Homosexual Marraige

[TheWay]

every point just lobbied was band wagon logic, I scratch my head because I even told you up front many times this is what you would fall back on and here you go band wagon logic. I am absolutly out of my mind over this lol. Can someone non biased please explain what I am saying here. Just on the band wagon logic and such you dont have to take a side just step in on the issue of pure reason

[Colton]

I scratch my head because it's itchy

[Mister Sandman]

Yes their has been many cultures throughout history have accepted homosexuality. The ones who have tend to be the most successful. Greeks, Romans, Chinese, African, Persians.

Lets have a look shall well. The most "successful" cultures...

Greek

For the Greeks it wasn't "homosexuality" it was a sort of male bonding.
It was a relationship called paiderastia. Men were called to respect, and bond with each other. However, they were not to desire sexual intimacy.

There were to educate, protect, love, and provide a role model for one another.

In no regards this relationship contain of homosexual acts. It was same-sex relationships.

I will contrast this with a typical 21st century setting.

Picture a the gang. Your mates. You go to the pub or whatever to bond and have a relationship. If some guy picks on your mates you would protect them right? They are your brothers so to speak.


Romans

Laws such as the Lex Scantinia, Lex Iulia, and Lex Iulia de vi publica regulated against same-sex activities among free-born males, Lex Scantinia as well as especially legislations for the Roman military put capital punishments upon same-sex activities


Chinese

Look at traditions of ying and yang.


African

Successful?


Persians

As far I am aware the Persians were against it. They were very religious people.

[fireball37]

every point just lobbied was band wagon logic, I scratch my head because I even told you up front many times this is what you would fall back on and here you go band wagon logic. I am absolutly out of my mind over this lol. Can someone non biased please explain what I am saying here. Just on the band wagon logic and such you dont have to take a side just step in on the issue of pure reason

Shut up, how exactly is my argument 'bandwagon logic' I think you've just heard a phrase you like and you now feel the need to say it at everything, if your not going to do anything useful please go away.

@sandman- The Greek male bonding you refer to involved sexual acts, therefore I would consider it homosexuality, in fact the whole principle of what you said, about mutual love and respect is no different to modern gay relationships. Although I don't agree with Greek views on pedophilia, and paiderastia only applied to those relationships.

With China, there was no hatred against homosexuality, provided that the men involved had families of there own, otherwise it was seen as weakening the empire and was frowned upon, but only because of the fact that gay men couldn't have offspring, however today many gay men adopt children who are orphans or from mothers who cannot look after them, the Chinese would not have had a problem with this.

And although the Persians where religious they where also very tolerant of homosexuality, there is record of homoerotic acts being allowed within monasteries. And much of there poetry had homosexual overtones.

[Mister Sandman]

The Greek male bonding you refer to involved sexual acts, therefore I would consider it homosexuality, in fact the whole principle of what you said, about mutual love and respect is no different to modern gay relationships. Although I don't agree with Greek views on pedophilia, and paiderastia only applied to those relationships.

Sexual acts were not condoned. Mutual love and respect is no different from any relationship. Your point being?

With China, there was no hatred against homosexuality, provided that the men involved had families of there own, otherwise it was seen as weakening the empire and was frowned upon, but only because of the fact that gay men couldn't have offspring, however today many gay men adopt children who are orphans or from mothers who cannot look after them, the Chinese would not have had a problem with this.

Weakening the empire should be frowned upon. Im not saying that Chinese, back then, didn't have a hatred of homosexuality. However, china wasn't really a successful empire back then. Today it has more power, and today homosexuality is frowned upon.

And although the Persians where religious they where also very tolerant of homosexuality, there is record of homoerotic acts being allowed within monasteries. And much of there poetry had homosexual overtones.

Poetry back then, and even now, have overtones of femininity. I don't say homosexual overtones because well that's a misconception. In addition, Persians were against homosexuality. Ive been doing research into the Persian culture and it is apparent the homosexuality was tolerated however, not condoned.

[fireball37]

The Greeks very much did condone sexual acts, there are many examples of homosexual intercourse being shown prominently in Greek art and even in there legal records, it was only prostitutes who were punished, it was unheard of for the sexual act between two men to be anything other than a normal healthy thing to do.(Although there where matters of tradition involved, which did add some unusual restrictions).

As for China, I wouldn't really consider them to have become more powerful than they once were (relative to the rest of the world of course) in fact, there culture reveres the past, the principle ethnicity of China is actually named after this period in there history.

[Thade]

To address a few points:

Band Wagon Logic: as TheWay is referring to it is (by my interpretation of his post) arguing that something is acceptable or good simply because it was accepted in the past or a popular idea does not in fact make it correct or valid. By stating that Homosexuality was accepted back in Ancient Greece etc. so it should be accepted here in America is a false argument because their acceptance has no bearing on the modern world. I'm not certain if there were other arguments made that would also fall within the purview of this negator.

Homosexual love in Ancient Greece-Rome:
While there may be details concerning homosexual acts that survive as art and text that does not exactly mean it was a regular/accepted thing. They believed that a man of the aristocracy could initiate sex with anyone of a lower social status than he (as long as they weren't already married of course). So raping a peasant woman was acceptable, having sex with a younger man was acceptable (as long as you were the giver and not the receiver), etc. Not exactly a homosexual love relationship but more a power issue just like rape is a power issue. When the older men courted the younger boys it was very socially frowned upon for the boy who was the target to actually show any sexual interest in taking part. So the homosexual relationships of Greece and Rome really couldn't be applied to the argument.

