From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 29th, 2004 11:19 am (UTC)		(Link)
on the story.

This is terrible!I cant belive someone would say that.

	From: tejun	Date: April 15th, 2005 09:05 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Gay Goths

Nice Vexen, read the whole thing, thanks for the information. I was wondering if I could throw some of that information up on another chat forum? A spirtual forum where I am trying to get people to take a stand and repeal a constitutional amendment here in America, specifically Oregon, one that prohibits same-sex unions or marriage...
I am on a lone crusade here.. not many Americans are happy with what I am saying...

On Satanism... I am one of those guys that exist on the fringe of the gay culture... only passing into it, to aquire desirable partners... free of their fashion and judgement as well as being free from Christian Conservative judgement... I walk my own walk... Satanism has taught me a lot... and I have spent time and effort with gay people and new age people, to broaden their perspective on Satanism...

Although I may not do it justice, I do try..

Tejun www.passionoftheantichrist.com

From: (Anonymous)	Date: August 24th, 2005 04:05 am (UTC)		(Link)
Homosexuality

That was complete bullshit. Animals do not have rational thought. If you can't see that penis goes to vagina you're a fool. Homosexuality among people is a choice, period. Animals don't know any better.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: November 14th, 2005 01:23 am (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Homosexuality

Hmmm, um... some animlas have rational thought.
Variuos animals{including the human animal} have different levels of intelligence,sentience, and trial and error/rational thinking thought processes. This is a fact of nature.
And homosexuality activity has indeed been observed amongst some lower animal species, not just amongst humans.
That fact, and the fact that homosexuality does NOT harm anyone, shows that any fear or hatred of it and/or those whom are such-is pure ignorance and/or bigotry.

Penis does go into vagina, it also fits well into other orifices, and the toungue fits well into other orifices.
I mean, hello, the lips were created for kissing and if you look at things purely from a simplistic and ignorant mindframe- the faces of the two peopple line up ,therefore it could be concluded that necking and kissing and licking below the face/mouth is immoral, but we know it brings pleaure and happiness and no harm to do so. In fact it's funny because oral sex{whether amongst heteros or homosexuals} is actually less risky/harmful than traditional penis/vagina sex{so going on what's leats safe, we could conclude that this fact makes penis in vagina sex immoral or bad in some way}.

Homosexuality amongst humans CAN be a "choice", and is indeed in many cases{not that this makes it bad or immoral or even harmful in and of itself just because of "choice"}, in other cases there is strong evidence that SOME people are indeed born homosexual, just as some people are born w/out a clearly definable gender-or even as 50/50 hermaphrodite/inter-sexed individuals; and the fact that many people "seemingly'{at first glance} of one particular gender have more chemicals of the opposite gender to their own or even possibly indefinable sex organs{if not outright the opposite of the rest of their physical appearance}, sayd thigs are'nt as simple as bigoted,ignorant, and prejudiced people such as yourself assume.

THINK! Educate yourself.

In Reason:
Bill Baker

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 10th, 2005 11:21 am (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Homosexuality

"DO NOT LIE WITH A MAN AS ONE LIES WITH A WOMAN. THAT IS DETESTABLE."
LEVITICUS 18:22

" MEATS FOR THE BELLY AND THE BELLY FOR MEATS, BUT GOD WILL DESTROY BOTH IT AND THEM. NOW THE BODY IS NOT MEANT FOR SEXUAL IMMORALITY, BUT FOR THE LORD AND THE LORD FOR THE BODY" 1 CORINTHIANS 6:13

"FOR YE ARE BOUGHT WITH A PRICE:THEREFORE GLORIFY GOD IN YOUR BODY, AND IN YOUR SPIRIT WHICH ARE GOD'S". 1 CORINTHIANS 6:20

	From: vexen	Date: December 10th, 2005 04:58 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Homosexuality

Some say the first of your three quotes is something to do with homosexuality, but: If a person is gay, and lies with a woman purely platonically, then for that person they shouldn't lie with women as with men. If a person is straight, it means don't sleep with the same sex. The quote you've provided actually says: Don't sleep with you don't naturally sleep with. Gays naturally sleep with only the same sex; so they don't lay with a man as they would a woman.

Even if most the people reading this website were Christian, the other two quotes are still irrelevant and the rules of Leviticus are largely ignored by Christians. Why do you think THAT Leviticus rule should be kept when all the rest are ignored? What's your agenda?

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 17th, 2007 02:26 am (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Homosexuality

What you say is intersting but unlike homosexuality, heterosexual sex has the added facet of reproduction. You don't mention reproduction in your comparisons.

Contrary to what you believe there is absolutely NO strong evidence to say homosexuality is genetic. I have another message on this board with some info on these pseudoscientific studies which appear in the media.


Most of the studies claiming to link gayness with genetics are done by male homosexuals and are only about male homosexuals. There are hardly any attempts to invstigate genetic lesbianism. Is there something about the male psyche that means they cannot accept that they may be responsible for their behaviour at some level? Do they have to make wildly innacurate cllaims about their origins to try to make themselves look good to the public? This could also be why a lot of lesbians would consider that they may actually be bisexual but most gay men say that they are definitely gay?

