Batwoman is a lesbian!

[90Xjay]

Originally Posted by mingez

Each one of these belief systems has decided that it is the correct one. And it's "Truths" to be finite. This is why morals can only be judged within the context of it's own culture.

Lacking such relativity is a huge reason there are cross-cultural conflicts and war.

You just shot yourself in the foot there.
You came out with a few attempts to show "traditions" or "customs" as morals within other cultures and centuries that are most definatley not American. Then you have the nerve to say we can only judge morals within the contect of it's own culture when that is what this discussion was about: gay lifestyle and morals here in America, not Mesopotamia:roll:

That was a good try though..........

 

[Sparky-Watts]

You just shot yourself in the foot there.
You came out with a few attempts to show "traditions" or "customs" as morals within other cultures and centuries that are most definatley not American. Then you have the nerve to say we can only judge morals within the contect of it's own culture when that is what this discussion was about: gay lifestyle and morals here in America, not Mesopotamia:roll:

That was a good try though..........

Sorry, but I don't see where he shot himself in the foot with that post. He was simply drawing comparisons of morals in other cultures to make his point that the morals of America can only be judged in the context of other American morals. What may be acceptable in one culture is not acceptable in another. Unfortunately, America itself cannot be judged evenly for it's morals. What is acceptable in LA or New York City certainly often is not acceptable here in the Bible Belt. Heck, for what it's worth, what's morally acceptable in Wichita is often not acceptable here on the western edge of the same county. I really didn't see anything he said as being "customs" or "traditions". What he stated was, in each of it's own cultures, a matter based on morals derived from their belief system. There is a HUGE difference between that and a custom or tradition.:roll:

 

[mingez]

You just shot yourself in the foot there.
You came out with a few attempts to show "traditions" or "customs" as morals within other cultures and centuries that are most definatley not American. Then you have the nerve to say we can only judge morals within the contect of it's own culture when that is what this discussion was about: gay lifestyle and morals here in America, not Mesopotamia:roll:

That was a good try though..........

My foot is unfettered thanks. But I guess I too would say something like "nice try" if someone else's view point challenged my belief system, so I won't fault you there. And I don't have the "nerve" to say anything. If there is an opinion or a fact, I'll state it. The word nerve implies that I'm trying to offend, and I'm not. If simply stating my opinion offends you, well that's your issue, not mine.

The point was to show that Truths are NOT universal, but only relevant relative to culture. In other words, yes Americans have different "Truths" and "Morals" then other cultures, thus these morals can't be "UNIVERSAL". So, my point is made clearly to anyone open enough to hear it. Clearly some are not and that's okay.

The only argument against this is that other cultures are "immoral" and "wrong" and "Bad" and whatever label someone chooses to use to further polarize other people from them because they are different. I can't jump on that line of thinking.

 

[mingez]

I don't consider any form of paganism as a good source for a moral compass.

Here is an obvious example of assuming that your beliefs are correct and true above other people's beliefs. Pagan beliefs in your eyes are deemed to be ridiculous, evil and ludicrous. That's akin to me telling you that your god is a figment of your imagination. Insulting isn't it? Well, I'm sure a Pagan would be none to happy with your comment.

I know too many Christians that are solid folks so I'd never subscribe to that statement, but I think you get the point. Try and view the situation without thinking your beliefs are a automatic truth. Remember that others are just as passionate about their god(s) as you. Then, and only then will we perhaps all "Get along" globally.

Does it even occur to you that perhaps someone might think that Christianity isn't a very good source for a moral compass either? Probably not.

Posting a rolling eyes happy face when referencing another person's religious beliefs seems disrespectful to me. That takes more nerve than anything I posted above.

 

[mingez]

Then when and if you have children, go ahead and let them read about homosexuality at an early reading age. My daughter was reading pretty well at 4 years old. It is not sheltering, Mingez. Why on Earth would you want to have to explain a sexual reference to someone who is as young as that?!?!?!
It's called letting a kid be a kid. Believe you me when they are old enough they will know. My oldest knows what homosexuality is, and you can be damn sure he knows the truth.

I respect your child-raising abilites. And if I had kids, I indeed would speak of homosexuality openly to them just as I do to everyone on this board. But to say it's not sheltering is an opinion isn't it? It's a moral, or value you have, and one you want to instill in your family. Which is fine, and I support that 100 percent. But I don't share those values. Yet another example of how morals aren't "Universal".

Remember: I didn't say it WAS sheltering. I said that I SEE IT as sheltering, meaning that I have a different value placed on that subject. I know that my moral value concerning this isn't universal, thus multiple angles are plausible.

