Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 10439113)

I'm not going to say that gay bashers are secretly gay, but you do have to wonder about what it is about homosexuality that elicits such a hateful reaction.

To clarify, I'm speaking specifically of gay bashers that aren't religious and/or have never had a negative encounter with a homosexual (like being molested by a gay uncle or being close to someone growing up that was molested by a gay, etc.)

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale (Post 10439112)

That's the same study I"m talking about. I know that this silly study, which was designed around reaching a specific conclusion, exists. Now let's apply common sense... does anything ELSE increase bloodflow that could make your cock expand a bit? There are a multitude of things that can cause it aside from sexual arousal... you know things like nervousness, stress, anger, and even fear. Ya think MAYBE these things could impact a study that is targeting people who are nervous, stressed, angry and fearful of gay people? Measuring penis circumference is not a good way to tell if someone is aroused, and a slight increase is NOT a boner. It's not scientific. It's dick measuring. Just stop and IMAGINE this thing taking place.

It's a bullshit study designed to justify a bullshit argument. However since it reaches the desired conclusion (which is to, again, emasculate people by calling them gay... which seems counter to the whole 'supportive of gay people' position) it's often cited and is plastered all over the ****ing internet.

I'm looking for the study I'm talking about, but I did find the study which imaged people's brains under similar circumstances (also with various control groups) to be far more reliable than a dick measuring session. If I can't find it... believe what you want. I view you as a pretty empirically minded guy, so honestly I'm surprised you'd buy into such a silly agenda driven study.

Look, I'm fully supportive of gay folks. Get married, adopt babies... I'm all for it. If you want to get to the root of why people hate gays, the best place to start is by being honest about it.

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale (Post 10439072)

This thread has been on the front page for days.

Obviously folks here care.

A lot.

Originally Posted by Donger (Post 10439139)

A lot of people rubberneck at accident scenes, too.

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale (Post 10439127)

That's the simple part.

People are assholes and they are prejudiced against people who are different. Some people are bigger asshole and their prejudices develop into full blown bigotry.

I'm not really sure there's some magic answer here. Some people are just assholes who are always looking for someone to be an asshole to.

Originally Posted by Donger (Post 10439139)

A lot of people rubberneck at accident scenes, too.

Originally Posted by Fish (Post 10439128)

There's plenty of other studies that support the notion of some homophobic behavior being linked to denial or unacknowledged homosexual desires.

Take a look at these:

http://www.livescience.com/19563-hom...mosexuals.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...-+ScienceDaily)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014

http://her.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/1/97.full

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 10439158)

A lot of people slow down at accident scenes.

You and others are parking your cars on the side of the road and actively walking up to the scene of the accident. And not to help, either.

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 10439158)

A lot of people slow down at accident scenes.

You and others are parking your cars on the side of the road and actively walking up to the scene of the accident. And not to help, either.

Originally Posted by KC native (Post 10439145)

I bet you're like Vizzini from Princess Bride IRL. You just give off the smug vibe of a mildly intelligent little man.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/U_eZmEiyTo0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Originally Posted by Pablo (Post 10439168)

I've posted in this thread six times. You're currently sitting at 30.

Donger is at 134, almost one hundred posts greater than Baby Lee in second place with 39.

Rubbernecking, indeed.

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 10439152)

That's the thing, though. If that were the case and it were so cut and dry, they'd all hate anyone that wasn't like them- not just gays. And honestly, it seems to have a much stronger focus on gay males (and masculine lesbians) than their female counterparts.

Why care? Why do they care so much?

I'm sure there's no blanket statement that could be true for all of them but it makes me wonder..

Originally Posted by Pablo (Post 10439168)

I've posted in this thread six times. You're currently sitting at 30.

Donger is at 134, almost one hundred posts greater than Baby Lee in second place with 39.

Rubbernecking, indeed.

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 10438999)

If you believe that it's important to promote procreation and child rearing in intact nuclear families, it's rational to promote the kinds of living arrangements that make that most likely. One way to do it is to give special benefits to traditional marriages, but not to people who choose to live life in other arrangements (single, cohabitation, same sex couples, three or more adult partners, etc.).

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 10438999)

If you believe that a child is best served by having a parent of each sex who live together in a committed relationship, then opposing adoption by single people or gay couples or groups of three or more is rational.

Originally Posted by KC native (Post 10439040)

Actually, the last time that someone claimed there were rational arguments for it (just pedofilin' by), he ducked out without ever saying what the rational arguments were.