NationStates Jolt Archive

What about in Africa? AIDS is a massive epidemic over there, and yet their religous values frown upon homosexuality even more than over here. Is it suddenly the heterosexuals that are the bane of public health in africa?

I provide links for my claim - or rather the fact that I´m stating that homosexuals have a very, very high risk to contracting Aids due to their lifestyle. Promiscuity and homosexuality are the main factors for the spread of Aids in the Western world.


So? Do not tell me I am gonna die dipshit, I am going to use a condom and also the use of shared needles for herion use is also a major factor. Oh and ovarian cancer tends to happen more in virgins and people who masturbate regularaly are less likely to get prostate cancer (source: Channel 4 UK and The Times).

What about in Africa? AIDS is a massive epidemic over there, and yet their religous values frown upon homosexuality even more than over here. Is it suddenly the heterosexuals that are the bane of public health in africa?
I said promiscuity and homosexuality. Especially the first is unfortunately very common in Africa. But in the Western world it is mainly a homosexual and promisque lifestyle.

So? Do not tell me I am gonna die dipshit, I am going to use a condom and also the use of shared needles for herion use is also a major factor. Oh and ovarian cancer tends to happen more in virgins and people who masturbate regularaly are less likely to get prostate cancer (source: Channel 4 UK and The Times).
Uh, it is from television, so it must be right. Anyway: you are not dying from this diseases even if this is true, which I doubt.
But you are much more likely to die from Aids.
I hope you take care of yourself and stop insulting people who disagree with you.

For what it's worth...

1) I've always known that there was something different about me but could never figure it out- until after starting puberty and learning what being gay was.

2) As a child, I was molested by my father up until my parents got divorced (when I was 9 y/o).

3) Never ever have I made a conscious choice of "hrm....I think that I'll be gay for a while." I'd happily choose to be hetero if I could in order to bypass all of the people in my bible-thumping community.....and BTW, I'm a Christian too!

4) If I were inherantly gay, being that I've been abused by another man, wouldn't I tend to levitate toward women according to some people's "theories"?

5) God created man and woman in varieties of colors. Doesn't it seem to some of you that this shows that God actually likes diversity? Why is it impossible then, that God didn't created us as Hetero, Bi or Homo?

6) According to modern psychology, nothing is simply black and white; there are various shades inbetween. Therefore, it's highly probable that most everyone slides around a bit back and forth. It's theorized that everyone is in this constant state of flux.... a straight psychiatrist friend told me this once.

7) Given the last statement, it's very likely that those who hate homosexuals so fervantly see some homo traits in themselves and are likely very scared by that.


As long as no one is doing harm to you, then why have a problem with it?

Many of you lack the knowledge and the ability to think more logically about this issue. ...And anthropologists think that the Neandrathols died out....

Uh, it is from television, so it must be right. Anyway: you are not dying from this diseases even if this is true, which I doubt.
But you are much more likely to die from Aids.
I hope you take care of yourself and stop insulting people who disagree with you.

1)TV often lies, I am aware of this. It was not in this case as medical journals show.
2)I am not dying of either of these diseases but masturbation and care free sex reduces the chances of them.
3)I hope you stop trying to control what people do with their own bodies.

...one more thing.

Just because someone is homosexual doesn't make them promiscuous. There are many out there like me who are waiting for the right person to come along, rather than just "putting out" for the sake of getting off.

I have to really KNOW someone first (and I'm talking about 1 1/2 to 2 years of dating first) and then it's time for lab tests.

I believe that for the most part, I'm typical.

...one more thing.

Just because someone is homosexual doesn't make them promiscuous. There are many out there like me who are waiting for the right person to come along, rather than just "putting out" for the sake of getting off.

I have to really KNOW someone first (and I'm talking about 1 1/2 to 2 years of dating first) and then it's time for lab tests.

I believe that for the most part, I'm typical.


Sssh...Stop telling that sorta thing to guys like that! If they actualy get informed they may stop making crude assumptions!

I said promiscuity and homosexuality. Especially the first is unfortunately very common in Africa. But in the Western world it is mainly a homosexual and promisque lifestyle.

Homosexuality itself has nothing to do with the chance of getting HIV/AIDS. Lesbians tends to have a lesser chance then hetrosexuals if i didn't missreead your sources. And they are homosexual aswell, are they not?

Anyway, it's 3 things that increases the chanses of getting AIDS/HIV as a STD. And that is how many partners you have, how often you use condom and what type of sex you have.

Homosexuality itself has nothing to do with the chance of getting HIV/AIDS. Lesbians tends to have a lesser chance then hetrosexuals if i didn't missreead your sources. And they are homosexual aswell, are they not?
.

Not according to some people. They always say "gay" not "lesbian". Maybe they realise the average american finds lezzas a turn on...

Homosexuality itself has nothing to do with the chance of getting HIV/AIDS. Lesbians tends to have a lesser chance then hetrosexuals if i didn't missreead your sources. And they are homosexual aswell, are they not?
Anyway, it's 3 things that increases the chanses of getting AIDS/HIV as a STD. And that is how many partners you have, how often you use condom and what type of sex you have.
Lesbians can´t have sexual intercourse. Due to that the chances of them getting infected are pretty low. Though for gays they are very high. If that is also linked with the promisque life style - which it very often is - the probability of getting infected is very, very high, though.

Lesbians can´t have sexual intercourse. Due to that the chances of them getting infected are pretty low. Though for gays they are very high. If that is also linked with the promisque life style - which it very often is - the probability of getting infected is very, very high, though.

Lesbians CAN have it! They stimulate each other clitorises.

Lesbians CAN have it! They stimulate each other clitorises.

Well obviously some people don't consider clitoral stimulation part of sexual intercourse. :P

Well obviously some people don't consider clitoral stimulation part of sexual intercourse. :P

Yeah, I feel really bad for Kyber if she is a girl and I feel really bad for any girl he might be with if he is a guy.

Yeah, I feel really bad for Kyber if she is a girl and I feel really bad for any girl he might be with if he is a guy.

I doubt he has a partener.

Actually, lesbians can have children, by extracting their spermatozae stuff and implanting it.... and scientists have mastered cloning, so.... It's just being treated like the American treated Communism. IT'S NATURAL! SHARE THE LOVE! :gundge:

Lesbians CAN have it! They stimulate each other clitorises.
And you call that intercourse??? Well, it depends what definition you use. They may be able to have some kind of sexual relations but not intercourse. Since Clinton you should know the difference.
And by the way: I´m male.

Actually, lesbians can have children, by extracting their spermatozae stuff and implanting it.... and scientists have mastered cloning, so.... It's just being treated like the American treated Communism. IT'S NATURAL! SHARE THE LOVE! :gundge:

Sorry, have to step in here. Lesbians still cannot have children without some sort of sperm donor. And absolutely no one has "mastered" cloning, especially not of humans.

Ever held of dildos?

I'm lesbian and a Christian and I do think it is natural. I couldn't see myself being any other way, however hard I have tried to like guys in "that" way.

Why stick to a religion that discriminate what you truely are?

And you call that intercourse??? Well, it depends what definition you use. They may be able to have some kind of sexual relations but not intercourse. Since Clinton you should know the difference.
And by the way: I´m male.

Since Clinton you should know the difference? What does that mean? Oh and relations and intercourse are the same thing. Try looking up the word intercourse some time.

I think the reason there is so much homopobia out there is because homosexual people don't make a very good reputation for themselves. With shows like "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" it just makes gay men look like prissy little fashion wimps. Most guys grownig up want to be tough and strong, which gay men are stereotyped to be the opposite of. I am in school and everyone uses the words "gay" and "fag" as an insult. If something is stupid then its gay or retarded. I know its cruel but, hey, kids are cruel.

actually i read somewhere that homosexuality is because something went wrong in your body. however, for men it's almost always this way, but for women, usually about half of them choose their sexual preference.

I think the reason there is so much homopobia out there is because homosexual people don't make a very good reputation for themselves. With shows like "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" it just makes gay men look like prissy little fashion wimps. Most guys grownig up want to be tough and strong, which gay men are stereotyped to be the opposite of. I am in school and everyone uses the words "gay" and "fag" as an insult. If something is stupid then its gay or retarded. I know its cruel but, hey, kids are cruel.

