Why I Find Vitriol Against ‘Homophobes’ Disturbing

Over the weekend, 8 time world boxing champion and senatorial candidate, Rep. Manny Pacquiao, got himself on the receiving end of verbal flurries from netizens and celebrities that were probably a lot more stinging than the beating he took from his arch-rival Juan Manuel Marquez. This happened after he expressed his disagreement on same-sex marriage by reasoning what he believed to be the nature of things as exemplified by the animal kingdom. What seems to have made netizens and celebrities so infuriated was Pacquiao’s assertion that homosexuals are worse than animals. Now I don’t agree with Pacquiao’s assertion that homosexuals are worse than animals and his opposition to same-sex marriage is nothing new. What I actually find disturbing is the vitriol being spewed by the pro-gay crowd against someone who doesn’t share their views.

same_sex_marriage_20

Consider singer and proud lesbian Aiza Seguerra’s words for Pacquiao:

“I am so fuckin’ mad I don’t know what to say.

“You might’ve done our country proud but with your statement, you just showed the whole country why we shouldn’t vote for you.

“And yes, I think you are an ignorant, bigoted hypocrite.

“You made me lose all respect that I had for you, Mr. Pacquiao.”

First of all, I find no issues with Seguerra not voting for Pacquiao. Afterall, Seguerra is a proud lesbian and a believer in same-sex marriage. However, it is one thing not to vote for Pacquaio because he doesn’t share your beliefs, it is another thing to suggest why the whole country should not vote for Pacquiao just because Pacquiao doesn’t believe in same-sex marriage. Is Seguerra suggesting that the whole country ought to believe in same-sex marriage and ought to only vote for pro same-sex marriage folks?

So what is Seguerra’s basis for claiming that Pacquiao is ignorant, bigoted, and a hypocrite using Pacquiao’s views on same-sex marriage and homosexuals?

Last I checked, ignorant means “lacking in knowledge or training”. For Seguerra to call Pacquiao ignorant seems to suggest that she holds factual and indisputable knowledge about homosexuality. I find her description of Pacquiao to be quite arrogant as the topic of the nature of homosexuality itself is still being debated. I invite my readers to check out an interesting debate on the nature of homosexuality at http://www.debate.org. Mind you, the site merely offers a debate on opinions. The internet is replete with scientific claims and arguments on both sides. One striking question on the nature of homosexuality comes from Dr. Paul Vasey of the University of Lethbridge. If homosexuality is indeed natural and there is genetic basis for homosexuality, Dr. Vasey asks:

“How can a trait like male homosexuality, which has a genetic component, persist over evolutionary time if the individuals that carry the genes associated with that trait are not reproducing?”

This is certainly an evolutionary puzzle on homosexuality and I don’t believe there is a definitive answer to such a puzzle yet. So perhaps it may be argued that Pacquiao may be ignorant of the true nature of homosexuality, but this may go the same with Seguerra. I am reminded of an old Filipino proverb that says:

“The rattan basket criticizes that palm leaf basket, still both are full of holes.”

Next, is Pacquiao necessarily bigoted if he does not believe in same-sex marriage or even homosexuality as a natural phenomenon? The dictionary defines bigoted as being extremely intolerant of another’s creed, belief, or opinion. I don’t consider Pacquiao to be extremely intolerant of another’s creed, belief, or opinion. Actually, in comparing both Pacquiao’s and Seguerra’s words and demeanor, it appears that the latter has exhibited a closer description for the definition of bigoted. Although Pacquiao has been quite vocal and passionate about his religious beliefs, I haven’t seen any evidence of him persecuting other people who don’t share his views, let alone spew out the same level of venomous vitriol Seguerra has given.

