Originally Posted by Snestorm (Post 1219201)

Do you take pride in your country?

Originally Posted by Snestorm (Post 1219200)

They aren't terrible people. The fact that they are homosexual has as much to do with us, collectivly, as it does with them.

Homosexuality in animals (4 legged as well as 2 legged) can be brought about by overpopulation. It's one of natures ways of trying to control the birth rate.

Originally Posted by mookiemookie (Post 1219129)

You may find this a bit enlightening: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrat

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1219219)

No. Nor do I feel ashamed by my nationality.

Antikristuseke sees it right, I think. You can take pride only in some kind of personal acchievement or performance. A skill you learned. A deed you did. A consequence you caused.

But being proud of living under a blue sky? Or being proud of being born in this country instead of another? - Or being proud of having this skin colour, and not another, or this sexual orientation and not another? where'S your personal acchievement in that quality you are porud of? You did not even contribute to it! Hell, you even did not get asked!

You can prefer this over that, and you can like or dislike to be this or that, or to stay here or there. You can love it and find it pleasant, or not. But being proud? Maybe parents can be proud of the acchievements of their offspring, because their educational success may be reflected in their children'S records, and thus: their investement/contribution. But I already have a problem when it is the other way around and the offspring says he is proud of his father/mother. My father was a classic musician. They said he did well on his instrument. Am I proud of him for having been member of a big famous orchestra? No. It was his acchievement, not mine, and I did not assist him in it. But I love him for being like that, and i love him for having been part of some great music being performed. But love is not the same like pride.

And then a principle thing, since it is often mistaken: pride, and honour, are two different things. What is it many moral systems and religions have to say on pride? They usually do not rate pride as a virtue, but a sin, don't they. I wouldn't go that far, but I prefer honour over pride any day.

so to come back to your question, I used to like living in Germany, because of it's landscape that I like more than most others i have seen in the world, the security and comfort it provides (different to some other nations I have seen) , and the access to medical help that you have (unknown in some countries), if needed. But proud of all that - I am not, because I did not make Germany to be that way.

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1219274)

A definition that catches a widespread populistic understanding of the term, but I very strongly disagree with it's correctness.

wikipedia:

Pride is, depending on the context, either a high sense of the worth of one's self or one's own or a pleasure taken in the contemplation of these things. Social psychologists identify it as linked to a signal of high social status.[1] One definition of pride in the first sense comes from St. Augustine: "the love of one's own excellence." [2] In this sense, the opposite of pride is humility.
Pride is sometimes viewed as excessive or as a vice, sometimes as proper or as a virtue. While some philosophers such as Aristotle consider pride a profound virtue, most world religions consider it a sin.
According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, proud comes from late Old English prut, probably from Old French prud "brave, valiant" (11th century) (which became preux in French), from Late Latin term prodis "useful", which is compared with the Latin prodesse "be of use".[3] The sense of "having a high opinion of oneself", not in French, may reflect the Anglo-Saxons' opinion of the Norman knights who called themselves "proud", like the French knights preux.[citation needed]
When viewed as a virtue, pride in one's appearance and abilities is known as virtuous pride, greatness of soul or magnanimity, but when viewed as a vice it is often termed vanity or vainglory. Pride can also manifest itself as a high opinion of one's nation (national pride) and ethnicity (ethnic pride).


As ex-psychologist I especially agree with Wikipedia's entry on pride in psychological understanding:

Pride is "a pleasant, sometimes exhilarating, emotion that results from a positive self-evaluation" (Lewis, 2002). The standard view of pride was that it results from satisfaction with meeting the personal goals set by oneself. Most research on pride attempts to distinguish the positive aspects of pride and the negative. Pride involves exhilarated pleasure and a feeling of accomplishment. Pride is related to "more positive behaviors and outcomes in the area where the individual is proud" (Weiner, 1985). Pride is generally associated with positive social behaviors such as helping others and outward promotion. According to Bagozzi et al., pride can have the positive benefits of enhancing creativity, productivity, and altruism.

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1219192)

Just in case no one caught that, that was sort of a joke. You know, Texans elected a gay woman because the only alternative was a black man...humor...eh? Probably not as funny as the voices in my head made it sound... :88)

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk (Post 1219222)

Well of course they are not terrible people. But I need to qualify that because there are some that are terrible. But this goes hand and hand with hetersexuals as well. Concerning your last sentence and natures way of control birth rate, can you elaborate on this?

Originally Posted by Snestorm (Post 1219310)

I would love to but, that was something I read many years ago about herd animals beginning to dry-hump (same sex) when the herd got to big.

Problem 1: I have no idé what the source was, or even if was a highly reliable one.
Problem 2: Is that I saw the similarity to human behavior and drew my own conclussion based on some ancient societies. (And no, I will not elaborate on which societies for fear of starting a new GT war).

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk (Post 1219315)

I was just wondering and thought it to be a strange theory.

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS) (Post 1219313)

Homosexuality is nothing new to the world. It's been around since the Spartans at least. I don't see what the big deal is..oh...wait never mind, Christianity has a problem with it.:shifty:

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1219442)

Not only Christianity. Ask Islam, for example. ;)

However you are right, homosexuality usually is no big issue and must not be an issue, neither in nature, nor amongst humans. But some people try to turn it into a big issue, and they want everybody else to take note of it. And then it is a big issue. Not by nature - but by effort.

Freaks, you see.

Originally Posted by Platapus (Post 1219447)

So, please consider, that when homosexuals "make a big deal out of it" it may be in response to the "big deal" societies have made about them first.

Originally Posted by Platapus (Post 1219447)

It is not a big issue if someone is black either..... until society made it an issue being black. The same applies to homosexuals. It should not be a big issue... until society makes it a big issue.

So, please consider, that when homosexuals "make a big deal out of it" it may be in response to the "big deal" societies have made about them first.

Originally Posted by Méo (Post 1219224)

Thanks,

Altough interesting, it's a bit weird, they seem to crossover..

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS) (Post 1219313)

Homosexuality is nothing new to the world. It's been around since the Spartans at least. I don't see what the big deal is..oh...wait never mind, Christianity has a problem with it.:shifty: