Post your unpopular opinions

[Champion RD92 8,655]

My reaction is neutral. Although I disagree, I respect his opinion. Even if he tells lies... I have to be mature and let it go like a big boy.

 

In other words:

 

I find it amazing how you and Clarity are so young, yet are two of the most mature people I've met on here.

 

By the way, funny pic lol 

[spas-ticShotty 3,582]

My reaction is neutral. Although I disagree, I respect his opinion. Even if he tells lies... I have to be mature and let it go like a big boy.

 

In other words:

TBH........I think the only reason I quoted him and asked you that was because he used the word "overrated".........dammit, I gotta stop that.

 

 

I find it amazing how you and Clarity are so young, yet are two of the most mature people I've met on here.

 

By the way, funny pic lol 

I find it amazing how mature Clari is, and she's the youngest of me and LF. Not to mention she's a girl. Not to stereotype, but after seeing how most of them at school act, she's a surprising little example.

 

Also, if it wasn't for mah ocassional rants, anger outburts, pure hatred for the word "overrated" and mah extreme pervertedness, I'd be even more mature than LF and Clari. Mah ideals on a lot of things are mature IMO (Not to toot mah own horn), but mah execution could use some work. Then again, I'm 15, so......

 

BUT I still regard myself as more mature than the average teen.

[DusK 1,264]

What it really boils down to is that someone who is homosexual cannot reproduce with other men. Therefore, the desire to be with other men is not right.

By this logic, so is infertility. By your arbitrary and, quite frankly, absurdly ignorant classification of right and wrong, nobody who lacks the ability to reproduce should be allowed to get married or, to any end, engage in sex.

 

Thankfully, that opinion can accurately be described as unpopular. Really, the gay marriage debate bears virtually no difference to the interracial marriage debates of yesteryear. Given one more decade, all the bigots who prattled on about "traditional marriage" and "family values" or, in your case, "being gay means you're broken" will be unanimously looked down on the same way people who who called interracial marriage "encroaching communism" or "the march of the anti-christ" are today.

Edited January 10, 2013 by DusK

[Clarity 3,094]

I find it amazing how mature Clari is, and she's the youngest of me and LF. Not to mention she's a girl. Not to stereotype, but after seeing how most of them at school act, she's a surprising little example.  

 

I find it amazing how you and Clarity are so young, yet are two of the most mature people I've met on here.

 

HELL no! I ain't mature. I ain't. LF would agree with me. I quitted like a baby. When I die in RotMG, I whine and swear like a ten year old.  When I get irritated by someone calling AJ a background pony, I complain and rant like a baby. Nuh uh. I ain't mature.

 

I agree that LF himself is very mature, kind, understanding, and dramatic He lived a tough life that he told the details about only to me (so don't ask). It's surprising he's still like he is now. If I were in his place, I would probably become a major bitchass.

 

Spazzy, on the other hand...*cough*   He likes sexy stuff. He's pretty mature... <_<

[Lightning Fluttershy 1,844]

I agree that LF himself is very mature, kind, understanding, and dramatic He lived a tough life that he told the details about only to me (so don't ask). It's surprising he's still like he is now. If I were in his place, I would probably become a major bitchass.

Aww ty Clari <3

And while yes, you sometimes overreact a bit when you die in RotMG, you're more mature than most people I know. You're smart and sophisticated. X3

[Bohtty 1,775]

By this logic, so is infertility. By your arbitrary and, quite frankly, absurdly ignorant classification of right and wrong, nobody who lacks the ability to reproduce should be allowed to get married or, to any end, engage in sex.

 

Thankfully, that opinion can accurately be described as unpopular. Really, the gay marriage debate bears virtually no difference to the interracial marriage debates of yesteryear. Given one more decade, all the bigots who prattled on about "traditional marriage" and "family values" or, in your case, "being gay means you're broken" will be unanimously looked down on the same way people who who called interracial marriage "encroaching communism" or "the march of the anti-christ" are today.