Lastly, why is Pacquiao a hypocrite for stating his opposition to same-sex marriage? Last I heard, Pacquiao has never married a man throughout his life. So he believes that homosexuality is not natural and he bases his belief on his understanding of the Bible. So what? How does that make him a hypocrite? Doesn’t being a hypocrite entail actions that belie stated beliefs? Now one may argue that Pacquaio is being a hypocrite when he dished out a statement offensive to some of his fellow human beings (which is contrary to the Christian tenet of loving one another). But to say that he is a hypocrite just because he holds a different opinion on the nature of homosexuality and same-sex marriage is a bit of a stretch. I, for one, think that Pacquiao never intended to offend anyone when he stated his opinion. He was nice enough to apologize to the LGBT community while maintaining his views on same-sex marriage.

Last I heard, there is no law in the Philippines that abridges freedom of speech. I say this because I think this whole controversy is not just about perceptions of homophobia but the underlying threat of political correctness or mere appeasement to freedom of speech. Of course, the pro-gay folks would probably think that Seguerra’s hateful words on Pacquaio and her strong beliefs on homosexuality has nothing to do with her personal feelings for the need of self-validation. But what seems very disturbing is the notion that anyone who questions or even disagrees with the (liberal) narrative on homosexuality and same-sex marriage is automatically a bigoted ignorant homophobe. Can’t we see the irony there?

print

91 Comments on “Why I Find Vitriol Against ‘Homophobes’ Disturbing”

  1. “How can a trait like male homosexuality, which has a genetic component, persist over evolutionary time if the individuals that carry the genes associated with that trait are not reproducing?”

    Aha…I have an answer to that: there are a lot of homosexuals who marry or have sexual relations with women and have children.

    1. The irony there is that it was the very social stigmatisation of homosexuals for centuries that drove them underground and forced them into mainstream heterosexual traditions that resulted in offspring that would go on to continue to propagate that DNA.

    2. I saw this thing about a study saying there’s likely to be no gay gene. I myself am not really convinced of its being genetic. But whether genetic or not, if there’s a gay person present, the issue for me is how one reacts. Should there already be condemnation and the bringing out of a shotgun, or will one just let them be? Nature vs. nurture doesn’t matter for me, I think that shouldn’t be the basis for determining how one should react to LGBTs.

      Also, someone in the FB group told me about the gay movement starters, Harry Hay and David Thorstad, being pedophiles themselves and the gay movement actually being a way to get pedophiles being accepted(his source I found in Liveleak, but I wonder how to check its veracity). Pedos actually have a group called NAMBLA. It sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it may hold water. But the alarmism may cause backlash against LGBTs in general, and then people will want LGBTs arrested or have them attacked because of fear of pedos. I suppose internal conflicts (which always happen, anyway) would have caused the pedos to separate or just be sneaky among the LGBT movement today. I still have to see how to handle this information I happened upon.

      1. I can’t buy the notion that homosexuality is a choice. Why would a straight person choose to live a life that is still being shunned by a lot of people today? Besides, straight people are hard-wired into feeling repulsed by the idea of having sexual relations with people of the same sex.

        1. God’s word, The Bible already prepared a clear definitive answer for you about 2000 years ago. Do read it, you have nothing to lose and eternity to gain. God bless you.

          18But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness. 19They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.
          21Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. 22Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools. 23And instead of worshiping the glorious, ever-living God, they worshiped idols made to look like mere people and birds and animals and reptiles.
          24So God abandoned them to do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other’s bodies. 25They traded the truth about God for a lie. So they worshiped and served the things God created instead of the Creator himself, who is worthy of eternal praise! Amen. 26That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. 27And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.
          28Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done. 29Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, quarreling, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. 30They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They invent new ways of sinning, and they disobey their parents. 31They refuse to understand, break their promises, are heartless, and have no mercy. 32They know God’s justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too.

          Holy Bible, New Living Translation copyright 1996, 2004, 2007 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois, 60188. All rights reserved.
          Learn More

        2. It is when the Bible is referred to as the only source of “facts” to support all arguments, the intelligent discussion/conversation thus endeth…

        3. Why would a grown person want to have sex with children? Is that also something that is hard wired? Then if they can’t help it who are we to judge….should this behavior also be debated?

