Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: gcruse

homosexual is a description of behaviours and activities, not of a state of being.

It is like saying someone is a “shirt wearer”. It is silly. People where shirts or they don’t. Wearing shirts is not a state of being.

Sexual arousal is a response to stimuli both suggested and initiated for that matter. Stroke a penis enough and it will ejaculate. Stimulate the female genitalia correctly and it will initiate an orgasmic wave in the body of a women.

There is no “orientation”. There may be preferences about who one is rolling around with but there is no orientation... except innies and outies.


37 posted on 06/28/2007 8:56:13 PM PDT by GulfBreeze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: GulfBreeze

” not of a state of being.’

Actually, it is the state of being arousable by the same sex and not the opposite sex. It’s not a preference, it’s a response.


39 posted on 06/28/2007 9:00:08 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: GulfBreeze
homosexual is a description of behaviours and activities, not of a state of being.

It's neither - it's a simple matter of taste. A person's taste in food is really not important - why is their taste in sex so important?

Eating and sex are both bodily functions. If someone really likes chocolate ice cream and really hates strawberry ice cream - is that choice in taste so over-poweringly important? Would we some up with a term to describe that person? Would we call it a "life style"?

Of course we wouldn't. Why is taste in sex so much more important in taste in food?

When you meet someone do you say, "Hi, my name is Mike and I like Chinese food."?

Saying, "Hi, my name is Mike and I am gay" is just as ludicrous to me.

I don't know why both homosexuals and fag-haters BOTH seem to think this matter of taste is so darn important.

When I meet someone I couldn't care less what kind of food they prefer - nor do I care what type of sex they prefer. Why would I? And why would anyone else?

Those who claim it IS important because of what the Bible says - remember the Bible mentions what food we should eat and not eat more than it mentions what kind of sex we should or shouldn't have.

Frankly, both the "gay" crowd and the "anti-gay" crowd are both guilty of making a mountain out of a molehill.

Unless I am planning on having sex with someone - why would I care what their taste in sex is? Unless I am planning on preparing a meal for someone - why would I care what their taste in food is?

And why is there such a difference between the tastes in two bodily functions?

(If your answer to that question is "the homosexuals indulge in 'unnatural' and dangerous sexual behaviors like oral and anal sex" - remember far more heterosexuals indulge in both of those behaviors than homosexuals. The sheer number of heterosexuals make that so. Also - some people eat things others would consider "unnatural and dangerous" - again, why would anyone else care?)

100 posted on 06/29/2007 10:36:22 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: GulfBreeze

Concise, and to the point!! Great explanation for those who cannot see the simple reality!


115 posted on 06/29/2007 7:58:54 PM PDT by gidget7 ( Vote for the Arsenal of Democracy, because America RUNS on Duncan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson