Edit Preferences
Logout
MoeB's Comments (3351)
View Comments:
Sort:
1 - 25 of 3351
What I Hope We Learn from the Heather Ellis Case
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 14:47:39 in Politics
“I get what you're saying Mack. However, I'd just like to point out, WHY do you have to be submissive to police officers BEFORE you even get arrested for anything? This is not to say that people shouldn't try to be respectful of police officers, but c'mon. This is NOT a police state. We shouldn't have to live in fear of possibly, maybe, saying something (who knows what specifically--it depends on the officer) to a police officer that would make him arrest, assault, or even shoot you.
I think the biggest problem here lies with police officers who believe they are OWED top-notch respect simply because they are cops, and police forces/review boards that tend to NOT take citzen complaints seriously (this of course does not apply to all policemen). Telling people to 'shut up and take it' when they do not have a clear avenue for justice if they do doesn't really help anymore than yelling at police officers does...
What we should be upset about is the fact that the white lady assaulted (ok, merely shoved) Ellis, and NOTHING has happened. Police didn't even bother to review the Wal-Mart video tapes! But we're supposed to trust that by simply referring to cops as "ma'am" and "sir", and basically bowing down to them just short of shining up their shoes for them, that THAT will get us "justice"??? Maybe...but in plenty of cases (too many) it does NOT.”
I think the biggest problem here lies with police officers who believe they are OWED top-notch respect simply because they are cops, and police forces/review boards that tend to NOT take citzen complaints seriously (this of course does not apply to all policemen). Telling people to 'shut up and take it' when they do not have a clear avenue for justice if they do doesn't really help anymore than yelling at police officers does...
What we should be upset about is the fact that the white lady assaulted (ok, merely shoved) Ellis, and NOTHING has happened. Police didn't even bother to review the Wal-Mart video tapes! But we're supposed to trust that by simply referring to cops as "ma'am" and "sir", and basically bowing down to them just short of shining up their shoes for them, that THAT will get us "justice"??? Maybe...but in plenty of cases (too many) it does NOT.”
What I Hope We Learn from the Heather Ellis Case
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 14:39:33 in Politics
“You clearly do not know much about this case.
1. Ellis was ALREADY in that line. She left her cousin in that line to move to another she thought was moving more quickly. It was not, so she went back to the original line.
2. It was the lady behind Ellis and her cousin who initiated physical contact by shoving Ellis.
3. When she originally pleaded "not guilty", the judge, in his *fairness* stated to Ellis that if it were "up to him" she'd already be in prison...that surely sets up the parameters for a *fair* trial.
4. Police officers *claimed* she attacked them. Yet they didn't record any pics or video of their supposed "injuries". Seems like something like that would be standard procedure.
5. Witnesses changed their stories, thus making them unreliable witnesses. Also, several witnesses who backed Ellis' claims were just tossed aside...again, real FAIR.
6. Prosecutors upped the charges from misdemeanors to felonies once Ellis originally decided to plead not guilty.
...lastly, I'd like to point out that I think PERCEPTION played a role in all of this. It's easier to believe that a black woman would be loud and unruly for NO REASON than it is that a white woman would DARE physically attack a black woman. The assumption being that black women are loud and rude, of course.”
1. Ellis was ALREADY in that line. She left her cousin in that line to move to another she thought was moving more quickly. It was not, so she went back to the original line.
2. It was the lady behind Ellis and her cousin who initiated physical contact by shoving Ellis.
3. When she originally pleaded "not guilty", the judge, in his *fairness* stated to Ellis that if it were "up to him" she'd already be in prison...that surely sets up the parameters for a *fair* trial.
4. Police officers *claimed* she attacked them. Yet they didn't record any pics or video of their supposed "injuries". Seems like something like that would be standard procedure.
5. Witnesses changed their stories, thus making them unreliable witnesses. Also, several witnesses who backed Ellis' claims were just tossed aside...again, real FAIR.
