Republican Ken Buck Says Being Gay Is A Choice, And Also Like Alcoholism

[Sunni Man]

I am straight and would have blown my brains out if you had been my father.

You don't sound like you are straight.

You talk like some kind if effeminate drama queen.

 

[Gadawg73]

Fo being gay you would spank them?
I am straight and would have blown my brains out if you had been my father.

Most people have gotten a spanking while growing up.

And haven't committed suicide.

Yeah, sorry, but I'm not being held hostage by, "Dad, if I cannot have a 6-pack of Mike's Hard Pink Lemonade, a TV in my room, the keys to the car, and a new butt plug for my BF, then I'll kill myself."

Mike's Hard Pink Lemonade fits you Samson.

 

[Gadawg73]

I am straight and would have blown my brains out if you had been my father.

You don't sound like you are straight.

You talk like some kind if effeminate drama queen.

I was a drama queen for 3 years on Saturdays.
But I doubt there are any offensive lineman or QBs that would have called me "effeminate".
I am not scared of the gay boogey man like you are.
Your milk is weak.

 

[Samson]

It isn't enough to say something just is unacceptable. WHY is it unacceptable?

You'll need to ask someone 10,000 years old.

Good Luck.

So it's unnacceptable but you have no fucking idea why? Are you getting yet why your argument doesn't have much in the way of credibility?

How exactly are you going to teach your kid that 'queerness is bad' if can't even intelligently explain why?

Why is it heterosexuality acceptable?

You have no "fucking idea" why.

And, you still continue to miss the point, although its been repeated over and over: Are you really this stupid? I can see that Abikersailor porobably has someone tieing his shoes for him, but where did I say I would teach EVERYone that "queerness is bad?"

You seem to be as intellectually confused as you are sexually confused.

 

[Bern80]

You'll need to ask someone 10,000 years old.

Good Luck.

So it's unnacceptable but you have no fucking idea why? Are you getting yet why your argument doesn't have much in the way of credibility?

How exactly are you going to teach your kid that 'queerness is bad' if can't even intelligently explain why?

Why is it heterosexuality acceptable?

You have no "fucking idea" why.

And, you still continue to miss the point, although its been repeated over and over: Are you really this stupid? I can see that Abikersailor porobably has someone tieing his shoes for him, but where did I say I would teach EVERYone that "queerness is bad?"

You seem to be as intellectually confused as you are sexually confused.

You didn't say everyone. I never said you said everyone. What you did say is 'queerness is unnacceptable behavior' and because you can't explain logically why that is you are trying to deflect your own ignorance back on me.

 

[Samson]

So it's unnacceptable but you have no fucking idea why? Are you getting yet why your argument doesn't have much in the way of credibility?

How exactly are you going to teach your kid that 'queerness is bad' if can't even intelligently explain why?

Why is it heterosexuality acceptable?

You have no "fucking idea" why.

And, you still continue to miss the point, although its been repeated over and over: Are you really this stupid? I can see that Abikersailor porobably has someone tieing his shoes for him, but where did I say I would teach EVERYone that "queerness is bad?"

You seem to be as intellectually confused as you are sexually confused.

You didn't say everyone. I never said you said everyone. What you did say is 'queerness is unnacceptable behavior' and because you can't explain logically why that is you are trying to deflect your own ignorance back on me.

I told you: Queerness is not socially accepted

I told you: Socially acceptable behaviour is a result of thousands of generations of humans living in societies.

Now I suppose I'll need to spoon feed the obvious: Humans, and all other living organisms, depend on reproduction: Therefore human societies value heterosexual activity, the basis of reproduction. It doesn't take too much imagination to hypothesise that since there are no entirely homosexual societies, the fallacies associated with such an absurd notion were recognised relatively early in human social development.

Biology 101.

Now that I've bothered to enlighten you, you might answer:

Why is heterosexuality acceptable?

***hint: I just explained it to you***

 

[JScott]

Homosexuals are and have been accepted through history in many many cultures.

Now lets end this stupid thread.

 

[Samson]

Homosexuals are and have been accepted through history in many many cultures.

Now lets end this stupid thread.

True, and who cares?