        4. That’s different because they are preying on the vulnerable – children who are defenceless and who do not give their consent. Obviously it is an illness.

        5. “It is when the Bible is referred to as the only source of “facts” to support all arguments, the intelligent discussion/conversation thus endeth…”

          This is why when you are talking to a person holding a Bible, you are talking to an inanimate object. End of conversation.

        6. Hi Ilda, tell us how it is different with practicing homosexuals and pedophiles, if indeed one “condition” is hard-wired and the other is illness. I don’t see the object (vulnerable or not) of their sexual desires has got anything to do with their sexual desires being just different or defective. Anyway, I do think homosexual behaviour is a mix of genetics (tendencies, hormonal activity), environment (circumstances affecting sexual development) and volition (lifestyle choices). Volition is a very important factor in brain development, something like “neurons that fire together, wire together”, that’s how amazing our brains really are; our choices and actions sort of shape our wirings too.

        7. For me pedophilia is different from homosexuality. Pedophilia is about power – adults picking on someone not their size. I consider pedophilia an illness because pedophiles obviously do not have empathy for their victims.

        8. Sexual orientation can be shaped, Ilda. That is what the current scientific studies say. In simpler terms, environment plays the bigger role.

        9. I see why people use the “natural” argument. They believe one should be allowed to do only natural things, and unnatural things should be allowed. For me though, there are some unnatural things that are OK, but some natural things that are wrong.

          What if someone says, it is natural for me to kill someone when I’m angry with him; that would still be wrong. On the other hand, it is unnatural for humans to be flying. But we do so as a common form of travel. I might discuss more in an article but I’ve publish some others first. Of course, my stance is allowing gays to have their own relationships. Pedophilia indeed is different, but the source I posted above, gotten from that guy in FB, claims that the LGBTs have a “hidden agenda” of legalizing pedophilia. That one I consider just a conspiracy theory, unless more proof comes up.

          For me, the naturalist argument in philosophy is not the only basis for determining right and wrong. There are also the teleological argument (it’s one’s duty to do good), and the consequential argument (we do/not do it because of its effect).

          As for the Bible, it is among the most misinterpreted works in history, simply because politicians (including those more a thousand years back) use it to justify their actions. It’s more of a source of principle and doctrine, not necessarily facts.

        10. “Why should a straight person choose to live a life…” This is also what I am asking of alcoholics and gambling addicts, etc. Why do they choose their ways in spite of the havocs they make to their families? Interestingly many addictics and homosexuals have experienced “healing”. Perhaps, they just need to take the same medicine that only them can discover and know if they really want to be healed. Our duty now is to respect them and give all the supports they needed if they want to get healed.

      2. For me pedophilia is different from homosexuality. Pedophilia is about power – adults picking on someone not their size. I consider pedophilia an illness because pedophiles obviously do not have empathy for their victims.

        Care the share that to all the members of NAMBLA then?

        My response is in my next article.

        I know. What I am trying to tell you is that the current scientific research shows that there is no gay gene.

        1. By definition
          Pedophilia: noun, Psychiatry.
          an adult who is sexually attracted to young children.

          This is not about power..it’s about sexual attraction. We are disgusted with this behavior and is currently not accepted in our society and rightly so. We label it an illness because a grown person is sexually attracted to a child. Is it fair for us to judge these people also…I’m here to say what is the difference?

    3. why would a man want to sex with another man? why would an adult want to have sex with a child? why would alcoholics, gamblers a addicts continue on being so even if it does not condone with society and even with the nature of existence itself?

      The answer is simple, it is the work of the devil.

  2. My take on this is that if Pacquiao wants people especially the LGBT community to respect his stand against gay marriage or being gay as unnatural is that he has to back that up with a solid argument and I don’t mean quotes from the bible because not all people are catholic or christian.