6. Prosecutors upped the charges from misdemeanors to felonies once Ellis originally decided to plead not guilty.
...lastly, I'd like to point out that I think PERCEPTION played a role in all of this. It's easier to believe that a black woman would be loud and unruly for NO REASON than it is that a white woman would DARE physically attack a black woman. The assumption being that black women are loud and rude, of course.”
Is Obama the First Black President or the First President of Black America?
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 13:05:10 in Politics
“And they SHOULD speak on these issues. Goff never said they shouldn't. She simply said that it is the president's job to look at the wider picture, which includes ALL americans, and not just minorities, or those of us who live in urban areas.
...and trust me, there are PLENTY of us who are a bit worried that Obama has stacked his administration with people who are all too cozy with corporate america...the bigger problem may be that our Congress appears to be stacked with too many corporate behind-kissers also.”
...and trust me, there are PLENTY of us who are a bit worried that Obama has stacked his administration with people who are all too cozy with corporate america...the bigger problem may be that our Congress appears to be stacked with too many corporate behind-kissers also.”
Is Obama the First Black President or the First President of Black America?
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 13:00:55 in Politics
“Typically, your debt goes up when you DON'T raise taxes...that was the lesson we just learned with the previous president...liberals get deemed "tax and spend", because they actually raise taxes to pay for the programs they want. Pelosi has her faults, but she does want to pay for the programs through higher taxes...primarily higher taxes on the wealthiest in this country.
And your "Obama plantation" reference is just ridiculous. Further, if we are "slaves" to anything, it's our current corporatocracy "economy" that seems to demand more productivity from the middle-class in particular, while we don't see any uptick in our wages. Elizabeth Warren writes a pretty extensive article on this w/facts to back her up...I highly recommend that read for anyone who is middle-class, or working-class.
Also, I find it funny that the same people who gripe about the debt we're imposing on "the children!" aren't willing to pay higher taxes to ensure they don't have to carry that burden. We seem to want all the pluses of this society without any of the sacrifice. If you want to lower the debt, the easiest way to do that is to increase taxes on the wealthy who enjoyed all the upside to the unfunded trillion dollar tax cut that was given to them by the previous administration.”
And your "Obama plantation" reference is just ridiculous. Further, if we are "slaves" to anything, it's our current corporatocracy "economy" that seems to demand more productivity from the middle-class in particular, while we don't see any uptick in our wages. Elizabeth Warren writes a pretty extensive article on this w/facts to back her up...I highly recommend that read for anyone who is middle-class, or working-class.
Also, I find it funny that the same people who gripe about the debt we're imposing on "the children!" aren't willing to pay higher taxes to ensure they don't have to carry that burden. We seem to want all the pluses of this society without any of the sacrifice. If you want to lower the debt, the easiest way to do that is to increase taxes on the wealthy who enjoyed all the upside to the unfunded trillion dollar tax cut that was given to them by the previous administration.”
hollyhoodjoe123 replied on Dec 10, 2009 at 14:38:12
“"Also, I find it funny that the same people who gripe about the debt we're imposing on "the children!" aren't willing to pay higher taxes to ensure they don't have to carry that burden."
lol. People who argue like this either: 1. Don't understand in order to ensure "the children" don't inherit this debt, then we must pay it., or 2. they are being intellectually dishonest. I hope its the latter because if its the former, then we are indeed a stupid country.
And why does this commentor put quotation marks around words that imply slavery. It couldn't be because we have a black president now, could it? Nah!”
lol. People who argue like this either: 1. Don't understand in order to ensure "the children" don't inherit this debt, then we must pay it., or 2. they are being intellectually dishonest. I hope its the latter because if its the former, then we are indeed a stupid country.
And why does this commentor put quotation marks around words that imply slavery. It couldn't be because we have a black president now, could it? Nah!”
Is Obama the First Black President or the First President of Black America?
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 11:52:30 in Politics
“"And so long as its based on skills and no preferential treatment then make it so, make it now."
LOL...c'mon. Do you REALLY believe that people hire based ONLY on skills and qualifications?”
LOL...c'mon. Do you REALLY believe that people hire based ONLY on skills and qualifications?”
