some say gay=unnatural

[Smaccoms]

Vodka... Nectar of the Gods! I actually say 100% because I've never met a woman that I've been sexually attracted to. It's always been only men. However, if that woman ever comes along, I'll rethink the percentage.

I think its more a concept that I believe with the no 100% thing, I've never met a women I've wantd to have sex with, but I dont put myself down as 100% either...I'm crtainly attracted to however :tongue: hehe

 

[Incocknito]

You keep referring to this supposed 'law of nature.' There is no such law. You are conflating three different types of proposition. All living things live, otherwise they would not be living things. This is just a tautology. All living things die, unless you believe in an afterlife. I suppose you could call that a law of nature if you like. Some of them procreate, some don't. There is no 'law of nature' that states that all living things should do so.

Watch some wildlife programmes and then get back to me. Only humans with their rationale and intellect and a select few animals choose to or have no desire to procreate.

 

[Incocknito]

You simply are not listening

Compelling arugment. I take back everything I said.

YOU WIN!!

 

[Smaccoms]

Maybe you should re-read it then Smaccoms:

In most instances, it is presumed that the homosexual behavior is but part of the animal's overall sexual behavioral repertoire, making the animal "bisexual" rather than "homosexual" as the terms are commonly understood in humans.

And its going to take something more than Wikipedia to change my mind.

oh plz read it in full, it cited several instances where a homosexual pair refused to mate with other females given the chance because their love for each other was too strong. It also states that homosexuality acts are nearly universal across the animal kingdom, after which citing the research of several studies conducted to find this result. Again, I say to read it...

 

[mitchymo]

Compelling arugment. I take back everything I said.

YOU WIN!!

Sarcasm aside you're absolutely right!

 

[Smaccoms]

Sarcasm aside you're absolutely right!

ha...ha...ha...thats funny...

 

[mitchymo]

Watch some wildlife programmes and then get back to me. Only humans with their rationale and intellect and a select few animals choose to or have no desire to procreate.

You're blowing your own argument out the water, you recognise that it is some animals as well as humans yet somehow believe that everything MUST procreate....those that do not simply do not, they are not falling out of line with the only (understood) concrete laws of living things...birth and death....procreation is a vital part of the cycle for survival but it is not supernatural to not create in the same way it would to be immortal or to be born without being concieved which would both be unnatural. (not to say that beyond our scope of knowledge that they are)

 

[mitchymo]

Compelling arugment. I take back everything I said.

YOU WIN!!

And just so you know, sarcasm is a sign of weak debater....you are unable to make a compelling case and so revert to contempt, in this case sarcasm....i respect your pride though, a less honorable person would have verbally assaulted their opposition by now.

 

[dolfette]

Watch some wildlife programmes and then get back to me. Only humans with their rationale and intellect and a select few animals choose to or have no desire to procreate.

get a qualification in animal behaviour and then get back to me.

mine may only cover canids, but it beats watching animal planet and thinking that makes you an expert.

 

[Incocknito]

oh plz read it in full, it cited several instances where a homosexual pair refused to mate with other females given the chance because their love for each other was too strong. It also states that homosexuality acts are nearly universal across the animal kingdom, after which citing the research of several studies conducted to find this result. Again, I say to read it...

Those animals that are homosexual were studied for their entire lives were they?

Is there an entire species of flaming, gay animals?

Is there even a species where a majority is gay?

According to your article, disregarding the vast majority of the case studies (which actually found bisexuality and not homosexuality):

The article itself states that homosexual acts can and usually are displays of dominance.

Wikipedia does not state whether the behaviours are learned or instinctive.

Until the above criteria are met then Wikipedia has not convinced me.

But its okay, like I said before YOU WIN!!

 

[DiscoBoy]

Therefore given that the law or course of nature for all living things is simply to live, procreate and then die am I not correct in saying that homosexuality is unnatural?

If you want to "get through to me" then show me some evidence to the contrary. So far I have seen jack shit from any of you.

If you want to change my mind then show me some evidence and don't give me your disjointed and poorly expressed personal opinion.