    Just for reference on the part when he said that animals do not exhibit even the slightest gayness act here is a documentary video that you might find interesting:

    Link to YouTube video

    Also there are tons of articles online verify if you like that you can check regarding animal behavior exhibiting sexual acts with the same gender.

    By the way I am not gay but I just believe that with a little bit of research our old ways of thinking can change. That’s our advantage compared to people during the medieval, slavery eras we have easily accessible information we can use to be well informed.

    Just my .2

      1. Backed up by science? Where is the scientific proof that homosexuality is passed on by DNA? There still is no scientific proof for that, so stop talking out of your ass. How do you define religious extremism? A person who follows the teachings of the bible is an extremist? Sounds more like a person who has a belief system, especially in this crazy world where “what I feel is what I believe” mentality. Don’t base your belief on your feelings, feelings can be very deceptive and not scientific……

        1. Gee…I can’t believe you didn’t get what I meant. Let me explain. When a closeted homosexual man marries or has sex with a woman and has kids, chances are, he could pass on his homosexual gene. It’s simple, really.

        2. Question 1: “How do you define religious extremists?”

          Answer 1: Toby.

          Question 2: Why?

          Answer 2: Because the Bible tells him/she so.

        1. Huh? What if one of the most natural thing in the world for some people is to be attracted to people of the same sex?

        2. Joe,

          God creating the world in six days and taking a siesta on the seventh? That’s natural? What happened to overtime?

          Aeta

      2. I could imagine the frustration of people who believed the earth was round trying to convince others that it’s not flat and that went on for years..you know in a few years probably a bit longer people will laugh that we had this kinds of issues. Same thing with the prohibition of marijuana but that’s for another topic..

  3. Why would anyone in their right mind vote for this illiterate fool (Manny Pacquiao) anyway, even if he didn’t make that stupid comment against same-sex couples? Oh, nevermind. We’re talking about the Failippines, where fools vote for fools.

    1. On the contrary, this probably increased his number of supporters. Before he was just the incompetent fool who took “underachieving” to the next level. Now he’s the stalwart defender of “Christian” values.

  4. Growing up knowing that you have a certain additional appendage or a lack of it yet still opting to play for the other team is a choice.

  5. Pacman opened his mouth on something he does not agree with and he gets bulldozed. We now live in a society where it’s ok to be critical of Christians and Muslims but are all going up in arms when it’s about the LGBT issue.

    1. yeah because when you’re against something especially if you’re a “Law Maker” and running for a senate seat you better have a damn good argument on why you oppose it something that people regardless of race, religion or gender status can understand. And no quoting bible verses doesn’t count as logical basis.

      It’s totally different when its just your average joe normal barkada inuman debate no one will care but maybe some of your gay friends

  6. Jo,

    That is because Christians and Muslims have been in the game of hypocrisy for far too long– in their own respective ways and against each other–and have done nothing to lessen the suffering in this world except add to it with their dogmas and doctrines. The world is tired of watching and listening to the same song and dance routine performed by the same cheesy characters. This observation is especially true with the people of the Failippines.

    Aeta

  7. Homosexuality was classified as a mental illness before, the same as how pedophilia is classified. Homosexuality enters mainstream. Now closet pedophiles in the UK government elites and among professional authors now starting to defend and even speak in favor of pedophilia and people they know who are pedophiles.

    There is no more slippery slope here. It has come to pass.

    1. Toby,

      You got it all wrong. Pedophilia is a mental illness and no one in their right mind is going to try defend it, especially when an adult and a child is involved. Heterosexuality and Homosexuality is not–whether it is written in your DNA, a tendency, or orientation. The only slippery slope is how you, as an individual, defines Homosexuality and Pedophilia.

      Aeta

      1. Aeta,

        Your opinion simply show that you ignorant of the current views being expressed in the West regarding pedophilia.

        A good place to start is SFW Association.

        Homosexuality has been redefined several since the 19th in the medical and scientific community.

        So, tell me, how does individual definition play any part in the discussion?