Actually, that logic does not apply to infertility.

 

The conclusion was not that if you can't reproduce then you can't get married or have sex, the conclusion was that since two men cannot biologically reproduce together, That liking other men is not right. You are broken if you're gay just like someone is broken when they have a cold or when they break a leg. It's an abnormality that obstructs the body from doing what it was originally designed to do.

 

For your benefit:

 

bro·ken

Adjective

1. Having been fractured or damaged and no longer in one piece or in working order.

 

 

PS: I never said anyone couldn't or shouldn't engage in sex. I don't give a shit if two guys have sex. I'm a strong believer that sex should be for more than just reproducing. Please stop ignorantly throwing words in my mouth.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Bohtty

[GuillermoGage 246]

Nah, Fox news isn't liberal. It has liberals on it sometimes, but it's mostly a biased-right leaned channel. Bill O' Reilly and Sean Hannity are HUGE Conservatives, and they have their own shows on Fox. If any news channels are liberal, it's MSNBC, CNN, and ABC...

 

And about more foxes... the show 'Red Eye' from Fox has random-cute videos of different animals doing funny things. I have seen quite a few foxes in those videos. My favorite is the one when the foxes are jumping on the trampoline!

 

Rarity is best pony for me, and my older bro thinks Celestia is best pony. Maybe you are right about that!

So you are admitting it is biased?

(The quick brown Fox News jumps over the lazy dog. Honesty, Kindness, Laughter, Generosity, Loyalty, and Magic.)

[Dark Fox 151]

Actually, that logic does not apply to infertility.

 

The conclusion was not that if you can't reproduce then you can't get married or have sex, the conclusion was that since two men cannot biologically reproduce together, That liking other men is not right. You are broken if you're gay just like someone is broken when they have a cold or when they break a leg. It's an abnormality that obstructs the body from doing what it was originally designed to do.

You realize people take offense to you refering to their identity as "broken" correct? And what do you mean "designed"? As if to imply it's unnatural, you know, plenty of animals species have been known to be as we refer to it "gay". So why exactly are you so persistant with this? Is this because you really really like to play semantics and want gays refered to as "broken" over nothing more than you're scewed perception of what is natural? Or do you harbor some dislike for people that are different from you...Because I've never heard someone go on and on about semantics like you are doing here.

 

 

For your benefit:

 

bro·ken

Adjective

1. Having been fractured or damaged and no longer in one piece or in working order.

Again, what exactly is damaged here? What does society lose by not having gay men reproduce? So if liking another man is not right merely because you don't produce children why isn't it wrong to choose not to have children? Im still not understanding you...

 

 

 

 

PS: I never said anyone couldn't or shouldn't engage in sex. I don't give a shit if two guys have sex. I'm a strong believer that sex should be for more than just reproducing. Please stop ignorantly throwing words in my mouth.

 

Sooo...Wow, kinda contradicted your entire argument there...I really hope you're lying about being 18. But by all means, give me some reasonable argument as to why gay people in particular are "broken" and even better, why does it even matter?

[Otter 1,942]

I REALLY don't like Twilight.

 

 

The book/movie series or the purple pony with who I am enamored? If you're talking about the series by Stephenie Meyer, then I agree with you a hundred percent. However, if you're talking about Twilight Sparkle... death to you and your entire family.

 

(LOL IF YOU COULDN'T TELL THAT WAS A JOKE LOLOLOLOL) 

Edited January 10, 2013 by HylianTwilian

[The Leafeon Pinkeh 3,602]

Katekyo Hitman Reborn is childish
Discord is the worst character in mlp ever. 
Creationism makes more since than Evelutionism (guess its just because im raised Christian)
Gangnum style doesn't deserve all its views because it is the worst song out there.
 

