Jusunlee.com Forums Pages (2): « 1 [2]
Show all 36 posts from this thread on one page

Jusunlee.com Forums (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/index.php)
- Random Thoughts (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=2)
-- anyone gay here? (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=4215)

Posted by seung ju on 08-17-2002 07:17 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by krnxswat
truth, i even felt offensive even though I'm not gasy.

you're not gassy? thats a first.

Posted by MellowYellow on 08-17-2002 07:25 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by seung ju

you're not gassy? thats a first.


~> ~>


well uh... i don't mind homosexuals... frisco... gay and lesbian pride month.... june right? there's a frisco pride parade or sumthing... whole load of pink ... my friend got stuck in it.. she was coming back from a soccer thing or sumthing... and their car got stuck in it... her parents were mormon btw...

oh well uh anyway.... i really don't think it's your place to ask that... and well since you did....you could have not added the smilie... it made the whole question seem offensive.. like you found it repulsive or sumthing....

__________________
I hate google cache.

Posted by GinaDaQueen on 08-17-2002 09:22 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by krnxswat
no but my boyfriend is.

jk.
i think that was prett offensive of you to do that. to tell you the truth, i even felt offensive even though I'm not gasy. you could have simply just asked the question "anyone gay here" but you justhad to put this --> expression and make it worse,making it more offensive. there was no point of this thread. what were you going to do if someone said they were gay? point a finger and laugh at them? i know you didnt intend to make it sound like this, but this is the way i heard it , or read it.


yeah i totally agree.... that was way offensive and in a way immature.... i'm not gay, but i don't "hate" them like everyone seems to..... cuz they didn't choose to be gay, they just are

__________________

Posted by TAIgrr on 08-17-2002 09:30 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by GinaDaQueen
cuz they didn't choose to be gay, they just are

um.. i kinda have to disagree with you.
as a christian, and my beliefs..

God did not create anyone to be gay
they chose to be gay

they are not gay because they just are

__________________
.

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 08-17-2002 10:59 PM:

Well, i don't believe in god, so i obviously disagree with that.

I think it's more chemical than insightful. People don't just choose to be gay, they are because they realize they are sexually attracted in that direction. If i just chose to be gay,...and was unable to be sexually turned on by the same sex, that would ruin your whole theory wouldn't it? That would happen to, because i don't think i'd be able to be gay physically...even if i chose it to be so.

Freud (correct me if i'm wrong about this tommy), i believe, said that all people are born bisexual. And that the first impression of the other sex is forever impelled and derived from their initial impression from their parents. People thus, develop a preference towards one side partially due to their initial impression of their parents. I've read barely anything about him, so that may be wrong haha . Someone correct me if so. But anyway, if that is true...perhaps there is some connection between chemical and intution processes.

-edit- btw, azn2296, if you are sorry, why didn't you edit your original post to not have the morbid emoticon?

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by Azn2296 on 08-17-2002 11:06 PM:

i could edit it???

Posted by TAIgrr on 08-17-2002 11:33 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Azn2296
i could edit it???

yes

__________________
.

Posted by DEmeant0r on 08-18-2002 03:41 PM:

I'm not gay, but my school friend is, he actually told me he sucked another man...

Posted by kpjoey287 on 08-20-2002 03:08 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
Well, i don't believe in god, so i obviously disagree with that.

I think it's more chemical than insightful. People don't just choose to be gay, they are because they realize they are sexually attracted in that direction. If i just chose to be gay,...and was unable to be sexually turned on by the same sex, that would ruin your whole theory wouldn't it? That would happen to, because i don't think i'd be able to be gay physically...even if i chose it to be so.

Freud (correct me if i'm wrong about this tommy), i believe, said that all people are born bisexual. And that the first impression of the other sex is forever impelled and derived from their initial impression from their parents. People thus, develop a preference towards one side partially due to their initial impression of their parents. I've read barely anything about him, so that may be wrong haha . Someone correct me if so. But anyway, if that is true...perhaps there is some connection between chemical and intution processes.




hmm...uhh..ok.


y would sum1 be born bisexual....uh cuz like physical attributes make it so that a guy likes a girl and girls like guys...aherm if i need to say this physical attributes thing further i will but nehoo yea i guess u could put it that way since u dont believe in God but i do n he meant for people to stay strait and not sway...if he did make us bisexual den if he's like..."yes my sons prosper in children" it wont be possible so there like no point in being gay unless u can make babies that way.


there i said it.

__________________
~Joey~

For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believed in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ~John 3:16~....^^




Our new forums :D
http://www.apartment102.com

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 08-20-2002 04:45 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by kpjoey287



hmm...uhh..ok.


y would sum1 be born bisexual....uh cuz like physical attributes make it so that a guy likes a girl and girls like guys...aherm if i need to say this physical attributes thing further i will but nehoo yea i guess u could put it that way since u dont believe in God but i do n he meant for people to stay strait and not sway...if he did make us bisexual den if he's like..."yes my sons prosper in children" it wont be possible so there like no point in being gay unless u can make babies that way.


there i said it.


hmm...uhh...ok.

You assume you know for a fact that physical attributes determine sexual orientation. Freud is a different person,...a philosopher of which i did not advocate his views, but provided as an example to support the theory of free will of the mind and how it may determine sexual orientation supporting taigrr's god view.

We don't know for sure what causes homo/bi-sexuality, and freud provides an option he believed may be right. Read some of his stuff, it is interesting.

I believe freud was atheist, but anyway...going in a god-view, if he created people bisexual then "prosper in children" would happen as it is today. It does not mandate that more people will be gay as a result of simple realization of the fact taht we are born bisexual...which is what you make it seem like. It'd be like it is today. Nothing would change, simply our knowledge of it. So it works in that way i guess.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by Crazydeb8ter on 08-20-2002 04:47 AM:

again really, no use arguing an argument that is based on ones own personal beliefs.

and yet again, this is the same argument that has been going of for centuries.

so really, nothing would be resolved here.

__________________
ni pour ni contre; ça m'est égal

"The weight of this sad time we must obey,/ Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say./ The oldest hath borne most; we that are young/ Shall never see so much, nor live so long."
King Lear (V.3.300-304)

Posted by tm11 on 08-20-2002 06:38 AM:

good job buddy. you're right.

no point in arguing unless it's using widely accepted maxims, and ignoring personal beliefs. let's not try to discuss anything if it's already been discussed before as well. It's not like we really could reach any sort of slight resolution.

__________________
word is bond

Posted by aznkid1008 on 08-20-2002 06:50 AM:

hey if someone is gay or not its their life. so who cares if someone is or not. they didnt do anythin 2 u so y should u start wit them? there's a gay guy at my skool. i talked 2 him a few times. wat im not gay jezz wat u guys think u talk or be wit a gay person u become gay? grow up

__________________
the fool is the one who thinks he is wise, yet the wise one is the one who thinks he is a fool

Remember the heros
Remember the lives
Remember the day
God bless

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 08-21-2002 12:10 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Crazydeb8ter
again really, no use arguing an argument that is based on ones own personal beliefs.

and yet again, this is the same argument that has been going of for centuries.

so really, nothing would be resolved here.


thats true and i know that, but nothing was really being repeated yet (elaboration at most), and it was never really arguing. I elaborated, and they aren't even my own beliefs... So it really wasn't bootless "arguing"

By stating this you've cut off discourse on a subject that was actually getting a little interesting and perhaps others would contribute to it but now will not. I know where your coming from because bootless argumentation has happened a lot in these forums, but there was really no point here.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by Ladi Jay on 08-22-2002 07:44 PM:

you all say "not me" as if being gay is a bad thing... I don't like this thread... I really dont

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 08-22-2002 09:20 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by RaCeR_LaDi_MoOn
you all say "not me" as if being gay is a bad thing... I don't like this thread... I really dont


actually, most everyone said that they were offended by the emoticon that introduced the thread, and proclaim they are not afterwards only in response to the thread at hand. If they thought being gay was a bad thing, we wouldn't be saying "i'm offended by the topic." , though i know what your talking about how people proclaim heterosexuality in order to feel more in the norm, but i only think thats a minutia here.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:46 AM. Pages (2): « 1 [2]
Show all 36 posts from this thread on one page