- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Are severly anti-gay people more likely to be gay?
Posted on 10/7/14 at 11:15 am to Vols&Shaft83
Posted on 10/7/14 at 11:15 am to Vols&Shaft83
quote:Liking dick but not getting any, apparently.
How does one become "severely anti-gay"?
Posted on 10/7/14 at 11:16 am to KeyserSoze999
quote:Not getting in a box was kind of the whole point in this case.
very common as they try to put everyone in a box
Posted on 10/7/14 at 11:23 am to FT
quote:
Not getting in a box was kind of the whole point in this case.
I laughed, I did
Posted on 10/7/14 at 11:32 am to FT
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/17/16 at 8:55 am
Posted on 10/7/14 at 11:41 am to FT
quote:
Are severly anti-gay people more likely to be gay?
I know several ppl that grew up in extremely closed minded houses and either the person is gay or just hasn't come out of the closet yet. It is a rebound thing, kinda like if you are too strict on your daughter so goes to college and becomes a major sloot.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 11:52 am to FT
quote:
los angeles tiger turned out to be gay.
"turned out"..... :rotflmao:
You just weren't paying attention. He just didn't share the unimaginative, knee-jerk, reactionary way of viewing the world. He was an Original Thinker with a first-rate mind and he didn't pander to Gay Rights Industry orthodoxy.
As for your premise, I have no idea if it is true or not. But It sure is part of The Gay Rights Industry Narrative. Gay Rights Industry Orthodoxy assumes that anyone who disagrees on a policy issue is smoking pole and so forth. It's a poor substitute for thought, and text book Alinsky 101 in every respect. It's fundamentally dishonest and hackish to bat away legitimate policy debate with simplistic Narrative.
I think it's FAR more complicated than this .
And for the record, I think it's really bad form to misrepresent and simplify the nuanced views of a departed and beloved poster with whom you disagreed with.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:22 pm to Lsupimp
My thoughts on homosexuality are overwhelmingly influenced by what the Bible has to say on the subject. I mean, you either believe it's the word of God, or you don't. I don't have a problem with people who don't see it that way, but I do believe that a lot of people get upset when a person asserts their beliefs on the subject based on Christian principles.
Seems like a strange premise to me. I oppose Obama as much as anyone here, but nobody has ever accused me of secretly supporting the man. A little different dynamic there, but I would assume that most people are being honest when expressing their views on homosexuality. Now, I suspect there are a few Hollywood types who publicly support gay rights because they feel pressure to do so, and they might feel differently in private. Look at Alec Baldwin, for example. You always knew when he was really mad, because he would always utter gay slurs.
But for the most part, I don't think the premise stated in the OP makes much sense. No pun intended, but this thread really blows.
Seems like a strange premise to me. I oppose Obama as much as anyone here, but nobody has ever accused me of secretly supporting the man. A little different dynamic there, but I would assume that most people are being honest when expressing their views on homosexuality. Now, I suspect there are a few Hollywood types who publicly support gay rights because they feel pressure to do so, and they might feel differently in private. Look at Alec Baldwin, for example. You always knew when he was really mad, because he would always utter gay slurs.
But for the most part, I don't think the premise stated in the OP makes much sense. No pun intended, but this thread really blows.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:27 pm to FT
I haven't encountered any 'severely anti-gay' people in my life so I don't know. I am severely anti-lesbian. But I'm pretty sure I'm not a lesbian.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:29 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
And for the record, I think it's really bad form to misrepresent and simplify the nuanced views of a departed and beloved poster with whom you disagreed with.
Upvoted.
It's truly a shitty thing to do.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:32 pm to FT
quote:
Are severly anti-gay people more likely to be gay?
Yes.
I think it's very clear that Fred Phelps was homosexual.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:43 pm to Rex
Rex, of course you want everybody to be gay.
What a-hole doesn't?
What a-hole doesn't?
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:45 pm to KCT
I'm morality-neutral on Homosexuality. I'm more Larry David than Book Of David on homosexuality. I'm a pretty standard-issue American on this I think, much more Libertarian than Conservative. But delightfully free of all the Liberal Orthodoxy with it's speech codes.
What I detest is the whole "Industry" that dumbs everything down so that only "Correct Speech" is allowed. Give me Camille Paglia blowing original thought out of her arse over this simplistic, agenda-driven "Are severely anti-gay people more likely to be gay?" drivel.
And I wish that the worst amongst us received a little "guidance" from our estimable admins, particularly when they have a documented history of starting "call-out" threads and intentionally misrepresenting the views of others. I mean, I could not imagine calling out the departed, misrepresenting their beliefs, and criticizing them for their views, which I had just conveniently twisted to fit my premise.It's so inherently dishonorable and cowardly at it's core.
What I detest is the whole "Industry" that dumbs everything down so that only "Correct Speech" is allowed. Give me Camille Paglia blowing original thought out of her arse over this simplistic, agenda-driven "Are severely anti-gay people more likely to be gay?" drivel.
And I wish that the worst amongst us received a little "guidance" from our estimable admins, particularly when they have a documented history of starting "call-out" threads and intentionally misrepresenting the views of others. I mean, I could not imagine calling out the departed, misrepresenting their beliefs, and criticizing them for their views, which I had just conveniently twisted to fit my premise.It's so inherently dishonorable and cowardly at it's core.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:46 pm to FT
quote:
It's a really disheartening situation, and one this board is very familiar with. los angeles tiger turned out to be gay. And this isn't isolated. I have a family member who's the same way. Virulently, almost radically anti-gay, and I've heard from several gay friends that, in private, he's come on to them.
I've only read page one, but this quote above chaps me off.
LAT never hid his homosexuality. Ever.
I'm about to rant, but you are clearly too stupid to waste my lunch break typing.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:48 pm to Wild Thang
quote:
Since you finally updated, I believe LAT's issue was the tactics the gay movement used in the quest for equality.
This.
I had private email convos with him about it frequently.
I received many a novel from LAT showing me instances where the gay movement was literally destroying his church. He resented that, and pegged it for what it really was years ago: selfish progs being selfish progs.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:53 pm to KCT
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/17/16 at 8:55 am
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:56 pm to EZE Tiger Fan
I agree with you, Lsupimp. This thread is practically slanderous, but that's pretty much FT in a nutshell. He's one of the most LCD posters here.
I dont know who any of the admins are, but they might want to consider whacking this abject failure of "hit piece" posting.
I dont know who any of the admins are, but they might want to consider whacking this abject failure of "hit piece" posting.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 12:59 pm to Rex
quote:
I think it's very clear that Fred Phelps was homosexual.
Are you trying to insult Fred Phelps or gays?
Posted on 10/7/14 at 1:03 pm to Lsupimp
quote:Pimp, there's no need for admin action here, not when the other posters are doing such an excellent job of destroying the OP's misguided premise.
And I wish that the worst amongst us received a little "guidance" from our estimable admins, particularly when they have a documented history of starting "call-out" threads and intentionally misrepresenting the views of others.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 1:08 pm to FT
Yes, because the scale loops back around.
Posted on 10/7/14 at 1:18 pm to L.A.
Yeah LA, I hear you. Shitty people with shitty character start shitty threads. I got that. But It's just so dishonorable. As much as I try, I can't wrap my head around people who don't possess basic human decency or a sense of fair-play and personal honor. Not to mention, respect for the dead. I mean, who does that.....? I just wish Charles was here to eviscerate this tired little shite stain. Alas...
I love you man.*not gay
OK, back to Political Talk hibernation mode for Your Humble Pimpness.
I love you man.*not gay
OK, back to Political Talk hibernation mode for Your Humble Pimpness.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News