so basically what you are saying is you can't step out from your view and empathize with others? It isn't a contest on who is discriminated against more, that is literally one of the most juvenile things one can do. Its recognizing that both groups face discrimination and should have some solidarity with each other with their struggles, even if its comes from different cultural points and different viewpoints. being gay and black i agree wholeheartedly that blacks had it far worse than gays, but attempting to quantify discrimination only does a service to those discriminating.

Thanks for yuor response. Its not about stepping out of my reality.

Its more about seeing past the great lie of the 21st century. Homosexuality is what it is..no less...no more..but the powerful homosexual lobby demands society to bto not only be accepting of homosexuality but to embrace it..to teach it under the guise of diversity to encourage the young to read about it in the form of colorful childrens books portraying kissing princes and duel mommies. They wish value to placed upon something that has no value..except to the homosexual. Homosexualism is increasing less an accidentof birth but a lifestyle to choose. To worship at the alter of oral and anal eroticism is at the very nexus of the lifestyle. No more..no less. I pass no moral judgement here..I do not proclaim homosexuality a sin..it is what it is and what it is has very little worth.

A lifestyle that offers nothing to society but a sterile self indulgence..

see BOSTONBASIN what you say leads you down a rabbit hole. You say a lifestyle that offers nothing to society but a sterile self indulgence. Which is code for you can't have children pass on your genes etc. Then what about sterile men? people in the clergy with celibacy vows, a woman who lost her uterus to cancer? If the only thing we offered to society were our offspring there wouldn't be much of it would there? I disagree on that statement, its pretty shallow and not well thought out, the most famous people are famous for deeds not chilrden. George Washington Carver for Peanut Butter, Armstrong for walking on the moon, Da Vinci for his works etc. to say that they can only be classified as great people because who they sleep with at night at the end of the day day is quite a strange viewpoint. It seems fine to teach young children about homosexuality, just like we teach children about racial diversity. No homosexual is worried about confusing a child since first of all we are talking about something like 1 or 2 lessons a year vs a whole other multitude showing the normal male-female dynamic. Secondly and more importantly its not a choice, it is biological and thus telling a young straight child about it does no more than telling young white children about chinese boys and girls it wont make them chinese. In the same way it wont make them gay, just understanding and tolerant of gay people. Like we are of left handed people, or people with blue eyes. Finally, a hint, when someone starts a sentence by saying "I pass no moral judgement..." it usually has it coming, especially when its the person who started the post basically passing pubic judgement. Then to have the line "A lifestyle that offers nothing to society but a sterile self indulgence..." Isn't that to some degree passing judgement? why don't you just man up and say you are passing judgement because you rhetoric is quite clear. I pass judgement on you as a close minded african american who has never probably seen more than a handful of homosexuals and at the same time when you look down on us with denigration and righteousness you indignantly look up at the man and wonder why he looks down on you. And in that moment when the sun should reflect a beam of light on you and you should see the vicious circle of hate and ignorance you are in... You turn away daft to your eureka moment and continue to look down on your fellow man.

Dear Jacquescas,

Thank you for your insightful response..however..I as a black man find find it difficult to empathise with a group who's whole exhistence is based on thethe anal and oral eroticism. When homosexuals celebrate their homsexualityu in Gay Rights Parades..the very heart of what they celebrate lies between the legs. Not whether one was a doctor or a scientist or a teacher. It is anal oral eroticism. It is a masterful lie thye have played on the populace. Oh the gays want us to think its all about love..its all about longevity of their homosexual relationships..no..its about the genitals..no more..no less. I pass no moral judgement.

What you are is full of crap.
Right now, HIV infection is on the rise again, and the group leading the way in frequency of new infections is YOUNG BLACK MEN. And why? Because of assholes like you.

i don't think you're funny and I don't think there's any more point to just mocking you for your bigotry and stupidity, because it's a bigotry that has the power to kill others, and you deploy it (and your moral judgement for which you take no moral responsibility) without conscience.

You SAY you're a black man. Who cares? You could claim to be a fucking Schnauzer Dog, and who could deny it? The lie here is not about anybody but you, and it's that you're not a bigot. Bigotry is your chosen life style. Also stupidity and selfishness. So basically, you're a George Bush republican. And full of crap, as noted.

Before I can start rooting around in that viscous pool of your ignorance you chose to treat the rest of this site to, I'm going to need to know where in the hell you get the idea that homosexuality is a choice. May I presume that you yourself have opted out of that particular lifestyle? Shy of personal experience, if I have to walk on the eggshells of racial sensitivity and not make wildly insubstantiated claims about what it must be like to be alternatively raced in the US then I would appreciate the same degree of consideration about the choice I made: to not let enlightened individuals like yourself with your racial politics keep me from living my life as I so choose regardless of how dehumanizing your particular views about my makeup may be.

Black people have been stigmatized in the past primarily for the way they look, not the way they act. No, that's not true. Black people are not stigmatized because they don't match the drapes, but because of what that is a marker for in the the minds of the bigot. In there minds its because blacks are 'lazy', 'stupid', 'criminal', 'unprincipled', 'sex-crazed', 'disease ridden' and all the rest. Yes, racial hatred is always based on what the race supposedly 'is' or 'does', its just wonderfully convenient for the bigot that they are color coded for easy identification. Its always 'behavior'. But that's not the way it really is, is it? Neither Race or Sexual Orientation have any intrinsic behaviors associated with them. And of course there is no behavior that gay people engage in that 10x or more straight people don't engage in too. The idea that sexual orientation is a behavior is bogus, since long before anyone has sex they have identified the gender that makes their heart race, they voice stammer, their stomach quiver. It might be easier to 'pass' as another sexual orientation than some people can on race, but the quality is no less an intrinsic part of them. You might not like that sexual orientation is like race but like it or not it is and I am 'offended' that you can't see such a simple truth.

So take your logic and apply it to opposite sex relationships and people will will its the vaginal eroticism, its not about love most men cheat and most marriages end in divorce... its just about genitals and vaginal penetration by a penis.... see your own words and own logic turned around makes anything look bad through that lens. So is there a set of rules of where are acceptable places to put a penis? vagina yes, mouth depends, anus no... hands yes.... etc its just pretty childish

"I cannot choose to be white no matter how hard I try, homosexuals on the other hand can choose to be different.

>>They can choose to act differently--that's hardly the same thing as choosing to be different.

I know of no evidence which suggests a homosexual can anymore choose to be sexually oriented to individuals of the opposite gender than heterosexuals can choose to be sexually oriented to individuals of the same gender.

Both may have some ability to act as if they were, but that's hardly thesame thing, is it?