Darwin, in his opus "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" never did speculate that the sole purpose for any individual is procreation. Rather, he postulated that those RACES whose practices, habits, instincts, and physical conformation are best suited to the environment they live in are most likely to survive, and therefor most likely to procreate, thus perpetuating their genes. Species that work together to rear offspring are more likely to successfuly rear offspring than those who exert no effort to rear their offspring. He did not state, nor did he imply that it is in any way unnatural for any individual to not procreate. He did state, though i can't at the moment find the direct quote, that the most natural thing an individual can do is strive to survive.

Now, Incocknito, the dictionary i have at hand (the New Oxford American Dictionary, second edition, 2005) defines Natural as thus:

"existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind"

natural: definition | Dictionary.com:
nat⋅u⋅ral
–adjective
1. existing in or formed by nature

natural: - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:
2 a: being in accordance with or determined by nature
5: implanted or being as if implanted by nature : seemingly inborn
10: b: existing in or produced by nature : not artificial

By those definitions, homosexuality is completely natural.

 

[Incocknito]

get a qualification in animal behaviour and then get back to me.

mine may only cover canids, but it beats watching animal planet and thinking that makes you an expert.

Not just Animal Planet but National Geographic as well. That evidence you referenced was very compelling.

Homosexuality is completely natural...maybe EVEN MORE natural than heterosexuality.

 

[Incocknito]

By those definitions, homosexuality is completely natural.

That assumes that homosexuality is formed by nature and not created by environmental factors now doesn't it?

You are also confused as to what I mean by homosexuality. I don't mean homosexual acts per se.

I am referring to and have always used the context of homosexuality as:

100% unerring

Which I have yet to see evidence for. I have seen evidence of 'homosexual episodes' but not of an animal (barring humans) which was 100% homosexual from birth.

And even if that evidence were found...there would still need to be some evidence that its homosexuality was natural and not environmental.

 

[dolfette]

Not just Animal Planet but National Geographic as well. That evidence you referenced was very compelling.

Homosexuality is completely natural...maybe EVEN MORE natural than heterosexuality.

you watch national goegraphic too!

well i'm just tearing up my certificates in shame. honest. :tongue:

 

[Incocknito]

And just so you know, sarcasm is a sign of weak debater....you are unable to make a compelling case and so revert to contempt, in this case sarcasm....i respect your pride though, a less honorable person would have verbally assaulted their opposition by now.

Just so you know, that's not what a sentence is supposed to look like.

Yes, I'm such a poor debater. It's only the 22nd page of the thread and I'm just now reverting to sarcasm in one post...

Well, now I just feel bad...

EDIT: 23rd page

 

[mitchymo]

This is great, the more i am compelled to think the more my mind opens and i learn so....There is only actually 1 thing that is ABSOLUTE in terms of life is actually death...not even birth is let alone procreation, this would obviously be true as it explains abortion, c-sections, and plantlife none of which is born but created and Creation is not absolute because it only exists after procreation.

 

[Incocknito]

Come again?

I never said reproduction was guaranteed or even likely for any living thing. I said that was the aim, not that it was a sure thing.

Maybe you should stop thinking for a bit.

 

[mitchymo]

Just so you know, that's not what a sentence is supposed to look like.

Yes, I'm such a poor debater. It's only the 22nd page of the thread and I'm just now reverting to sarcasm in one post...

Well, now I just feel bad...

EDIT: 23rd page

Yes...because only now you are deep down realising that you're wrong on this one....and still using sarcasm tut-tut

 

[Incocknito]

Yes...because only now you are deep down realising that you're wrong on this one....and still using sarcasm tut-tut

Yet you are still not using proper sentences or capitalising letters. Are you old enough to be on this site?

I feel that the majority of my responses have been concise and followed the proper grammatical form. I'm happy with that.

 

[dolfette]

Yet you are still not using proper sentences or capitalising letters. Are you old enough to be on this site?

yet you only stopped using

ANGRY SIZED TEXT IN CAPS

And Bold Font

when it was pointed out and mocked.

:smile: