Sexual preference

My apologies campy, I really thought this thread was for everyone to give opinions etc. I wasn't trying to quash your thread nor it's topic. I didn't wish to begin another whole new thread, as that would really appear to be only for debate. I am tired of others who are mind readers I guess, telling others what I supposedly think.

Daniella, those people who stand on the street corner with hate signs indeed IMO have their own problems with hate.

But I'm back to the issue for me here: is this forum only for non-heterosexual support, or not? (Rhetorical?)

TC, truly.

Believe in Him or not --- GOD LOVES YOU!

Want to share your Christian faith? Click HERE

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
This thread is in support of sexuality, straight, gay, lesbian, bi, transgendered, asexual, single handedly safistied, confused and confounded...and all pieces and parts in-between!

Hi. Just wanted to show ya'll some love and respect!

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I guess the idea was just to be a place for open minded foks who are accepting of all people, regardless of how they express their sexuality.

That's cool. Wonder why my thread of support was crashed then.

Believe in Him or not --- GOD LOVES YOU!

Want to share your Christian faith? Click HERE

I think as the stigma attached to being gay is finally at an end the efforts of many now look promotional. To then make a balance heterosexual promotion seems like another put down on the sexual feelings of some, in the same way as its ok to say black is beautiful but not white is beautiful............

Maybe its time to stop promoting and just enjoy whatever it is we enjoy.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
the stigma attached to being gay is finally at an end

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

when did that occur? In more than 1/2 of US states it is completely legal to discriminate on the job based on sexual orientation.

I think we need to promote *acceptance* and positive regard for all.

I've not witnessed anyone advertising to recruit homosexuals.....although the ads sure would be entertaining! :-)

Campy

And I have not noticed anyone advertising for heterosexuals.

there are cultural differences around the world. the U.S. is amongst the more puritanical.

I am from the UK and I see no stigma for gays here at all even in the rural area I live in.

"the U.S. is amongst the more puritanical"

Sad, but true. Just know that there are a lot of people here who are working to change that.

I think people outside the US think we have "How to think American" meetings here. But, really, there is a HUGE variety of opinions here.

Campy

Wow - some very good points mentioned here!

I have experiences that support both sides of the discussion here (and actually, I believe that almost everyone is ultimately on the same side in this thread anyway).

I was living abroad a few years ago when the gay marriage issue was under debate. Many non-Americans that I met wanted to know what the "typical" American thinks about the issue. I rolled my eyes and said that I didn't understand why the media was even making it an issue. I could count the number of bigots I knew on one hand. To my utter shock, the opinion polls began being published and I found out that I was well into the minority about how Americans feel about sexuality. I realized that I have always lived in very liberal bubbles (New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Portland) where the stigma is minimized. I didn't realize how strong the 'red' contingent is. I was very hurt and ashamed of my countrymen to learn that gay marriage is frowned upon by the majority.

At the same time, even in my liberal social circles, I learned that unless you're publicly gay or bi, the stigma is not obvious, but indeed it's still there. My hope is that the stigma is disappearing, but I believe that only those who are stigmatized can really say that for sure.

About the promoting, I agree with that as well. Why is it ok to pronounce homosexuality as something to be proud of, yet it would sound oppressive to say the same about heterosexuality? Same with black vs white. But I think that while it constitutes a double-standard, I do think that those who experienced oppression have some right to overcompensate... for a while. Not forever, but for a while it seems fair.

Peace to all

oh, and one more thing. I disagree that the US is one of the most puritanical. If you compare the US to European or the Australasian countries, sure. But that doesn't constitute the majority of countries or cultures in the world. Believe me, the US is NOT one of the most puritanical. Think India, China, the Middle East, South America...

I guess it depends what you mean by 'puritanical'. third gendered people have been accepted in India and China and the Middle East and I'd say they are less accepted in developed western nations (where intersex infants are often operated on such that they appear female).

But that is distinct from sexual preference (in some instances at any rate). I guess we could look at whether homosexual sex is illegal and what kinds of penalties there are (e.g., criminal conviction, fine, death penalty)...

Most puritanical... I'd put in a vote for Nazi Germany (extermination programs 'n all).

yeah, and that's the thing... it is almost pointless to try to stereotype cultures. I think our time is better spent trying to improve the situation, no matter where we live.

yeah. amen. lol.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
the U.S. is amongst the more puritanical

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Adj. 1. puritanical - of or relating to Puritans or Puritanism
2. puritanical - exaggeratedly proper; "my straitlaced Aunt Anna doesn't approve of my miniskirts"
prissy, prudish, square-toed, straight-laced, straightlaced, strait-laced, straitlaced, tight-laced, priggish, prim, victorian
proper - marked by suitability or rightness or appropriateness; "proper medical treatment"; "proper manners"

The USA was formed on such premises via the puritans (which came from Europe, as we all know.) It was formed on this type foundation and this is why the USA is the way it is today. It isn't perfect, but if you have travelled (as some of you have) you have to admit it is great to see "CUSTOMS: US CITIZENS" and walk through.

