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.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Lsupimp

Ersatz Amerika-97.6% phony & fake

Member since Nov 2003

78971 posts

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.