Is Obama the First Black President or the First President of Black America?
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 11:50:02 in Politics
“Why is it that *some* older blacks tend to think that younger ones just don't 'get it'?? As if none of us have experienced racism or bigotry or prejudice before in our lives...
We do. What we also understand is that things are significantly better than what they were in the 40's, 50's, and 60's...and many of us believe that we should ALL get credit for that. For me personally, I just don't feel that thinking everything is still doom and gloom is a great attitude to have. I'm certainly not sure how it HELPS you in life.
Most blacks who need assistance need that assistance due to poverty, not their race. Now, this is not to say that the two don't share some connection based on past events, but by pulling (or at least attempting to) people out of poverty, you will, in effect, be helping a good portion of the black community by default. The PRESIDENT'S goal should be to pull ALL of us up, not just loyal groups. As we can see with how wealth has been distributed in this country over the past few decades, the country as a WHOLE does not benefit when we only help one or two particular groups.
Maybe generationally, we see things different. I view work aimed particularly at blacks (and other minority groups) as work headed by ACTIVISTS...and it starts locally and progresses from there.”
We do. What we also understand is that things are significantly better than what they were in the 40's, 50's, and 60's...and many of us believe that we should ALL get credit for that. For me personally, I just don't feel that thinking everything is still doom and gloom is a great attitude to have. I'm certainly not sure how it HELPS you in life.
Most blacks who need assistance need that assistance due to poverty, not their race. Now, this is not to say that the two don't share some connection based on past events, but by pulling (or at least attempting to) people out of poverty, you will, in effect, be helping a good portion of the black community by default. The PRESIDENT'S goal should be to pull ALL of us up, not just loyal groups. As we can see with how wealth has been distributed in this country over the past few decades, the country as a WHOLE does not benefit when we only help one or two particular groups.
Maybe generationally, we see things different. I view work aimed particularly at blacks (and other minority groups) as work headed by ACTIVISTS...and it starts locally and progresses from there.”
Nommo replied on Dec 10, 2009 at 14:38:14
“The connection that both Moe and bizness fail to make has, oddly enough, been pointed out by Barack Obama himself. The poverty that afflicts the Black communities, where it does is the result of deliberate acts whose aim was to suffocate the economy of those communities. Such financial services as supplied by banks and insurance companies were deliberately denied to any neighborhood. All that was required was the presence of one "minority". You can actually look this up. It began with the National Housing Act in 1934.
Racist America would suggest and likes to believe that this poverty is endemic to the nature of Black people. Is t hat not easier to put forth than the fact that Black communiites were deliberately cut off from financial services that other communities take for granted? Does this "young" generation actually remember a time when banks were few and far between in Black communities across the country?
Does this young generation comprehend the effect of Jim Crow laws in generations of poverty? Obama suggested or pretened that he did. His acts, up to now, suggest otherwise. If anyone has any difficulty in comprehending the attitude and stance of the CBC, I would suggest digging a little deeper into the origins of things.”
Racist America would suggest and likes to believe that this poverty is endemic to the nature of Black people. Is t hat not easier to put forth than the fact that Black communiites were deliberately cut off from financial services that other communities take for granted? Does this "young" generation actually remember a time when banks were few and far between in Black communities across the country?
Does this young generation comprehend the effect of Jim Crow laws in generations of poverty? Obama suggested or pretened that he did. His acts, up to now, suggest otherwise. If anyone has any difficulty in comprehending the attitude and stance of the CBC, I would suggest digging a little deeper into the origins of things.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 16:40:14 in Media
“Being born gay is not a defect...which you are implying it is. Your sexuality, much like your gender and race, are merely an accident of birth. You have no say.
Being born heterosexual is only "normal" (in the sense that you use the word) because most people are heterosexual.
Gay people aren't missing a vital organ, nor are they developmentally challenged. They are simply gay.”
Being born heterosexual is only "normal" (in the sense that you use the word) because most people are heterosexual.