You're a good dad TC, I would never question that. I'd just raise my children differently.

 

[mingez]

FWIW, I enjoy reading the paper while eating pancakes and having coffee with my wife on weekend mornings. It's not boring it is relaxing.

I'm sure it is, but (and take no offense at this) nobody wants to read a comic book about you and your wife having breakfast and reading the paper....that was my point.

 

[Sparky-Watts]

nobody wants to read a comic book about you and your wife having breakfast and reading the paper...

Oh, I don't know about that.....look at how popular "Seinfeld" was/is!!

 

[90Xjay]

Here is an obvious example of assuming that your beliefs are correct and true above other people's beliefs. Pagan beliefs in your eyes are deemed to be ridiculous, evil and ludicrous. That's akin to me telling you that your god is a figment of your imagination. Insulting isn't it? Well, I'm sure a Pagan would be none to happy with your comment.

IF you look up the word "pagan" you'll see it defines it a a person who has no religious values...no god...one who does not profess Christianity, Jewish, or Muslim faiths.. a person who is hedonistic... a heathen.

so..my previous remarks stand..., I have no moral duty nor am I inclined whatsoever to make pagans happy.

 

[90Xjay]

Posting a rolling eyes happy face when referencing another person's religious beliefs seems disrespectful to me. That takes more nerve than anything I posted above.

You referred to a pagan sacrificing a young woman to ensure a good crop harvest. In responding to that example, I consider my "rolling eyes" a mild form of rejection. If you can sit there at your computer and honestly say to yourself that you consider that throwing a young human being off of a cliff to please a pagan god is a decent, valid, action worth honoring, and respecting.....well..I feel bad for you. There is no grey area for me in that case. I know in my heart that is wrong, and no one has to tell me that. I didn't have to read it in a book either.
It's call conscience.
Con meaning "with" and "science" meaning knowledge. Most everyone including you were born with a conscience, which means you have some instilled, inherent, sense of right and wrong.

 

[TwistedCU]

I respect your child-raising abilites. And if I had kids, I indeed would speak of homosexuality openly to them just as I do to everyone on this board. But to say it's not sheltering is an opinion isn't it? It's a moral, or value you have, and one you want to instill in your family. Which is fine, and I support that 100 percent. But I don't share those values. Yet another example of how morals aren't "Universal".

Remember: I didn't say it WAS sheltering. I said that I SEE IT as sheltering, meaning that I have a different value placed on that subject. I know that my moral value concerning this isn't universal, thus multiple angles are plausible.

You're a good dad TC, I would never question that. I'd just raise my children differently.

Again, I did not say I would not discuss homosexuality, but at an early age (Like the age when they begin to read, which in our homeschool environment is usually 4 yrs old) they are too young to learn about anything sexual. What possible reason could there be for doing so? Are you saying that 4 year olds should be taught about sex? I would find that disturbing. Like I said, my 10 yr old knows what homosexuality is, but only because it needed to be explained on account of our media and entertainment businesses beating us all to death with it.

Ya know, you really like to view just about everything as an opinion or view. I am of the mindset that the more grey are we have in life, the more confusing and difficult life will be, and where there is more grey area, the easier it is to excuse wrongs and immorality.

Let your yes be yes, and your no be no. Stand for something or you will fall for anything.

Without a defined truth, without a moral standard, there is that grey area which disintigrates a united people. It undermines law and it undermines unity. A good example is Sparky's post about sexual maturity. We have a standard in this country and it is rock solid. He started his post by acknowledging that. If someone breaks those rules then they are severely punished (albeit I would be all for heavier punishment as I have two daughters).

On that topic, Sparky, although I was pretty shocked by your post, I am not making any judgements about you. I am trying to view it as you stated - from a biological standpoint.

In today's world, our children do not mature as quickly. It is not necessary for them to take on adult responsibility at a young age, so they have more years for education and to plan their lives. A 13 year old raised in Colonial American times would have the maturity level of a 20 year old woman in today's society. Another thing to look at is, and it's not pretty to think of it that way, but they were often married off at a young age to lesson the burdon of feeding, clothing, and housing her.

Young girls are just simply not prepared for marraige at the age when they hit puberty anymore. They are still mentally and emotionally just little girls at that age, no matter what you may think when you look at there developing bodies. Another thing to consider is that in our society, you can even drive an automobile until you are 16. You can't vote until you are 18. You can't Drink alcohol until you are 21 in almost every state. The reason is maturity level.

Your post was referencing age of maturity of a biological standpoint, well the reason the legal age for marraige is 18 is because of emotional and mental maturity reasons, not physical. For someone to be in a sexually active relationship of marraige, they should be all three.

