some say gay=unnatural

[kiwirower]

What an odd argument Incocknito makes: That the only thing that is "natural" for a human is to procreate. And that not doing so by the time of death amounts to "failure" as a human and is "unnatural".

So are humans that are infertile, or choose not to, or simply don't have the opportunity to procreate (but are heterosexual) also "unnatural" or "failures"? What about those that do, but their offspring don't live long enough to procreate? They have not ultimately contributed to continuation of the species, so are they also "failures"? And those that produce multiple offspring - are they more "natural" or greater "successes"?

What about if you produce offspring, but cause the death of a number of humans that exceeds the number of your offspring? Are you a "success" or a "failure"?

And what about homosexuals that do have children? I can be 100% homosexual but still provide my sperm to a female and generate a child. So by Incocknito's reasoning does that mean that only some homosexuals are unnatural? While some heterosexuals are also unnatural due to their inability or unwillingness to procreate? In which case the heterosexual/homosexual split on natural/unnatural is completely meaningless....

I don't know if Leonardo da Vinci, Shakespeare, Einstein, Newton, Mozart or Frank Lloyd Wright contributed to the continuation of the species by creating offspring, but I would venture to suggest that they were "successes" and contributed greatly to humanity.

It seems to me that Incocknito imbues the term "natural" with a specific meaning which is quite odd, and quite unhelpful. I suspect that most people would assume a more normal meaning of "natural" to be "that which occurs in nature". Which homosexuality does, without question.

And ultimately, who cares whether it is natural? What importance does that have? Clothes aren't natural. Buildings aren't natural. Music isn't natural.

Homosexuals are humans like everyone else. There are those that contribute more to the richness of human life, and those that don't, just as there are a mix of heterosexuals. Denying homosexuals the right to enjoy the relationships they choose, along with privileges and obligations that sit with those relationships, whereas those rights are granted to heterosexuals, to me seems a perverse intrusion into private life.

 

[Incocknito]

Fact: A book written by man, does not equate to fact
It equates to more of a 'fact' than coming from someone with no academic qualifications or indeed knowledge or interest in natural science.

Fact: Cherry picking examples from nature, to either effect, does not equate to fact.
Nature is not biased, does not have an agenda and doesn't get upset if you challenge it. Nature is the only real truth

Fact: Gays, bisexuals and straights exist and are surviving world wide.
Really? Because I had no idea.

Fact: We occurred naturally, in the same manner that everyone else occurred.
I never said ANYTHING to the contrary.

Fact: We can, if we choose, reproduce naturally, just like everyone else can.
If someone reproduces then they are not ENTIRELY homosexual are they? That is the context in which I have been speaking ALL ALONG.

Fact: Anyone who can't understand the above, has far bigger things to be concerned with, than trying to prove they are superior to the rest of us.
I agree. It seems that you and many others lack the cognitive functions necessary to comprehend basic words even when given their definitions.

NOTE: Where did I ever say that one type of people or type of orientation was better or worse than the other? In fact, I expressly stated THE OPPOSITE.

Again, you are seeing things that have not been written and are not even implied. I am using the WORDS (natural, unnatural) posed by the thread starter.

There is nothing more unnatural about choosing not to reproduce because of your sexuality than there is about choosing not to due to careers, devotion to helping family members, because you simply don't want children, because of your faith, or because you don't want to bring children into a world full of hate.

Choosing not to reproduce because of a 'career' is another example of social roles and conformities taking precedence over the instinct of all living things to reproduce. I mentioned this at least TWICE before.

If someone doesn't want children then there is probably some sort of psychological cause such as they were abused as a child, had a bad childhood themselves, or they have such low self esteem that they feel they are "not good enough" to have children.

 

[dolfette]

dolfette...read my many earlier posts. Dictionary definitions were used and my answer was given in the conext of such verifiable, unchanging definitions. I also cited an article from another source to backup my assertion(s)

Also:

Biological imperative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
FuturePundit: Habitat Loss Reduces US Bird Populations

Taken from the second link:

The instinct to reproduce is incredibly strong (even as many intellectuals erroneously claim we've somehow escaped our instincts).

Sane Psychology - Google Books

Taken from the above link:

The instinct to reproduce is so universal in all biology that it may be considered a fundamental characteristic of life itself, for without it life cannot continue.

I answered your question about animals that don't reproduce yet look after others of the same species as well. I answered it twice and the second time was very clear.

If you need more sources of evidence then use google. Or do you need me to help you with that too?

Now, show me some evidence to support your point of view or else stop making me repeat simple facts and information that I have repeated too many times already.

so far all your posts have hinged on ''because someone said so!!''
...though often they seem to have said no such thing.
''someone said so'' is not proof or evidence. a cut and paste definition is just someone elses opinion, not proof or evidence.
nature is everything on this planet with the exception of some human behaviours & creations.
the non breeding wolves don't defy nature. they are nature.
the non breeding ants don't defy nature. they are nature.
you can twist as many cut & paste opinions as you like but nature is every animal, plant and rock on the planet until it is manipulated by people.
and nature has enough examples of social groups with non-breeding adults to show that this is natural.
and nature has enough examples of non-procreational sex used to bond, to relieve frustration, to amuse to show that this is natural also.
nature provides proof that the biological imperative to reproduce can include indirect preservation of your gene line, by assisting siblings etc.
and humans evolved in family groups.

i find your attemps to slot nature into such narrowly constructed definitions highly amusing.
so actually i DO want you to keep repeating yourself.

so come on!