Gay people aren't missing a vital organ, nor are they developmentally challenged. They are simply gay.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 16:35:27 in Media
“Homosexual men who contract STD's have the SAME "fondness" that heterosexual men have who contract STD's...and that's a fondness for unprotected sex. Period.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 16:29:26 in Media
“Based on what proof? I'm willing to bet money that for every person who has 'gone straight', there is a member of the same sex they are SEXUALLY attracted to...which would mean they have NOT changed their sexual orientation. What a ridiculous comment. Kinda like me saying I could change my race if I just tried REALLY hard.
Please educate yourself. There is a BIG difference between sexual ACTIVITIES and sexual ORIENTATION. A gay person can "choose" to not engage in homosexual sex, but that doesn't make them heterosexual...just a celebate homosexual.
And once again, if you can effectively "choose" between the two sexes (meaning you are sexually attracted to members of both sexes) then you are BISEXUAL.”
Please educate yourself. There is a BIG difference between sexual ACTIVITIES and sexual ORIENTATION. A gay person can "choose" to not engage in homosexual sex, but that doesn't make them heterosexual...just a celebate homosexual.
And once again, if you can effectively "choose" between the two sexes (meaning you are sexually attracted to members of both sexes) then you are BISEXUAL.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 16:24:44 in Media
“LOL!!!!
"sexual behavior is a behavior"...DUH!
The poster stated that SEXUALITY (totally different from sexual BEHAVIOR) is different.
Your sexuality has NOTHING to do with your "behavior". A virgin has no sexual behavior to speak of, but they still have a SEXUALITY.”
"sexual behavior is a behavior"...DUH!
The poster stated that SEXUALITY (totally different from sexual BEHAVIOR) is different.
Your sexuality has NOTHING to do with your "behavior". A virgin has no sexual behavior to speak of, but they still have a SEXUALITY.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 16:18:12 in Media
“"Normal" is a relative term. "Normal" could be anything.”
markinaz replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 16:28:03
“It's not the "norm". As in not the majority. So what? Everyone is a minority in some way.”
Rush Limbaugh: 'The Black Frame Of Mind' Is 'Terrible' And 'Tiger Woods's Choice Of Females Is Not Helping' (AUDIO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 12:40:48 in Media
“My hairs only stand up when people like RUSH make those type of comments. I know plenty of whites who are genuinely concerned for the plight of blacks out of a desire to see them excel, and out of a basic concern for humanity. People like Rush do these folks no justice at all.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 12:25:52 in Media
“LOL!!! Is it possible to double-fan someone???”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 12:21:32 in Media
“Way to COMPLETELY miss the point. Goodness.
IF sexuality is a "choice", then it would be just as easy for a gay to go straight, as it would for a straight to go gay. IF it is a "choice", it is not a "choice" that's exclusive to only gay people. Further, homosexuality/heterosexuality/bisexuality deals with sexual ATTRACTION, not sexual ACTIVITIES. Please learn the difference.
And your example is WEAK. A person born with two arms may not "wish" to only have one arm, but they COULD chop off an arm and only have one. A person with one arm can have a fake arm crafted for them. Either way, they still would've been BORN with two arms or one arm, respectively.”
IF sexuality is a "choice", then it would be just as easy for a gay to go straight, as it would for a straight to go gay. IF it is a "choice", it is not a "choice" that's exclusive to only gay people. Further, homosexuality/heterosexuality/bisexuality deals with sexual ATTRACTION, not sexual ACTIVITIES. Please learn the difference.
And your example is WEAK. A person born with two arms may not "wish" to only have one arm, but they COULD chop off an arm and only have one. A person with one arm can have a fake arm crafted for them. Either way, they still would've been BORN with two arms or one arm, respectively.”
MyOwnThoughts replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 12:34:29
“Being born straight is NORMAL, but being born gay is ABNORMAL. The norm is for the ABNORMAL to want to be NORMAL and not the other way around.