        1. Toby,

          I can think of far worse acts that Christian fundamentalists like yourself have committed in this world, than two people being involved in a homosexual relationships. What I have told you is not based on ignorance, but on realizing and accepting the truth that life in this world is not black or white, or a perfect square like you imagined it to be.

          Aeta

        2. Toby,

          “So, tell me, how does individual definition play any part in the discussion?”

          I was going to ask you the same question. You just beat me to the punch. So go ahead.

          Aeta

        3. Aeta,

          I like how assuming you are on how I view life in this world. *chuckle*

          You raised the “individual definition”. Your problem. Not mine.

          2 people being involve in homosexual relation is just the same as any other people in a sexual relationship.

          But it does not necessarily follow that it should be considered marriage material.

          I can also think of much much worse acts done by people who are atheists. But that is besides the point.

          So, is there anything else you want discuss regarding same-sex marriage?

        4. Toby,

          “I like how assuming you are on how I view life in this world. *chuckle*”

          I don’t assume anything. I just know a fundamentalist when I meet one. Nice to meet you, Toby.

          “You raised the ‘individual definition.’ Your problem. Not mine.”

          Oh, you mean the ‘individual definition’ which you cannot define? Forget it. Dennis had to define for you that heterosexuals and homosexual can also commit pedophilia.

          “2 people being involve in homosexual relation is just the same as any other people in a sexual relationship.”

          That is what a sexual relationship is. Two or more people. Unless, of course, you’re asexual.

          “But it does not necessarily follow that it should be considered marriage material.”

          Marriage is so overrated these days that it has become a joke. I know many Christians who are just as promiscuous being married as they were being single. Again, nothing is as black and white as you imagined it to be.

          “I can also think of much much worse acts done by people who are atheists. But that is besides the point.

          “So, is there anything else you want discuss regarding same-sex marriage?”

          No, not really, but I’m not the one who is having an issue with same-sex marriage. You are.

          Aeta

    2. lol they also said that blacks, browns, reds, yellow races are inferior to the whites.

      you’re confusing pedophilia and homosexuality. Straight men and women can also be pedophiles.

      you’re a hard NUT to crack

      1. Dennis,

        “you’re confusing pedophilia and homosexuality. Straight men and women can also be pedophiles.”

        Exactly. It’s hard for Toby to accept the fact that heterosexuals can be as guilty of pedophilia as homosexuals.

        That’s all right, Toby. You don’t have to answer the question on “individual definition.” Dennis had already answered it for you.

        Aeta

        1. aeta

          this (toby) dude is obviously trolling, but haven’t really mastered the dark art hahaha..

          Anyway good chatting guys I think I already made my point.

          till next time:)

          Cheerio!

  8. Bwahahaha!!

    Where did I define homosexuality as synonymous with pedophilia?

    I’ll wait was you flinch.

    Marriage is so overrated these days that it has become a joke. I know many Christians who are just as promiscuous being married as they were being single. Again, nothing is as black and white as you imagined it to be.

    You are showing your ignorance again. Haha!

    No, not really, but I’m not the one who is having an issue with same-sex marriage. You are.

    Good.

    haha that’s your comeback???

    That’s cute. Maybe a little upgrade on your accusation prowess and maybe you won’t be as boring as you are now.

    1. Toby,

      You need more life experience. Not just from your own life, but learning from other people’s lives as well. You obviously have been deluded by the school of thought you attended and failed to understand that an ice cream has more than one flavor. You may not want to taste all the flavors, but you need to understand why people like them.

      Aeta

  9. In the end though, most people who vote for Pacquiao will not worry about his stances. They care more about his being famous (Pride ng Pinoy, Pride chicken) and his being magaling na boxingero (which has no relation to politics at all, but hey, there are people who consider that as a qualification). People are mostly acting on mob mentality in the Philippines.

  10. Let us TONE DOWN the “inflammatory rhetoric” on both sides of the issue. Manny Pacquiao is only, speaking what he believes in; same as those in the LGBT community.

