Magic Johnson's son goes public with boyfriend

[captainsneakerhead23]

The chick is full of ****, you should know that.

And the dude, is just trolling not to crush the chicks world.

If this was for me, the chick is not full of **** because she was in some SERIOUS relationships. And the guy had no problem telling his wife and kids that he had decided to stick with his lover from prison. Not everyone operates the same when it comes to this, all paths to a final destination isn't going to be the same.

 

[boris]

Natural isn't the correct term for homosexuality imo. While I have absolutely zero problems with homosexuality I believe it's a genetic defect.

A harmless defect obviously but still, you get my point.

A couple things wrong here. 

By calling it a genetic defect, you're placing it in the same category as conditions such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy. What reasons do you have for that?

How is it harmful? What exactly does it do to inhibit the organism's fitness?

Also, I hope you realize that genetic diseases ARE natural. This, however, does not mean that I agree that homosexuality is a genetic disease. 

 

[boris]

You know this how? 

I can't tell if it's a really ignorant assertion or a statement from personal experience. Either way, it's a terrible generalization. 

Ok, so what's the difference between gay and strait people? I'll wait...... As for the hate towards me from my statement, you sound very defensive.....hmmmm.....

Lets make this clear, i don't care what people want to do, gay, bi, strait, tri, IDGAF.

Wait, are you going to answer my question? How did you come up with your previous statements? 

 

[Belgium]

A couple things wrong here. 

By calling it a genetic defect, you're placing it in the same category as conditions such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy. What reasons do you have for that?

How is it harmful? What exactly does it do to inhibit the organism's fitness?

Also, I hope you realize that genetic diseases ARE natural. This, however, does not mean that I agree that homosexuality is a genetic disease. 

Well we're supposed to reproduce right? Homosexual men are attracted to eachother instead of women, which prevents reproduction.

I said it was harmless. I refer to it as a defect because in my opinion, homosexuality isn't supposed to happen. Like I said before we're supposed to reproduce.

However that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it, not at all. Their sexual attraction is different and that's it. Homosexuals are people just like everyone else on the planet and deserve to be treated as such.

As for placing it in the same category as Duchenne muscular dystrophy, I wouldn't exactly say that. Homosexuality is neither a disease nor harmful, however I simply see it as a "defect" because of its interference with reproduction of our species.

My bad if I'm unclear in certain aspects, I'm 18 and English is my 3rd language.

 

[captainsneakerhead23]

Yeah I agree, by any means I would never encourage my son or daughter down that path of homosexuality. If they choose that lifestyle, I can only be there to support their decisions. My only request, especially in regards to my son, would be to miss me with them furs & purses!! I can't get jiggy with that **** I'm sorry.

They don't choose that lifestyle, so in essence, supporting your child should be easier if (s)he happens to be gay.

I always feel like you have choice in my world. I'm not into the whole scientific facts and genetic makeup BS. That's just me though and I respect those who think otherwise.

So.... assuming you're attracted to women only (as am I)- you think gay people should just suck it up and live as heterosexuals, and force themselves to have sex with the opposite sex? You want them to go against whats natural to them just to please you and keep the bigots quiet? Well... could you get it hard for a dude- and then PITB? Its a legitimate question, I know I couldn't

Dirk what's happening homie?

To answer your question, my thought process isn't the same as others which is why I said I respect those who believe scientific evidence and genetic makup, etc .. I personally think it's a choice because I have a gay male friend and a gay female friend who tell me all the time that they chose the lifestyle. Both were straight as 6 o'clock, none of that hiding in the closet or whatever you want to call it. On the female's end, it went from being an experiment to finding comfort in being with the same sex. The male did a 14 yr bid in prison and started to shift that way because he was around men all day, he also has a wife & two kids.They both always say they can go back to the oppositie sex whenever they want but they perfer the lifestyle they chose.

I didnt say anything about going against what's natural to them, not sure why you assumed that nor would I ask my kids to do anything to please me, except my son with the purses & furs

And no Dirk, I can't get my jimmy up for a dude nor has that thought crossed my mind until you asked the question. Hopefully I provided you with enough details to see where I'm coming from, if not we can simply agree to disagree no biggie

