another word for that is “accurate” 
Webster dictionary does not define that as inaccurate.
Indeed. You are the role model of Christianity in the worst sense. Anyone with even just a bit humanity would care. That you don‘t care for their need only because they are born that way, or that you wouldn‘t try to help a suicider from jumping, speaks volume about what kind of a rotten human being you are.
I dislike their pride parades as well. But every time I see a hateful comment by homophobes like you and Reggie, I need to admit that they unfortunately still have enough justified reasons to do so.
Then you should be way more unsettled about the heterosexuals, if you really care for children. 
Yes, I am a rotten human being. What does that make you, my twisted sister in Christ.
Geez! That was hateful.
I never make hateful comments about homosexuals.
I find their sex act gross, but that is not hate. I do not go around telling them I find it gross, and none of them have ever asked my opinion on that.
I don’t think we should be having drag queens or other such performers in schools, but that is also not hate. I really don’t see why elementary school aged kids (under 12) need any sex education.
I don’t like their parades. I dislike the traffic, but I also dislike the amount of public nudity here during their parades. I used to support public nudity when I was younger but I’ve changed on that and prefer that people keep their clothes on, now.
I support gay marriage, gay spousal benefits, and I don’t think businesses should be allowed to discriminate against gays in the workplace.
Which of these things do you disagree with? In our previous talks, back when we were friends, you told me clearly you find anal sex very disgusting, that you disagree with drag shows in schools, that you don’t like their parades, that you disagree with public nudity, that you also support gay marriage and gay spousal benefits, and that you don’t agree with discrimination against gays in the workplace.
As far as I can see, we agree on everything to do with homosexuality. What is your quarrel?
sounds like there is an easy fix for all of this:
you both need to do some anal sex in a public place and then dress up, parade around town and then go to school to tell some kids about it
We are not Dutch, Nico.
yes you are and germans are practically dutch too
That’s probably why they don’t ask. Why would anyone want to hear condemnation spewing forth from the mouth of a heterosexual. That’s why they don’t go to church. If they don’t publicly express sorrow and repentance they either think or know church goers will use Scripture to condemn them when there is no condemnation in Christ. That’s why David chose Gods punishment over man’s. Because he knew God was merciful but man is not merciful at all. He knew God would humble him but stop short of taking his life. No so when the life of another and power is handed over to man.
Back when you were friends? I know it’s not my business but you’re the one who posted it so I’m curious, why do you say you’re not friends anymore?
dutch humour would be to say that its obvious: she didnt want anal sex (but i agree its their business)
Oh
I’m sure if he would ben…nevermind.
Don’t be silly, Michele. Finding something gross is not condemnation. I find flip-flops gross but I don’t condemn people who wear them. I don’t believe it is the fault of homosexuals that they are gay. I do think that all human desires will be controllable in the future.
It’s funny the reaction that gets among some, as though I’m advocating some kind of genocide. If I say, “in the future, I believe there will be treatments that make us find unhealthy food repulsive and only healthy food desirable”, most people say, “great, that sounds wonderful, perhaps people who choose that treatment will be healthier”. Say it about other things and the same people freak out.
The difference is plain to see actually. For such a treatment you need to want it. Many if not most homosexuals don‘t feel the wish to change their sexual orientation. Of course you could compel them (directly by law but also indirectly by increasing the social and financial pressure on them). But why would you want to apply this sharp tool if they don‘t want it - assumed they live in a society which grants them equal rights hopefully soon?
This difference exists only in your mind. Absolutely nobody is talking about forcing homosexuals to take a treatment they don’t want. If they want to be heterosexual, let them be. If they don’t want to be heterosexual, then leave them alone. Obviously.
If someone cures diabetes and I prefer to stay diabetic, nobody would force me to take the cure. It’s totally up to me. And it’s totally up to each homosexual. But nobody would say we shouldn’t come up with new treatments for diabetics, or that it’s wrong to talk about that because it may marginalize diabetics.
lol no the difference only exist in the minds of religious nuts and other insane people
homosexuality is not a disease like your diabetes, its a natural form of sexuality
Why is my diabetes a disease, Nico? I am perfectly happy being diabetic. My blood sugar is controlled by diet. It just means I have to avoid eating crap, which people should do anyway. I am happy, healthy and entirely content with my life. Who are you to call it a disease? Why do you seek to label me?
If someone comes with a way for my pancreas to produce insulin, who are you or anyone else to tell me I have to take it? It’s my choice.
And if someone comes up with a way for me to find chocolate unappealing but have a huge desire for broccoli, who are you or anyone to tell me I can’t take it? Enjoying chocolate is not a disease, but it’s my choice and my life and my decision, not yours and not Gunda’s and not anyone else’s.
And if someone comes up with a way for heterosexuals to find the opposite sex unappealing but find the same sex desirable and attractive, who are you or Gunda to stop them from taking that treatment and turning homosexual?
And oh yeah, that means gays get the same choices.
I agree to everything you wrote regarding that no pressure should be applied, neither directly nor indirectly (for this a society need to grant them full equal rights, though). But I disagree with the above quote of yours.
The difference exists not just in my mind, as homosexuality isn‘t at all comparable with eating unhealthy food or diabetes. Homosexuals are healthy just as heterosexuals are. They also don‘t need treatment to get healed from being sick.
Whether they need “treatment” or whether they choose to modify their desires with new tech is not your decision to make. It is theirs.
Sure, but you choose Diabetes and unhealthy food as examples. And those aren‘t correct comparisons.
I wouldn‘t have a problem if you label it as an option, though, but without this negative connotation as being something unhealthy and/or a sickness.