Um, I believe our very own Esprix was running for prez. Or was it VP with Polycarp as the main man?
One more (probably fruitless) attempt.
gobear, I did not make any claim that “nigger” and “heathen” were equivalent. I was referring to the phenomenon of people of a group calling each other names that no one not of that group can get away with. Nobody I know that is not an atheist (unless they are close friends) has called me a “heathen” without intending it as an insult. My post directed to vanilla was to let her know about how the word, coming from her, could be perceived as an insult. Nothing more or less. All your pontificating to me about the history of “nigger” doesn’t change that fact one iota.
You could have asked for clarification instead of going off on me, you know?
Arrrgh!
…that people not of that group can get away with.
It was Polycarp for president, and Esprix for vice president. Me? I’m down for chief of staff.
Vanilla, I’m afraid my take on things is you owe a lot of people apologies for your behaviour six weeks ago, including me. If you’ll recall, I can’t e-mail you now, but if you choose to change that, I wouldn’t mind trying to repair some of the damage done. My e-mail address is in my profile, and I will read what you have to say. I can’t promise more than that.
Now that I’ve got the hijacks out of the way, I think I might have something relevant to contribute. A few years ago, I was convinced I did not need human contact. I figured I was unlikeable, anti-social, and about as huggable as a porcupine with an attitude problem. I had effectively walled myself off from part of my humanity, much as I see the weblogger doing. It wasn’t completely useless as a coping mechanism – it made some very unpleasant stuff bearable – but in the long term, it wasn’t healthy for my soul. It did damage me. Fortunately, I fell in with the right crowd. They didn’t laugh too loud when I told them this; they just let me know that I was wrong when I assumed I was unlikable and unlovable and taught me that a hug or a literal shoulder to lean on are very good things indeed and that it is all right for me to enjoy them and perfectly reasonable for me to want them. As a result, one of the ones who taught me that will be coming over this evening, as will another gentleman. Not only will there be hugging, the former’s been teaching the latter how to do massage with me as the practice dummy! 
(read that one blissed out!)
My point is while it may be possible to wall oneself off from homosexual urges, to me, doing so diminishes the human soul. I’m not saying “Do what you will, where you will, to whom you will.” If I believed that, Iampunha might find himself in trouble at tomorrow’s Dopefest. What I’m saying is that the simple desire to know a human touch, to see a smile from someone you love or might love, or to seek comfort in times of sorrow is not wrong. I’ve been known to believe myself so wretched I’m worthy of nothing but death. The God who spoke to a certain Samaritan woman, who responded to a woman who referred to herself as a dog, who healed someone who touched the hem of His garment, apparently disagreed.
I’m straight. The fact that it will be two gentlemen who might be giving me a massage tonight lends a particular pleasure to the prospect, even though all three of us will be fully clothed. Even for a dear friend, I can’t force myself to be gay, or even bisexual. For me to approve of someone who’s gay forcing himself to be straight would be hypocrisy to me, and that’s one sin I’m certain Jesus denounced, clearly, plainly, and emphatically. I understand doing what one has to to survive; I just hope the blogger finds a better way.
Respectfully,
CJ
“Sort of like,” then. Use of That Word obscured the point you were attempting to make.
WE approach it from different POVs, then, because for one thing, calling me (for example) a “heathen” as insult is meaningless in reference to atheism, and second, I couldn’t give a crap what a fundy calls me–I don’t respect them enough to care what they think of me. If their insane cult weren’t at the controls of this country, I’d just ignore the Bible-thumping morons.
Clear enough now, I get your point. Although I don’t see why you wrote two angry posts in a row w/o giving me a chance to respond.
My apologies.
Apology accepted.
Peace 
Like that would be worse than Bush.
No, that would be “has paid another human being to force another human being to perform mock gay fellation on film.”
Going back a bit to the comment that homosexuals are that way because of “fundamental brain wiring”, i.e. that it is innate, is it not possible that *some * homosexuals choose to be that way? Anyone who is homosexual or knows more about this than me care to comment?
What kind of comment are you expecting to get? There’s still no conclusive scientific evidence for a biological “cause” for homosexuality, so all you’re going to get is people relating their own experiences, and the documented cases of others. I am “someone who is homosexual,” but I couldn’t tell you whether or not it’s possible for someone to choose it, any more than I could tell you what it’s like to grow up heterosexual or what it’s like to grow up on Mars.
I know I never chose it, in fact I fought it and denied it as hard as I could for as long as I could. I’ve heard similar – but thankfully, not as protracted – stories from other gay people. I’ve never spoken to anyone who believed they “chose” it, or in fact had any control over it at all. I can’t imagine why anyone would actually choose to be homosexual.
And again, the question is really irrelevant. The blogger from the OP spends a good bit of time asking himself why he’s gay, which is timer that could be better spent asking himself why it matters. As long as we’re forced to use “we’re just born that way” as a justification for homosexuality, that just perpetuates the idea that there’s something wrong with it, and that it needs justification.