Not much, waiting for 5 o clock to roll around. I get what you're saying, I went to school with a few (from about 5th grade to graduation)- the 3 guys were always pretty feminine and a little flamboyant (1 was over the top)- and this was even really before anybody thought about that (at that age you don't really think about it). A couple females too, were always tomboys- played basketball with us- turned out to be homosexual as well. I guess I've just seen it from early on and it seemed like all of them truly were just born into it rather than choosing it (sure , they choose to sleep with the same sex just like you and I choose to sleep with the opposite- but it seems like we all have in common that the reason we make those choices is because that's what comes natural to us, respectively). I just wanted to ask that question, because it made the point I was trying to make in the easiest possible way (sorry for the gross visual, haha). But, I didn't mean any disrespect to you by what I said- I can appreciate that you (as well as myself) have said what we really believe without getting disrespectful or pushy with others. g (of course theres been a few jokes, but- with some of these responses- you just have to laugh)

You always dropping knowledge and I can tell your responses are thoughtful not a bunch of blabber .. I get what u mean though. My question to you is what do you think about the boys who were raised by their mom and a bunch of sisters, no brothers or father figures in their life? I think that can also play a factor in young males being attracted to the same sex. Thoughts?

 

[boris]

Well we're supposed to reproduce right? Homosexual men are attracted to eachother instead of women, which prevents reproduction.

I said it was harmless. I refer to it as a defect because in my opinion, homosexuality isn't supposed to happen. Like I said before we're supposed to reproduce.

However that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it, not at all. Their sexual attraction is different and that's it. Homosexuals are people just like everyone else on the planet and deserve to be treated as such.

As for placing it in the same category as Duchenne muscular dystrophy, I wouldn't exactly say that. Homosexuality is neither a disease nor harmful, however I simply see it as a "defect" because of its interference with reproduction of our species.

My bad if I'm unclear in certain aspects, I'm 18 and English is my 3rd language.

Thanks for the clarification.

Are we supposed to reproduce? Reproduction is necessary to carry on a species, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we're supposed to do it. As far as evolution is concerned, there's no plan or future in mind. 

Calling it a defect implies that it is a disorder or disease. It doesn't really make sense to say that it's a defect but also say that it's harmless. 

 

[sooperhooper]

This is going to become the largest thread on nt.

 

[Gex the Damaja]

Thanks for the clarification.

Are we supposed to reproduce? Reproduction is necessary to carry on a species, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we're supposed to do it. As far as evolution is concerned, there's no plan or future in mind. 

Calling it a defect implies that it is a disorder or disease. It doesn't really make sense to say that it's a defect but also say that it's harmless. 

What do you mean by "doesn't mean we're suppose" to do it? If reproduction is necessary, how does that not support the idea we are suppose to do it?

DISCLAIMER: Not talking in reference to Homosexuality, just this specific point.

 

[jbug88]

if only there were a gay person in this thread who could tell us whether or not he or she chose to be gay....

View media item 346598


and after I posted this pic, I realized it was of George Takei.
View media item 346598
-J-

 

[boris]

Thanks for the clarification.

Are we supposed to reproduce? Reproduction is necessary to carry on a species, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we're supposed to do it. As far as evolution is concerned, there's no plan or future in mind. 

Calling it a defect implies that it is a disorder or disease. It doesn't really make sense to say that it's a defect but also say that it's harmless. 

What do you mean by "doesn't mean we're suppose" to do it? If reproduction is necessary, how does that not support the idea we are suppose to do it?

DISCLAIMER: Not talking in reference to Homosexuality, just this specific point.

I said that reproduction is necessary to carry on a species. However, saying that we are supposed to reproduce implies that we were given some sort of purpose or goal. Nothing mandates that we reproduce. 

 

[Belgium]

Thanks for the clarification.

Are we supposed to reproduce? Reproduction is necessary to carry on a species, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we're supposed to do it. As far as evolution is concerned, there's no plan or future in mind. 

Calling it a defect implies that it is a disorder or disease. It doesn't really make sense to say that it's a defect but also say that it's harmless. 

I do believe that we are supposed to reproduce yes. What sets us apart from other animals in this department is free will.

We can choose whether or not we reproduce. Most animals' lives essentially revolve around birth, reproduction and death.

Us humans have reproductive systems and sexual attraction to eachother in order to procreate. Whether it's something you're really supposed to do is debatable and rests more on personal opinion than a scientific basis imo. Of course with my age and limited background on the subject I can't speak on the latter.

As for the term defect; I'm aware of its implication(s) but like I said earlier I'm not sure how else to put it.

Is "flaw" "deviation" perhaps a better term?

