Apple Celebrates Pride in San Francisco Parade

[bandrews]

I

If you think I'm a bigot, you should go places and hang around with real homophobes - with those who deny LGBTQs the right to marry, those who speak of stoning or otherwise lynching LGBTQs, those who instill fear and hatred into their children about LGBTQ, etc. You really never traveled outside of your liberal bubble if you think I'm a bigot.

I'm not going to cry about you calling me a bigot. It really makes me laugh because the real right-wing homophobic bigots consider me an extreme liberal for my views. Since left-wing liberals like you obviously consider me a right-wing homophobic nut, I must be smack in the middle of the spectrum, and that's where I intend to remain.

I do not discriminate against LGBTQ, I support their rights to marry, inherit, etc., I always treat all people, including LGBTQ with respect. I just don't think they should be flaunting their LGBTQ identity (aka lifestyle) and try to influence kids who are in search of their own identity. By the same token, I don't think that the African American community should continue insisting that they are being oppressed. Today, an African American applying to an Ivy League school would have much better chances of being admitted (and of getting a scholarship) than my Caucasian child even if my child's SAT scores were better.

Is there a latent racism today? Of course there is. Not only latent white racism against blacks, but also latent black racism against whites. Is there an institutionalized racism in the US in the second decade of the 21st century? IMHO, there is not. In fact, institutions intentionally render preferential treatment to African Americans, and corporations are judged by their "diversity" percentages. Whereas the Affirmative Action had its place in the mid-to-late 20th century in the US, all it does today is serve as a tool of reverse discrimination.

The same is true with LGBTQ. Was the LGBTQ community persecuted in the past? Yes it was. Is it still persecuted? I don't think that their today's status warrants calling anyone who is not interested in marching in the LGBTQ parades a bigot. Maybe somewhere in rural Alabama or Mississippi, an LGBTQ person is still scared of coming out, but is it the case in San Francisco? Give me break. Tim Cook and Co. march in LGBTQ parades in San Francisco. If Tim Cook were so concerned about LGBTQ rights, he should stop selling Apple's gadgets in places like Saudi Arabia and Russia, where LGBTQs are truly persecuted. Why doesn't he fly 1,000 Apple employees to Riyadh or Moscow and march there in an LGBTQ Pride Parade?

Please continue calling me a bigot because it speaks volumes of who you are and how tolerant left-wing liberals are of those who do not support their extremist views. Left-wing extremists are just as intolerant as right-wing extremists. I catch the same amount of flak from both extremist sides but for opposite reasons.

The “it’s ok to be LGBT as long as you don’t turn my kid gay” line. Seriously. Nobody is turning your children. If your kids turn out gay, it's because they're gay - not because they accidentally watched an episode of Ru Paul's Drag Race.
Nobody is calling people who don't march in the parades a bigot. Just the people who oppose the existence of the march.

And FYI there is no pride march in Riyadh or Moscow because it's illegal. You are essentially saying what Putin says - that gay "propaganda" should be banned. Ban people's right to march and you're no better than him.

I'd honestly like Tim Cook to be more vocal about human rights abuses in some of their more conservative markets but I know the shareholders would crucify him for it.

 

[Krizoitz]

Please continue calling me a bigot because it speaks volumes of who you are and how tolerant left-wing liberals are of those who do not support their extremist views. Left-wing extremists are just as intolerant as right-wing extremists. I catch the same amount of flak from both extremist sides but for opposite reasons.

I am not at all tolerant of bigoted viewpoints and no one should be. Tolerance is not absolute. If it was that would mean in order to be “tolerant” by your ridiculous standards I would have to accept the people who think gays should be killed (or blacks, or Jews, etc). No rational person would apply that standard. Tolerance does not require accepting intolerant and hate based viewpoints at all. Just because you aren’t the most extreme in your anti-gay, anti-black, anti-other bigotry doesn’t mean you aren’t still being bigoted.


Meanwhile, you seem proud to be “in the middle“ as if that some how makes you the reasonable one. Being in the middle of an arbitrarily divided issue doesn’t put you on the correct side at all, and when it comes to certain things, like basic human rights there is absolutely a right and a wrong side. The idea that the left and right as the currently exist in American politics are somehow equally off from the center where the “correct” values lie is ludicrous.

The right (including you) wants to oppress minorities based on inherent traits due only to your decision those traits are somehow immoral or undesirable. Because make no mistake, when you suggest gays should have to hide who they are based on your arbitrary, made up rules, you are in fact discriminating against them.

Meanwhile the left says no, that’s wrong. These people should not be punished and oppressed because of who they are. They should have the same rights as everyone else.

Somehow, in your twisted world view, the middle ground between those two point is correct?

Garbage.

There is nothing inherently correct about the middle. There is nothing inherently balanced about two sides (or more of an issue). Some issues are debatable, say the best baseball player or the best place to build a highway. Some are not, say whether it’s ok to steal your neighbors life savings. If you want to hit an innocent person, and I don’t want you to hit that person, there isn’t a “middle” ground that is correct. Hitting them less hard isn’t a middle ground (which is what you metaphorically want to do to gay people). Not hitting them is the correct view.


Not discriminating against gays is the correct view.


You call me a liberal as if that’s somehow a bad thing? Liberals created democracy. Liberals championed free speech, a free press, and all those other rights. Liberals ended slavery. Liberals ended child labor. Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals fought for civil rights. Throughout history liberals are on the right side over and over. I’m proud to be a liberal because it means doing the right thing. So by all means, shower me with that label, I will gladly wear it. I am proud to side with people like Gandhi, Lincoln, and King. Damn proud.

Meanwhile consider who you stand with. I won’t name names, but it’s not company I’d be proud to be included in.

 

[sirozha]

You may not be as extreme as those you’ve described but you do fall into that camp based on your views. Suggesting Pride events and children being exposed to the gay community can influence them into becoming homosexuals is hilariously incorrect and shows a complete lack of understanding as to what it actually is.

I’m guessing you’re American too as with most debates on here I see the ‘liberal card’ thrown in to try and discredit an opposing opinion lol. It doesn’t work or act as a deflection when read by a third party I’m afraid.

It’s a fact that young people are very impressionable. If they hang around druggies, they will try drugs. If they hang around LGBTQ, they will try that lifestyle. Few will be able to resist the temptation to try the forbidden fruit. Most will go with the flow.

I am not at all tolerant of bigoted viewpoints and no one should be. Tolerance is not absolute. If it was that would mean in order to be “tolerant” by your ridiculous standards I would have to accept the people who think gays should be killed (or blacks, or Jews, etc). No rational person would apply that standard. Tolerance does not require accepting intolerant and hate based viewpoints at all. Just because you aren’t the most extreme in your anti-gay, anti-black, anti-other bigotry doesn’t mean you aren’t still being bigoted.


Meanwhile, you seem proud to be “in the middle“ as if that some how makes you the reasonable one. Being in the middle of an arbitrarily divided issue doesn’t put you on the correct side at all, and when it comes to certain things, like basic human rights there is absolutely a right and a wrong side. The idea that the left and right as the currently exist in American politics are somehow equally off from the center where the “correct” values lie is ludicrous.

The right (including you) wants to oppress minorities based on inherent traits due only to your decision those traits are somehow immoral or undesirable. Because make no mistake, when you suggest gays should have to hide who they are based on your arbitrary, made up rules, you are in fact discriminating against them.

Meanwhile the left says no, that’s wrong. These people should not be punished and oppressed because of who they are. They should have the same rights as everyone else.

Somehow, in your twisted world view, the middle ground between those two point is correct?

Garbage.

There is nothing inherently correct about the middle. There is nothing inherently balanced about two sides (or more of an issue). Some issues are debatable, say the best baseball player or the best place to build a highway. Some are not, say whether it’s ok to steal your neighbors life savings. If you want to hit an innocent person, and I don’t want you to hit that person, there isn’t a “middle” ground that is correct. Hitting them less hard isn’t a middle ground (which is what you metaphorically want to do to gay people). Not hitting them is the correct view.


Not discriminating against gays is the correct view.


You call me a liberal as if that’s somehow a bad thing? Liberals created democracy. Liberals championed free speech, a free press, and all those other rights. Liberals ended slavery. Liberals ended child labor. Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals fought for civil rights. Throughout history liberals are on the right side over and over. I’m proud to be a liberal because it means doing the right thing. So by all means, shower me with that label, I will gladly wear it. I am proud to side with people like Gandhi, Lincoln, and King. Damn proud.

Meanwhile consider who you stand with. I won’t name names, but it’s not company I’d be proud to be included in.

I was born and lived more than half of my life in a country that was upended by the lefties and thrown into the horrors of communism.

The leftist ideology is inherently flawed. I’m proud of being in the center between the two extreme ideologies. The leftie support for LGBTQ propaganda is just as bad as the leftie support for communist regimes in the 20th cemtury. The Democrats moved from the centrist position that they were taking in the last decades of the 20th century to the extreme left-wing ideology in the second decade of the 21st century. Beteeen the mid-19th century and the mid-20th century, Democrats were racist and homophonic bigots - much more so than Republicans. Democrats have always had a problem with their identity.

I am staying with the moderates, as the two political parties move further to their respective extremes.

Your views are extreme left-wing, as those of Tim Cook and most of those who live in large West-Coast conglomerates. You may think you are mainstream, but you hang around people who think and believe like you do.

I lived in a system that was built by extremist leftists who mirdered millions of people to make everyone conform to their extremist views. I have no appetite for your type of ideology.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

It’s a fact that young people are very impressionable. If they hang around druggies, they will try drugs. If they hang around LGBTQ, they will try that lifestyle. Few will be able to resist the temptation to try the forbidden fruit. Most will go with the flow.