    We still don’t know the causes of homosexuality.

    However, I have a Hindu Friend, from India, who is my co worker, who believes in Reincarnation.
    His belief is, the Planet Earth, is like a large school house, where we learn good lessons, to perfect our spirit/soul. We learn the lessons of: love, tolerance, humility, etc…

    So, if you were a Woman in your previous life. Then come back in this life as a Man. And some of the “Womanly Traits” are not erased in your “subconscious mind”…then, you surely become “Gay”. And vice versa.

    It has some sense, if you believe in Reincarnation. He told me also, that you can be reincarnated as an animal like : pigs, dogs, monkey, etc…

    Okay, so much for this reincarnation. I hope that our political leaders will be reincarnated as: pigs, monkeys, dogs, etc…they are acting like these animals, they are so despicable…Aquino , Mar Roxas , Abaya and Abad will be reincarnated as, Hacienda Luisita Swines…Karma in good sense!!!

  11. Let us TONE DOWN the “inflammatory rhetoric” on both sides of the issue.

    My side will tone down AFTER the other side tones down.

    Cause and effect, guys and gals.

    You simply get what you give.

  12. Don’t go to Church and believe in the Bible if you agreed with those homosexuals… let it be accursed…

    12 But these people blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like UNREASONING ANIMALS, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and LIKE ANIMALS they too will perish.

    13 They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you. 14 With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an ACCURSED BROOD!

  13. Manny…is just following what the Bible is saying. Manny’s comment did not originate from him, but from the mouth of God.

  14. Here’s a simple analogy of Pacquiao’s stupidity. I’m inside a store to buy Coke and Pacquiao doesn’t even know me but then he tells me to buy Pepsi instead. Who are you to tell me what to buy? I made my choice and if you don’t like it, just shut your mouth. That is called respect.

    I admire you and respect you as a boxer but that’s the extent of it. Congressman? And maybe senator? I don’t think so buddy. Go get an education first then, maybe I’ll reconsider.

    You don’t have to be a politician to help the people if that is what you want to do. Instead of spending your millions on your campaign for something you don’t know anything about, set up a foundation to help the needy, aspiring athletes and most of all those who want to further their education. They are the future pillars of our country.

  15. I love people regardless of their “sexual preference”, and I will never condemned them. That’s just me.

    At the same time, God loves also all people, regardless of their sexual preference. God loves every person so much that he gave His
    only begotten Son for the whole world to die on the cross, so that He who believes on Jesus’s death of redemption will have everlasting life, the Bible declares.

    If a person rejects God’s gift, His Son Jesus, He still loves that person, but will not force that person to love Him back. Love by force is not love at all.

    Heaven is the abode of God, and He will not force any person to come in if that person is not interested, that would be unfair.

    If a person wants to have a relationship with Jesus in Heaven, he must have first a relationship with Him here on earth.

    God is holy, that is why He gave Jesus His Son so that we too, LGBT or not has a chance to be Holy. Holiness is the standard of God. That is what the Bible says. God bless to all

  16. Marriage is a sacrament from God, based on the New Testamen. It is between one man and one woman. Modern man legalized it.? Now, since the LGBT community does not adhere to the Biblical teachings of man/woman relationship, why opt for ‘marriage’? Why not legalize the union by entering into a contract?

    1. “Marriage is a sacrament from God, based on the New Testamen[t]”

      I prefer to believe in humanity; it has a more practical application, than the triviality of religion, on marriages and relationships. In fact, before you get married in church, you have to legalized the union first by getting a marriage license/contact. Therefore, a church wedding is just a formality that each religion dictates.

