Being a Homosexual

[Skip To My Marriage]

I had a thought a couple of days ago as a man who's been married to a beautiful woman for the last 7 years:

Being homosexual is no different than being a pedophile.

Both are sexual perversions that are different from the expected sexual preference of an "adult of the opposite sex". I know that the BIG difference is that when it comes to pedophiles, there are VICTIMS and that of course makes it 100 times worse morally speaking.

However, when it comes to straight up sexual discussion, both a pedophile and a homosexual have perverted sexual thoughts that differ from the mean. If a man can't help himself and is naturally attracted to other men, how is that different than a man who can't help himself to be naturally attracted to sick pedophile thoughts. Really think about this - what is the sexual difference? Both are straying from the norm of being attracted to beautiful women, they want none of it, it doesn't interest them.

Might as well pile on here, a man who has bestiality thoughts - how is that different than a man who wants to bang another man?? And I mean, how is it different when it comes to SEXUAL PERVERSIONS? I know that legally there is a difference, and victim-wise there is a difference.

But in the end, the reason so many people dont (or at least used to not) like the idea of homosexual sex is because it's a perverted mindset that differs from the norm. But the media has managed to convince everyone otherwise. SURE, there are no victims LEGALLY, but its still a perversion of normal sexual thought.

Pedophiles, bestiality lovers, necrophiliacs, they all have perversions of what turns them on - how is that different than a man perverting away from wanting women and wanting a man instead?

Everything I have just said can be applied to lesbians as well.

Someone convince me that being a homosexual is no better a perversion than the ones i described above.

 

[Tictac]

If you enjoy being a moron, then enjoy it.

Nobody here or anywhere else owes you an explanation of anything.

Your bizarre thoughts are your bizarre thoughts.

 

[Skip To My Marriage]

If you enjoy being a moron, then enjoy it.

Nobody here or anywhere else owes you an explanation of anything.

Your bizarre thoughts are your bizarre thoughts.

I'd enjoy more if someone posted a logical argument for or against what i said, instead of liberally and retardedly calling me a moron.

 

[Tictac]

There is no logical response to your post.

You have an opinion based in your opinion.

Congratulations.

 

[Tenacity]

Not sure if this is a Troll post or what this is ?

I had a thought a couple of days ago as a man who's been married to a beautiful woman for the last 7 years:

Being homosexual is no different than being a pedophile.

Both are sexual perversions that are different from the expected sexual preference of an "adult of the opposite sex". I know that the BIG difference is that when it comes to pedophiles, there are VICTIMS and that of course makes it 100 times worse morally speaking.

You just answered your own question. One act involves two willing (and legal) participants while one involves a form of child rape, or sexing someone that's not at the mental capacity to willingly (and legally) participate.


However, when it comes to straight up sexual discussion, both a pedophile and a homosexual have perverted sexual thoughts that differ from the mean. If a man can't help himself and is naturally attracted to other men, how is that different than a man who can't help himself to be naturally attracted to sick pedophile thoughts. Really think about this - what is the sexual difference? Both are straying from the norm of being attracted to beautiful women, they want none of it, it doesn't interest them.


So are Asexual men the same as Pedophiles as well? Because your argument is seemingly based on if a man doesn't want to have sex with a woman, that means he's kind of "sick in the head," so sick in the head that he's on the same level as a pedophile, which makes absolutely NO sense.


Might as well pile on here, a man who has bestiality thoughts - how is that different than a man who wants to bang another man?? And I mean, how is it different when it comes to SEXUAL PERVERSIONS? I know that legally there is a difference, and victim-wise there is a difference.

It's very different, one is an act between two adults and the other "could" be categorized as abuse of an animal. Plus you are comparing apples to oranges overall.

But in the end, the reason so many people dont (or at least used to not) like the idea of homosexual sex is because it's a perverted mindset that differs from the norm. But the media has managed to convince everyone otherwise. SURE, there are no victims LEGALLY, but its still a perversion of normal sexual thought.

Pedophiles, bestiality lovers, necrophiliacs, they all have perversions of what turns them on - how is that different than a man perverting away from wanting women and wanting a man instead?

Everything I have just said can be applied to lesbians as well.

Someone convince me that being a homosexual is no better a perversion than the ones i described above.

Sir, I'm not sure if I can convince you of anything. You come off like a troll with these questions that make absolutely no sense. You are comparing two adults having sex to child rape and a human being fvcking a dog? It doesn't matter if the two adults having sex is considered heterosexual sex or homosexual sex, it's still TWO ADULTS. The other forms of sexual acts are in totally different categories and cannot (and should not) be compared to each other.

 

[Skip To My Marriage]

Not sure if this is a Troll post or what this is ?

Forget the legality of it all.

The MINDSET of a gay person, is it not just a sexual perversion that is no different than the examples I brought up? A sexual attraction that is different than normal.

No trolling here, I've been reading this site the past 10 years, these are actual logical thoughts I had as a straight woman loving man. Sexually speaking, if a man doesn't get turned on by women, and instead gets turned on by men, how is his mind any less perverted than a man that is turned on by children? It's all sexual perversion in the end, a sexual preference that is not normal, not what we are brought up to believe by our parents, if you take away the obvious legality of it. Now is there anyone smart enough to give me a valid argument against it?

