Oh Yeah, Homosexuals Are So Oppressed.

[Fiannan]

To hear liberals talk, you'd think homosexuals were the victims of oppression and an uncaring society. They must suffer psychologically, physically and economically. They don't seem to be doing so bad:

Of course there were some individuals among heterosexuals who said they would spend the money on themselves or put it up for a new business, but most of them had more common things in their minds. They said they would save the money for their children and grandchildren, repair their houses, and even donate it to charity organizations.

Here is the US statistics to give more details for the picture. About 6% of Americans belong to sex-minorities. In the year 2000 there were more than 600,000 homosexual couples living together, and 30% of them had children (while there were only 48% of heterosexuals with kids).

The average yearly income of a homosexual couple makes up $76,500 while the same of a heterosexual couple is a bit more than only a half of that - $42,000.

http://funreports.com/fun/16-01-2006/1320-homosexual-0

This story deals with if a person suddenly was given 100,000 dollars and what differences would exist in spending preferences between heterosexuals and homosexuals.

Actually, homosexuals tend to have a lot of buying power. That makes sense as the vast majority of male homosexuals have no kids and, if they live with someone, have two incomes. Same is true of virtual homosexuals (double-income no kid heterosexual couples who have chosen not to have kids). At least as materialism and hedonism goes such people have certain economic ADVANTAGES over those who are more traditional. Doesn't sound like oppression though.

[sgallan]

So the point is.... if you make good money then you are not oppressed? I didn't realize money was that important.

[shanstress70]

virtual homosexuals (double-income no kid heterosexual couples who have chosen not to have kids)

A bit of a stretch, dontcha think? Funny how you so love to judge others. Why don't you just live your life the way you want, and get off of everyone who happens to have different views than you.

[sgallan]

Yeah, I don't think there is much room in ol Fiannan's religious niche' for anybody except those exactly like Fiannan.

[Fiannan]

A bit of a stretch, dontcha think? Funny how you so love to judge others. Why don't you just live your life the way you want, and get off of everyone who happens to have different views than you.

which was a response to my statement:

virtual homosexuals (double-income no kid heterosexual couples who have chosen not to have kids)

Shanstress70, my label of DINKs as being virtual homosexuals is in the social and biological sense, not one of sexual orientation (which is more a psychological term). If someone chooses not to have children and just live for the present how is that all that different from what we generally see as the gay male lifestyle? No reason to get specific in terms of sexual organs -- you still wind up with no children, and still have a lifestyle that any two men or women could have.

Now in fairness to lesbians, many are now turning to sperm banks to have children and in a Biblical sense I would assume that they are living the commandment given in Genesis to multiply and replenish the earth better than a couple that is heterosexual and chooses not to have kids.

Sgallen, strange you should bring up religion as you claim not to have one -- as an atheist then why are you sitting in front of a computer and not out living what little time you have on the planet? I would encourage you to examine Romans 1 carefully, but alas, the Bible was written by psychotic would-be prophets and Jesus was just a man suffering from narcissistic personality disorder and delusions of grandure, isn't that right?

[shanstress70]

If someone chooses not to have children and just live for the present

Just because one chooses not to have children does not necessarily mean that they just live for the present. And trust me, there are some people who do the world good by not reproducing!

[Aristotle]

To hear liberals talk, you'd think homosexuals were the victims of oppression...

We are big fans of Survivor. One episode, a homosexual nudist named Richard won. (This gave new meaning to the term "survivor", as his fellow campers watched him parade around the camp nude. LOL)

I understand Richard is in trouble with the IRS for not paying taxes due on the million he won from the show. What he claimed to do with the money was to invest it in some sort of a charity for boys. When I last saw him interviewed, he had a young man with him who he claimed to be his adopted son.

[sgallan]

Sgallen, strange you should bring up religion as you claim not to have one -- as an atheist then why are you sitting in front of a computer and not out living what little time you have on the planet?

Hmmm..... lets see, Saturday I was at a wrestling tournament with the HS team. Then Sunday I was at a wrestling tournament for the kid. Monday I was tired because we had been to 5 tournaments all over the place in nine days. I did run five miles and took the kid to the skate park. Yesterday I did a little pest control. Prepared a class for next semester. Home schooled. Ran some and helped with a HS/JH practice from 3:30 to 6:00 then ran a little kids practice until 7:30. Today it was pest control till now. Grade some homeschool stuff. Then some shopping, a run, and a wrestling practice later on. Tommorrow will be like yesterday. Friday a mix of work, practice with a friend and his kid who are coming down to visit and workout and another tournament. Saturday day two of a tournament. Sunday a drive into Phoenix to be one of the seeders for Junior High state.

Also on the schedule this year is rock climbing. Scuba (the kid will get certified). More wrestling, including a trip to Michigan, Colorado Springs, and Klamath Oregon. Softball coach. Yosemite. Water skiing. Boating in general. Lots of hiking. And more.

Is that living enough for ya?

Jesus was just a man suffering from narcissistic personality disorder and delusions of grandure, isn't that right?

But in a nice way. Part of that message you never seem to have gotten......

Sgallen, strange you should bring up religion as you claim not to have one

Are you suggesting I'm lying? Remember, I post as a real person. It is hard to make stuff up when you do that......

[shanstress70]

<div class='quotemain'>

To hear liberals talk, you'd think homosexuals were the victims of oppression...

We are big fans of Survivor. One episode, a homosexual nudist named Richard won. (This gave new meaning to the term "survivor", as his fellow campers watched him parade around the camp nude. LOL)

I understand Richard is in trouble with the IRS for not paying taxes due on the million he won from the show. What he claimed to do with the money was to invest it in some sort of a charity for boys. When I last saw him interviewed, he had a young man with him who he claimed to be his adopted son.

And because he happens to be gay, that automatically means that he is a pedophile, right?

[Aristotle]

And because he happens to be gay, that automatically means that he is a pedophile, right?

Some polygamists sexually molest minors; some homosexuals sexually recruit young boys.

Both lifestyles are practiced in open rebellion to God.

- Mrs. A

[shanstress70]

<div class='quotemain'>

And because he happens to be gay, that automatically means that he is a pedophile, right?

Some polygamists sexually molest minors; some homosexuals sexually recruit young boys.

Both lifestyles are practiced in open rebellion to God.

- Mrs. A

Some straight men molest children. Some straight women molest children. Some LDS... some Catholic... some atheist... some Baptist... some Hindu... what's your point?

[Aristotle]

And because he happens to be gay, that automatically means that he is a pedophile, right?

Some straight men molest children. Some straight women molest children. Some LDS... some Catholic... some atheist... some Baptist... some Hindu... what's your point?

What was your point?

[Outshined]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

And because he happens to be gay, that automatically means that he is a pedophile, right?

Some polygamists sexually molest minors; some homosexuals sexually recruit young boys.

Both lifestyles are practiced in open rebellion to God.

- Mrs. A

Some straight men molest children. Some straight women molest children. Some LDS... some Catholic... some atheist... some Baptist... some Hindu... what's your point?

I stopped looking for a point way back in her "satanic Mick Jagger" phase...

[sgallan]

Both lifestyles are practiced in open rebellion to God.

And religious people molest children too. I guess since some do I could say religion leads to child molestation....

[Outshined]

All I'll say on that is that my wife's brother is gay, and he's a much better parent than his ex-wife is.

[Snow]

as an atheist then why are you sitting in front of a computer and not out living what little time you have on the planet?

As opposed to a Mormon sitting in front of a computer and not living out the time left to him?

If I could vote in these matters - I would vote that you can't say you are Mormon if you are going to make little-minded derogatory posts about minorities. I know you don't speak for all of us but does tend to make all Mormons look like, er, little-minded bigots

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

To hear liberals talk, you'd think homosexuals were the victims of oppression and an uncaring society. They must suffer psychologically, physically and economically. They don't seem to be doing so bad

I guess it all depends on how you define "oppressed".

I tend to reserve words like oppressed for people who have very little freedom, so I would agree that they are not oppressed.

But what CAN be said is that people have prejudices against them, which apparantly makes them feel bad, especially when those people are their own parents, or their church.

Some are told they will burn in a very real Hell. Some are told they will simply be unable to spend eternity with their families. At the very least, they are told they cannot have a legal marriage in most states.

Taking that into consideration, I don't see why their income is relevant to their sense of happiness.

Look at Pat Robertson. He is a millionaire and he thinks he is oppressed...what with the liberals trying to cancel Christmas, end school prayer, etc. Poor guy.

Its really all about personal feelings, not money.

Since you are so concerned about these people "sinning" (according to your church), I will give you some free advice: Don't become a homosexual.

[Fiannan]

To hear liberals talk, you'd think homosexuals were the victims of oppression and an uncaring society. They must suffer psychologically, physically and economically. They don't seem to be doing so bad

I guess it all depends on how you define "oppressed".

I tend to reserve words like oppressed for people who have very little freedom, so I would agree that they are not oppressed.

But what CAN be said is that people have prejudices against them, which apparantly makes them feel bad, especially when those people are their own parents, or their church.

Some are told they will burn in a very real Hell. Some are told they will simply be unable to spend eternity with their families. At the very least, they are told they cannot have a legal marriage in most states.

Taking that into consideration, I don't see why their income is relevant to their sense of happiness.

Look at Pat Robertson. He is a millionaire and he thinks he is oppressed...what with the liberals trying to cancel Christmas, end school prayer, etc. Poor guy.

Its really all about personal feelings, not money.

Since you are so concerned about these people "sinning" (according to your church), I will give you some free advice: Don't become a homosexual.

I do agree with you that they have all the freedoms that all US citizens have. Therefore they are not oppressed. There are not treated as second class citizens, their per capita income demonstrates that by and large they are not being economically challenged, and they can live where they want.

I do not agree that they are subject to unfair practices as they cannot marry -- or maybe in some states cannot adopt. In many states two 1st. cousins who might love each other very much are not allowed to marry -- although they can get married in a state that allows it and then merely move back. Two siblings have no right to marry each other -- are they oppressed? Under these laws Abraham and Sarah would have been barred from marriage (although half-siblings can marry in some European nations from what I understand). Adoption? Nothing is preventing a lesbian couple from going to a sperm bank -- hey more power to them if that's what they desire. Two men? Sorry, no womb -- but they could hire a surrogate.

Then you could say that polygamists in this country live in a state of fear that the government could go after them. Maybe that makes them feel bad.

People in fundamentalist churches tell Mormons they are going to burn forever -- so what, I am not asking for any special hate crimes laws to punish them with. And speaking of hate crimes laws why should a person who assults a person get more punishment if he makes reference to the victim's race or sexual preferences?

[sgallan]

Much better there Fin. Even if I disagree with some of your conclusions it is a well thought out argument, instead of some narrow view focusing on money. And it's not in the least bit homophobic.

[Fiannan]

Wow, thanks sgallen -- you haven't been that positive since I suggested you might look into helping out women with, well, you know.

[Aristotle]

People in fundamentalist churches tell Mormons they are going to burn forever -- so what, I am not asking for any special hate crimes laws to punish them with. And speaking of hate crimes laws why should a person who assults a person get more punishment if he makes reference to the victim's race or sexual preferences?

The homosexual lobby has campaigned and enacted special hate crime laws to punish those who speak out against their lifestyle. Hiding under the guise of "minority group", this has become a freedom of speech issue. Christians who take a stand (freedom of religion, i.e., First Amendment rights) are persecuted by homosexuals who label Christians as "homophobes", when in reality, homosexuals are demonstrating paranoiac heterophobia.

Are Christians oppressed by society? When special interest groups lobby to subvert our Christian heritage guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, removing Christian symbols from public places, eliminating any trace of Christianity in public schools, and most recently, intimidating Christians into not saying "Merry Christmas", the answer is a definite yes.

[sgallan]

When special interest groups lobby to subvert our Christian heritage guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, removing Christian symbols from public places, eliminating any trace of Christianity in public schools, and most recently, intimidating Christians into not saying "Merry Christmas", the answer is a definite yes.

Poor baby....

[Aristotle]

More labeling...is this the voice of Christianphobia speaking? LOL

[sgallan]

More labeling...is this the voice of Christianphobia speaking? LOL

Huh?

[prisonchaplain]

Are Christians oppressed by society? When special interest groups lobby to subvert our Christian heritage guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, removing Christian symbols from public places, eliminating any trace of Christianity in public schools, and most recently, intimidating Christians into not saying "Merry Christmas", the answer is a definite yes.

"It's our country and we're taking it back " Well...I used to feel that way. Of late, I've become much more nuanced about this. For the longer, published version, see the following:

http://www.fedwaymirror.com

1. You'll have to go to the search area

2. Type in the word ELLIS

3. When the story links come up, click on: Dec 10 2005

Christians hope to influence society, not take it over

Sorry the direct link wouldn't work...but it'll be worth the trouble--my wife says this is her favorite, of the six I did last year. :-)

(Side note to Sgallan--following this link will expose me as a real person, too. LOL)

A brief synopsis: The United States is no longer predominantly Christian in practice. Additionally, I would never support a Christian political party. Jesus commanded us to be "salt and light"--to preach the gospel, and to be an influence for good. So, yes, we lobby for political/social issues we believe God would speak to. However, our desire is not to command or force, but to persuade, and to draw the ungodly to God. Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world." If we follow him, then ours isn't either.