That’s absolute rubbish. Anybody can decide to try a substance (drugs) but sexual orientation is not something that can be changed on a whim. Being gay is not a lifestyle choice as you make out and I think your education in this department is seriously lacking.

 

[bandrews]

It’s a fact that young people are very impressionable. If they hang around druggies, they will try drugs. If they hang around LGBTQ, they will try that lifestyle. Few will be able to resist the temptation to try the forbidden fruit. Most will go with the flow.

I was born and lived more than half of my life in a country that was upended by the lefties and thrown into the horrors of communism.

The leftist ideology is inherently flawed. I’m proud of being in the center between the two extreme ideologies. The leftie support for LGBTQ propaganda is just as bad as the leftie support for communist regimes in the 20th cemtury. The Democrats moved from the centrist position that they were taking in the last decades of the 20th century to the extreme left-wing ideology in the second decade of the 21st century. Beteeen the mid-19th century and the mid-20th century, Democrats were racist and homophonic bigots - much more so than Republicans. Democrats have always had a problem with their identity.

I am staying with the moderates, as the two political parties move further to their respective extremes.

Your views are extreme left-wing, as those of Tim Cook and most of those who live in large West-Coast conglomerates. You may think you are mainstream, but you hang around people who think and believe like you do.

I lived in a system that was built by extremist leftists who mirdered millions of people to make everyone conform to their extremist views. I have no appetite for your type of ideology.

WTF? There’s nothing liberal about a communist dictatorship. Don’t go confusing economic communism with social liberalism. Castro was a hideous homophobe.
Are you worried you’re going to be murdered by a drag queen in your sleep if you don’t turn gay?
The whole point of being a liberal is allowing people to live their best life rather than forcing them to conform to a rigid conservative cookie-cutter template.
Everything you are basing your arguments on is irrational fear. I don’t know whether you’re desperately trying to rationalise your hysteria or simply delusional.

 

[Krizoitz]

I was born and lived more than half of my life in a country that was upended by the lefties and thrown into the horrors of communism.
The leftist ideology is inherently flawed.

I’m proud of being in the center between the two extreme ideologies. The leftie support for LGBTQ propaganda is just as bad as the leftie support for communist regimes in the 20th cemtury.

What is "extreme" about believing people should be treated fairly and equally? What is "extreme" about believing that a person should not be discriminated against or persecuted simply because they like people of the same gender? You would do well to remember that these regimes you supposedly hate and saw the horrors of persecuted gay people for being gay too. In other words you are acting exactly like them.

Aside from that you are conflating liberal, left and leftist. The countries you describe may have been labeled leftist or communist but they would be properly labeled authoritarian. You are hiding behind labels to demonize beliefs that have nothing to do with each other. As I said, LGBT people have long been the vicitims of the same groups you claim to be against. If you TRULY stand against what those groups did and want to continue doing (and you should, we all should) then supporting gay people being able to freely live their lives without persecution should be something you want to do and are proud of doing.

The Democrats moved from the centrist position that they were taking in the last decades of the 20th century to the extreme left-wing ideology in the second decade of the 21st century. Beteeen the mid-19th century and the mid-20th century, Democrats were racist and homophonic bigots - much more so than Republicans. Democrats have always had a problem with their identity.

Again, you are hiding behind labels. Its very true that the Democratic party of those time period included people with harmful and hateful ideologies. Just like the United States used to be a country that allowed slavery. But groups, and labels are not static, especially over long periods of time. Things change, groups change.

Once upon a time the San Francisco 49ers were one of the top teams in American football. Things change, people came and went, and now the team with that label is bad at football.

Once upon a time the Democratic party supported slavery, racism, and segregation. Things change, people came and went, and now the party with that name opposes those same viewpoints. The people who thought like that shifted to the Republican party, and people who opposed those ideas shifted to the Democratic party over time. When evaluating the Democractic party of today (or the Republican party), it makes absolutely zero sense to reference the same named groups from the late 1800's. Every single person who was a member then is dead. The country has changed dramatically. And the groups with the names now have different views and platforms. You judge them based on what they do and support now, not what they did 100, 200, 300 years ago. The Democrats of that day were bigots, the ones now aren't. The Republicans back then were on the right side, fighting against slavery and racism, today they embrace those ideals. It doesn't matter what they USED to believe, it matters what they believe NOW.

Your views are extreme left-wing, as those of Tim Cook and most of those who live in large West-Coast conglomerates. You may think you are mainstream, but you hang around people who think and believe like you do.

Nope, my views are very much mainstream. 62% of American support gay marriage. Thats absolutely mainstream. Those of you who oppose gay rights and gay acceptance are in an every shrinking minority. Because good people realize its stupid and evil to hate someone because of the gender of the person they love. And if you claim to be in the middle, neither Republican nor Democrat, then you're even LESS a member of the mainstream if you oppose gay marriage since independents support it by 70%. And each generation supports it more and more. Baby-boomers support it by 56%, Gen-X by 65% and Millenials by 74%. Sounds to me like you are the one living in a bubble.

I lived in a system that was built by extremist leftists who mirdered millions of people to make everyone conform to their extremist views. I have no appetite for your type of ideology.

Equality is not an extremist view. Accepting gay people for who they are is not an extremist view. And those of us who support gay rights have no interest in murdering anyone. You are falsely conflating two unrelated things to try and prop up your bigotry based ideology. And I will remind you one last time, that all those murderous regimes you cite targeted gay people. If you don't want to be like them then stop doing the same. Stop trying to oppress gay people. Stop acting like gay people wanting to be treated as equals is an "extreme" agenda. Stop supporting evil.

Again, you can't choose to be gay, you can choose to be a bigot. Make the right choice.

 

[bandrews]

What is "extreme" about believing people should be treated fairly and equally? What is "extreme" about believing that a person should not be discriminated against or persecuted simply because they like people of the same gender? You would do well to remember that these regimes you supposedly hate and saw the horrors of persecuted gay people for being gay too. In other words you are acting exactly like them.

Aside from that you are conflating liberal, left and leftist. The countries you describe may have been labeled leftist or communist but they would be properly labeled authoritarian. You are hiding behind labels to demonize beliefs that have nothing to do with each other. As I said, LGBT people have long been the vicitims of the same groups you claim to be against. If you TRULY stand against what those groups did and want to continue doing (and you should, we all should) then supporting gay people being able to freely live their lives without persecution should be something you want to do and are proud of doing.



Again, you are hiding behind labels. Its very true that the Democratic party of those time period included people with harmful and hateful ideologies. Just like the United States used to be a country that allowed slavery. But groups, and labels are not static, especially over long periods of time. Things change, groups change.

Once upon a time the San Francisco 49ers were one of the top teams in American football. Things change, people came and went, and now the team with that label is bad at football.

Once upon a time the Democratic party supported slavery, racism, and segregation. Things change, people came and went, and now the party with that name opposes those same viewpoints. The people who thought like that shifted to the Republican party, and people who opposed those ideas shifted to the Democratic party over time. When evaluating the Democractic party of today (or the Republican party), it makes absolutely zero sense to reference the same named groups from the late 1800's. Every single person who was a member then is dead. The country has changed dramatically. And the groups with the names now have different views and platforms. You judge them based on what they do and support now, not what they did 100, 200, 300 years ago. The Democrats of that day were bigots, the ones now aren't. The Republicans back then were on the right side, fighting against slavery and racism, today they embrace those ideals. It doesn't matter what they USED to believe, it matters what they believe NOW.



Nope, my views are very much mainstream. 62% of American support gay marriage. Thats absolutely mainstream. Those of you who oppose gay rights and gay acceptance are in an every shrinking minority. Because good people realize its stupid and evil to hate someone because of the gender of the person they love. And if you claim to be in the middle, neither Republican nor Democrat, then you're even LESS a member of the mainstream if you oppose gay marriage since independents support it by 70%. And each generation supports it more and more. Baby-boomers support it by 56%, Gen-X by 65% and Millenials by 74%. Sounds to me like you are the one living in a bubble.



Equality is not an extremist view. Accepting gay people for who they are is not an extremist view. And those of us who support gay rights have no interest in murdering anyone. You are falsely conflating two unrelated things to try and prop up your bigotry based ideology. And I will remind you one last time, that all those murderous regimes you cite targeted gay people. If you don't want to be like them then stop doing the same. Stop trying to oppress gay people. Stop acting like gay people wanting to be treated as equals is an "extreme" agenda. Stop supporting evil.

Again, you can't choose to be gay, you can choose to be a bigot. Make the right choice.

You’ve got him all wrong. He’s fine with gays existing and is all for equal rights.....
Except, you know, if anyone wants to talk about homosexuality in public or portray it in any positive light in the media. Or heaven forbid two men holding hands. That’s only one DragCon away from the USA becoming a communist dictatorship.

 

[sirozha]

What is "extreme" about believing people should be treated fairly and equally? What is "extreme" about believing that a person should not be discriminated against or persecuted simply because they like people of the same gender? You would do well to remember that these regimes you supposedly hate and saw the horrors of persecuted gay people for being gay too. In other words you are acting exactly like them.

Aside from that you are conflating liberal, left and leftist. The countries you describe may have been labeled leftist or communist but they would be properly labeled authoritarian. You are hiding behind labels to demonize beliefs that have nothing to do with each other. As I said, LGBT people have long been the vicitims of the same groups you claim to be against. If you TRULY stand against what those groups did and want to continue doing (and you should, we all should) then supporting gay people being able to freely live their lives without persecution should be something you want to do and are proud of doing.



Again, you are hiding behind labels. Its very true that the Democratic party of those time period included people with harmful and hateful ideologies. Just like the United States used to be a country that allowed slavery. But groups, and labels are not static, especially over long periods of time. Things change, groups change.