[Bohtty 1,775]

You realize people take offense to you refering to their identity as "broken" correct? And what do you mean "designed"? As if to imply it's unnatural, you know, plenty of animals species have been known to be as we refer to it "gay". So why exactly are you so persistant with this? Is this because you really really like to play semantics and want gays refered to as "broken" over nothing more than you're scewed perception of what is natural? Or do you harbor some dislike for people that are different from you...Because I've never heard someone go on and on about semantics like you are doing here.

The title of this thread is "unpopular opinions" if they come here not expecting to be possibly offended then they are stupid. What do I mean by designed? Men were designed to have sex with women so that the human race could reproduce. They were not designed to be gay or there would be no human race because men can't reproduce together.

 

 

Again, what exactly is damaged here? What does society lose by not having gay men reproduce? So if liking another man is not right merely because you don't produce children why isn't it wrong to choose not to have children? Im still not understanding you...

Going by what I said as the design for humans. The brain of someone who is homosexual is not in complete working order because they have desires for men and not women. Choosing not to have children isn't wrong because the option is there for you. You don't get that option in a homosexual relationship (excluding adoption and other similar programs).

 

 

Sooo...Wow, kinda contradicted your entire argument there...I really hope you're lying about being 18. But by all means, give me some reasonable argument as to why gay people in particular are "broken" and even better, why does it even matter?

It's not contradicting my argument at all. Sex and reproduction, while similar, aren't necessarily the same thing. I hope you're lying about being 19. You can't even seem to read any of my posts. It's not just gay people that are broken. Anyone who is sick, injured, bisexual, pansexual, and or asexual could be considered broken. "Why does it even matter?" What? what are you talking about? The argument or gays being married? Sorry for the confusion, but none of this matters to me. Not sure if I mentioned it in this thread yet, but I honestly don't care what others do. It doesn't stop me from having a strong opinion on it though.

 

 

There's nothing broken about a gay person, in my opinion.

Lets try taking it to the extremes.

 

In World A everyone is gay or lesbian.

 

In World B nobody is gay or lesbian.

 

What do you think the conditions (regarding reproduction) of the two worlds would be?

 

If I had to guess, I would say that World A is going to have a big reproduction problem while World B would not. Do you disagree? I'm interested to see what you have to say on this.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Bohtty

[Kazuki Fuse 534]

I don't think gay people can be considered 'broken', seeing as human beings are imperfect creatures to begin with. We are all 'broken'. Humanity is a flawed design.

[Shiki 5,854]

I don't think gay people can be considered 'broken', seeing as human beings are imperfect creatures to begin with. We are all 'broken'. Humanity is a flawed design.

If this is true, then I see no reason for anyone to be offended over someome calling anyone "broken."

 

He didn't say they're bad. He said they're broken. I'm fairly certain he meant in that aspect, but not entirely as people.

 

I believe he is right. They are broken. But I would add not completely. They are functional, they (depending on the specific individual) can be intelligent, they can be anything. However, they are broken in regards to sexuality, because they are not conforming to what it is humanity NEEDS to do in order to survive as a species.

 

But that's fine. So, really, if you're taking offense to them being considered "broken", you're the one(s) that are putting them into the bad lighting, and not accepting them for who/what they are.

[Sunny Fox 5,939]

Same. My older brother gave me a beer once and I took a drink of it. As soon as he turned his head I spit it out as fast as I could. Couldn't get the taste off my tongue.

So you wouldn't pay even one bit for that drek? In fact, I'm drinking a beer right now. I think it's an acquired taste, like a lot of alcohol. It takes time for it to burn the right channels into your brain matter.  

 

Unpopular opinions:

1. Cigarettes are one of the worst inventions ever. Then people say "It's my choice to smoke or not, so you can't say anything bad about it!" That logic fails when you consider they're polluting everyone's air and littering their cigarette butts all over the place. Although I do have the occasional ciggie myself.

 

2. I don't care if you call me a hypocrite. Everyone is a hypocrite about something. Jesus gave the word a bad rep.

[NostalgicPony 310]

Lets try taking it to the extremes.

