Dumbledore is gay
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
- Status
It's ok, but are you really married? You went and purposly referred to your wife again, so it makes me wonder why you keep doing that??? Either way, I am just messing with ya.
I don't have a problem with gay paople, and I am not a biggot because I don't condone the lifestyle. I hate being acused of that, not saying you were acusing me of it I mean in general, but I don't have to like the lifestyle. I think my main problem with it is that it's so in your face in the media now. I have gay friends, but they don't shove it in my face, they keep it between them. Oh, and they know I am not comfortable with it, so they seem respectful. It's just gross to me when 2 dudes kiss, I can't give a reason why, but it does.
As far as the book goes, they shouldn't have announced he was gay. You can't wait until after you've read a story and then describe the character! Oh, by the way Harry was black the whole time!
I don't have a problem with gay paople, and I am not a biggot because I don't condone the lifestyle. I hate being acused of that, not saying you were acusing me of it I mean in general, but I don't have to like the lifestyle. I think my main problem with it is that it's so in your face in the media now. I have gay friends, but they don't shove it in my face, they keep it between them. Oh, and they know I am not comfortable with it, so they seem respectful. It's just gross to me when 2 dudes kiss, I can't give a reason why, but it does.
As far as the book goes, they shouldn't have announced he was gay. You can't wait until after you've read a story and then describe the character! Oh, by the way Harry was black the whole time!
Well, apparently Rowling was assisting with the filming for the next movie and the director or writer had made some kind of ad lib about a woman in Dumbledore's past. Rowling had never been specific about it either way, but had to stop him from contradicting her internal canon.It's ok, but are you really married? You went and purposly referred to your wife again, so it makes me wonder why you keep doing that??? Either way, I am just messing with ya.
I don't have a problem with gay paople, and I am not a biggot because I don't condone the lifestyle. I hate being acused of that, not saying you were acusing me of it I mean in general, but I don't have to like the lifestyle. I think my main problem with it is that it's so in your face in the media now. I have gay friends, but they don't shove it in my face, they keep it between them. Oh, and they know I am not comfortable with it, so they seem respectful. It's just gross to me when 2 dudes kiss, I can't give a reason why, but it does.
As far as the book goes, they shouldn't have announced he was gay. You can't wait until after you've read a story and then describe the character! Oh, by the way Harry was black the whole time!
Re; Lifestyle
Just like any people, judging all based on the actions of some is not a good thing. That's the basis for the word "prejudice"; pre-judging. Yeah, a bunch of gay guys hanging out in a bar and having sex in the bathroom is probably distasteful to many people, but replace the homosexual couplings with heterosexual couplings -- is it still as distasteful? Random sex happens all the time in bars -- yes, even straight bars. Of course, the HIV/AIDS issue complicates it. It's tantamount to a murder attempt to have sex with someone knowing you have a lethal disease that could be communicated even through protected sexual contact and not telling them.
When I see guys kiss I think it's weird too, but I shrug it off as something I'm just not used to. It will become more common, and two generations from now it won't be as big a deal.
I bet we could have a really good gay topic going, but I think that could get heated real fast. Probably waouldn't be a good idea and better left alone.
It's cool that all of us are on here from different backgrounds, cultures and lifestyles and can discuss topics rationally. Too bad our government has problems doing the same.
It's cool that all of us are on here from different backgrounds, cultures and lifestyles and can discuss topics rationally. Too bad our government has problems doing the same.
I didn't make the choice to be heterosexual.
Why is it any different if you are gay? Do you actually know any gay people? I know a few - and none of them say it is a choice. I've never heard a gay guy say he could just make a choice to want to lick pussy instead of suck dick.
Do you have any scientific evidence that being gay is a choice?
Read this: The Associated Press: Study Seeks Genetic Links to Being Gay
Saying "so high-school" is so gay.
It's anecdotal, but if all the gay people are saying they didn't choose it, and they are constantly being persecuted and abused for it, yet they continue to do it, I'd say they're being honest about it not being their choice. Occam's razor and all that.
Also, considering animals can exhibit homosexual behavior in nature, I would guess it's either a genetic, hormonal, or chemical imbalance during pregnancy/early development, since aberrations happen, but I haven't read any hard evidence either way.
I doubt most people would choose to be gay. It's probably very bothersome aside from people who happen to live in unusual cities (San Francisco, Ann Arbor) and I'm glad I don't have to deal with it, myself.
Oh, I don't know if I want to go here but, do you think pedophiles share the same argument for being accepted? Could we consider it a mental illness?
Not trying to be abusive, but this does make me question it.
Not trying to be abusive, but this does make me question it.