      1. Really Aeta?
        Are you an Atheist?
        Read this: WORLD VIEW. There are only 2: Theistic and Atheistic.
        Religions have been around since the beginning of mankind. The major religions (Baha’i, Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, and Zoroastrianism), have always taught marriage was between a man and a woman, men and woman or man and women. Only in modern society have the original religions become “liberal” to the concept of same-sex marriage. But those who are true to their original religious teachings all share the same understanding in their doctrines of marriage. Heck, even legal systems got the idea of marriage from religion.
        If you don’t believe in God or a god, then there isn’t any point in me pursuing a discussion with you. If you believe in God or a god, then you are obviously of a religion affected by liberalization, or at least think that God made “adam and steve” in the Christian sense of the creation of gender as well as “adam and eve”. In other words, an off-shoot of original religious beliefs.
        My point?
        Religion has everything to do with marriage, and the original and true concept of marriage is between male and female, just as nature designed. A very black and white point. The only thing grey in this topic is the amount of matter that has to increase inside your brain to understand that concept.

  17. So you don’t consider being called worse than animal a bigoted view? Try searching for the word moron. It clearly defines you

  18. Mike,

    Sticking to your religious or political dogmas and doctrines is also a personality disorder, especially when you refuse to acknowledge that others will live their lives the way they want to.

    Aeta

  19. Gay people getting married is not a threat to the institution of marriage. You know what’s a threat to the institution of marriage? Infidelity is! Hate is! Unforgiveness is! Apathy is! Coldheartedness is! Fear is! And you know what’s a threat to the kids? It’s not having gay parents! Most gay kids have straight parents! And plenty of gay parents raise respectable, straight kids! The threat to children isn’t their parents being gay; the threat to children is their parents not loving one another! Not caring for one another! Not being crazy about each other! Domestic violence is a threat to children. Stupidity is a threat to children. A swimming pool in the backyard with no supervision is a threat to children!

    1. What if we let the LGBT community all live in their own world and let them get married, after a generation there will be no one left…LOL…..Now there is a real threat to the institution of marriage…

  20. I am so glad manny n the lgbts save us from chinas annihilation with their missiles pointed right unto us jst a few hundred kilometers from our shores …… They are probably surprised and re think their strategy coz firing a missile to P.I. Wont get our attention , coz we are still busy busy arguing about homosexuality ????????????????so thank you ….

  21. 100% agree with pacquiao, at he got some common sense in his mind. Even the lowest of animals know the difference between a male and female. People who are supporting thay idea ate even worst, ignorant, hypocrite, dillutional, lost living in a imaginary world. Ask yourselves what the word human being mean ? And what is the signification of the word living means?
    The truth will only reveal itself very soon
    Don’t ve surprise!! I would say, I told you so!

  22. “How can a trait like male homosexuality, which has a genetic component, persist over evolutionary time if the individuals that carry the genes associated with that trait are not reproducing?”

    The problem lies in the purely materialistic conception of what we know as genetics, heredity. Our identification and definition of ourselves as human beings as only biologic beings and our rejection of our metaphysical origins as the formative force of our material existence is what continually screws us as can be seen not only in this particular issue but also in the realms of education, medicine, agriculture, and many more.

  23. What I find umbrage in is this: manny apologized for his comment comparing animals and humans on the issue of homosexuality (which i admit is a really bad analogy to support his belief; i think he just heard that comparison from somebody who was able to explain it articulately that doesn’t seem offensive, and then he adopted the same analogy and didn’t come out right because, admit it, he never was a good public speaker) but when he didn’t apologize for his stand, a lot of people was still angry because he remained steadfast in his belief. what do they want? for him to retract everything that he said, including his stand? if he does, then he’ll be called a hypocrite. damn if you do, damn if you don’t.

    another thing, why do people can’t believe that it is possible for one to disapprove of the act, but not of the person? yes, it is possible. to illustrate, society condemns prostitution, and the Bible condemns it too because it is a sin… but we don’t necessarily condemn the prostitute. it is the act which is being disapproved of–not the person. it’s the same banana as what manny said in his apology. But still, he still gets crucified for that apology. The thing is, the LGBT community wants him to apologize for his stand, and i think to even retract it. That’s uncalled for.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.