Once upon a time the San Francisco 49ers were one of the top teams in American football. Things change, people came and went, and now the team with that label is bad at football.

Once upon a time the Democratic party supported slavery, racism, and segregation. Things change, people came and went, and now the party with that name opposes those same viewpoints. The people who thought like that shifted to the Republican party, and people who opposed those ideas shifted to the Democratic party over time. When evaluating the Democractic party of today (or the Republican party), it makes absolutely zero sense to reference the same named groups from the late 1800's. Every single person who was a member then is dead. The country has changed dramatically. And the groups with the names now have different views and platforms. You judge them based on what they do and support now, not what they did 100, 200, 300 years ago. The Democrats of that day were bigots, the ones now aren't. The Republicans back then were on the right side, fighting against slavery and racism, today they embrace those ideals. It doesn't matter what they USED to believe, it matters what they believe NOW.

Nope, my views are very much mainstream. 62% of American support gay marriage. Thats absolutely mainstream. Those of you who oppose gay rights and gay acceptance are in an every shrinking minority. Because good people realize its stupid and evil to hate someone because of the gender of the person they love. And if you claim to be in the middle, neither Republican nor Democrat, then you're even LESS a member of the mainstream if you oppose gay marriage since independents support it by 70%. And each generation supports it more and more. Baby-boomers support it by 56%, Gen-X by 65% and Millenials by 74%. Sounds to me like you are the one living in a bubble.



Equality is not an extremist view. Accepting gay people for who they are is not an extremist view. And those of us who support gay rights have no interest in murdering anyone. You are falsely conflating two unrelated things to try and prop up your bigotry based ideology. And I will remind you one last time, that all those murderous regimes you cite targeted gay people. If you don't want to be like them then stop doing the same. Stop trying to oppress gay people. Stop acting like gay people wanting to be treated as equals is an "extreme" agenda. Stop supporting evil.

Again, you can't choose to be gay, you can choose to be a bigot. Make the right choice.

Barak Obama was against gay marriage during his first campaign. Yet, he was considered the champion of the liberal ideology in the US. I'm in favor of gay marriage only 10 years later, and I'm called here a homophobic bigot. That's how fast the country is drifting to the extreme left wing ideology where people who support gay marriage but oppose "in your face" gay propaganda are labeled bigots.

 

[bandrews]

Barak Obama was against gay marriage during his first campaign. Yet, he was considered the champion of the liberal ideology in the US. I'm in favor of gay marriage only 10 years later, and I'm called here a homophobic bigot. That's how fast the country is drifting to the extreme left wing ideology where people who support gay marriage but oppose "in your face" gay propaganda are labeled bigots.

“You can be gay - just not in public”
Wow, you’re so kind.

 

[sirozha]

“You can be gay - just not in public”
Wow, you’re so kind.

That’s not what I said.

 

[bandrews]

That’s not what I said.

Oh, I’m sorry.

Please tell me then; which part of my existence would you have censored to avoid turning your children gay.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Barak Obama was against gay marriage during his first campaign. Yet, he was considered the champion of the liberal ideology in the US. I'm in favor of gay marriage only 10 years later, and I'm called here a homophobic bigot. That's how fast the country is drifting to the extreme left wing ideology where people who support gay marriage but oppose "in your face" gay propaganda are labeled bigots.

You say you support gay marriage but you evidently don’t understand what being homosexual is. You think it’s a lifestyle choice and your own children could turn gay if exposed to gay people. That to me suggests you don’t understand it.

 

[sirozha]

You say you support gay marriage but you evidently don’t understand what being homosexual is. You think it’s a lifestyle choice and your own children could turn gay if exposed to gay people. That to me suggests you don’t understand it.

Of course I don’t understand what being gay is. Do you understand what being straight is?

It seems to me that you have a very limited understanding of the child rearing process. You can’t have kids naturally, so do you have kids through adoption or through a surrogate?

Kids are not puppies or bunnies born with instincts only. Kids are little humans with intellect born as a clean slate. Their behavior needs to be shaped and molded by their parents. The same child who is raised in a dysfunctional family could become a serial killer but if raised in a loving family could become an decent person. It all depends on the environment in which a child is reared.

I accept that some are born homosexual but I am convinced that those born heterosexual but exposed to homosexual lifestyle from an early age have much higher chances of chosing homosexuality than if they were raised in a heterosexual environment. There is nothing unscientific in this, as it has been proven that the environment in which a child is raised has a significant impact on how he/she will turn out as an adult.

You don’t understand why this is a concern to heterosexual parents. If you had kids, you would not mind them choosing homosexuality as their sexual orientation. I don’t know what being gay is like, but I would assume that you would be happier if your child chose homosexuality rather than heterosexuality. Perhaps I’m wrong, and you would be happy either way.

Most heterosexual parents do not want their kids to choose the homosexual lifestyle. Some would be more accepting than others if this were to happen to their kids, but very few would just shrug it off as if it were not a big deal.