 

In World A everyone is gay or lesbian.

 

In World B nobody is gay or lesbian.

 

What do you think the conditions (regarding reproduction) of the two worlds would be?

 

If I had to guess, I would say that World A is going to have a big reproduction problem while World B would not. Do you disagree? I'm interested to see what you have to say on this.

 

I'm sure there will always be an initiative to continue the human race. Of course you're giving rather vague hypothetical situations seeing that I can highly doubt seeing a world with only Gays and Lesbians as opposed to one world where everyone is assumed Heterosexual. We also have technology, and with that we have sperm donor banks and artificial wombs. Also Gay and Lesbian couples would want to seek children to raise, so their option is sperm donor and artificial wombs, etc. You can call this unnatural I suppose, but it is possible in your hypothetical example.

 

But I'm rather confused with your objective approach, you claim those that are inclined to love someone of a gender or person that is incompatible of engaging in reproductive intercourse is broken. But what if sex is not the main component in a relationship? I know I see it that way at the moment, I rather just love someone for who they are and not get involved with sexual intercourse. Do I control that though? Most likely not, I cannot force myself to have sex if it does not appeal to me. Does that qualify me as " broken " ? Maybe if someone was a Eugenicist and looking for the able man and thought that sure, not to point fingers at you though.

 

Truth is, we all have these odd subjective standards of what is " broken ", as Stryker has stated, Humanity has many broken elements that most of us can't control or we voluntarily engage in. Someone with Autism may have some mental deficiencies, but does that make them broken and not perfect? After all, many brilliant scientists and mathematicians had Autism and the like and outnumbered many groups of non-Autistic academic individuals, but even them too are not broken because they cannot grasp the high standard that these Autistic intellectuals have.

 

So really, even if you think many of us are " broken " because either we cannot reproduce to save the worlds population and continue what mother nature had created for us, what about the other natural aspects of humans? What about discrimination? we are naturally prone to choose one over the other, but we cry out to others to stop discriminating because it is immoral, or what about our rather repulsive greedy reflexes us humans have? we are born with free will and self-determination and we have our own self-interests even if it results in greed that affects others. Would we be broken for not discriminating or choosing not to be greedy since it is out of line of what humans tend to do? Just like reproductive intercourse, even though we are built to have the opportunity to do so, are we supposed to under natural standards? I guess that depends on the individual's self-interest of how the natural mind and the natural environment molds.

 

Of course I'm not offended by your remarks, don't get me wrong. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my bones. But I just wanted to get my popular opinion out to shed another perspective on the matter.

[Dark Fox 151]

The title of this thread is "unpopular opinions" if they come here not expecting to be possibly offended then they are stupid. What do I mean by designed? Men were designed to have sex with women so that the human race could reproduce. They were not designed to be gay or there would be no human race because men can't reproduce together.

Well you're so abrasive about it, like unreasonably so...Also "designed", do you believe in a god? If you're Christian then I don't believe we need to discuss futher, also do you carry a different attitude towards gay people? Something others would call prejudice? You realize the human race is stable enough at this point that having a few gay people would be benefitial to the population increase?

 

Going by what I said as the design for humans. The brain of someone who is homosexual is not in complete working order because they have desires for men and not women. Choosing not to have children isn't wrong because the option is there for you. You don't get that option in a homosexual relationship (excluding adoption and other similar programs).

No, the brain is actually just fine, that's like saying people who are left-handed have a brain not in working order, it's merely a different shade of a color. You realize it's not impossible for a gay man to father children right? Being gay doesn't turn off your testicles or ovaries...It's just not your personal preference to have sex with the opposite gender.