As for China, I wouldn't really consider them to have become more powerful than they once were (relative to the rest of the world of course) in fact, there culture reveres the past, the principle ethnicity of China is actually named after this period in there history.

China is probably one of the most powerful nations in the world. They control the vast majority of manufacturing and other such neccessities of the economic world. Not to mention the fact that they own the banks that own a large portion of US real estate. China at one point in their history could have ruled the world easily (around 1066 I believe), however the Emperor of that time was assassinated and his replacement ordered the burning of the Chinese fleet thus they did not conquer the world. Since that time they were "used" by the British Empire and they learned a lot from them concerning the need to control the economy in order to truly control things. They built on that philosophy and it has served them well so far.

[semper]

Yes...band wagon logic. What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.

You need to be careful when using the opinion of the majority to decree whether something was right. HOWEVER, same faults can be seen with religion I just want to add...so I would use the accusation very carefully there, less you wish the same disdain be thrown at religion so readily by many more people.

[Apadamek]

The Greek male bonding you refer to involved sexual acts, therefore I would consider it homosexuality, in fact the whole principle of what you said, about mutual love and respect is no different to modern gay relationships. Although I don't agree with Greek views on pedophilia, and paiderastia only applied to those relationships.

Sexual acts were not condoned. Mutual love and respect is no different from any relationship. Your point being?

Learn about the Sacred Band.

[~Sokar~]

No.

I always say it's an illness, a genetic error, but there is a cure for that. It's a proved fact. Like the old soviet olympic women who turned to men (yep some of them had nuts) cause of the steroids and cause of the million tablets and chemical things they ate to become stronger. Simple logic. It can be reversed. Today the medical and healthcare technology can do anything. They open up your brains and make you depressed or make you happy. Nowadays almost everything is possible that you can imagine.

I voted no. It wouldn't be the worst thing if there were more yes than no. It is much worse that if a 6 year old child turn on the TV, go on to the net or just open the window and take a look at the streets s/he will see this. A gay movie, a gay pornsite or a gay marching festival in the streets. You think it is just a simple question. I think it is advertiseing.. Advertiseing by the media and by the already infected ppl, I can look anywhere but I always see this and similiar **Filtered** everywhere... They want you to think that it's normal and it's naturally. And it will be worse. A few years later blue and pink haired children in the kindergarten will talk about XY's father and father while a half men and half women pedofil nursery nurse give them their daily afternoon light drugs.. That will be the coup de gráce, the real end of our sweet world..

[Thriller]

Yes their has been many cultures throughout history have accepted homosexuality. The ones who have tend to be the most successful. Greeks, Romans, Chinese, African, Persians.

Lets have a look shall well. The most "successful" cultures...

Greek

For the Greeks it wasn't "homosexuality" it was a sort of male bonding.
It was a relationship called paiderastia. Men were called to respect, and bond with each other. However, they were not to desire sexual intimacy.

There were to educate, protect, love, and provide a role model for one another.

In no regards this relationship contain of homosexual acts. It was same-sex relationships.

I will contrast this with a typical 21st century setting.

Picture a the gang. Your mates. You go to the pub or whatever to bond and have a relationship. If some guy picks on your mates you would protect them right? They are your brothers so to speak.


Romans

Laws such as the Lex Scantinia, Lex Iulia, and Lex Iulia de vi publica regulated against same-sex activities among free-born males, Lex Scantinia as well as especially legislations for the Roman military put capital punishments upon same-sex activities


Chinese

Look at traditions of ying and yang.


African

Successful?


Persians

As far I am aware the Persians were against it. They were very religious people.

YOU absolutely no nothing of history, Just because you googled it doesn't mean you understand anything in the context of the time. Plz be quiet on this now.

That's a pretty low blow to African culture.

[Demeisen]

Yet not the British empire, and that was arguably the most successful of the lot.

not 'arguably.'

tis fact it was



from what i remember the greeks (Spartans) were as gay as the day is long.



i have seen people make points about whats natural and whats not. the simple fact is that the human body is not intended for male/male or female/female intercourse. i argue that its fundamentally unnatural as it cannot lead to procreation. although this depends on definitions i suppose.

[Apadamek]

Yet not the British empire, and that was arguably the most successful of the lot.

not 'arguably.'

tis fact it was



from what i remember the greeks (Spartans) were as gay as the day is long.



i have seen people make points about whats natural and whats not. the simple fact is that the human body is not intended for male/male or female/female intercourse. i argue that its fundamentally unnatural as it cannot lead to procreation. although this depends on definitions i suppose.

I wouldn't call it fact.

As for "natural" we've evolved past "natural" we don't naturally need to drive cars, or eat a varied diet, we don't naturally need to have cities, or economies, the word "natural" cannot be used in regards to a human being, it's moronic to think it can.

[semper]

I would not call it fact, as much as I want to.

Success comes in many forms Liquid...

[Mordack]

If there was a 'proven cure' for homosexuality, I'm fairly sure it'd be more widely documented... especially by those who consider it a genetic disorder. Can you elaborate on it further, Dexx?