 

[sir charles]

i get what you are saying but jim carey, hart etc... do not emulate, display mannerism, or behavior that is typically associated with the opposite sex. for as silly and wild and crazy as adam sandler may act, he doesnt vicariously lives, acts overtly over the top as a woman. That is what i think he is addressing. Saying the fact that a man...refuses to accept he is a male, and goes overboard with what he feels makes a woman....and in doing so, basically makes a spoof/mockery of women in the process.

As far as homosexuality is concerned...1 many ppl say its always been around which is false, seeing as the oldest evidence in history we have of homosexuality is in european countries....and i think we all know life started well before european colonization. Also in terms of races etc... their hasnt been any documented accounts of homosexuality in other races untill the assimilation of europeans in other countries and/or races. So if it is so called "natural" or born with it etc...how come no other races... until interaction with europeans have a history of homosexuality? Unless ppl are saying its some sort of biological trait that was exclusive to them...and with race mixing it became prominant in other races.

In my opinion, i dont believe it is natural and honestly think it is bigger then any of us...and how and why it is so relevant/rampant is something only the ppl in the know will know. Im not trying to sound like some conspiracy theorist. But im not buying just out of the blue this huuuuge emergence of homosexuality "just happend". I believe it is one of those the picture is bigger then any of us lowly ppl on the totem pole of this world.

What determines what a man is though? Clothing? Sexual preference? You? Jim Carey goes to the beach wearing women's swim wear. So in your logic, he is acting like a woman. Yet he is straight. So paragraph one, invalid. Here is a nice picture to show you. 

Paragraph two. So your saying humans had no sexual preferences besides heterosexuality until it started getting documented in European culture? Who are you to know? Have you looked at any other cultures? Ancient Egypt? I bet if you look at a few of the hieroglyphics you will be pretty surprised at what you find.

Paragraph three. Not natural? In terms of reproduction, no it isn't. In terms of human emotion, completely natural. I understand you completely, but I just don't think you are correct. There wasn't really a huge emergence in homosexuality either, with the advancements of technology and more people ready for society to change, it has become a more popular issue. Gay people don't just pop up out of the blue. 

 

[soleking]

What determines what a man is though? Clothing? Sexual preference? You? Jim Carey goes to the beach wearing women's swim wear. So in your logic, he is acting like a woman. Yet he is straight. So paragraph one, invalid. Here is a nice picture to show you. 

Paragraph two. So your saying humans had no sexual preferences besides heterosexuality until it started getting documented in European culture? Who are you to know? Have you looked at any other cultures? Ancient Egypt? I bet if you look at a few of the hieroglyphics you will be pretty surprised at what you find.

Paragraph three. Not natural? In terms of reproduction, no it isn't. In terms of human emotion, completely natural. I understand you completely, but I just don't think you are correct. There wasn't really a huge emergence in homosexuality either, with the advancements of technology and more people ready for society to change, it has become a more popular issue. Gay people don't just pop up out of the blue. 

you do realize jim carey is a huge troll/attention *****?

 

[Gex the Damaja]

I said that reproduction is necessary to carry on a species. However, saying that we are supposed to reproduce implies that we were given some sort of purpose or goal. Nothing mandates that we reproduce. 

What biological idea are you stating this on? Depending on who you read, our behavior, just as animals, is designed to reproduce individual genetic material. Reproduction being the tool, replication of genetic code the purpose.

 

[sir charles]

"i get what you are saying but jim carey, hart etc... do not emulate, display mannerism, or behavior that is typically associated with the opposite sex. "Bruh you completely missed the point. Jim Carrey is acting like a woman. As well as a fool. Yet, he has no mental disorder.

 

[boris]

I said that reproduction is necessary to carry on a species. However, saying that we are supposed to reproduce implies that we were given some sort of purpose or goal. Nothing mandates that we reproduce. 

What biological idea are you stating this on? Depending on who you read, our behavior, just as animals, is designed to reproduce individual genetic material. Reproduction being the tool, replication of genetic code the purpose.

Designed to reproduce? Who, or what, designed our behavior to reproduce? 

 

[shoelyesses]

What determines what a man is though? Clothing? Sexual preference? You? Jim Carey goes to the beach wearing women's swim wear. So in your logic, he is acting like a woman. Yet he is straight. So paragraph one, invalid. Here is a nice picture to show you. 

Paragraph two. So your saying humans had no sexual preferences besides heterosexuality until it started getting documented in European culture? Who are you to know? Have you looked at any other cultures? Ancient Egypt? I bet if you look at a few of the hieroglyphics you will be pretty surprised at what you find.

Paragraph three. Not natural? In terms of reproduction, no it isn't. In terms of human emotion, completely natural. I understand you completely, but I just don't think you are correct. There wasn't really a huge emergence in homosexuality either, with the advancements of technology and more people ready for society to change, it has become a more popular issue. Gay people don't just pop up out of the blue. 

There is a social norm, if you will in terms of women clothing/behavior etc... your basically saying we live in a unisex world. In which we simply dont. And to my point in terms of mindset/mannerism behavior...there is scientific proof the womans mind/thought process...etc, differs from a man. This is fact... While some men act more affeminine then others...there are to many factors that could lead to this, such as processed foods ie...pumped full of hormones, the environment in which you are raised so on and so forth. So that along would null and void the whole "natural" born this way argument ie whose to say whats a man/woman behavior. That kind of gets thrown out the window when a person involves themselves in the unnatural. By no means am i saying it isnt possibly, but look at it like this... you take two kids...place one in a single mother home, full of crime, drugs, poverty etc... and the other kid in a dual parent mother/father home, with a stable well to do environment...and the first kid is more then likely to fail then the second kid. To dismiss the factors of his upbringing and say oh he was born to fail be a criminal is for lack of better words foolish. Could it happen the opposite way...sure but the likelihood and probability is much lower, slim to none.

there is proof and in terms of ancient cultures..all there is is this assumption by historians...ie if their is viable proof such and such ppl did it then by default these other ppl have done it as well. I wouldnt neccesarily call that "credible". Their are writings scrolls etc..... discovered with text/drawings etc... of older european cultures/cilivizations that state homosexuality. Whether it be eluded or outright stated. So again all we can go by is what we do know. To assume someone else did something, despite lack of proof just of the principals of well these ppl over hear did it.....

As far as history goes id have to disagree based on what i mentioned above. Yes i made some what of an assumption, but the assumption was at the very least backed by facts.

Example suppose you lived in a area...no signs evidence of crime... some ppl move from an area documented and known for crime relocate to your area. Later on down the line there is reports and accounts of crime etc... Although there wasnt anything to say there was/wasnt any crime in your area before...based on the evidence we do know... there werent any reports, accounts of crime until those new ppl who came from an area known for crime moved to the area.

And as far as emergence im not talking like a generational thing ie the 90's 80's etc... im talking in terms of large spans of time. Timelines in which we have what i would say relaively modern documented accounts of history. I would go as far as to say 100 or a few 100 years ago. While id agree as of late our society is more accepting and ppl are more forthcomming in terms of homosexuality. But i wouldnt conclude because of this the growth of the community hasnt changed just the amount of ppl who admit it has. I cant just make that assumption ie...like saying there was 20 million gays then and 20 million gays now only difference now is that because of change of times instead of 5 million outta 20 being open and honest, its all 20 million being open and honest about it.

it kinda reminds me when i hear young cats say it was just as many jumpoffs etc...sluts etc and what not back in the day as it is now...only difference is technology exposes it more....and as a person who is from the so called back in the day, im like nooooo...im not saying it didnt exist or never happened but technology and the times isnt the sole reason you see more...its the fact that there is more of it period.

Its like wshh, ig, facebook etc... twitter isnt the reason we see more crime ratchetness etc... we see more crime rachetness/crime bafoonery because simply put more ppl involve themselves in it.

 

[oidreez]

For the people who are against homosexuals, think its a choice and that they weren't born that way, please explain this for me....

When a baby boy is conceived and developing in a mothers womb, they get hormones & DNA from both their mother and father, right?

Who's to say that baby boy didn't get more of his moms hormones/DNA? And that's what made him homosexual?

Honestly, its pointless to debate with close-minded people like this...so many ignorant people in this thread...SMH...

We say stuff like "people are born gay" but then who gave the fetus the code to be gay? If mommy is straight and daddy is straight then how was the baby born gay?

 

[alp]

"i get what you are saying but jim carey, hart etc... do not emulate, display mannerism, or behavior that is typically associated with the opposite sex. " Bruh you completely missed the point. Jim Carrey is acting like a woman. As well as a fool. Yet, he has no mental disorder.

he has adhd, a quick google search wouldve told u that,but no, u wanted to find the picture of him in womens swimwear.............

 

[shoelyesses]

I do believe that we are supposed to reproduce yes. What sets us apart from other animals in this department is free will.

We can choose whether or not we reproduce. Most animals' lives essentially revolve around birth, reproduction and death.

Us humans have reproductive systems and sexual attraction to eachother in order to procreate. Whether it's something you're really supposed to do is debatable and rests more on personal opinion than a scientific basis imo. Of course with my age and limited background on the subject I can't speak on the latter.

As for the term defect; I'm aware of its implication(s) but like I said earlier I'm not sure how else to put it.

Is "flaw" "deviation" perhaps a better term?

true to an extent i believe dolphins, forms of primates ie apes chimps etc...and a feew other mammals choose sex and actually have sex simply for pleasure in the same manner that us humans do. So while it isnt an abundance of creatures there are infact many that have as you put it "free will" in terms of choosing as partner to have sex with solely for enjoyment. If anything we should study these creatures and see what makes them choose same sex vs opposite sex. At the very least we do know (as far as limited knowledge the higher ups gives us) animals arent influenced in any matter that alters who they are. Should try to see for example what makes a male dolphin if he infact does so... choose to have sex with another male dolphin...and in the same what makes this other male dolphin have sex with female dolphins only.

 

[sir charles]

That's his personality, not the fault of his sexuality.
And this is where you are at fault. You said being gay is a mental disorder because men act flamboyant and stupid, but then you said straight men do the same.

Why blame homosexuality? Homosexuality isn't the disorder, it's that individuals personality.

because more often than not its the homos that act in gay ways. I dont get y ppl in this forum are pretending like theyve never seen a gay person that pissed them off before

What? 

Pretending like the sight of a gay male has never upset me? What do I have to be mad about? That he has a sexual preference? I'm good. I have no reason to be upset. Same with clothing. Why should I care that a man is wearing a dress, or a large scarf? I am in no way affected by that mans choice, and I would have no reason to be upset by his choices. Why are you getting upset over another man's life choice? There can't be than many reasons why. Are you stuck in a childish mentality that won't let you grow up and realize that the world doesn't revolve around your beliefs? Or are you upset because you don't like the think about what he does behind closed doors? Or maybe you are upset he doesn't fit the schema you have created for the average male? I really want to know, what about another man makes you upset?

"More often than not its the "homos" that act in gay ways"

C'mon son. Seeing from your post history, you obviously believe that "gay ways" means wearing dresses and acting flamboyant. Which isn't the case. Being gay refers to sexual preference. A gay man may be flamboyant, but a flamboyant man isn't always gay. I could put on some high heels, a dress, and some lipstick, but that does not make me gay. 

Learn the difference between flamboyant behavior, and homosexuality. The two can mix, but they will never be hand in hand.

More importantly, Grow up.

 

[sir charles]

"i get what you are saying but jim carey, hart etc... do not emulate, display mannerism, or behavior that is typically associated with the opposite sex. " Bruh you completely missed the point. Jim Carrey is acting like a woman. As well as a fool. Yet, he has no mental disorder.

he has adhd, a quick google search wouldve told u that,but no, u wanted to find the picture of him in womens swimwear.............

So dressing like a woman is due to ADHD in a straight male, but when it comes to a gay male it cannot be any other reason except his sexual preference?

 

[alp]

What? 

Pretending like the sight of a gay male has never upset me? What do I have to be mad about? That he has a sexual preference? I'm good. I have no reason to be upset. Same with clothing. Why should I care that a man is wearing a dress, or a large scarf? I am in no way affected by that mans choice, and I would have no reason to be upset by his choices. Why are you getting upset over another man's life choice? There can't be than many reasons why. Are you stuck in a childish mentality that won't let you grow up and realize that the world doesn't revolve around your beliefs? Or are you upset because you don't like the think about what he does behind closed doors? Or maybe you are upset he doesn't fit the schema you have created for the average male? I really want to know, what about another man makes you upset?

"More often than not its the "homos" that act in gay ways"

C'mon son. Seeing from your post history, you obviously believe that "gay ways" means wearing dresses and acting flamboyant. Which isn't the case. Being gay refers to sexual preference. A gay man may be flamboyant, but a flamboyant man isn't always gay. I could put on some high heels, a dress, and some lipstick, but that does not make me gay. 

Learn the difference between flamboyant behavior, and homosexuality. The two can mix, but they will never be hand in hand.

More importantly, Grow up.

im not upset, doesnt even cross my mind what anyone does behind closed doors. My interpretation of gay and your interpretation are completely different. Anyways, i had enough talking about homosexuals, time to abandon this thread

 

[alp]

So dressing like a woman is due to ADHD in a straight male, but when it comes to a gay male it cannot be any other reason except his sexual preference?

could be, i dont know him jim personally to say yes or no and chances are neither do you, but your point on jim carrey is mute because he does have a mental disorder.

 

[Peep Game]