It's just like a parent whose child was born with autism wishes he/she was NORMAL. Just like the blind want to see and the deaf want to hear, etc, etc,,,,”
It's just like a parent whose child was born with autism wishes he/she was NORMAL. Just like the blind want to see and the deaf want to hear, etc, etc,,,,”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 12:13:19 in Media
“Err, there are plenty of heterosexuals who engage in anal sex. I doubt there are many, if any, sexual practices that homosexuals engage in that heterosexuals do not. There are plenty of people who engage in anal sex and NO ONE contracts HIV or an STD...”
guillermo85 replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 12:51:35
“That does not change the fact that anal sex is the easiest way for the virus to enter your lymphatic system. Homosexual men seem to have a fondness for the practice and it shows in their STD rates.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 11:45:00 in Media
“Will you please stop making sense!!”
michaelws replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 12:23:01
“hahaha!”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 11:42:37 in Media
“Oh, I didn't take that post to be anti-gay in any sense (and that's even if you wouldn't have added your lead-in comment). I actually believe that human sexuality, like many other aspects of the human existence, is more complicated than we currently understand.
I know plenty of gays who spent the bulk of their lives with members of the opposite sex. Many have said they enjoyed the sex they had with members of the opposite sex (I'm one of those who did NOT...LOL). It varies...as we should've learned by now, it's not easy to put people into little boxes.”
I know plenty of gays who spent the bulk of their lives with members of the opposite sex. Many have said they enjoyed the sex they had with members of the opposite sex (I'm one of those who did NOT...LOL). It varies...as we should've learned by now, it's not easy to put people into little boxes.”
LauraD replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 11:57:21
“"it's not easy to put people into little boxes."
Exactly, and it really ticks me off when people try to.”
Exactly, and it really ticks me off when people try to.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 11:31:45 in Media
“It's shocking that even some reasonable people cannot make that connection. People constantly confuse sexual activities for sexual orientation.”
dobriyden replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 11:45:55
“Hmmmm...Using your logic animals can be included sexual activities.”
PWM replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 11:38:05
“The Catholic Church is a good example.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 11:27:02 in Media
“LOL...I love your language...you know gays who "feel" they've been gay their whole life (if they "feel" that way, it's probably because they have been gay their entire lives).
You know "quite a few" (wink and nod)...sure you do. You aren't just saying that to make your argument.
They've "chosen" different lifestyles for "different reasons". Uh, the reasons are the same...they're attracted sexually to members of the same sex. That's what homosexuality is.
Further, what members of the same sex are YOU attracted to? If gay is a "choice", then it must be a choice that we all have. I find it very odd that people who claim to be 100% heterosexual are SO convinced that somehow, GAY people are able to choose what sex they're attracted to, yet you do NOT have that choice. So which is it? If people can "choose" their sexuality, that would make us ALL bisexual by "nature"...which brings me back to my question: what members of the same sex are you fighting your sexual attraction to, because of your personal "feelings" about homosexuality?”
You know "quite a few" (wink and nod)...sure you do. You aren't just saying that to make your argument.
They've "chosen" different lifestyles for "different reasons". Uh, the reasons are the same...they're attracted sexually to members of the same sex. That's what homosexuality is.
Further, what members of the same sex are YOU attracted to? If gay is a "choice", then it must be a choice that we all have. I find it very odd that people who claim to be 100% heterosexual are SO convinced that somehow, GAY people are able to choose what sex they're attracted to, yet you do NOT have that choice. So which is it? If people can "choose" their sexuality, that would make us ALL bisexual by "nature"...which brings me back to my question: what members of the same sex are you fighting your sexual attraction to, because of your personal "feelings" about homosexuality?”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 11:03:53 in Media
“She wanted to prove the FACTS because they are important. You could replace "gay" with anything...for instance:
'Who cares if blacks are genetically pre-disposed to violent acts? People are what they are and should be accepted as such'. --The comment sounds inclusive and accepting, but it does so on a faulty premise that it *may* be true that blacks are pre-disposed to violence...and they aren't. It's important to point that out.
'Who cares if women are inferior to men? Women are what they are and should be accepted as such'.
