Jump to content

Virginia Park now taken over by gay sex


Rooster7

Recommended Posts

Rooster posts a link to an article about gay men using a public park as a "meeting place," driving family and Scouting activities out of the park. I don't think anyone in this forum would argue that this is a good thing. Sexual activity should be kept behind closed doors, regardless of the gender identities of the participants.

 

But then Rooster asks:

 

Is anyone that surprised?

 

Rooster, what does that comment mean? Are you suggesting some generalization about gay people as a group, based upon the bad behavior of these particular gay people?

 

If so, let me ask you this: There are quite often newspaper stories about men raping women, or adult males being arrested for molesting under-age girls, or statistics about "heterosexual" rape generally. These unfortunate stories are much more plentiful than stories about gays taking over some park. What would be your reaction if someone posted one of these stories, or all of these stories, and then said:

 

"Is anyone that surprised?"

 

In other words, do you as a heterosexual wish to be judged by the behavior of the worst-behaving members of our "orientation?" Because I sure don't. I want to be judged, if at all, by my own conduct, and I think the same thing should apply to gay people.

 

If I have leaped to the wrong conclusion about what your comment means, I am sure you will point that out. But please don't be shy about telling us what it really does mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NJCS

According to Webster's, gays can only have a desire to have sexual relations with each other, and cannot actually have sex. Sex is activity that is ultimately related to reproduction between a male and a female.

Rooster

What do you mean by, bad behavior by these gay people? Let me be morally straight here and not politically correct. Gay behavior of desiring sexual relations with one's own sex is bad period and illegal. I think that Rooster was referring to the lackadaisical morals of the politically correct view that gays have a right to pursue these types of activities. The city or county police and citizens have a resposibility to clean up the illegal activity in that park and any other place where this goes on. Why let these people take over a place that every taxpayer has paid to use. I say take a stand and take it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rooster, what does that comment mean? Are you suggesting some generalization about gay people as a group, based upon the bad behavior of these particular gay people?

 

Since we are posting on a Scouting forum, it should come as no surprise to you and other posters, that I do find the behavior to be immoral. It's a little ironic that you would use the same forum as a soapbox to defend the behavior.

 

Nevertheless, here goes -

 

If so, let me ask you this: There are quite often newspaper stories about men raping women, or adult males being arrested for molesting under-age girls, or statistics about "heterosexual" rape generally. These unfortunate stories are much more plentiful than stories about gays taking over some park.

 

Yes, these stories do exist. Alas, they happen quite often. However, if you're going to make comparisons, compare apples with apples. Rape and molestation is not a crime unique to heterosexuals. Per capita, homosexuals commit more than their share of these crimes. Having said this, read on for a better comparison.

 

What would be your reaction if someone posted one of these stories, or all of these stories, and then said: "Is anyone that surprised?"

 

Lets try the apples with apples comparison -

 

I would be surprised if an entire park was taken over by adult heterosexual men and women having sex out in the open. I would be even more surprised, if upon refusing an invitation, bystanders were attacked. More likely, these men and women would flee in embarrassment. Also, I don't envision a large segment of the heterosexual community ignoring the protests of the community, and the threats of police, to return to the same park over and over again. So, YES, I would be very surprised if the facts were different and we were discussing heterosexual adults instead. But since we are discussing homosexuals, I'm not surprised. This Virginia state park story is reminiscent of many other similar stories that I have read in the past involving homosexuals. They worship their "orientation" and the rest of society be damned.

 

In other words, do you as a heterosexual wish to be judged by the behavior of the worst-behaving members of our "orientation?" Because I sure don't. I want to be judged, if at all, by my own conduct, and I think the same thing should apply to gay people.

 

Conduct? You mean like anal and oral intercourse. A very distasteful conduct, so much so, I hesitated to put them in print. But it's extremely problematic to defend my position and not do so, especially when someone is trying to ignore the fact that homosexuality is about conduct - offensive conduct. By definition, homosexuals practice conduct that is offensive. As for me judging folks, personally I don't know a single person who was arrested in that park. I only know about their conduct. It is the conduct that I am judging. I find it to be abhorrent. The fact that a large group of homosexuals have taken over a state park so they may do "as they please", does not surprise me.

 

If I have leaped to the wrong conclusion about what your comment means, I am sure you will point that out. But please don't be shy about telling us what it really does mean.

 

No, you're right on target.

 

ASM7, I believe, we are in agreement.

(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it all depends on what is, is

 

What is happening in that park, and any park where homosexual activity is in the open is flat out wrong. As would be any type of sexual activity.

 

I agree with NJCubScouter however, I would hate to have heterosexuality be defined by the behaviop of those revelers at Mardi Gras where puplic copulation is not unknown. Nor would I say that the publized carnal indulgences of "Spring Break" accurately portray the overall morals of all college students.

 

Any transgression of the law should be dealt with according to the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rooster

Sorry. The statement was meant for NJCS and not you. As the kids say today, my bad.

littlebillie

I said sex was activity that is ultimately related to reproduction between a male and female. I believe part of that activity is also any foreplay that may occur. You be your own judge of what those activities are, but the point is it is intended for reproduction between male and female. It is impossible for two adults of the same sex to reproduce. So, I will not call it sex, but will be more apt to declare it an act that defiles what God intended as an act of love between married men and women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...