What do you suggest? Action Gay figures? Also most of those children will grow out of it. I hope.

True. Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back is the exact opposide to steriotyping homosexuals. It makes fun of it for nearly two hours, but anybody with the slightest sense of humor doesn't get offended (at least I havent met anybody).

But look at all other films. Do you think that after watching Kill Bill, The Godfather and The Lord of the Rings people think; "Oh, all straight people does nothing but murdering each other."

Just a note for those trying to say homosexuality is unnatural, especially based on the reproductive issues...

Humans are *social* animals, guys, we're not meant to live in isolated pairs: nor are we necessarily designed such that *every single individual* must reproduce to contribute: as in many animals, it can be a distinct advantage for there to be more adults providing for and supporting the group without adding the burden of children of their own all the time.

Human sexuality is so complex, intense, and constant because it serves more functions than mere reproduction: it forms the kind of *bonds* that hairless, cooperative creatures like ourselves need to survive.

If it were solely for the purpose of reproducing, humans would *go into heat* when fertile, and otherwise not be interested in sex.

One thing Nature doesn't long let survive is *waste,* so when a phenomenon exists, there's almost certainly a *function* for it.

What is the *function* of stuttering? How about chronic lying, bipolarity, or multiple personality disorder?

What is the *function* of stuttering? How about chronic lying, bipolarity, or multiple personality disorder?

These were not intended but are either developmental issues when an event or upbringing derails the natural plan or genetic ones that are caused by gamates not properly melding.

True. Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back is the exact opposide to steriotyping homosexuals. It makes fun of it for nearly two hours, but anybody with the slightest sense of humor doesn't get offended (at least I havent met anybody).

But look at all other films. Do you think that after watching Kill Bill, The Godfather and The Lord of the Rings people think; "Oh, all straight people does nothing but murdering each other."

I laughed my arse off at Jay and Silent Bob. And who said the characters in LOTR are strait?

Well, most of those 'function' to displace some trauma to enable the person to function on some level. In other words, they function as a response to what might otherwise be an overwhelming injury to the psyche. Bipolarity is currently believed to be a congenital illness, but it certainly has the effect of producing very creative people who can certainly be of great benefit to the group. It's believed that a number of great leaders and artists were bipolar.

Homosexuality, however, isn't an illness. It in no way impedes one's function as an animal, nor as a person, apart from people presuming a priori that there's something 'wrong' with it.

Homosexuality, however, isn't an illness. It in no way impedes one's function as an animal, nor as a person, apart from people presuming a priori that there's something 'wrong' with it.

Perhaps it is the first ever disease to rely on social stigmata given off by bigots to affect it's host?

I laughed my arse off at Jay and Silent Bob. And who said the characters in LOTR are strait?
As long as the opposite is not presented, a person is straight (~90% - that's good odds).

As long as the opposite is not presented, a person is straight (~90% - that's good odds).

Well the 90% figure is flat out wrong and does not even bring bi people intto the equatio but I mean honestly, could you not tell? Do you think that "Sparring practice" was the REAL reason Borimir got the hobbits into those leg revealing in film #1. Only if it is not swords they are going to spar with...

Homosexuality is natural, or so claims a species of quite natural hyenas in which the females have large clitorises and use sexual activity as a display of dominance to keep the other females (and sometimes the males) in line.

Nobody goes into your head with a drill and changes things to make you homosexual.

As a strictly organic matter of development, uninfluenced by technology, I have to say that it is most definitely natural.

Unnatural objects and practices are the result, or the end of a chain of results, of the intentional harnessing and application of fire as a tool. By transcending physical tools and employing an energy-based one, most of human civilization has been tainted by the ripple of technological advances derived from it. Man no longer eats (most of) their meat fresh. They burn it in the fire before it can even be made palatable. They collect oil and coal and uranium to fuel the fire and generate electricity, which spreads like blood throughout civilization. They use the fire to make tools that would never have occurred naturally. Humans have evolved to embrace this unnatural world, enslaved to their fire. Most unnatural.