..... they are not accepted TODAY.

Why?

Again, its really immaterial, except to Bern.

 

[Seawytch]

Homosexuals are and have been accepted through history in many many cultures.

Now lets end this stupid thread.

True, and who cares?

..... they are not accepted TODAY.

Why?

Again, its really immaterial, except to Bern.

You are speaking in awfully broad generalities aren't you? "They" aren't accepted today? Not true. "They" are coming very close to enjoying majority support for legal, civil marriage. "They" do enjoy majority support for their serving in the military. "They" are certainly more accepted today than when I first came out over 20 years ago.

 

[Navy1960]

Frankly, I fall into the catagory of who gives a a damn if it's a matter of choice or it's a matter of birth, if two people want to have a relationship with one another and it does not harm others in doing so and effect you personally then direct your focus on something that matters your own self. Way too much attention is focused on what in my humble opinion at this moment in time is a trivial mattter when it comes to this nations needs. If a person is gay, straight, or likes aliens for that matter as long as they are willing and part of the soluton and not the problem I could care less if they choose something or are born with it. The fact remains if they claim to be what they are now, and it has ZERO effect on you personally it doesnt matter one damn bit.

That's all Fine and Good...

Consenting Adults should be Allowed to do whatever they want...

Except Demand that Society Validate those things.



peace...

Perhaps, but if those that favor those "things" as it were using the methods set down by our constitution get them as a result of a majority of society through it's vote , is that not society validating it in some small way? If your speaking of the moral aspects of what society will and will not tolerate it's my opinion that many who engage in the moral side of the argument need to look in the mirror these days before doing so. Having said all that, on a personal level I do believe that our nation would be better served with all this energy directed at the way others live into something more productive , like helping this nation back on it's feet.

All the best Mal ...

 

[Samson]

Polls that Seawytch was so kind to post, demonstrate that for the first time in the history of the poll, going back decades, more Americans find queer behaviour acceptable than Americans that do not.

Not really. The fact is that more people are coming around but there is still a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population that does not accept gay behavior. That and the fact that answering a POLL that you are 'tolerant' is different than actually acting that way. Children will ALWAYS separate those that are not like them and it takes parents to teach them that differences are not bad and people care people. The same thing happens regarding minorities. It is more prevalent with gays because they are a fairly rare sight. Tolerance takes a long time to fully develop.

You are speaking in awfully broad generalities aren't you? "They" aren't accepted today? Not true. "They" are coming very close to enjoying majority support for legal, civil marriage. "They" do enjoy majority support for their serving in the military. "They" are certainly more accepted today than when I first came out over 20 years ago.

48 pages into the thread and you gotta put quotes around the word T-H-E-Y?

You've just illustrated why "there is still a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population that does not accept gay behavior." It's not as much because queer behaviour in private is so deviant, but because queer behaviour in public is so absurd.

 

[Bern80]

I told you: Queerness is not socially accepted

Neither were black people at one point. Acceptance is just another term for something a lot of people don't like. The reason they don't like it can be rationally based or not rationally based. There are a host of things society doesn't accept. That in of itself doesn't make those things bad and it doesn't make the bulk of society that doesn't like it, right.

I told you: Socially acceptable behaviour is a result of thousands of generations of humans living in societies.

Yes it is. Unfortunately for your argument, the behaviors society accepts or doesn't accept does not objectively make that behavior bad. The behavior of using technology in certain societies is unacceptable, like the Amish. So I should conclude, according to your argument, that since using it is unacceptable to them, technology is therefore bad?

Now I suppose I'll need to spoon feed the obvious: Humans, and all other living organisms, depend on reproduction: Therefore human societies value heterosexual activity, the basis of reproduction. It doesn't take too much imagination to hypothesise that since there are no entirely homosexual societies, the fallacies associated with such an absurd notion were recognised relatively early in human social development.

Biology 101.

Now that I've bothered to enlighten you, you might answer:

Why is heterosexuality acceptable?

***hint: I just explained it to you***

First humans don't have sex just to reproduce. In fact sex happens far more often for pleasure. Which really has nothing to do with how our sex organs are organized to facilitate mating.

