some say gay=unnatural

[pedercic99]

The very first evolutionary forms of every animal were not choosing not to breed.

If that were the case then nothing would have evolved would it?

Incocknito, can you explain what you mean by 'the first evolutionary forms of every animal.' Preferably with a couple of examples.

 

[dolfette]

You're my new favourite person. Will you bear my children? :biggrin1:

yay! i'll make sure you aren't failed!

 

[dolfette]

Incocknito, can you explain what you mean by 'the first evolutionary forms of every animal.' Preferably with a couple of examples.

ahahahahahaha!
classic.

 

[joyboytoy79]

yay! i'll make sure you aren't failed!

OK, so i'm going to watch some porn on my completely natural (ie, not man made) computer and jack off into a completely natural glass vial, pack it into some dry ice i have brewing in the lab, send it express mail to england, and then you can use completely natural movements with the turkey baster, k?

 

[dolfette]

OK, so i'm going to watch some porn on my completely natural (ie, not man made) computer and jack off into a completely natural glass vial, pack it into some dry ice i have brewing in the lab, send it express mail to england, and then you can use completely natural movements with the turkey baster, k?

include a return address.

...i just mail the baby back to you once it's done?

 

[mitchymo]

You're my new favourite person. Will you bear my children? :biggrin1:

What about me? I've been harping on about Incognito's misinterpretation of the dictionary for several posts before anyone else and i don't get an offer of procreation! :frown1: Dolfette could be surrogate! :biggrin1:

 

[dolfette]

What about me? I've been harping on about Incognito's misinterpretation of the dictionary for several posts before anyone else and i don't get an offer of procreation! :frown1: Dolfette could be surrogate! :biggrin1:

one frigid woman, two gay men, three kids.

sounds like the perfect family set up to me.

:smile:

 

[mitchymo]

one frigid woman, two gay men, three kids.

sounds like the perfect family set up to me.

:smile:

OMG...hit upon the perfect recipe for slapping down the homophobes.

One woman with two bisexual men or two gay with in vitro tech would be more productive to procreation as each woman has more opportunity to give birth.....homosexuality therefore makes women pregnant! IT'S NATURAL wahey :biggrin1:

 

[joyboytoy79]

What about me? I've been harping on about Incognito's misinterpretation of the dictionary for several posts before anyone else and i don't get an offer of procreation! :frown1: Dolfette could be surrogate! :biggrin1:

Well, don't get me wrong Mitch. I'm all for male/male procreation, but my husband and I have been trying for over a year to no avail. You are a hottie though, and great for your recognition of inco's misinterpretation. I just think the hubby may get a little jealous if I suggest trying to procreate with someone else of the attractive male persuasion.

one frigid woman, two gay men, three kids.

sounds like the perfect family set up to me.

:smile:

Three kids? Where did the second and third ones come from? :tongue:

OMG...hit upon the perfect recipe for slapping down the homophobes.

One woman with two bisexual men or two gay with in vitro tech would be more productive to procreation as each woman has more opportunity to give birth.....homosexuality therefore makes women pregnant! IT'S NATURAL wahey :biggrin1:

I think you're on to something here!

 

[Cynix]

The great revelation behind this discussion should ultimately be that we have absolutely no evidence to proof whatsoever we might launch out as an argument.

Funnily, we do trust science or believe in a certain religion, but if we were absolutely honest we have no reason to.
Is something true, if it has been reported multiple times in experiments, if it is (empirically) verifiable, if it is logically traceable? Or do we believe/have we deemed it to be true for a different reason? Because we need a frame our reason can grasp at? A mere basis for our existence? An excuse for our own lack of creativity in developing... solutions or coming up with explanations?

We live in societies created by humans, speak human languages and take human measures to evaluate theories like this one. Perhaps that's the problem. Our languages lack accuracy to properly describe a subject, our points of views are heavily influenced by our surroundings. Mankind fails in terms of objectivity and reliability when it comes to the determination of an issue. [So not only homosexuals, but all humans are fails]

My opinion.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

[So not only homosexuals, but all humans are fails]

HI FIVE! :slomo: (god, there are some dumb smilies out there!)