We must bear in mind that the word of the question in the poll was "natural", not "good," "evil," "amoral," or "acceptable." Nature does not care what you think of it. It only cares about how many pirahna you feed.

Why stick to a religion that discriminate what you truely are?

What a silly thing to say. Christianity (and Christians) as a whole do not discriminate against GLBT people. The right-wing fundamentalists groups of it do.

I laughed my arse off at Jay and Silent Bob. And who said the characters in LOTR are strait?

Careful, we got into quite a shouting match on the old boards about the possibility of gay hobbits.

What a silly thing to say. Christianity (and Christians) as a whole do not discriminate against GLBT people. The right-wing fundamentalists groups of it do.

*sigh* Alas, but the latter group have done it so much and so often bringing the G word into it that I am finding it hard to try and think of them as seperate groups.

Careful, we got into quite a shouting match on the old boards about the possibility of gay hobbits.

But they are just the right size!

Well, libertines, homophobia is probably a sexual dominance response turned into ideology by binary thinking and a history of religious authoritarianism. :)

*sigh* Alas, but the latter group have done it so much and so often bringing the G word into it that I am finding it hard to try and think of them as seperate groups.

You shouldn't, though. That's the same sort of thought process that allows people to make statements such as, "All muslims are terrorists."

Eh, maybe I should have said, *dualistic* thinking, rather than binary, there.

*sigh* Alas, but the latter group have done it so much and so often bringing the G word into it that I am finding it hard to try and think of them as seperate groups.

Please do though, because the rest of us are very insulted (er...well...me, anyways) that we have to be lumped in with them all the time.

You shouldn't, though. That's the same sort of thought process that allows people to make statements such as, "All muslims are terrorists."

I know I know. I will endevour to differenciate..

Lesbians can´t have sexual intercourse. Due to that the chances of them getting infected are pretty low. Though for gays they are very high. If that is also linked with the promisque life style - which it very often is - the probability of getting infected is very, very high, though.

Still, why are you claiming it is homosexuality that is bad when you only think it's homosexual men who lives in danger?

And is it really that hard for you to understand that hetrosexuals are actually capable of having, and also have, sex the way gays do? Conclusion, it is not an issue of homosexuality.

AIDS is irrelevant to the question, anyway.

If 'something could get you sick,' means that thing is unnatural, then heterosexuality would have been unnatural when a leading cause of death was complications from childbirth.

AIDS is a health issue, and it currently afflicts more heterosexuals who got it through heterosexual intercourse than it does gay people.

I laughed my arse off at Jay and Silent Bob. And who said the characters in LOTR are strait?

Hehe, yeah. Frodo and Sam are like best friends. And they travell to Mordor to destroy a ring. Now, what is can a ring symbolise? marriage? ;)

Look, I no this is a forum and everything, but why are we even discussing this? It doesn't matter wether it's natural or unnatural, it's somthing that exsists in at least 40-45% of the population and isn't going to go away. Can't we just respect these people and not invite people to call them 'unnatural'

Having not read through all the previous 53 pages I don't know if this has already been brought up, but to those who think that homosexuality is abnormal I should like to point out the following:

Up until quite recently in human history homosexuality has been considered superior to hetrosexual relationships. The Romans, who viewed women as inferior beings, considered that sex with a woman was a matter of duty but that a relationship with another man was ideal and normal. So did the Greeks, especially the Spartens who disallowed marriage before manhood at 20, and encouraged young boys to have relationships with each other to avoid breaking the law. Also homosexuality is common in the animal kingdom, especially in primates.

You only believe homosexuality is unnatural because you have been trained to believe it and because physically you can't understand it.

Incidentally I am a lesbian. I have been conciously attracted to women since puberty kicked in at 12 but even before then I got great enjoyment from the company of other girls and watching things like Wonder Woman & Charlies Angels. I don't believe that I was ever straight - although because of society and my own homophobia I did try dating men and was married for 10 years. Trying to be something I wasn't just made me miserable.

No one chooses to be gay. We all just have to chose whether to accept that we are.