 

[Incocknito]

dolfette and Kiwi. All of your weak arguments have been answered in this thread. You still cannot grasp basic meanings of simple words.

I already said that social roles can sometimes take priority over the instinct to reproduce. That makes your silly "ants and bees" argument moot and rather silly. They are the exception(s) and not the rule.

You can think what you like but I have given very detailed answers and cited multiple sources.

You have done no such thing. And I doubt you ever will.

 

[dolfette]

ahahahaha!!

 

[B_Hamadim]

"They can do nothing but laugh... Their mind is diseased...

The Devil shows up for them every night, sure they cannot see him, with his long tail and dancing scrotum over their Satanic music... He licks their cheeks with his rotten tongue... Ordering them to be Satanists..."

 

[dolfette]

"They can do nothing but laugh... Their mind is diseased...

The Devil shows up for them every night, sure they cannot see him, with his long tail and dancing scrotum over their Satanic music... He licks their cheeks with his rotten tongue... Ordering them to be Satanists..."

'she thinks me a fool...she must be the devil!!!!'

 

[798686]

I don't think these differences of opinion are reconcilable really.

Also, maybe it's not important to work out whether it's 'natural' or not - it's just a situation that exists in reality, that people have to deal with.

I think homosexuality is something that people have and is not of their own choosing. It's a shame for people who would love to have a wife/kids but feel they cannot because of their sexuality. I know a lot of people wouldn't chose this anyway (plus there are other solutions such as adoption, etc), and that's fine - but it would still be nice for everyone to have the option.

 

[dolfette]

...a dancing scrotum?

 

[dolfette]

i want to hear more about the dancing scrotum!

 

[pedercic99]

If someone doesn't want children then there is probably some sort of psychological cause such as they were abused as a child, had a bad childhood themselves, or they have such low self esteem that they feel they are "not good enough" to have children.

Probably? You mean you don't know but you're just speculating.
I have three close friends (two straight, one gay) who don't have children. As far as i know they were not abused, had happy childhoods and have pretty good self-esteem. I'll pass on your comments to them and see how they respond.

 

[dolfette]

Probably? You mean you don't know but you're just speculating.
I have three close friends (two straight, one gay) who don't have children. As far as i know they were not abused, had happy childhoods and have pretty good self-esteem. I'll pass on your comments to them and see how they respond.

'probably' meaning 'i made it up'.

most male animals don't desire babies either. they desire sex.
they aren't even conscious of the fact that sex = babies.

and the child free people i know just enjoy life without kids.
no trauma required.

 

[Enid]

Some people choose not to have children due to the world's already spiraling out of control population. Not because there's something psychologically wrong -- that is a blanket statement.

 

[B_FruitFly]

Once people get passed GOD(s), the world will either get better or worse. I personally believe it will become better.

 

[pedercic99]

'probably' meaning 'i made it up'.

most male animals don't desire babies either. they desire sex.
they aren't even conscious of the fact that sex = babies.

and the child free people i know just enjoy life without kids.
no trauma required.

we shouldn't be too hasty
perhaps he found this piece of 'information' in the dictionary as well...

 

[BigDallasDick8x6]

Some people choose not to have children due to the world's already spiraling out of control population.

THANK YOU!! And some of us also refrained from having children because we aren't sure what kind of place the world will be 30 to 50 years from now. I'm a worrier anyway, and on my deathbed I don't want to be worried about my kids and grandkids in a world of wars, terrorism, and plagues. Obviously, other people came to different conclusions, I'm just pointing out another reason that some of us don't have kids.

It's also a good thing some people don't have kids. Parents shouldn't pressure their kids to have kids because they aren't prepared emotionally to do so, or are just too selfish, etc. It would have been better if Haylee's mom had never had her, so if you really love kids don't ever pressure on anyone to have kids or judge them for not having kids. Some people don't consider themselves "childless" but "kids free." In fact that's the name of an organization of like minded people -- Kidsfree. It's a valid choice.

 

[pedercic99]

i want to hear more about the dancing scrotum!

I agree. I've never seen a dancing scrotum, especially one attached to a long tail...

 

[dolfette]

I agree. I've never seen a dancing scrotum, especially one attached to a long tail...

most just sway a bit.

 

[Incocknito]

Probably? You mean you don't know but you're just speculating.
I have three close friends (two straight, one gay) who don't have children. As far as i know they were not abused, had happy childhoods and have pretty good self-esteem. I'll pass on your comments to them and see how they respond.

Yes and when someone commits suicide their friends say 'as far as I knew he was happy'.

"As far as you know" is not a valid reason or basis for anything.

 

[dolfette]

Yes and when someone commits suicide their friends say 'as far as I knew he was happy'.

"As far as you know" is not a valid reason or basis for anything.

nor are your assumptions.