one...

www.renewamerica.us...

[edit on 18-6-2005 by BadMojo]

How about giving us something that isn't biased? This is like saying the holocaust wasn't that bad, then linking to reports from Nazi soldiers to support your claim. Yes I used Nazi's in the analogy, it was just the first thing to come ot mind.

WyrdeOne

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link

IAF
You say you're spiritually wounded by the existence of homosexuals, and you think that they should be banned from America because of that fact? I'm spiritually harmed by your existence. Do you think you should leave the country?

I find Christianity distastefully submissive and subversive, so are you going to find your own way to the camps, or do you need me to arrange the train?

Do you see my point yet?

You say they cause you spiritual harm..how do you define that? How do you quantify that? How do you prove that in a court of law? How do you separate the harm that was caused by the act and the harm that was caused by your particular perception of the act?

I normally don't argue religion with the relgious, because it's a circuitous debate, and almost entirely without merit, but I'm making an exception because I'd like people to know that you folks never have, do not, and hopefully never will represent the majority.

You want to banish homosexuals because they offend you and your people. Well, a long time ago my people were unceremoniously targeted for extermination for the very same reason. Way to keep the flame of Auschwitz burning buddy.

BadMojo
Your position is that homosexuality is wrong, but that the parents went about it the wrong way. Gotcha. I agree with half your sentiment, I'm sure you can deduce which half. If you'll look back, what I actually said was that I perceive the world in shades of gray, rather than black and white, and I feel that the picture rendered is more accurate and more finely detailed.

What's the Christian argument against homosexuality? It's wrong. Well, why? Because you won't get into heaven! Oh really?

Here's what I know for a fact. The last moment of every human being's life is spent in utter euphoria, chemically induced rapture. We all go to heaven, regardless of who we prayed to, or who we knelt before, or who we buggered in our off hours, we ALL spend at least some time in heaven. Eternity? Can't guarantee it, but that final moment might seem like it lasts forever, knowing the way the brain keeps time, in dreams for example.

Some people don't like my explanation, they feel it lacks the visible justice schematic, whereby sinners are punished and the righteous prosper. I know it seems wrong to you that hitmen go to heaven too, but the fact is, we pay for our sins with the lives we lead.