 

[bandrews]

Of course I don’t understand what being gay is. Do you understand what being straight is?

It seems to me that you have a very limited understanding of the child rearing process. You can’t have kids naturally, so do you have kids through adoption or through a surrogate?

Kids are not puppies or bunnies born with instincts only. Kids are little humans with intellect born as a clean slate. Their behavior needs to be shaped and molded by their parents. The same child who is raised in a dysfunctional family could become a serial killer but if raised in a loving family could become an decent person. It all depends on the environment in which a child is reared.

I accept that some are born homosexual but I am convinced that those born heterosexual but exposed to homosexual lifestyle from an early age have much higher chances of chosing homosexuality than if they were raised in a heterosexual environment. There is nothing unscientific in this, as it has been proven that the environment in which a child is raised has a significant impact on how he/she will turn out as an adult.

You don’t understand why this is a concern to heterosexual parents. If you had kids, you would not mind them choosing homosexuality as their sexual orientation. I don’t know what being gay is like, but I would assume that you would be happier if your child chose homosexuality rather than heterosexuality. Perhaps I’m wrong, and you would be happy either way.

Most heterosexual parents do not want their kids to chose the homosexual lifestyle. Some would be more accepting than others if this were to happen to their kids, but very few would just shrug it off as if it were not a big deal.

Please also don’t forget to reply to my post above. I’m terrified if I leave the house I’m going to turn a straight kid gay.
(And yes, it’s very unscientific - there is NO, ZERO, NIL, NADA proof that children who see gay people will turn gay. Gay conversion therapy has been debunked so I don’t know why you think it’s going to work the other way around)

 

[widgeteer]

Of course I don’t understand what being gay is. Do you understand what being straight is?

It seems to me that you have a very limited understanding of the child rearing process. You can’t have kids naturally, so do you have kids through adoption or through a surrogate?

Kids are not puppies or bunnies born with instincts only. Kids are little humans with intellect born as a clean slate. Their behavior needs to be shaped and molded by their parents. The same child who is raised in a dysfunctional family could become a serial killer but if raised in a loving family could become an decent person. It all depends on the environment in which a child is reared.

I accept that some are born homosexual but I am convinced that those born heterosexual but exposed to homosexual lifestyle from an early age have much higher chances of chosing homosexuality than if they were raised in a heterosexual environment. There is nothing unscientific in this, as it has been proven that the environment in which a child is raised has a significant impact on how he/she will turn out as an adult.

You don’t understand why this is a concern to heterosexual parents. If you had kids, you would not mind them choosing homosexuality as their sexual orientation. I don’t know what being gay is like, but I would assume that you would be happier if your child chose homosexuality rather than heterosexuality. Perhaps I’m wrong, and you would be happy either way.

Most heterosexual parents do not want their kids to choose the homosexual lifestyle. Some would be more accepting than others if this were to happen to their kids, but very few would just shrug it off as if it were not a big deal.

It's only a big deal because bigoted people keep insisting there's something wrong with being gay.

 

[bandrews]

Of course I don’t understand what being gay is. Do you understand what being straight is?

It seems to me that you have a very limited understanding of the child rearing process. You can’t have kids naturally, so do you have kids through adoption or through a surrogate?

Kids are not puppies or bunnies born with instincts only. Kids are little humans with intellect born as a clean slate. Their behavior needs to be shaped and molded by their parents. The same child who is raised in a dysfunctional family could become a serial killer but if raised in a loving family could become an decent person. It all depends on the environment in which a child is reared.

I accept that some are born homosexual but I am convinced that those born heterosexual but exposed to homosexual lifestyle from an early age have much higher chances of chosing homosexuality than if they were raised in a heterosexual environment. There is nothing unscientific in this, as it has been proven that the environment in which a child is raised has a significant impact on how he/she will turn out as an adult.

You don’t understand why this is a concern to heterosexual parents. If you had kids, you would not mind them choosing homosexuality as their sexual orientation. I don’t know what being gay is like, but I would assume that you would be happier if your child chose homosexuality rather than heterosexuality. Perhaps I’m wrong, and you would be happy either way.

Most heterosexual parents do not want their kids to choose the homosexual lifestyle. Some would be more accepting than others if this were to happen to their kids, but very few would just shrug it off as if it were not a big deal.

Um, and actually kids, puppies and bunnies all have a certain amount of instinct (“nature”) and the rest is learned from environmental experience including teaching from parents (“nurture”).

This is basic high school science.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Of course I don’t understand what being gay is. Do you understand what being straight is?

It seems to me that you have a very limited understanding of the child rearing process. You can’t have kids naturally, so do you have kids through adoption or through a surrogate?

Kids are not puppies or bunnies born with instincts only. Kids are little humans with intellect born as a clean slate. Their behavior needs to be shaped and molded by their parents. The same child who is raised in a dysfunctional family could become a serial killer but if raised in a loving family could become an decent person. It all depends on the environment in which a child is reared.