I'm not even going to attempt to read this thread. I got to half-way through an argument about God and drowned in fail.

Anyways, for all the gays out there, you don't need to justify your existance! This is 'such' a troll topic! You exist, therefore you are, that's all that matters. Your feelings are created by natural hormones, your biology is natural and I'm sure your orgasms aren't fake.

Celebrate that you are proud of your sexuality and leave the sematics to people who don't have enough seman-antics.

 

[Monk4Life]

When did I say that sex is or must always be for procreation?

My point was that if an animal by the time it dies does not reproduce then it has defied Nature.

Its nice that you can all hope for "more" or "higher" things in life because you are humans. You are still animals at the most basic level.

I'm still waiting for some evidence or a source other than a biased, angry person which suggests that HOMOSEXUALITY is "natural".

Note: There is a difference between something that is natural and something which occurs in nature.

In nature, a lioness mother will care for and raise a gazelle cub given the right environmental factors. This is not natural as gazelle are normally a prey animal to lions.

Homosexual acts occur in nature but they are not natural. They are responses to changes in the environment ie when no females are around male dolphins will engage in sex.

Homosexuality (ie 100% unerring homosexuality throughout an animal's entire life) occurs in (human) nature but it is not natural. I don't know of any animals except humans that are 100% homosexual and never have sex with females of their species.

Some sources you may be able to use: the dictionary, scientific articles, documentary evidence.

If you are only backing up your claim with your own slanted view then please refrain from responding.

Everything I have said has been backed up by evidence. The only responses I have seen have been personal attacks and unverified, unsubstantiated personal opinions.

If that animal has instead spent its life protecting the pack, helped raise the young, contributed to the packs society, then he/she has been a great help and is anything but failed.

Please by all means link your "evidence" but no fictional books of the old testament thanks.

 

[Monk4Life]

include a return address.

...i just mail the baby back to you once it's done?

LOL:tongue:

 

[karldergrosse]

My answer: According to the dictionary, it is unnatural.
Mitchymo...I'm not even going to try to explain it to you anymore. Look up unnatural in the dictionary. I've posted the definition twice.

The purpose of life is to create more life and continue the species.

(1) We'll not try to explain it to you anymore, either, In. Much earlier I challenged you to cite for us the publisher and edition of the dictionary that, so you claim, even vaguely implies such a definition. Why haven't you done so...? Obviously because no dictionary does so. Using your sleight-of-hand method of "proof" (looking up the definition of "unnatural" and then applying it arbitrarily to "homosexuality"), you could demonstrate that "natural" is "unnatural." Quite a feat, that..... Or we could also show that "you" are/is "unnatural," were we so maliciously inclined.

(2) Hallelujah, the Lord be praised! After millennia of praying, searching, speculating, questioning, philosophizing, and otherwise tormenting itself in vain, humankind has at last received the answer to the Big Question...thanks to your astounding revelation. "The purpose [my emphasis] of life is to create more life." Who would have dreamed that it's so simple, so undemanding, so...so unprofound and circular, signifying nothing? And judging by the overwhelming and still increasing world overpopulation, people are amply fulfilling their only purpose in life!

--Apologies for the mildly sarcastic tone--I honestly intend no offense, even though you've unintentionally invited it. And no, we are not being "defensive"--quite the contrary. We're only attempting to show judgmental antigays that we are just as normal [sic] and natural [sic] human beings as we consider them to be.

 

[B_WER25]

People who see homosexuality as unnatural are usually religious people.

Lemme just add on to that. People who see homosexuality are usually flaming religious freaks!

 

[B_Hamadim]

WER25

What is Religion to you?

What does "Obey" mean to you?

Is it worth it Obeying your own beloved mother?

What is her reaction when you don't Obey her?

What is God to you?

When God is greater than all, and he is commanding you to do something...

Is it worth it Obeying God?

When you are not Obeying God, You are not afraid of the Consequences?

When a man on the streets, threatens your Life.. you will be shacking under your pants in fear of him....

But When God himself warns you..... You are not afraid?

