You are so scared that your manhood might be challenged. I don’t see anyone strapping you to a table and tickling your feet until you turn gay!
You have a sick little mind.
Seriously what are you so sacred of? Are you scared that some people have the balls to live their lives the way they want to? Seriously think it over. You are sounding like a pussy, with a serious psychological disorder.
Hush. I’m only playing. Gay people are adorable and I have nothing against them. What someone does with their wang is their business.
Well you know what they say: you are what you eat.
What the fuck. You were responding to something Primal said. I didn’t say that, so why did I respond to it?
Note to self: pay attention idiot.
This thread would have been sufficient if it had ended here.
Someone cares. You care. You’re talking about it, no? Created this thread and all.
I agree with the “who the fuck cares” statement. Not your business. Not mine.
Adult people who choose to spend their lives together now have legal recognition across the board. That’s awesome for everyone who didn’t have that recognition before the ruling. For the rest of us, who the fuck cares? Either be happy for the people who’s lives are affected by this, or be indifferent, but you have no reason to be displeased. The ruling only affects you if you’re gay.
Obviously, I care if I made this thread; however, my concern is negligible, nothing major.
" Who the fuck cares?" is part of my rhetoric, meant to highlight how trivial this whole thing is.
If you read my thread entirely, you would understand why I am bothered by this.
I made this thread to point out the elephant in the room and scoff at societal absurdities, not because I’m some religious zealot.
Again, I think that most or the people do not understand why people support homosexuality directly/indirectly, even those who are not homosexulas.
It is not the issue of sexual preference, as it is presented and understood in general. Not at all.
The crux is whether one wants follow his all untamed desires or remain in some boundaries. That is what matters actually not homosexuality per se.
The fight is not for homosexuality but the right to do what one wants to do with his/her life and others also. Homosexuality is merely a symbol of that.
People may find this analogy bizzare, but homosexuality is pure capitalism, where rich are free from any taxes, no obligation to the society. And, heterosexuality is capitalism mixed with some socialism, where some rules are to be followed to maintain overall goodness.
Supporters of homosexuality do not have enough wisdom to understand what may be the future implications for their demand of absolute freedom in other verticals of life, besides sexuality.
A millionaire can also demand that he is free to do whatever he wants to do with his money. What right on the earth a state has to ask him to pay such taxes, which poor do not pay?
Is it not unfair to ask rich people to pay more taxes than poor? If they are rich, is it their fault? Why they should be punished for their hard earned richness?
And, believe me, once homosexuality will be established completely in the social system, these types of questions will be raised from other and totally unexpected quarters. They will also demand that they are also free whatever they want to do what belongs to them.
Can any supporter of homosexuality can answer me how taxing rich more than poor is justified, if you put societal cause aside? How is it not discrimination against a rich minority by the poor majority? Why they should suffer for the betterment of others?
It is not their duty. Even the supreme courts will have to concede to this one day.Then, homosexuality will be questioned once again by the same people who now say " who cares".
The problem with leftists is that they want that the state should not interfere at all in morality, but at the same time, they want state to control all economic activity. But, both of these approaches cannot go long hand in hand. They have to choose and stick to one.
In the same way, extreme rightists want complete economic freedom but ask for a lot of control over morality. Contradiction is here also.
Both parties have to come down a bit from their extremism. A little control of the state is necessary on the both of economics and morality to maintain the equilibrium. People will have to accept that there should be line between absolute freedom and control in all verticals of life. Then, such line should be drawn very carefully.
That is the only solution. And, people will understand that too, sooner or later.
With love,
Sanjay
Homosexuality is using capitalism as a vehicle.
The capitalists are using homosexuality as a vehicle…
In order to “enrich” the environment, ultimately dominanting the social front.
The bigger fight is too stragetically encourage freedom, but heavily pushing for an exclusive feminine expression of it, not by directly denying all else, but rather overflowing all else, to the point where all else will be pushed onto the periphery…There is more than one way to achieve the same result…by changing the nature of the environment, the activity will change accordingly therein…
The freedom itself is a vehicle, similar to how secularism is to religion, in how it can adopt certain aspects and drop the spiritual context…Ultimately what is to be modern is to refine freedom…and we can all see where that is going, at least we should by now…This is their face currently, basically the right to be more free, means the right to be more female…
There will be a time where there will be no need for freedom…at that point, the vehicle has served its purpose…
and the face changes…