As far as your questions goes. Again you first need to examine your premise. I don't get how the concept of acceptability pertains to sexual orientation. How we are biologically designed to mate has nothing to do with what forms of sex are 'acceptable'.

 

[eagleseven]

..... they are not accepted TODAY.

The times, they are a-changing.

 

[Samson]

..... they are not accepted TODAY.

The times, they are a-changing.

Not entirely for the better.

 

[Samson]

How we are biologically designed to mate has nothing to do with what forms of sex are 'acceptable'.

Heh.

True, as long as you're not human.

The expression of such a nonsensical POV demonstrates a level of consciousness so far removed from reality (although possibly common among the queer "community") it makes continued discussion pointless.

 

[JScott]

Polls that Seawytch was so kind to post, demonstrate that for the first time in the history of the poll, going back decades, more Americans find queer behaviour acceptable than Americans that do not.

Not really. The fact is that more people are coming around but there is still a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population that does not accept gay behavior. That and the fact that answering a POLL that you are 'tolerant' is different than actually acting that way. Children will ALWAYS separate those that are not like them and it takes parents to teach them that differences are not bad and people care people. The same thing happens regarding minorities. It is more prevalent with gays because they are a fairly rare sight. Tolerance takes a long time to fully develop.

You are speaking in awfully broad generalities aren't you? "They" aren't accepted today? Not true. "They" are coming very close to enjoying majority support for legal, civil marriage. "They" do enjoy majority support for their serving in the military. "They" are certainly more accepted today than when I first came out over 20 years ago.

48 pages into the thread and you gotta put quotes around the word T-H-E-Y?

You've just illustrated why "there is still a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population that does not accept gay behavior." It's not as much because queer behaviour in private is so deviant, but because queer behaviour in public is so absurd.

Oh come now Samson, Im sure in your day youve experienced some pretty deviant behavior in private...but I digress.

A mixed couple was absurd 50 years ago. I was there.

 

[skookerasbil]

Last time I checked............plugs go into sockets!!!!

 

[Samson]

Not really. The fact is that more people are coming around but there is still a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population that does not accept gay behavior. That and the fact that answering a POLL that you are 'tolerant' is different than actually acting that way. Children will ALWAYS separate those that are not like them and it takes parents to teach them that differences are not bad and people care people. The same thing happens regarding minorities. It is more prevalent with gays because they are a fairly rare sight. Tolerance takes a long time to fully develop.

You are speaking in awfully broad generalities aren't you? "They" aren't accepted today? Not true. "They" are coming very close to enjoying majority support for legal, civil marriage. "They" do enjoy majority support for their serving in the military. "They" are certainly more accepted today than when I first came out over 20 years ago.

48 pages into the thread and you gotta put quotes around the word T-H-E-Y?

You've just illustrated why "there is still a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population that does not accept gay behavior." It's not as much because queer behaviour in private is so deviant, but because queer behaviour in public is so absurd.

Oh come now Samson, Im sure in your day youve experienced some pretty deviant behavior in private...but I digress.

A mixed couple was absurd 50 years ago. I was there.

Were they queer?

 

[JScott]

48 pages into the thread and you gotta put quotes around the word T-H-E-Y?

You've just illustrated why "there is still a SIGNIFICANT portion of the population that does not accept gay behavior." It's not as much because queer behaviour in private is so deviant, but because queer behaviour in public is so absurd.

Oh come now Samson, Im sure in your day youve experienced some pretty deviant behavior in private...but I digress.

A mixed couple was absurd 50 years ago. I was there.

Were they queer?

Your situations or the mixed couple? It doesnt matter to me.

 

[Samson]

Oh come now Samson, Im sure in your day youve experienced some pretty deviant behavior in private...but I digress.

A mixed couple was absurd 50 years ago. I was there.

Were they queer?

Your situations or the mixed couple? It doesnt matter to me.

The couple, I assume, was "Mixed" because they were of different races.

Trying to equate racial inequalities to being queer is a common strawman for those who realise their arguement for social acceptance of genetic deviants and their unnatural, aberrant behavoiurs cannot be defended on their own rhetorical merits: E.g., if we cannot defend rotten apples, then let's talk about bananas.