 

[JeepMonkey]

As always this has been a great debate here on Jeepz! I really enjoy reading peoples different opinions on subjects. And I certainly don't mean to get anyone fired up to the point that it's not fun anymore. As for me I'd like to say that we as a society have lost control in the morals department. A moral is something that you should stand by no matter what anyone says. Unfortunately a long time ago someone started adjusting their morals to suit the popular opinion and it has gone unchecked ever since. Now when something comes up that we don't like we try to make laws against it until finally we just accept it and change the laws so no one is breaking them. I believe it will (HAS) happen with homosexuality and I'm sure there are other issues that will ultimately conform to the popular vote and not anyones moral code. Just look at the current arguments over immagration and illegal aliens. Here is a group of people who are clearly breaking the law, but their are people trying to re-write the laws so it's legal. The only thing you can do as an individual is stand by your moral code and ultimately respect the right of others to stand by theirs.

Thank you and goodnight!

 

[Sparky-Watts]

On that topic, Sparky, although I was pretty shocked by your post, I am not making any judgements about you. I am trying to view it as you stated - from a biological standpoint.

In today's world, our children do not mature as quickly. It is not necessary for them to take on adult responsibility at a young age, so they have more years for education and to plan their lives. A 13 year old raised in Colonial American times would have the maturity level of a 20 year old woman in today's society. Another thing to look at is, and it's not pretty to think of it that way, but they were often married off at a young age to lesson the burdon of feeding, clothing, and housing her.

Young girls are just simply not prepared for marraige at the age when they hit puberty anymore. They are still mentally and emotionally just little girls at that age, no matter what you may think when you look at there developing bodies. Another thing to consider is that in our society, you can even drive an automobile until you are 16. You can't vote until you are 18. You can't Drink alcohol until you are 21 in almost every state. The reason is maturity level.

Your post was referencing age of maturity of a biological standpoint, well the reason the legal age for marraige is 18 is because of emotional and mental maturity reasons, not physical. For someone to be in a sexually active relationship of marraige, they should be all three.

That is the point I was trying to make. Because of society's changing morals, we are now raising children that lack the emotional and mental capacity of those we raised even 150 years ago. You don't have to go back to colonial times to find young girls being married off at 12, 13 or 14 years of age. It was still common practice right up to the beginning of the 20th century. All 4 of my great grandmothers were married before they were 14 years of age, and all 4 of them were born after 1910. My maternal grandmother was married at the age of 14. So, somewhere in the past 100 years, we've slacked off on educating our children both mentally and emotionally. Your statement about your 4 y/o not needing to know about sex or homosexuality is good proof of this (not faulting you in the least, I agree). When I was 4 years old, I knew what sex was, how babies were made, and even knew what homosexuality was. I was reading at the age of 3, watching the news and retaining a good portion of the information given there. Perhaps I was more curious than most kids, but I asked a lot of questions about everything. My parents were not shy nor sheltering and answered my quesions as appropriately as they could.

And yes, I totally agree that our children today (with a few exceptions) are not prepared emotionally and mentally for marriage and sex. However, there is a small percentage that is, and in those cases, I still feel that biological, mental, and emotional age should take precedence over chronological age. I am just wondering when and how our society decided that an arbitrary chronological age is more appropriate. I know women in their late teens, 20's, and 30's that are still not emotionally and mentally prepared to raise children, yet because they've reached that magic chronological age of 16 (legal age in Kansas) to marry and bear children, they have families that they cannot take care of, much less take care of themselves. If it were based more on emotional and mental age, they would not be putting those children at risk in that environment. (I purposely left out the biological age factor in that sentence, as it would be a given if they were able to have children.)

 

[TwistedCU]

Sparky, some of the largest problems our nation faces were caused by changing laws that work for the majority, but either offend or do not suit a few. This is acutally the reason for the moral decay mentioned by Jumprr, but he wrote that the cause was to suit the popular opinion, when more often than not new laws are made (or old ones are amended) to suit special interest groups who represent a very small percentage of our culture but have a large financial backing.

Sometimes a few must be inconveinienced for the good of the majority. Waiting a few years to enter adult relationships is not really too much to ask. I think lowering the age of "adulthood" would make many common problems worse (divorce rate, unwed pregnancies, the # of high school dropouts, etc.).

Does it really hurt a child to tell them to grow up first and allow them to get an education?

You can't please all the people, all of the time. Too bad for several years now our government has made a mess of our country trying to do just that.

 

[Sparky-Watts]

Does it really hurt a child to tell them to grow up first and allow them to get an education?

