It just means lame or undesirable...easily dismissed, and yep its derogatory towards gay people even if the intent isn't meant that way.
2006-11-30 14:01:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by imaginary friend 5
·
7⤊
0⤋
Though I am straight, I do not disagree with homosexuality, and for good reason. In theory, the only difference between a heterosexual and a homosexual is a prefix. I grew up in the Methodist church, so I'm no Antichrist, but I disagree with the church, which says homosexuality is a sin. It's a sexuality, not a sin. It's a feeling, not a choice. (When did you choose to be heterosexual?) My big problem with the "issue" of homosexuality isn't what religious people think; it's how religious viewpoints are pushed on to the American government, which is set to be secular, as stated in the Separation of Church and State. (I just wrote a college speech over this.) It's also important to know that though America was founded by Christians, it was even said by James Madison that this doesn't mean it's founded on Christian values. There is a big distinction, whether others see it or not. Because of religious viewpoints, homosexual marriage is illegal in many states, including my own, and for no logical reason. I live in Kansas, and after much searching for a logical reason, I saw that Kansas wants to keep the "tradition" of marriage alive, as do many other states. However, "tradition" doesn't mean that same thing to me as it does to you, nor does it mean the same thing to the next person. "Traditional" is just one of those things that you cannot define. I'm appalled that people let homosexuals "join civil unions" and think that's enough for them. A homosexual is no less a person than you are, so why are we treating them like they are? "Joining a civil union" is just like saying, "Well, we won't let you have the same rights because our religion says it's wrong (which is a violation of the First Amendment, actually, which states that people have a freedom of religion), so we're just going to let you have something close to a marriage, but isn't actually the same." It's just taking something unjust, two consenting adults unrelated by blood being denied the right to marry, and calling it something new. I can't believe more people can't see through that. However, there was a point brought up that if we let gays get married, what's next? Marrying your first cousin? An animal? The problem I have is this: marriage is the union of two consenting adults, not one adult and one animal that may (but we really don't know) be content with a marriage. While humans are technically animals, too, we know if we are consenting to something or not. The second problem I have with this is the problem that if we let gays marry, we'd have to let cousins marry, too. Honestly, there's nothing wrong with people getting married if they aren't blood related. However, marrying a first cousin, a sibling, or whomever you share blood with, is illegal for a logical reason, while banning homosexual marriage is not. The reason why marrying a blood relative is illegal is because it creates a limited gene pool because you and your blood relatives share many genes. By conceiving with a blood relative, you greatly add to the risk of causing a dangerous recessive gene to surface. This is why smaller groups of people who marry within the group have problems like this. One such example is the Amish. Sorry this is kind of a rant, but this is something that I have quite a viewpoint on. I know you don't agree with me, but I'm hoping I'm making some sense to you. EDIT: Another issue I have with not being able to prioritize sin is this: you have sinned. Axe murderers have sinned. Would you say you're as "bad" as an axe murderer? I don't think being intimate with my boyfriend before marrying him is as sinful as murdering a human being.
2016-05-23 06:41:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
they use this word as a term of offense and contempt and in a derogatory way. this is their way of saying that "gay' is the worse thing in the universe.
I'm not impressed with today's young generation. While technologically more sophisticated - they are culturally and socially backwards. Very intolerant and RABIDLY homophobic. they lack compassion and depth. all they can aspire to is get B.J's from their girlfriends. they only want to be "cool" acting in front of their peers. None of them have an independent , mind which has a conscience that criticizes itself daily and tries to become a better person to others. Young guys today - to use an Arabic expression "they have had their balls coddled too often".
2006-11-30 15:11:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well I'm 16, kids call stuff gay as another way to call something lame, or defective etc...
But I'd just rather say it's lame, because I think calling something gay is disrespectful and can be offensive. Plain and simple.
2006-11-30 16:56:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because somebody told them it's ok. Somebody had to teach them this. It's not good. It gives the word a negative... Personally when the word is used in context like that I get upset. Later on in life,if they grow up & happen to be gay then that's not going to sit well with them. Who would want their sexual orientation acossiated with a negative word? NOT ME. So if you see kids saying this word in the wrong context then tell them it's wrong. They should know better. It's not ok...
2006-11-30 14:08:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ida 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I am not exactly sure.. I work in a school and the use of that word is immeasurable.. They are using it as in saying that really sucks! Just another slang word I suppose.. kids are wierd.. haha and I think it leads down to they are idiots!!! HA HA
2006-11-30 14:03:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by itza_mea 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I really don't think most of the kids mean anything by it; so it normally doesn't offend me.
I had one of my employees do it earlier while in my office.....the look on his face when he realized what he had said in front of his gay boss. The facial expression was wonderful! He was sure I'd be mad, maybe fire him.
2006-11-30 14:18:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
the meaning of the word "gay" has been used to describe something uncool. That's so gay.
2006-11-30 14:03:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by What'd You Say? 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Just a buzz word, nothing more. Like kids who say 'radical' for things they find to be cool.
Kids associate being gay with femininity ( thanks to steretypes pushed by the media), so anything creative, artistic, sentimental or heart-felt will be called 'gay'.
I'm not offended by the use of 'gay' by kids as being 'nerdy' They're just kids. They do not affect the quality of my life with their application of the word......
2006-11-30 14:01:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
it's just a word to them with no real meaning as to a homosexual. I've found that more and more of the younger generation are more excepting
2006-11-30 14:03:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Ron N 5
·
1⤊
0⤋