Forget the legality of it, that is obvious. I am strictly talking about the MINDSET.

 

[Skip To My Marriage]

To bring it to another level, some parts of the world are against gay people, but have no problem marrying off 10 year old girls to adult men-I don't agree with that of course, but it goes back to my point, it's all sexual perversions and completely unnatural, but in this country the gay perversion is celebrated like crazy and it's sickening to me.

So, how is a homosexual mindset different from a pedophile mindset? Good ole normal sex just doesn't do it, something more perverse is needed.

 

[Greg S]

I had a thought a couple of days ago as a man who's been married to a beautiful woman for the last 7 years:

Being homosexual is no different than being a pedophile.

Both are sexual perversions that are different from the expected sexual preference of an "adult of the opposite sex". I know that the BIG difference is that when it comes to pedophiles, there are VICTIMS and that of course makes it 100 times worse morally speaking.

However, when it comes to straight up sexual discussion, both a pedophile and a homosexual have perverted sexual thoughts that differ from the mean. If a man can't help himself and is naturally attracted to other men, how is that different than a man who can't help himself to be naturally attracted to sick pedophile thoughts. Really think about this - what is the sexual difference? Both are straying from the norm of being attracted to beautiful women, they want none of it, it doesn't interest them.

Might as well pile on here, a man who has bestiality thoughts - how is that different than a man who wants to bang another man?? And I mean, how is it different when it comes to SEXUAL PERVERSIONS? I know that legally there is a difference, and victim-wise there is a difference.

But in the end, the reason so many people dont (or at least used to not) like the idea of homosexual sex is because it's a perverted mindset that differs from the norm. But the media has managed to convince everyone otherwise. SURE, there are no victims LEGALLY, but its still a perversion of normal sexual thought.

Pedophiles, bestiality lovers, necrophiliacs, they all have perversions of what turns them on - how is that different than a man perverting away from wanting women and wanting a man instead?

Everything I have just said can be applied to lesbians as well.

Someone convince me that being a homosexual is no better a perversion than the ones i described above.

You're a garbage human being.

 

[Tictac]

something more perverse is needed.

_________

How about you make us a list of 'normal' activity.

No one on SoSuave would want to do anything perverse.

So stand in judgement and tell us how we all ought behave.

 

[Greg S]

Forget the legality of it all.

The MINDSET of a gay person, is it not just a sexual perversion that is no different than the examples I brought up? A sexual attraction that is different than normal.

No trolling here, I've been reading this site the past 10 years, these are actual logical thoughts I had as a straight woman loving man. Sexually speaking, if a man doesn't get turned on by women, and instead gets turned on by men, how is his mind any less perverted than a man that is turned on by children? It's all sexual perversion in the end, a sexual preference that is not normal, not what we are brought up to believe by our parents, if you take away the obvious legality of it. Now is there anyone smart enough to give me a valid argument against it?

Forget the legality of it, that is obvious. I am strictly talking about the MINDSET.

Do you want a medal? My apologies in calling you a garbage human being. You're a subhuman.

 

[Greg S]

I'd enjoy more if someone posted a logical argument for or against what i said, instead of liberally and retardedly calling me a moron.

Moron is way too kind. Subhuman POS fits much better.

 

[prison/con.net]

why? cause he tells it like it really IS, instead of being subverted into being a queer?

 

[Fatal Jay]

I had a thought a couple of days ago as a man who's been married to a beautiful woman for the last 7 years:

Being homosexual is no different than being a pedophile.

Both are sexual perversions that are different from the expected sexual preference of an "adult of the opposite sex". I know that the BIG difference is that when it comes to pedophiles, there are VICTIMS and that of course makes it 100 times worse morally speaking.

However, when it comes to straight up sexual discussion, both a pedophile and a homosexual have perverted sexual thoughts that differ from the mean. If a man can't help himself and is naturally attracted to other men, how is that different than a man who can't help himself to be naturally attracted to sick pedophile thoughts. Really think about this - what is the sexual difference? Both are straying from the norm of being attracted to beautiful women, they want none of it, it doesn't interest them.

Might as well pile on here, a man who has bestiality thoughts - how is that different than a man who wants to bang another man?? And I mean, how is it different when it comes to SEXUAL PERVERSIONS? I know that legally there is a difference, and victim-wise there is a difference.

But in the end, the reason so many people dont (or at least used to not) like the idea of homosexual sex is because it's a perverted mindset that differs from the norm. But the media has managed to convince everyone otherwise. SURE, there are no victims LEGALLY, but its still a perversion of normal sexual thought.

Pedophiles, bestiality lovers, necrophiliacs, they all have perversions of what turns them on - how is that different than a man perverting away from wanting women and wanting a man instead?

Everything I have just said can be applied to lesbians as well.

Someone convince me that being a homosexual is no better a perversion than the ones i described above.

I like this guy opinions

 

[Greg S]

why? cause he tells it like it really IS, instead of being subverted into being a queer?