Homosexuality is viewed as 'deviant', 'immoral', and an 'abomination' to some. It makes it vitally important to challenge lame assumptions that cannot be backed up by fact, because these lame assumptions lead to injustice and inequality.”
'Who cares if blacks are genetically pre-disposed to violent acts? People are what they are and should be accepted as such'. --The comment sounds inclusive and accepting, but it does so on a faulty premise that it *may* be true that blacks are pre-disposed to violence...and they aren't. It's important to point that out.
'Who cares if women are inferior to men? Women are what they are and should be accepted as such'.
Homosexuality is viewed as 'deviant', 'immoral', and an 'abomination' to some. It makes it vitally important to challenge lame assumptions that cannot be backed up by fact, because these lame assumptions lead to injustice and inequality.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 10:50:25 in Media
“Simply ceasing to sleep w/members of the same sex does not make you an "ex-homosexual". Further, if you are now able all of a sudden to have sexual attractions to members of the opposite sex, I'd argue you are bisexual.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 10:46:03 in Media
“I think we are just starting to understand human sexuality...I think it is far more complex than we currently understand it to be.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 10:43:18 in Media
“Turn off FOX "news" for a night or two, and you'd notice that Rachel in particular, practically BEGS the opposition to come on her show. Oddly, they do not. Weird that democrats/liberals are more willing to go into the 'lions den' than republicans/conservatives are...then you all complain and whine that it's the liberal shows that don't want to have opposing views on their shows, when it's actually those with the opposing views that are scared to have their views challenged.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 10:39:39 in Media
“Agreed! I love how she does it without being rude or yelling over her guests.”
Richard Cohen: Gay-To-Straight 'Therapist' Spars With Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 10:29:58 in Media
“Hmmm...but how do you know those 200 people you "treated" weren't bisexuals who just had a stronger attraction to the same sex? And what exactly is a "repressed heterosexual"? Does that mean the person was somehow raised to be gay, and identified w/a gay "lifestyle" but was really heterosexual? How does that work?”
LauraD replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 11:24:08
“Okay, I'm going to say this but I don't want it taken to mean I'm anti-gay. I'm not. Not only am I pro-gay rights, I'm quite vociferously pro-gay. I think this world is far more interesting and colorful with a nice healthy dollop of diversity.
That said - Some people (and we're talking about a very small percentage here) I could see "choosing" a homosexual lifestyle for the purpose of attention or rebellion. Kind of like someone who pretends to be "punk" for the same reasons. It's just a facade. And if you're fairly sexually indiscriminate, it's not that strange (particularly if you're the pitcher and not the catcher, follow?). Then there are bisexuals or people who are experimenting with sexuality that are actually straight, but have some level of homosexual desire that they chose to act on for at least some period of time.
That said, I'm quite sure that the number of homosexuals pretending to be heterosexual for the purpose of not being discriminated against is much larger than the number of heterosexuals pretending to be homosexual for the attention. And none of what I just said is intended to discount the people who are who they are and see no reason to hide it, nor should they. In addition, even if someone is choosing the lifestyle instead of following their own natural truth, their choices don't give you the right to discriminate against them, in my opinion.”
That said - Some people (and we're talking about a very small percentage here) I could see "choosing" a homosexual lifestyle for the purpose of attention or rebellion. Kind of like someone who pretends to be "punk" for the same reasons. It's just a facade. And if you're fairly sexually indiscriminate, it's not that strange (particularly if you're the pitcher and not the catcher, follow?). Then there are bisexuals or people who are experimenting with sexuality that are actually straight, but have some level of homosexual desire that they chose to act on for at least some period of time.
That said, I'm quite sure that the number of homosexuals pretending to be heterosexual for the purpose of not being discriminated against is much larger than the number of heterosexuals pretending to be homosexual for the attention. And none of what I just said is intended to discount the people who are who they are and see no reason to hide it, nor should they. In addition, even if someone is choosing the lifestyle instead of following their own natural truth, their choices don't give you the right to discriminate against them, in my opinion.”
1 - 25 of 3351