With regard to the claim that some people are intersexed, this is only a phenotypic issue. The sex can be determined genetically.

The way genetics works is that anyone with a Y chromosome is male. XY is the normal male. XXY is Klinefelter's syndrome where the man is infertile(amongst other distinct features) but he is still male. XYY is associated with mental problems and aggression. Just a Y on it's own is non-viable(the Y chromosome can only work in presence of an X chromosome).

Females have only X chromosomes: XX is the normal female, X (only one X) is Turner's syndrome (very short, infertile female with heart probs, etc.) XXX is rare but can happen.



Think! Educate yourself.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 17th, 2007 02:27 am (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Homosexuality

the above was a reply to bill baker

From: (Anonymous)	Date: June 15th, 2006 04:12 pm (UTC)		(Link)

hie. my name is Emma. i live in a surbub called Ilanda in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. i am a satanist in my early twenties and i would like to say to Vexen, "you are doing a great job" . love the article on homosexuality.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 17th, 2007 02:07 am (UTC)		(Link)
'Gay animals?'

A lot of pseudoscientists have filmed/ watched animals of the same sex engaging in so called homosexual behaviour. Most of the time, this is not the case at all. The activity is not actually sexual but some kind of test to see which is the dominant male (in male situations). Also, how do you know if the animal is not BIsexual?

It is also really silly to ay animals are gay so it must be okay. Humans are very different from other animals e.g. dogs are not toilet trained/ it's natural for them to defaecate/urinate in public so is it then okay for humans to do so? Is it unfair discrimination for us to tell such people to use toilets?

This site seems to be about using logic and weeding out silly beliefs so if we think logically and scientifically about homosexuality we see that it is a useless endeavour genetically. It goes against reproduction and basic biology.

Sex between men is also one of the highest risk factors for infection and the rates of new HIV infection (in UK - don't know if you're American) are increasing in the gay male population. The amount of HIV in gay men is disproportionately large (ie look at percentages). Lesbianism is not really a health risk.

I think that instead of just making fun of religions, you should weed out nonsense, pseudoscientific views in the popular secular culture. Those relevant to this topic include those that claim that homosexuality is a genetic condition. There have been no studies that haev shown this - only random speculation. Last year (in the Times - British paper) there was an article claiming that gayness (in males) was genetic. If you actually read the article, it said that the only result foud was that gay men had a lot of brothers. NO other facts at all.
From this one random observation, they concocted a theory that pregnant women produce anti male antibodies towards the male foetus as they cannot handle maleness in their bodies.(!) The gay son is gay because he has been attacked by the most anti male antibodies. (What this should say to any sensible person reading it is that gay men have a 'destroyed' form of maleness as they were attacked in utero).

However, true to form, letters came through the next day from all sorts of poele saying that gayness is genetic (and a good number attacking religions using the article as their weapon). They even included lesbians who were nothing to do with the study or the theory.

Most claims to gayness being genetic are similar to the above.

If gayness was genetic and normal for the gay person then surely they should not produce any sperm/ ova? However you hear of several gay men who become fathers through sperm donation and alos lesbians who have babies. This makes it seem that there body is indeed heterosexual but somehow their mind is gay.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 17th, 2007 02:39 am (UTC)		(Link)
sexist

From the main article: 'Why this behaviour might be favoured by natural selection, though, is a difficult question to answer. In an attempt to do so, the exhibition picks on gay flamingos. Two males raising a chick after one of them had a one-night stand (of sorts) with a female are able to hold a larger territory than male-female partnerships. This suggests a chick with two dads could get more food and therefore have a better chance of survival.'

In your article, you try to make human gay behaviour acceptable by saying that animals do it too. This example highlights something very worrying. The male flamingo obviously had to mate with a female to acquire a child. He then goes and raises it with another male and held a large territory. This is very sexist indeed. And if I am manet to extrapolate such a thing to humans, it would be like a gay man getting a woman pregnant and then 9 months later, taking the baby off her and raising it with his boyfriend. As men earn more than women these guys will get a better house, etc than if a woman was living with them.

Quite heartless really.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 17th, 2007 02:49 am (UTC)		(Link)
Re: sexist

From Rosie (otherwise labelled as 'anonymous')

I have sent many messages because the amount of ignorance and misquoting of science is increasing everyday. People should learn to scrutinize journals and not jump to conclusions because of the title of the article. I think people are not at all open minded when it comes to homosexuality - they assume that any article agreeing with homosexuality is true.

On a more feminist note- you can put this bit in your feminist section if there is one:
I have met quite a few misogynistic gay men but noone dares to speak up about this sort of thing because they fear that they may be breaking some equality law. So instead I continue to see women giggling stupidly when gay men make misogynistic comments but getting annoyed when straight/presumed straight men do so.

Men are richer than women and gay men are generally richer than other men, therefore I think it is particularly loathsome to let gay men get away with sexism.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 17th, 2007 02:51 am (UTC)		(Link)
Re: sexist

'manet' should read 'meant'