No you dumbass. I wouldn't be surprised if both you and him are gay.

 

[Greg S]

I like this guy opinions

That puts your IQ in the single digits. Congratulations.

 

[Tenacity]

I'm in BOLD

Forget the legality of it all.

The MINDSET of a gay person, is it not just a sexual perversion that is no different than the examples I brought up? A sexual attraction that is different than normal.

Who defines normal? I have a different theory on sexuality than others, a lot of guys might disagree with me however. You have people that are "curious" or "freaks", and they might end up screwing someone of the same sex but not actually "commit" to any serious relationships. Then you have people that are actually attracted, fall in love with, etc. members of the same sex. I guess I don't know what defines "normal"? If you are talking about a natural order of things, then I guess you could make homosexuality abnormal, but there are ways to still create children without actual sexual intercourse between a man and a woman.


No trolling here, I've been reading this site the past 10 years, these are actual logical thoughts I had as a straight woman loving man. Sexually speaking, if a man doesn't get turned on by women, and instead gets turned on by men, how is his mind any less perverted than a man that is turned on by children?

Well, you are equating LGBT to being a pervert and child rapist, and I don't see how the comparison can be made? Again, when two adults decide to have sex that's their business, whatever type of "sex" they get involved in is nobody's business. When you have someone molesting a CHILD, that's a child rapist. This is someone that really is looking for power, control and domination and they are taking advantage of an innocent child in the act of doing so. Child molesting is Child Rape, because it's in the same category of raping a female that's been drugged up. The point is to have power over a WEAKER person, so you can take advantage of them and feel some sort of superiority. There's NO COMPARISON between two adult LGBT members and a Child Rapist, they are not in the same category.

It's all sexual perversion in the end, a sexual preference that is not normal, not what we are brought up to believe by our parents, if you take away the obvious legality of it. Now is there anyone smart enough to give me a valid argument against it?

I already gave you an argument against your premise. For one, you are tying two separate acts together as ONE unethical act, when only ONE of the two separate acts is unethical. Two gay dudes or two lesbian women having sex, is just them having sex. A child rapist is something totally different as I pointed out.

 

[zekko]

This thread shows how prevalent PC thinking has become. Homosexuality has been considered abnormal throughout most of history. Only in about the last 10 years or less has it been decided that you are a "piece of human garbage" if you think it may be a perversion.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I had a thought a couple of days ago as a man who's been married to a beautiful woman for the last 7 years:

Being homosexual is no different than being a pedophile.

Both are sexual perversions that are different from the expected sexual preference of an "adult of the opposite sex". I know that the BIG difference is that when it comes to pedophiles, there are VICTIMS and that of course makes it 100 times worse morally speaking.

However, when it comes to straight up sexual discussion, both a pedophile and a homosexual have perverted sexual thoughts that differ from the mean..

Agree, abnormal is abnormal. I've came to the same conclusion many years ago. This is pretty much how it was almost universally viewed for most of history and likely prehistory until a few years ago. In fact, opposite sex 'child brides' has much more historical support than gay marriage, which has none.

 

[mangotot]

At least for a man to find another another man for $ex is straight forward.

 

[Tenacity]

I think if the argument the OP was making was that homosexuality was abnormal to mankind in terms of human creation, then I would be in 100% agreement. Even though there's other ways to still create humans without sexual intercourse, you can make the argument that homosexuality does go against a seemingly naturalistic point of view.

But when he compares homosexuality to child rape, that's when I have to look at the OP sideways?

Even if homosexuality is outlawed in other portions of the world, the fact is that if we are talking about two adults having sex, both of them are at the rational and mental capacity to make such decision. When you are talking about an adult having sex with a child, the child is not at the rational and mental capacity to fully ACCEPT such decision, which is why it's considered rape in some portions of the world, because it's on the same par as "taking" sex from someone.

Yes, some portions of the world might not see having sex with a child as rape, but the fact can be pretty much stated (based on various research that's been done) that a child's mind has not rationally developed to a point to accept such an act.

I've never been homo-phobic, I honestly have no personal issues with LGBT members. I don't even have an issue with them getting married EVEN THOUGH I'm a Republican....why? Because the damn Marriage system is already broken.

Marriage was supposed to be based on christian principles of two separate pieces of flesh coming together as one, which resembles "twins at the hip". Well, if you are twins at the hip, there's no option to separate back to individual pieces of flesh as doing so would cause you BOTH to die. So a true "marriage" has no option for divorce, period. You are now twins at the hip, and only DEATH can do you part, period. But that's obviously NOT how things are operating.

Like I said before, Marriage is operating like a Civil Union, where you can obtain various government/tax related benefits of the union but if at anytime you are inconvenienced to the point where you no longer want to participate in the union, you can just get up and WALK out of the door. That's not what Marriage is supposed to be, that's what a Civil Union is supposed to be, but yet we are getting "married" and calling it Marriage, but the activity is operating like a Civil Union.

So marriage is dead, the system is dead and it's NOT based on Christian principles anymore. So hell, because it's not based on Christian principles, why not let LGBT members participate in the screwed up system?