 

It's not contradicting my argument at all. Sex and reproduction, while similar, aren't necessarily the same thing. I hope you're lying about being 19. You can't even seem to read any of my posts. It's not just gay people that are broken. Anyone who is sick, injured, bisexual, pansexual, and or asexual could be considered broken. "Why does it even matter?" What? what are you talking about? The argument or gays being married? Sorry for the confusion, but none of this matters to me. Not sure if I mentioned it in this thread yet, but I honestly don't care what others do. It doesn't stop me from having a strong opinion on it though.

If you think sex without reproduction is fine then why are gays "wrong" for doing what you consider "ok"? You argue that having a condition such as homosexuality that hinders your reproduction is wrong, but having sex for recreation is ok? Broken is a pretty harsh term to use by the way. It's not like having a cold, it's someones identity.

 

Your argument, what does society lose by having a few gay people? Why are you so strongly defending this idea that gay people are "broken" even though in today's society it doesn't matter, as in, our population is stable, we don't need more babies and they don't hurt anyone.

 

 

 

Lets try taking it to the extremes.

 

In World A everyone is gay or lesbian.

 

In World B nobody is gay or lesbian.

 

What do you think the conditions (regarding reproduction) of the two worlds would be?

 

If I had to guess, I would say that World A is going to have a big reproduction problem while World B would not. Do you disagree? I'm interested to see what you have to say on this.

 

I do disagree actually, you're providing a scenario without some kind of history, what's the cause of the mass homo/hetero sexuality in each world? If it's evolutionarily dictated then obviously it would benefit reproduction, if not, then I'd argue humans are not stupid, if the fate of a species is an issue then obviously people would reproduce merely to save it. You're scratching the bottom of the barrel merely to fuel this debate over semantics and personal identity while failing to see it's impact on modern society, which overall pretty neutral because again...we don't need more babies, a modern society such as ares doesn't need to be held up to this prehistoric notion of "what's natural".

 

If it doesn't hurt anyone, why do you regard it with such harsh terminology? Why is being gay, where you can infact reproduce if society needed it, worse than being infertile or sterile?

 

Do you believe gay people deserve the same rights as straight people? (not marriage, you mentioned that earlier)

[Steve 290]

another one i thought of, i honestly think cut for beaver is stupid and i think those who do it are stupid and need to die, beaver should keep smoking and well let nature take its course

 

edit: cardfight vanguard looks stupid and the anime looks liek it ripped off the original yugioh (yes im keeping in mind that who made the original yugioh anime also made the cardfight vanguard anime, but i think they couldve done better at originality)

Edited January 10, 2013 by STVB

[Shiki 5,854]

Lol, the world full of lesbians and gays would not survive to the point in which they develop technology needed in order to develop the systems in which we have now. There would be no sperm bank because we would all die off.

 

We all came from cavemen. Imagine them all being gay. They wouldn't last at all. The species would go extinct because no one would make babies. They, in this sense, "broken."

[NostalgicPony 310]

Lol, the world full of lesbians and gays would not survive to the point in which they develop technology needed in order to develop the systems in which we have now. There would be no sperm bank because we would all die off. We all came from cavemen. Imagine them all being gay. They wouldn't last at all. The species would go extinct because no one would make babies. They, in this sense, "broken."

 

Hence why such a hypothetical is nonsense and has such a low percentage of ever happening in the world. However it is still possible with such technology in regards to giving females the oppertunity with male sperm donors to be injected to become fertile and people would be reproduced and with the chances of it not being Homosexual would still happen. But really, I highly doubt our world would result in just only Gay's and Lesbians since of course, there is such a mix diversity of sexuality out there, it is always changing rampant.

[Dark Fox 151]

Lol, the world full of lesbians and gays would not survive to the point in which they develop technology needed in order to develop the systems in which we have now. There would be no sperm bank because we would all die off. We all came from cavemen. Imagine them all being gay. They wouldn't last at all. The species would go extinct because no one would make babies. They, in this sense, "broken."

 

I don't think you get it, the fact is if there were gay cavemen, then that would imply the species survived long enough up to that point meaning homosexuals would have some benefit to reproduction, such as asexual reproduction or by some other means.