God has the wisdom, Knowledge of everything... Sight of the Unseen...

When he forbids Homosexuality, he knows the reason behind it....

You are going to call him a Homophobe? You are going to Debate with God?

You are miserable....

You could be Atheist, I do not blame you....

 

[AlbertCunning]

Anything that appears in nature, it is per definition 'natural'.

It's not 'normal', however, because most people aren't gay.

 

[gymfresh]

Here is the definition of unnatural:

un⋅nat⋅u⋅ral

–adjective

1. contrary to the laws or course of nature.

Source: unnatural definition | Dictionary.com

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?

Oh dear, there is the crux of the disagreement in one word.

Given? As in "settled"? Sez who? Where in the blazin' sunshine did you get the idea that all reasonable people agree that "procreation" is the law or course of nature for all living things? How f-ing convenient for a sentient being who himself feels aroused by the opposite sex and the urge to procreate that the words mean exactly and only what you want them to mean.

My sexual interest in the opposite sex and/or procreation is nonexistent, and it's on a cellular level. I seriously doubt I and my ilk are some weird mutation from the norm (quite the contrary, at 10% or so of the population we're quite solidly in the norm) or that some incident(s) in my past whittled or whacked me into homosexuality, like an amnesiac.

You contend that survival of the species ultimately depends on all humans being naturally programmed for procreation, barring a genetic aberration or psychological reversal that renders them predominantly or wholly homosexual. OK. This is actually a close variant on the argument of the religious right, that homosexuals are really only errant heterosexuals driven by lust/devil/drugs/unChristian influences to betray their true nature.

Baloney. Do the math. Two genders, two attraction possibilities. I believe (as firmly as you) that in the absence of crushing societal pressure the ratio of straight to gay would naturally be closer to 50/50. Something would have to be very compelling to for me and many others to believe otherwise, and your argument of "well it really, really makes sense to me" is far from compelling, dude.

Does nature appear to making homosexuals, from birth, in the millions every year? Uh yeah, it sure seems to. About 14 million, actually. And it's not anything new. Just churns 'em out that way, millennia after millennia. I'd guess the percentage is probably about the same today as it was in the Triassic, Mesozoic and Cretaceous eras, though I'd venture the suppession rate of gays by straights is somewhat less now.

I'll iterate my previous comment: my natural course is to be born, do good deeds, and die. Procreation wasn't in the program. YMMV. And as an aside, both of my siblings -- sister and brother -- are "heterosexual", almost 50, have never married, have no desire to marry, and never had a moment's interest in procreation. Maybe pressure to procreate is a societal construct, rather than an innate urge. If it were the latter, the Earth's human population probably would would be over 100 billion by now.

 

[mitchymo]

WER25

What is Religion to you?

What does "Obey" mean to you?

Is it worth it Obeying your own beloved mother?

What is her reaction when you don't Obey her?

What is God to you?

When God is greater than all, and he is commanding you to do something...

Is it worth it Obeying God?

When you are not Obeying God, You are not afraid of the Consequences?

When a man on the streets, threatens your Life.. you will be shacking under your pants in fear of him....

But When God himself warns you..... You are not afraid?

God has the wisdom, Knowledge of everything... Sight of the Unseen...

When he forbids Homosexuality, he knows the reason behind it....

You are going to call him a Homophobe? You are going to Debate with God?

You are miserable....

You could be Atheist, I do not blame you....

If i extend my hand to you will you not take it?

If i can save your child's life will you not let me?

If i can show you the safe passage across the desert will you not heed my advice?

If i live my life as you do in good intention will you hate me?

If i choose to follow my heart will you see to break it?

If i cannot believe as you do am i wrong?

ETC ETC, your post is very much answerable to those who have a god but for me and most gay people it is not an issue, the hate of religious man has turned my eyes away from God, i did not abandon him, he through his believers pushed me away....not a friendly godly thing to do.

What exactly is your point in blunt words please?

 

[dolfette]

Three kids? Where did the second and third ones come from? :tongue:

well there was this man and he had sperm.
and there was me, with my eggs.
and his peepee went in my hoohoo.
and... TahDah! kids!