Ahh, but there's the rub. Our forefathers (and mothers) were better educated by the age of 14 than most of us were after 4 years of college. Remember the post someone made a while back that showed the exit exam at a Saline County School from the 1800's? But, also I'll admit that with more technology, there's more crap to cram down our children's throats these days. However, there's also more crap that our children are learning that isn't necessary that wastes their time during school.

I guess that's part of why we've seen the change toward a higher age of consent, because schooling takes longer, among other things. Also, women are working outside the home now, while back in the day, they only worked in the home raising children, and helping raise crops.......

 

[socal_rob]

I saw that earlier this week.
Ya just another attempt by the Gay agenda to "normalize" the gay lifestyle choice.

Choice? Are you living in the stone age? Um, let's see...gays and lesbians choose their lifestyle because they:

1) Enjoy ridicule
2) Enjoy being discriminated against
3) Think it's great to be bashed, beaten, and murdered
4) Love hearing how they're going to "burn in hell" on a regular basis
5) Look forward to being shunned by their families when they come out

I'm sure I could go on, but I think you get the point.

Anyone who says being gay is a choice isn't thinking. That's like saying it was a choice to be a Jew in Nazi Germany.

Christianity seems to always need an enemy. It's either those damn pagans who need to be converted or the non-whites who bear the mark of Cain, or whatever. Gays and lesbians are just the latest whipping boys and girls of the ever-loving Christian faith. Fundamentalists need the "gay lifestyle" to be a "choice" or they couldn't very well spew their venom and hatred.

Forget science, which has repeatedly demonstrated sexual orientation to be a matter or biology, NOT choice. After all, these are the same people who believe evolution never happened. Science be damned. Facts be damned. Evidence be damned. No, despite the absolute impossibility of the human race having come from two people, the fundamentalists insist that it's true. Just as they insist being gay is a "choice."

Anyone who views sexual orientation as a choice should sit down with a gay person and ASK him or her if it's really a choice. I guarantee that not a single gay person will tell you that he/she made a choice to be gay. Not one. They might tell you how hard they tried to be straight, how they lied to everyone they loved for fear of rejection, how they maybe even got married or prayed night and day that they might be "cured." But not one will say that he or she chose the "lifestyle." After all, if a gay person chooses to be gay, logic demands that all straight people made a choice to be straight. How many straight people sat down one day and said "gee, should I be straight or gay?"

The only people who seem to believe this nonsense are people who've never bothered to educate themselves in the slightest way - or are so brainwashed by their church that they can't even think for themselves on a base level.

As for Batwoman, who cares if she's a lesbian? I agree that sex has no place in comic books, gay or straight. Her being gay just reflects society's diversity...gay, straight, black, white, asian, disabled, whatever.

 

[socal_rob]

Heterosexual does too, I agree, and it5 does infer sex. Would DC comics bother mentioning that Superman is heterosexual? No.

Given his ongoing flirtation/love-that-cannot-be with Lois Lane, I think it's pretty OBVIOUS that he's heterosexual.

I don't think any of us have seen the new comic with Batwoman, correct? So who knows how they will handle it. I have a feeling it will be a "no big deal" sort of thing, but we'll all have to wait and see.

As for kids, keeping them away from sexually explicit material is not the same thing as keeping them ignorant of homosexuality. This is the domain of the parent. However, like it or not, gay people have always existed and will always exist in society. One's kids will learn about homosexuality sooner or later. So the choice is simple. Do you educate your kids about it...or do you vilify it (or perhaps ignore it altogether) and then have your kids figure things out on their own when they get older? Either way, homosexuality exists and isn't going away.

 

[socal_rob]

You referred to a pagan sacrificing a young woman to ensure a good crop harvest. In responding to that example, I consider my "rolling eyes" a mild form of rejection. If you can sit there at your computer and honestly say to yourself that you consider that throwing a young human being off of a cliff to please a pagan god is a decent, valid, action worth honoring, and respecting.....well..I feel bad for you. There is no grey area for me in that case. I know in my heart that is wrong, and no one has to tell me that. I didn't have to read it in a book either.
It's call conscience.
Con meaning "with" and "science" meaning knowledge. Most everyone including you were born with a conscience, which means you have some instilled, inherent, sense of right and wrong.

Before one comes down too hard on the pagans, I don't think Christians should be passing judgment, especially when one considers their faith's history. Um, let's see...crusades, witch burning, lynchings, etc.

How many people were burned at the stake to please a Christian god??? Probably a lot more than were thrown off a cliff for a pagan one.