 

It is a ridiculous hypothetical scenario which has no basis in reality nor does it contribute anything reasonable to an argument.

[Shiki 5,854]

Hence why such a hypothetical is nonsense and has such a low percentage of ever happening in the world. However it is still possible with such technology in regards to giving females the oppertunity with male sperm donors to be injected to become fertile and people would be reproduced and with the chances of it not being Homosexual would still happen. But really, I highly doubt our world would result in just only Gay's and Lesbians since of course, there is such a mix diversity of sexuality out there, it is always changing rampant.

I don't believe that was the point of his argument, though. What I'm guessing, is that Bohtty was simply trying to prove that, in a very strictly literal sense, he is right, and they are "broken." But as I've already stated, only in this regard. Bohtty, from what I've seen, is very VERY literal with his words. And no one seems to understand it very much, sadly. It cause a lot of problems, I've seen. o;

[Dark Fox 151]

I don't believe that was the point of his argument, though. What I'm guessing, is that Bohtty was simply trying to prove that, in a very strictly literal sense, he is right, and they are "broken." But as I've already stated, only in this regard. Bohtty, from what I've seen, is very VERY literal with his words. And no one seems to understand it very much, sadly. It cause a lot of problems, I've seen. o;

 

But not in a modern world, if a few people are gay it doesn't matter, you're jsut arguing semantics at that point, and there are better words to use than "broken" to describe someones identity that doesn't contribute to the population (even though it's not needed).

 

He's making excuses for the infertile and whatnot leading me to think he is prejudiced and his definition only applies to those with the capacity to reproduce just not the preference...For...some...reason. I mean, if it's not prejudice it's lack of empathy, I personally wouldn't like my own identity referred to as "broken".

[Shiki 5,854]

But not in a modern world, if a few people are gay it doesn't matter, you're jsut arguing semantics at that point, and there are better words to use than "broken" to describe someones identity that doesn't contribute to the population (even though it's not needed).

 

He's making excuses for the infertile and whatnot leading me to think he is prejudiced and his definition only applies to those with the capacity to reproduce just not the preference...For...some...reason. I mean, if it's not prejudice it's lack of empathy, I personally wouldn't like my own identity referred to as "broken".

There would be no modern world if everyone was gay, that's what he was saying.

 

And hey, I'm asexual, so he called me broken and I'm cool with it, because I personally believe he's right, in a sense. However I agree "broken" is a misleading term. Or rather, in the context it's been used it. It would even just be better if it were said more like, "Gayness itself is broken." Because saying gay people are broken is a bit too difficult to not take implications from. I'm actually having a really hard time trying to explain what I want to in what way right now. :V

[Dark Fox 151]

There would be no modern world if everyone was gay, that's what he was saying. And hey, I'm asexual, so he called me broken and I'm cool with it, because I personally believe he's right, in a sense. However I agree "broken" is a misleading term. Or rather, in the context it's been used it. It would even just be better if it were said more like, "Gayness itself is broken." Because saying gay people are broken is a bit too difficult to not take implications from. I'm actually having a really hard time trying to explain what I want to in what way right now. :V

 

Ill wait for him to reply, I still don't understand why he's so persistant on defending semantics, besides his situation has no basis in reality and doesn't mean anything about gays now is wrong. That would be like me saying modern religious people are broken because if everyone was religious their would be no science, it has no basis in reality and leaves no middle ground.

[Shiki 5,854]

Ill wait for him to reply, I still don't understand why he's so persistant on defending semantics, besides his situation has no basis in reality and doesn't mean anything about gays now is wrong. That would be like me saying modern religious people are broken because if everyone was religious their would be no science, it has no basis in reality and leaves no middle ground.

I'm actually kind of in between, here. Because I can really understand where you both come from.

 

But I can always say that when it comes down to it, no one should care what anyone else has to say. So if you don't ageee with him, then fine don't. But don't get upset over it. :3c