Michael Sam and the Vikings

[King James]

That's what I meant.

And who are you to decide how men or women are supposed to act? Because they don't act the way you act, or the way you were raised, or the way you believe is "right" that makes them immoral? Is it then also immoral to believe in different religions than you? Or to not believe in any religion at all?

as for the rest of your post, ignorance really is bliss I guess

And who are you to think my views are ignorant???? If I think it's immoral then that's what I believe in. If you endorse men sticking each other in the bum then that's you. But I do not support that lifestyle. Does that mean I hate you? No. Why do I have to support gay views? Tell me.

[NextQuestion]

getting off topic:

Henderson and McKinney were not charged with a hate crime, because no Wyoming criminal statute provided for such a charge.

The Matthew Shepard Act was adopted as an amendment to S.1390 by a vote of 63-28 on July 15, 2009

The act is related to hate crimes.


King James: You said people of incest are probably deformed. That's what I wanted facts on, not if homosexuals can reproduce. By your logic of me having a Kluwe AVI = me being homosexual....you must be too since you seem to enjoy men slapping butts and running into each other on Sunday afternoons

[dead_poet]

Why do I have to support gay views? Tell me.

You do know that "gay views" are human views, right? A gay person might have the same opinions as you on sports, religion, politics, art, education, movies, etc. "Gay views" are not limited to (I can't believe I'm going to type this): "men sticking each other in the bum."

[saint33]

I can have love for someone without accepting and supporting the entirety of their actions and choices. Nor do I have to judge them or have an opinion at all, which is ideal. The problem arises when it is no longer adequate to just lack an opinion, or say "none of my business", as it is quickly becoming. Even the tone of your posts imply that there are only two options: accept and support that individual, or hate and condemn them... Which is NOT the case at all.

I've seen example sentences on here saying "I love him/her despite they're alcoholic or they're an adulterer". Those are actions that are viewed bad in society. One is a disease that sticks with you, and one is morally bad. Being a homosexual isn't a bad thing.[/quote]

Not sure what that has to do with what "I" said, but I'll bite and sway topics with you. Some would disagree that homosexuality is not a bad thing, just as some disapprove of a vegetarian diet. I am a Christian, and choose to opt out of judging others (as best I can, I'm only human) which falls in accordance with what God has called us to do anyway, to judge not. But because my relationship with God is so important to me, I willfully choose not to accept and support homosexuality... But let's not mistake this with the hatred or condemnation of those who do. I feel as though many of you (and EVERY writer on nfl.com) are making that absent connection, conveniently. I also do not believe someone is born gay (and we can do the nature /nurture thing all day), but I don't feel as though stressed S's, a knack for interior design, or sexual attraction is a biological or inherited trait. I like brunette's with brown eyes, but not because I have the (hot for brunette's) gene, it because Jennifer Love Hewitt was my first Hollywood crush growing up and I've kind of subconsciously set her as a standard. (To much info? Probably)[/quote]

I'm going to stick to just the last part about Jennifer Love Hewitt, because that is an extremely poor choice to argue that homosexuality is not genetic (even though it has scientifically proven to be, but whatever).

You're preference in the type of women does not negate the fact that women are who you are biologically attracted to. It has nothing to do with choice. You happened to have a crush on Jennifer Love Hewitt, which has made you prefer brunettes, but why were you attracted to her in the first place, rather than say Freddie Prince Jr.? Why were you not sexually stimulated by a man the same way you were stimulated by a woman?

[NextQuestion]

And who are you to think my views are ignorant???? If I think it's immoral then that's what I believe in. If you endorse men sticking each other in the bum then that's you. But I do not support that lifestyle. Does that mean I hate you? No. Why do I have to support gay views? Tell me.

We think your views are ignorant because of the way you handle yourself. You wouldn't talk to your cousin unless he was dying? You don't show a lot of compassion and love for even people close to you. You make generalizations of homosexuals while admitting you won't get close to them. How do you know homosexuals in your area, for which I doubt you know any, come from broken homes? Did you know that Whitney Houston had four #1 singles on her debut LP, simply titled, "Whitney Houston"?