I accept that some are born homosexual but I am convinced that those born heterosexual but exposed to homosexual lifestyle from an early age have much higher chances of chosing homosexuality than if they were raised in a heterosexual environment. There is nothing unscientific in this, as it has been proven that the environment in which a child is raised has a significant impact on how he/she will turn out as an adult.

You don’t understand why this is a concern to heterosexual parents. If you had kids, you would not mind them choosing homosexuality as their sexual orientation. I don’t know what being gay is like, but I would assume that you would be happier if your child chose homosexuality rather than heterosexuality. Perhaps I’m wrong, and you would be happy either way.

Most heterosexual parents do not want their kids to choose the homosexual lifestyle. Some would be more accepting than others if this were to happen to their kids, but very few would just shrug it off as if it were not a big deal.

I’m a married heterosexual male with two daughters, so yes I do understand what it’s like to raise children.

I also understand that my children mixing with homosexual people (my brothers in law and my cousin), they are not going to ‘catch’ homosexuality and become gay because of who they mix with.

If my daughters turn out to be gay, they will get all the love and support they need from my wife and I.

 

[I7guy]

[...]
If my daughters turn out to be gay, they will get all the love and support they need from my wife and I.

One (actually more than one) of my family is gay. I accept that person's sexuality and for who (s)/he/they are. What I don't accept are human beings who are self-centered, egotistical and care about nobody other than themselves. I just don't want that to be confused with not accepting a persons sexuality.

 

[jonblatho]

Barak Obama was against gay marriage during his first campaign. Yet, he was considered the champion of the liberal ideology in the US. I'm in favor of gay marriage only 10 years later, and I'm called here a homophobic bigot. That's how fast the country is drifting to the extreme left wing ideology where people who support gay marriage but oppose "in your face" gay propaganda are labeled bigots.

People like you are exactly why Pride celebrations continue to be observed by millions.

 

[tkermit]

I am convinced that those born heterosexual but exposed to homosexual lifestyle from an early age have much higher chances of chosing homosexuality than if they were raised in a heterosexual environment.

Are you sure you're not (at least a little) gay? I'm always surprised when a (supposedly) heterosexual male claims someone could choose homosexuality. If you aren't gay, you should know that's not possible. You might as well claim you've chosen your eye color after noticing in the mirror one day that you have blue eyes.

choosing homosexuality as their sexual orientation.

Not a choice. Also:

"
There is no substantive evidence which suggests parenting or early childhood experiences play a role when it comes to sexual orientation"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation

 

[Fugabutacus]

Of course I don’t understand what being gay is. Do you understand what being straight is?

It seems to me that you have a very limited understanding of the child rearing process. You can’t have kids naturally, so do you have kids through adoption or through a surrogate?

Kids are not puppies or bunnies born with instincts only. Kids are little humans with intellect born as a clean slate. Their behavior needs to be shaped and molded by their parents. The same child who is raised in a dysfunctional family could become a serial killer but if raised in a loving family could become an decent person. It all depends on the environment in which a child is reared.

I accept that some are born homosexual but I am convinced that those born heterosexual but exposed to homosexual lifestyle from an early age have much higher chances of chosing homosexuality than if they were raised in a heterosexual environment. There is nothing unscientific in this, as it has been proven that the environment in which a child is raised has a significant impact on how he/she will turn out as an adult.

You don’t understand why this is a concern to heterosexual parents. If you had kids, you would not mind them choosing homosexuality as their sexual orientation. I don’t know what being gay is like, but I would assume that you would be happier if your child chose homosexuality rather than heterosexuality. Perhaps I’m wrong, and you would be happy either way.

Most heterosexual parents do not want their kids to choose the homosexual lifestyle. Some would be more accepting than others if this were to happen to their kids, but very few would just shrug it off as if it were not a big deal.

I mean I could direct you to scientific studies to show you that you're wrong, but I don't think you'd bother to read them or do anything except continue screaming into the void to save face.

But, like... A single ounce of common sense should tell you you're wrong. Something like sexuality is clearly coded into our genes—we'd be dead as a species if evolution was relying on word of mouth.

And the idea that you're born a blank slate is just ridiculous. Your brain has to support a million complex functions from day one. You're born with a fully-functioning brain just in order to stay alive. Doesn't sound like a blank slate to me.

Hate to break it to you, but your gender, your sexuality, your mental health, your ability to regulate your emotions, your likelihood of turning to crime, your likelihood of becoming an addict, your appetite... These are all things that are at least in part determined by your brain development in utero.

You might have an influence over your children, but ultimately, you're taking what you're given and you're fine-tuning it. You can't and you won't reshape their brains entirely.

If your child is gay, it's because they were born gay. They we gay before they were born, they were gay the day they were born, they'll be gay the day they die. You can do nothing about that.

What you can do is influence whether they live a life filled with love and acceptance, or a life of hatred, bigotry and self-loathing.

Also, is it just me, or do the bigots seem to change their mind on this constantly? One day being gay is a choice, next day it's all estrogen in the water supply...