That is FUCKED up. Are you comparing homosexuality with pedophilia? HOw fucking insulting is that? Do you really need to be told why there is no comparison to be made between the two?? There is so much wrong with your ENTIRE statement that I wouldn't even know where to start.
Fuck it. I'm not going to respond to it, because to do so would treat it as a reasonable question.
Yes, it should be treated as a mental illness in a similar way to how someone with psychopathic tenancies is (or should be) treated.
I don't think he (or she?) was comparing them, rather going off on a tangent from the genetic nature/nurture comments... that's how I read it anyway.
That point is very commonly made.
My personal opinion is briefly, I do think homosexuality is not natural, and people would be happier if they weren't. A lot of people have the desire to pass on their genes, and have a really hard time doing that when they're not sexually attracted to the opposite gender. I think that everyone should have the opportunity to have children, and I don't know how successful homosexual couples are with the whole adoption thing; there's too much social stigma.
I think what you're driving at is, should it be something we try to fix? Well, I think people *have* tried to fix it psychologically, and it doesn't work. People commit suicide when pressured into being what they're not, etc. If it's a genetic/chemical/hormonal issue like I think it is, you'd have to correct it very early on, but we don't know anything about how to go about doing that.
Once we know exactly how to prevent it, should we? That's a moral question as well as a medical one. As a Christian, would you say medicine is interfering with nature if we can prevent homosexuality? Heh, an interesting question for you.
I think if we can track it down and it does turn out to be something broken, and we can correct that without breaking anything else, sure, we should do it. I think those people would live happier lives. But, the caveat of not doing any other harm is a very big one; we need to know 100% that it doesn't cause any other changes to them. Genes are not completely understood, no matter the headlines of the Human Genome project.
But, I'm an odd duck. I think eugenics has a lot of potential for good if used correctly. Not like Hitler, but more like advice: "Hey, if you can pass along a strong dominant trait that will kill your children by 45 because of heart failure, it might be a good idea for you to adopt instead."
Strong eugenics, weeding out ALL of the "bad" traits is too clumsy, though. A diverse genetic playground is good for the race. Many of our past geniuses have been plagued by one disability or another, so we have no way of knowing if bad traits might be related to good traits. With our current technology and science, the outcome from turning switches on and off in genes is guesswork.
Don't get me wrong, I love science. I have a sub to Discover. But I don't fool myself into thinking we are beyond the tip of the genetic iceberg.
This whole way of thinking about homosexuals being "broken" is a slippery slope. You are implying that we will just have to accept them because' it's the nice thing to do,' but "I don't have to like it! or feel comfortable with it." If anything needs to be fixed it is our (the straights) attitude. If we would accept them, befriend them, celebrate them and give them the exact same rights that we have because they are humans and deserve to be happy, then this whole issue would be moot and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
What in the world are people so scared of? Do you really want everyone to be just like you? How boring this world would be.
What in the world are people so scared of? Do you really want everyone to be just like you? How boring this world would be.
Actually the question was to: "Also, considering animals can exhibit homosexual behavior in nature, I would guess it's either a genetic, hormonal, or chemical imbalance during pregnancy/early development, since aberrations happen, but I haven't read any hard evidence either way."
Turbolapp, you sort of contradict yourself, as you scream about acceptance and the feelings of homosexuals, but you don't seem to practice that with people of faith, from our other thread. Granted, you never attacked me personally and I appreciate that, but as i implied in the other thread, you should consider the feelings of people with faith.
My statement changes nothing and your gay friends will go on being gay, so quit tripping out on us, as I asked a simple question. Pedophiles and homosexuals are both considered choices until proven otherwise, so you ca be pissed at me for asking, as I felt it was a legitimate question and I am not the first to ask it.
I also didn't directly ask that question to be hurtful, nor did I say anything degrading. It's the same question I asked a friend of mine, that is gay by the way. I also asked could the same argument go for people who would have sex with animals... no one is hurting the animal either!
To clarify, I was referring to paedophilia, not homosexuality.
I think they are likely related genetically, but don't influence each other as someone could be one, the other or both. I'm no expert, but I don't think there is a significant difference in numbers between gay and straight paedos.
I'm not sure about where fucking about with nature could lead, but if we could alter whatever genes affect sexual attraction and love and 'tweak the age scale' I think it would help paedophiles and society... and teen site webmasters no doubt.
I don't have anything against gay people, but do little children really need to know about a book character's sexual orientation? I would have been devastated to learn that Nancy Drew, Pippi Longstocking (or another beloved character) was a carpetmuncher during my childhood. I think J.K. Rowlings' disclosure is very inconsiderate to everyone who has supported her all these years. Parents shouldn't have to address this topic with their children until they are comfortable doing so, not because this woman is a moron.
- Status