 

[socal_rob]

If you are gay, that is fine. I'm not, so I don't feel threatened. Just because you are gay doesn't mean I want to see you in every other TV show just because Hollywood has made it trendy to be gay. And one other thing, if you are gay that is your prerogative, but don't expect me not to make fun of your silly A$$.

If you are black, that is fine. I'm not, so I don't feel threatened. Just because you are black doesn't mean I want to see you in every other TV show just because Hollywood has made it trendy to be black. And one other thing, if you are black that is your prerogative, but don't expect me not to make fun of your silly A$$.

Tell me that isn't utterly disgusting. And now go back and read your post.

 

[Sparky-Watts]

Anyone who says being gay is a choice isn't thinking. That's like saying it was a choice to be a Jew in Nazi Germany.

Ummmm......A Jew is someone who follows Judaism. Judaism is a religion. Religion is a choice. The Jews in Nazi Germany did have a choice, and many of them actually did choose to either leave or change religions, whereas others chose to hide it. Perhaps a better analogy would have been to say it was a choice to be black in Mississippi in the 1960's.

 

[TwistedCU]

Choice? Are you living in the stone age? Um, let's see...gays and lesbians choose their lifestyle because they:

1) Enjoy ridicule
2) Enjoy being discriminated against
3) Think it's great to be bashed, beaten, and murdered
4) Love hearing how they're going to "burn in hell" on a regular basis
5) Look forward to being shunned by their families when they come out

I'm sure I could go on, but I think you get the point.

Social Rob, I am so tired of the cry that Homosexuality is something people are born with. I am tired of hearing the same old line about how it could not possibly be a choice because of all the baggage that comes with it. It's a lie. It's bunk. The same arguement could be used to justify any socially deviant behavior. Why would someone be a theif? A pediphile?

Anyone who views sexual orientation as a choice should sit down with a gay person and ASK him or her if it's really a choice. I guarantee that not a single gay person will tell you that he/she made a choice to be gay. Not one. They might tell you how hard they tried to be straight, how they lied to everyone they loved for fear of rejection, how they maybe even got married or prayed night and day that they might be "cured." But not one will say that he or she chose the "lifestyle." After all, if a gay person chooses to be gay, logic demands that all straight people made a choice to be straight. How many straight people sat down one day and said "gee, should I be straight or gay?"

Then why, might I ask, have so many people turned from homosexuality to live life the way it was meant to be lived? Were they put under a spell? As you say - "brainwashed"? No. They removed themselves from a life of lies and discovered the truth.

Forget science, which has repeatedly demonstrated sexual orientation to be a matter or biology, NOT choice

Repeatedly? Try to support that ridiculous claim with real evidence and you will find it to be false.

The only people who seem to believe this nonsense are people who've never bothered to educate themselves in the slightest way - or are so brainwashed by their church that they can't even think for themselves on a base level.

That is a pretty arrogant statement. I have been a Christian for nearly ten years, but my views were very similar 20 years ago. The only difference is now I am more sympathetic to it and do not ridicule them. My head and concience are quite clear, and as for being educated - I am fully prepared to diligently debate this topic with complete confidence (and so is 90XJay).

Christianity seems to always need an enemy. It's either those damn pagans who need to be converted or the non-whites who bear the mark of Cain, or whatever. Gays and lesbians are just the latest whipping boys and girls of the ever-loving Christian faith. Fundamentalists need the "gay lifestyle" to be a "choice" or they couldn't very well spew their venom and hatred.

This (and the last of your statements I quoted) is a clear indication of your misconceptions of Christianity. They are also very stereotypical when you speak of venom and hatred. The God I serve is a loving God, not one that insites hatred.
****************
Look, yes, plain and simple - I view homosexuality as wrong. That is a fact, therefore I will not submit to the lies and deception that are attempted by those who want to justify or promote it. This does not mean I hate anyone. It doesn't mean I wouldn't sit next to you on a train. It means I disagree. If you are a homosexual that is your bit, but do not expect me to lie to my children about it, nor allow it to be openly publicized in my home via a television, radio, newspaper, or comic book. And don't expect me to support it in any way.

You have made your choice. I have made mine. I don't expect you to carry a Bible and I don't expect you to accept Christ if it is not your belief SO DON'T EXPECT ME TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE HOMESEXUAL AGENDA.

You don't need my support. You can be gay without my nod. I don't need your approval to be a Christian, and I could care less what your opinion of me is for being one.

If we discuss this topic I will post my views without insult or stereotype to homosexuality. Please have the decency to not make insults or stereotypes about Christians, because they only make you look ignorant.

Get it?