Another day, another Right-wing hypocrite.

[B_OtterJoq]

I was just wondering how his pastor would respond to
"11 shot 8 foot cumshot
First person view
Raining down on you
A 'jackson pollock'"

 

[justasimpleguy]

Yeah, the anger from people like Face is just confusing as shit. What is someone who's a social conservative doing on a site like this?

 

[maxcok]

Question for you... and just asking, since most homosexuals are anti-creationism and pro-Darwinism.

Is your "naturally occurring event" an inferior trait? Relax, throttle back and put the Darwinian shotgun back in your sights, that you love to shoot at the religious right.... doesn't homosexuality in species that can't procreate amidst same sex coitus constitute a DEFECTIVE gene in Darwinian speak?

Just askin'?

"Current research indicates that various forms of same-sex sexual behavior are found throughout the animal kingdom. A new review made in 2009 of existing research showed that same-sex behavior is a nearly universal phenomenon in the animal kingdom, common across species."

Homosexual behavior in animals

I was just wondering how his pastor would respond to
"11 shot 8 foot cumshot
First person view
Raining down on you
A 'jackson pollock'"

He'd try to humiliate her and give her a bukkake.

 

[houtx48]

Oh Face Queen is just cruising for some dick; let him do it. 100% str8....lolllllllllllllll

 

[B_Nick4444]

Question for you... and just asking, since most homosexuals are anti-creationism and pro-Darwinism.

Is your "naturally occurring event" an inferior trait? Relax, throttle back and put the Darwinian shotgun back in your sights, that you love to shoot at the religious right.... doesn't homosexuality in species that can't procreate amidst same sex coitus constitute a DEFECTIVE gene in Darwinian speak?

Just askin'?

no they don't

hallmark of liberalism is absence of intellectual integrity, consequently, the consistent appearance of internal logical coherence in any of their statements or positions

hence, the pattern thinking, pattern statements, and bumper sticker phrases substituting for thought and discourse

 

[conntom]

Question for you... and just asking, since most homosexuals are anti-creationism and pro-Darwinism.

Is your "naturally occurring event" an inferior trait? Relax, throttle back and put the Darwinian shotgun back in your sights, that you love to shoot at the religious right.... doesn't homosexuality in species that can't procreate amidst same sex coitus constitute a DEFECTIVE gene in Darwinian speak?

Just askin'?

Fair question Face.

I find it no matter if it is or is not an inferior trait or defective trait.

Obviously, the species fails to continue if we stopped heterosexual behavior. So we need it and it should be encouraged and the production of children should be encouraged at a gov't level as well - ie tax credits or what have you.

All that said, we will still have gay people. They are valuable people and can contribute greatly to society just as any heterosexual. As much as I agree with the right, I do not see why gays are treated the way they are.

I find it laughable when religious right figures preach anti-gay rhetoric and then get caught engaging in such behavior. There has to be a reassessment of how they approach the issue. I think their fear is that it will become too commonplace and kids (in particular) at the odd stages of puberty will engage in behavior that they would regret because society made it too easy.

I'm not necessarily suggesting that the militant gay agenda is right. But I agree that they are treated poorly for something that can be scientifically proven to be a normal characteristic just as much as blue, brown or green eyes are.

 

[vince]

no they don't

hallmark of liberalism is absence of intellectual integrity, consequently, the consistent appearance of internal logical coherence in any of their statements or positions

hence, the pattern thinking, pattern statements, and bumper sticker phrases substituting for thought and discourse

Oh, I had no idea you were a liberal.

 

[TurkeyWithaSunburn]

Question for you... and just asking, since most homosexuals are anti-creationism and pro-Darwinism.

Is your "naturally occurring event" an inferior trait? Relax, throttle back and put the Darwinian shotgun back in your sights, that you love to shoot at the religious right.... doesn't homosexuality in species that can't procreate amidst same sex coitus constitute a DEFECTIVE gene in Darwinian speak?

Problem with creationism is who's creationism? The Native Americans and their two-spirit berdache. The south Pacific islanders with their own version of effeminate men. Or maybe Islamic Iran which has the death penalty for gays but allows sex change operations for transsexuals. Maybe an Amazonian jungle tribe that believes they were created by jaguars.

By definition, beliefs require no proof.

As for defective genes, genes may or may not be involved in homosexual orientation. Identical twins aren't 100% congruous for sexual orientation. You can inject pregnant rats with hormones and the offspring show a larger than expected amount of samesex attempted matings in the offspring. The 2d4d ratio, known as the lesbian finger, which is influenced by hormones. And there are the studies showing the older brother effect, the more older brothers you have the more likely you are to be gay.