It's hard to choose a favorite among so many great tracks, but "The Greatest Love of All" is one of the best, most powerful songs ever written about self-preservation, dignity. Its universal message crosses all boundaries and instills one with the hope that it's not too late to better ourselves. Since, King James, it's impossible in this world we live in to empathize with others, we can always empathize with ourselves. It's an important message, crucial really. And it's beautifully stated on the album.

[King James]

King James: You said people of incest are probably deformed. That's what I wanted facts on, not if homosexuals can reproduce. By your logic of me having a Kluwe AVI = me being homosexual....you must be too since you seem to enjoy men slapping butts and running into each other on Sunday afternoons

What?????? So I guess that makes every football fan and player homosexual then? Slapping a player on the butt does not mean, "I want you." It means good job. You probably never played football before so no surprised you didn't know. Running into each other is how the game is meant to be played right? Is the guy suppose to not tackle a player because he's scared that it might look gay? Worst comparison ever. Oh my goodness, you are freaking hilarious!!!!!!

The fact that you look at football as men slapping each other butts and running into each other really makes me think you could be homosexual. But if men is what you like, I can't stop you.

[mondry]

because love does not consist solely of trying to make someone feel good or of accepting everything they do. Any parent knows this. At times love is to do something that upsets or hurts the very one you love because you know or believe it is in their best interest. Of course, as any parent can tell you, at times we disapprove of the actions of the ones we love.

I find your position that to disapprove of one's action equates to not loving that person to be really an unfair accusation or at least a very strange accusation based on a very strange conception of what it is to love another person.

I'm not trying to convince you that homoeroticism is wrong, I just want to encourage a more sensible and civil discussion than what is going on here-and in this country and the western world-, which is pretty pathetic on both sides frankly. Imagine, if you can, that you believe someone is doing real damage to their spiritual self through fornication, adultery, homoeroticism, etc. I know this will likely require you to use some imagination and empathy but put yourself into the shoes of one who believes that these acts spiritually harm those who commit them. Is it really difficult to see how you could disapprove of that act specifically because you love the individual committing it? In fact, the more you love that individual the more you might object to the spiritual harm they are doing to themselves. This is pretty easy to see isn't it? Why denigrate your "opposition" when it is really very easy to understand that they are frequently approaching a sensitive issue with love and care and compassion and doing the best they can to deal with it? You may find their philosophical or theological opinions without merit, in which case it is really more sensible to discuss those issues rather than leaping ahead to homosexuality in particular.

I appreciate the fact that you want to have a civil discussion and I'll try do my best to keep this respectful. I think it's really easy for either side to be so convinced they're "right" that it actually becomes hard to "explain" why.

What you're posting basically sounds like religion to me. Instead of using Heaven or Hell, you're substituting "spiritual harm" and to me it sounds like you think if we do enough spiritual harm to ourselves bad things will happen. (Hell)

The problem I have with that mentality is there are religious fanatics (and I don't know if you are one or not) that don't care about the "sinner" at all. You don't see the 3 straight guys beating up the gay kid because they want to "save his soul" and give him some tough love. You don't see the fanatics picketing the abortion clinic to prevent her from harming her spiritual soul.

What they're doing isn't because they care about the person, what they're doing is taking it upon themselves to enforce their beliefs onto other people. So forgive me if I'm extremely skeptical when someone says "we just want to help them not commit spiritual harm to themselves".

Even if you're genuine in what you say, and I do believe there are religious people who are genuine. One of the same things in your post that you want us to imagine is actually the same exact thing I would say to you. Imagine you might be wrong, that there is no god, or heaven and hell, and that people don't need to avoid "spiritual harm" in the first place. By believing there is such a thing, and trying to "help people" who clearly don't share that belief, a great deal of harm and pain gets inflicted on them in the process. Maybe not by you specifically, but by like I said, the fanatics.

I don't mind if people are religious nor am I going to say religion is the problem but you guys really need to lead by example! Personally I believe in being a good person because that's how I'd want to be treated! I don't think beating up gays or heckling woman who are already in a lot of stress is the right thing to do nor do I think Jesus or God or whatever would be impressed by that.

[saint33]

And who are you to think my views are ignorant???? If I think it's immoral then that's what I believe in. If you endorse men sticking each other in the bum then that's you. But I do not support that lifestyle. Does that mean I hate you? No. Why do I have to support gay views? Tell me.

I am someone who is informed. Ignorance is not a matter of opinion, it is a lack or refusal to accept facts and knowledge.

I support gay people for the same reason I support straight people. Because that is the way they were born. I am not personally attracted to men, nor do I want to engage in anal sex with a man, but that is because I am attracted to women and have been all my life. I was not taught to be attracted to women, it has been engrained in me since the moment I was born. I don't have the same chemical reaction to an attractive male asI do an attractive female. To put it simply, I HAVE NO CHOICE. Gay men are born the way the are, it is not a decision they make to be attracted to men.

But beyond that fact, there is much more to me as a human being than just my sexual preference to women. So to condemn a human being for their differing sexual preference would be hypocritical of me, because I would never want to be condemned for my attraction to women.

[Superman]

[/quote]

Not sure what that has to do with what "I" said, but I'll bite and sway topics with you. Some would disagree that homosexuality is not a bad thing, just as some disapprove of a vegetarian diet. I am a Christian, and choose to opt out of judging others (as best I can, I'm only human) which falls in accordance with what God has called us to do anyway, to judge not. But because my relationship with God is so important to me, I willfully choose not to accept and support homosexuality... But let's not mistake this with the hatred or condemnation of those who do. I feel as though many of you (and EVERY writer on nfl.com) are making that absent connection, conveniently. I also do not believe someone is born gay (and we can do the nature /nurture thing all day), but I don't feel as though stressed S's, a knack for interior design, or sexual attraction is a biological or inherited trait. I like brunette's with brown eyes, but not because I have the (hot for brunette's) gene, it because Jennifer Love Hewitt was my first Hollywood crush growing up and I've kind of subconsciously set her as a standard. (To much info? Probably)[/quote]

I'm going to stick to just the last part about Jennifer Love Hewitt, because that is an extremely poor choice to argue that homosexuality is not genetic (even though it has scientifically proven to be, but whatever).

You're preference in the type of women does not negate the fact that women are who you are biologically attracted to. It has nothing to do with choice. You happened to have a crush on Jennifer Love Hewitt, which has made you prefer brunettes, but why were you attracted to her in the first place, rather than say Freddie Prince Jr.? Why were you not sexually stimulated by a man the same way you were stimulated by a woman?[/quote]

Cause I'm not gay... Haha nah I get what your saying. Ok first of all (while I understand the significance of science and technology and the impact it has on society), science is still just a label machine. Science takes God's creations, slaps a label on it ("what should we call it, how about an... Atom, BRILLIANT, after yet another scientist" who is still a mere man and is prone to error every second of every day), and because we have placed a title on it and have learned how to manipulate it, we think we have CREATED it and have achieved mastery and ultimate knowledge of it, which is prideful. ANYWAY, the word "proven" doesn't even belong behind the word "scientifically", because the pot of gold at the end of the science rainbow, lands you with a THEORY. Look it up, it's science bro. And I liked J Love (she likes it when I call her that), because she has crescent moon eyes when she smiles, and I initially liked THAT because it was unique. You would truly argue that I have a (J Love) gene and that I was born with less taste for blondes and redheads?

[King James]

People are born gay or straight? Explain bi-sexual people then. People who love outside of their gender but seem to love their same gender as they get older or vice versa.

[NextQuestion]

What?????? So I guess that makes every football fan and player homosexual then? Slapping a player on the butt does not mean, "I want you." It means good job. You probably never played football before so no surprised you didn't know. Running into each other is how the game is meant to be played right? Is the guy suppose to not tackle a player because he's scared that it might look gay? Worst comparison ever. Oh my goodness, you are freaking hilarious!!!!!!


You tend to overreact and not sense any sarcasm. I did play football btw
The fact that you look at football as men slapping each other butts and running into each other really makes me think you could be homosexual. But if men is what you like, I can't stop you.

[Funkytown]

People are born gay or straight? Explain bi-sexual people then.

Same. Born that way.

[saint33]

Not sure what that has to do with what "I" said, but I'll bite and sway topics with you. Some would disagree that homosexuality is not a bad thing, just as some disapprove of a vegetarian diet. I am a Christian, and choose to opt out of judging others (as best I can, I'm only human) which falls in accordance with what God has called us to do anyway, to judge not. But because my relationship with God is so important to me, I willfully choose not to accept and support homosexuality... But let's not mistake this with the hatred or condemnation of those who do. I feel as though many of you (and EVERY writer on nfl.com) are making that absent connection, conveniently. I also do not believe someone is born gay (and we can do the nature /nurture thing all day), but I don't feel as though stressed S's, a knack for interior design, or sexual attraction is a biological or inherited trait. I like brunette's with brown eyes, but not because I have the (hot for brunette's) gene, it because Jennifer Love Hewitt was my first Hollywood crush growing up and I've kind of subconsciously set her as a standard. (To much info? Probably)[/quote]

I'm going to stick to just the last part about Jennifer Love Hewitt, because that is an extremely poor choice to argue that homosexuality is not genetic (even though it has scientifically proven to be, but whatever).

You're preference in the type of women does not negate the fact that women are who you are biologically attracted to. It has nothing to do with choice. You happened to have a crush on Jennifer Love Hewitt, which has made you prefer brunettes, but why were you attracted to her in the first place, rather than say Freddie Prince Jr.? Why were you not sexually stimulated by a man the same way you were stimulated by a woman?[/quote]

Cause I'm not gay... Haha nah I get what your saying. Ok first of all (while I understand the significance of science and technology and the impact it has on society), science is still just a label machine. Science takes God's creations, slaps a label on it ("what should we call it, how about an... Atom, BRILLIANT, after yet another scientist" who is still a mere man and is prone to error every second of every day), and because we have placed a title on it and have learned how to manipulate it, we think we have CREATED it and have achieved mastery and ultimate knowledge of it, which is prideful. ANYWAY, the word "proven" doesn't even belong behind the word "scientifically", because the pot of gold at the end of the science rainbow, lands you with a THEORY. Look it up, it's science bro. And I liked J Love (she likes it when I call her that), because she has crescent moon eyes when she smiles, and I initially liked THAT because it was unique. You would truly argue that I have a (J Love) gene and that I was born with less taste for blondes and redheads?[/quote]


Haha well I'm not going to get into a science vs. religion argument with you, that's a topic that will just go in circles (although I guess this current one seems to fit that category as well).

But I do think you at least acknowledge my point, which is all I'm looking for. And in a way, yes I do believe that you have a "J Love" gene, or at least towards certain aspects of her. Whether or not that is the color of her hair, I can't say.

[NextQuestion]

Dang, my post about people being bi-sexual didn't make it here. Straight up genetic thing...I wasn't born to experiment but a lot of people I know were. I had a girlfriend who made out with girls at parties! OH NO!

Perhaps King James needs to listen to Huey Lewis & The News. Their early work was a little too new wave for my tastes, but when "Sports" came out in '83, I think they really came into their own, commercially and artistically. The whole album has a clear, crisp sound, and a new sheen of consummate professionalism that really gives the songs a big boost. He's been compared to Elvis Costello, but I think Huey has a far more bitter, cynical sense of humor.

In '87, Huey released "Fore", their most accomplished album. I think their undisputed masterpiece is "Hip to be Square", a song so catchy, most people probably don't listen to the lyrics. But they should, because it's not just about the pleasures of conformity, and the importance of trends, it's also a personal statement about the band itself.

[Superman]

anyone who denies that society has an influence on the sexual practices of its members is being willfully ignorant for political reasons.

Or social reasons. Well said though.