 

[Fugabutacus]

It’s a fact that young people are very impressionable. If they hang around druggies, they will try drugs. If they hang around LGBTQ, they will try that lifestyle. Few will be able to resist the temptation to try the forbidden fruit. Most will go with the flow.

What do your mother, father, and anyone else who was prominent in your childhood think of LGBT rights?

 

[sirozha]

Please also don’t forget to reply to my post above. I’m terrified if I leave the house I’m going to turn a straight kid gay.
(And yes, it’s very unscientific - there is NO, ZERO, NIL, NADA proof that children who see gay people will turn gay. Gay conversion therapy has been debunked so I don’t know why you think it’s going to work the other way around)

You are not going to turn my kid gay. So, please leave your house.
[doublepost=1530555030][/doublepost]

What do your mother, father, and anyone else who was prominent in your childhood think of LGBT rights?

They think the same as what I do. LGBTQ should have equal rights with heterosexuals.

They do not want to see their grandchildren choose the LGBTQ orientation, though. If a child is born homosexual, it's a different story. There's nothing that can be done about it.
[doublepost=1530555454][/doublepost]

Right, so first up, a rainbow is not a message from god - it is light being refracted by water droplets. Science.

Secondly. Seriously? You think LGBT propaganda turns kids gay? Because straight propaganda and homophobia for the first 18 years of my life didn't turn me straight, just made me want to kill myself.

Those who do not see God's creation in the world around them, have absolutely nothing in common with my view of the world. So, there's not really much to discuss here.

The fact that the rainbow is light refracted through droplets of water at different angles (the prism refraction effect) does not in any way eliminate God from the creation of light, water, humans, human ability to perceive the world around them through vision, or the light refraction effect. But, there's absolutely no reason to go down the path of arguing over this, as it's obvious that theists cannot disprove atheism, and atheists cannot disprove theism.

 

[tkermit]

You are not going to turn my kid gay. [...] do not want to see their grandchildren choose the LGBTQ orientation, though.

You seem extremely confused.

 

[sirozha]

I mean I could direct you to scientific studies to show you that you're wrong, but I don't think you'd bother to read them or do anything except continue screaming into the void to save face.

But, like... A single ounce of common sense should tell you you're wrong. Something like sexuality is clearly coded into our genes—we'd be dead as a species if evolution was relying on word of mouth.

And the idea that you're born a blank slate is just ridiculous. Your brain has to support a million complex functions from day one. You're born with a fully-functioning brain just in order to stay alive. Doesn't sound like a blank slate to me.

Hate to break it to you, but your gender, your sexuality, your mental health, your ability to regulate your emotions, your likelihood of turning to crime, your likelihood of becoming an addict, your appetite... These are all things that are at least in part determined by your brain development in utero.

You might have an influence over your children, but ultimately, you're taking what you're given and you're fine-tuning it. You can't and you won't reshape their brains entirely.

If your child is gay, it's because they were born gay. They we gay before they were born, they were gay the day they were born, they'll be gay the day they die. You can do nothing about that.

What you can do is influence whether they live a life filled with love and acceptance, or a life of hatred, bigotry and self-loathing.

Also, is it just me, or do the bigots seem to change their mind on this constantly? One day being gay is a choice, next day it's all estrogen in the water supply...

Not sure. You should ask one.

So, I've read the studies, and they are inconclusive. Some studies support my view and others support yours. Most studies were done 15-20 years ago, when it was not common for homosexuals to raise children, so the studies are not representative. For one, the homosexual marriage was not legal in the US then, so the homosexual relationships were much more fluid then. Any modern reference to a study I find on this issue is from LGBTQ web sites, which is not an authoritative source for me.

However, at this point, doing a long-term representative study on the effect of homosexual parents on their adoptive kids would be considered as bigoted as doing a study comparing an average IQ of Caucasians with an average IQ of African Americans. Therefore, I'm not holding my breath that a modern, representative, and long-running study will be funded (hence conducted) by an authoritative body in the current atmosphere. That is an atmosphere when a person supporting LGBTQ rights is called a homophobic bigot for expressing concerns about the effects of influence of early exposure of a child to homosexual propaganda on the child's sexual orientation in the future.
[doublepost=1530556684][/doublepost]

Are you sure you're not (at least a little) gay? I'm always surprised when a (supposedly) heterosexual male claims someone could choose homosexuality. If you aren't gay, you should know that's not possible. You might as well claim you've chosen your eye color after noticing in the mirror one day that you have blue eyes.


Not a choice. Also:

"
There is no substantive evidence which suggests parenting or early childhood experiences play a role when it comes to sexual orientation"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation

OK. Do you realize what Wikipedia is and how articles are authored? Is Wikipedia the extent of depth of your research?
[doublepost=1530556903][/doublepost]

You seem extremely confused.

You are extremely perturbed to encounter a person who does not hold extreme views. I know it hurts your brain.