It's more than likely in-utero hormones are involved.

 

[B_OtterJoq]

no they don't

hallmark of liberalism is absence of intellectual integrity, consequently, the consistent appearance of internal logical coherence in any of their statements or positions

hence, the pattern thinking, pattern statements, and bumper sticker phrases substituting for thought and discourse

Actually, you just described the Tea Party to a, well, T.

 

[B_OtterJoq]

Yeah, the anger from people like Face is just confusing as shit. What is someone who's a social conservative doing on a site like this?

Looking at pics of big dicks...just like everyone else here.

 

[conntom]

Actually, you just described the Tea Party to a, well, T.

I'm Tea party-ish and I fully reject that statement as would many Tea Party people.

 

[mikeyh9in]

Fair question Face.

I find it no matter if it is or is not an inferior trait or defective trait.

Obviously, the species fails to continue if we stopped heterosexual behavior. So we need it and it should be encouraged and the production of children should be encouraged at a gov't level as well - ie tax credits or what have you.

All that said, we will still have gay people. They are valuable people and can contribute greatly to society just as any heterosexual. As much as I agree with the right, I do not see why gays are treated the way they are.

I find it laughable when religious right figures preach anti-gay rhetoric and then get caught engaging in such behavior. There has to be a reassessment of how they approach the issue. I think their fear is that it will become too commonplace and kids (in particular) at the odd stages of puberty will engage in behavior that they would regret because society made it too easy.

I'm not necessarily suggesting that the militant gay agenda is right. But I agree that they are treated poorly for something that can be scientifically proven to be a normal characteristic just as much as blue, brown or green eyes are.

I would love for you to outline the "militant" gay agenda for me.

 

[mikeyh9in]

I'm Tea party-ish and I fully reject that statement as would many Tea Party people.

Wow, I wouldn't have guessed you as a TEAbagger ... Oh wait, Crazy white closeted male... I take that back, that is 50% of the TEAbaggers.

 

[conntom]

Wow, I wouldn't have guessed you as a TEAbagger ... Oh wait, Crazy white closeted male... I take that back, that is 50% of the TEAbaggers.

Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me.

The fact that so many of you resort to personal attacks is telling.

 

[mikeyh9in]

Question for you... and just asking, since most homosexuals are anti-creationism and pro-Darwinism.

Is your "naturally occurring event" an inferior trait? Relax, throttle back and put the Darwinian shotgun back in your sights, that you love to shoot at the religious right.... doesn't homosexuality in species that can't procreate amidst same sex coitus constitute a DEFECTIVE gene in Darwinian speak?

Just askin'?

Inferior traits that serve no purpose usually disappear in species. Homosexuality appears in all species, so nature has deemed it an important trait. The question you should be asking is if it is a superior trait?

 

[conntom]

I would love for you to outline the "militant" gay agenda for me.

I'm saving that for a thread during times of lesser political food for typing.

You're welcome to join the conversation although I would hope you could keep it a civil discussion for an exchange of ideas an an attempt at reaching more understanding on the part of both sides of the issue.

 

[mikeyh9in]

Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me.

The fact that so many of you resort to personal attacks is telling.

I'm still waiting your your enumeration of the "militant" gay agenda...

 

[mikeyh9in]

I'm saving that for a thread during times of lesser political food for typing.

You're welcome to join the conversation although I would hope you could keep it a civil discussion for an exchange of ideas an an attempt at reaching more understanding on the part of both sides of the issue.

Wow you are just like Fox News... through a incendiary statement out, ignore it, and then when asked about it, ignore it some more.

 

[conntom]

Inferior traits that serve no purpose usually disappear in species. Homosexuality appears in all species, so nature has deemed it an important trait. The question you should be asking is if it is a superior trait?

Inferior traits constantly show up in populations.

The trait could be considered superior in some situation - you could make the argument. Fair enough. But overall....well, if everyone turned gay the baby production would likely drop significantly. Dontcha think ? Not really a superior idea.

Again, trying to judge sexual orientation is not getting any of us anywhere.

 

[conntom]

Wow you are just like Fox News... through a incendiary statement out, ignore it, and then when asked about it, ignore it some more.

Your question was rhetorical anyways. Was it not? I don't think you need me to define it. Anyting I would say would be my opinions on such things.

Stop looking for a fight. It gets you nowhere. If you are set to disagree with me and call names then you have made that clear and accomplished your goal. You can feel free to move on.