Believe in Him or not --- GOD LOVES YOU!

Want to share your Christian faith? Click HERE

Which is ironic because Americans have a very bad reputation abroad for sleeping around and having terrible manners.

> if you have travelled (as some of you have) you have to admit it is great to see "CUSTOMS: US CITIZENS" and walk through.

yes, i'm sure it is much nicer than facing dehumanisingly conducted strip searches and involountary detainment...

(i'm semi kinda sorta joking but it is considered no joke at all to people considering travelling into the US from abroad)

i always thought the french had a bad reputation... 'french moral laxity' i thought it was called (with respect to the sleeping around thing).

Katherine Mansfield (a New Zealand author who emigrated to England so I expect they will claim her too) had this to say about the French:

(I'm having to paraphrase as I don't have the txt)

People wonder why there is French moral laxity. to see why, you only need to take a look in their homes. the electic man comes to look at the lights and you could stand there, gesturing and pointing. or you could attempt to explain the situation sitting on four square knobs and a bit of cane. How much easier and more pleasant to simply give oneself up to it. Theres simply nothing to be done but to go to bed.

I really should apologise again for not being able to quote directly... I can't even remember precisely where she said this... I'm sure she was much more eloquent than me.

Or the passion of the spanish...

But yeah... Racial / cultural / religious / nationalistic stereotypes... Interesting claims about them are likely to be false.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
_Sky said:
The USA was formed on such premises via the puritans (which came from Europe, as we all know.) It was formed on this type foundation and this is why the USA is the way it is today.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

History lesson:
---
Puritan oppression, including torture and imprisonment of many leaders of non-Puritan Christian sects, led to the (voluntary or involuntary) "banishment" of many Christian leaders and their followers from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This negative impact of Puritanism on many new colonists had a positive result on American history in that it led to the founding of many new colonies—Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, New Hampshire, and others—as religious havens that were created for devout Christians who wanted to live outside the oppressive reach of Puritan theocracy.

The power and influence of Puritan leaders in New England declined further after the Salem Witch Trials in Salem, Massachusetts in the 1690s. Although they began as a trial of one or several self-avowed witches who admitted to practicing voodoo-type rituals with malicious intent, the trials got out of hand and ended with a number of innocent people being falsely accused, found guilty, and executed by Puritan leaders. Although most of the magistrates never admitted fault in the matter, at least one, Samuel Sewall, publicly apologized in later life. Many other witch trials wrongly accused others of supernatural crimes elsewhere in New England and in various parts of Europe of the time. Because most people of that era believed in the existence and efficacy of witchcraft, the witch trials can be seen as a very unfortunate miscarriage of justice in the face of public hysteria, and less as the result of a prejudice specific to the Puritan leaders.

In addition to rival Christian clergy members and suspected witches, the Puritan leaders' strict governing of their own people—as depicted in Nathaniel Hawthorne's fictional novel The Scarlet Letter—led to their ouster from direct political control in Massachusetts by 1700 and the decline of the influence of Puritanism as a religious sect in many areas by the mid-1700s.
from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritan
----
</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
_Sky said:
It isn't perfect, but if you have travelled (as some of you have) you have to admit it is great to see "CUSTOMS: US CITIZENS" and walk through.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I have travelled...to cold war Russia & Poland, Bermuda, Canada, England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Germany, and Switzerland. I experienced no such elation on seeing "CUSTOMS: US CITIZENS". That just meant after going through the tedious process of "CUSTOMS: WHERE EVER ELSE", i'd have to go through the same tedious process again. These days however, it'd be a wonder if I'd even be allowed to travel without hassles, as I've been a vocal critic of the current pResident and his policies since day one. Especially since I wouldn't be caught dead wearing one of those tacky nationalist loyalty pins.

I used to feel proud to re-enter the US until I realized that most of us have been duped with propaganda. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything close to that, but do I feel proud when I re-enter the US? Not really. Not anymore. It just makes me kind of sad.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
LMo said:
I used to feel proud to re-enter the US until I realized that most of us have been duped with propaganda. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything close to that, but do I feel proud when I re-enter the US? Not really. Not anymore. It just makes me kind of sad.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I agree.....really sad isn't.