To all those who believe that homosexuality is a matter of choice:

Let's see you "choose" your sexual orientation! If you think a person can "choose" to be gay or straight, why don't you PROVE IT by choosing to change your sexual orientation for, say, one week?

better yet... if they believe that you choose your sexual orientation, then they must have chosen to be straight despite their major attraction to the same sex, because their bible/church told them that it was wrong.

To the one wondering why we're even having this debate:

Personally, I think a mature understanding of sexuality in all its many forms would make for a happier society for everyone. We *all* suffer from the prejudices and controls encoded in the current mores: these were an attempt to control sexuality, and hence, *people,* through laws that make all the wrong assumptions about how it *works.*


If we want to have a society with more health and happiness for *everyone,* I think it's important that we gain a more sophisticated understanding of the complexity of our sexuality. Repressed sexuality causes strife and war, as I think the bitterness of this debate amply shows.

Whether or not one is identified as gay, themselves, *everyone* is confined by a pretty strict model of sexuality that, at least in terms of marriage, clearly doesn't work for everybody, and doesn't actually take the realities of sexuality into account. Basically, this model presumes universal procreative monogamy, but can't really enforce it, anyway; (cause *that's* unnatural to our instincts) and once the rules are broken, as they quite often are, all bets are suddenly off: there's just about no social guidance whatsoever, and great disharmony results.

Even straight alpha males suffer from homophobia, because what may be a perfectly natural instinct to express their masculinity over more, ah, receptive males, is socially-constructed here to be a *threat* to that same masculinity. The sexual feelings are, by societal conditioning, labeled 'unacceptable,' and so, unfortunately, tend to spill out as everything from social and political hostility, to *violence,* (and, tellingly, rape, which can be involved in most of the worst incidents of homophobic violence.)

Short of that, as it is in most cases, it still isn't good for people's sense of well-being. It obviously bothers them. The 'I don't want to hear about it, this is sick, I don't want to hear about it, I shouldn't have to accept it exists, I don't want to hear about it,' sort of response to gay people wanting the same rights as anyone else.

To wit, homophobia makes *straight* people uncomfortable with themselves, cause it's taboo to even *look* at your own sexuality. The only option, for some, seems to be to destroy or at least render unacceptable the existence of any other possibilities, in order to validate the box *they're* in.

That's not freedom.

Particularly in Western society, we're woefully short of terms and understandings of the complexities of sexuality. We have male and female, straight and gay (with bisexuality being some kind of confusing combination of the other two terms rather than the manifold ways one can be bi,) and, for the most part a bunch of dirty and negative-sounding terms even for 'normal' sexuality.

That's why it's good to talk about this. I mean, a consensus that it's not OK to repress, discriminate against and slander gay people, would be a definite step forward, but it's also a chance to start coming to a mature and complete understanding of something that's a big part of everyone's life.

Frankly, people are being reactionary these days, because things *are* changing, and they're afraid they're losing a control they never really had.

Lesbians can´t have sexual intercourse. Due to that the chances of them getting infected are pretty low. Though for gays they are very high. If that is also linked with the promisque life style - which it very often is - the probability of getting infected is very, very high, though.

First: You REALLY need to watch "Chasing Amy"

Second: Of all of the gay guys I have known (that have cared to discuss such issues), and, of all the straight guys I have known (that have cared to discuss such issues).... approximately the same proportion have been 'into' anal sex. That, I would estimate at about 25%. Most of the rest performed fellatio - which is not unlike the proportion of heterosexual lovers that receive fellatio (I would guess). Some of the rest only manually stimulated their partners, and others were gay but celibate.

While on the subject, the amount of promiscuous gay men I have known has been less than the number of promiscuous straight men... most of those I have met have preferred long-term relationships. The same with gay girls - but in a far more exaggerated manner.

You have no argument. You have no statistics, no facts.
You are, I'm afraid to say, just making stuff up.

I'm surprised this is still being replied to. I would have thought that any disagreeing with homosexuality would have been argued or scared away long ago.

This is actually standard slander against groups certain types want to keep down: Other than gays, people that have been baselessly accused of being more promiscuous than anyone else include:

Other ethnicities,
Other religions,
Other Economic Groups,
Other political affiliations,
People in other times,
People on the other side of the river
People on the other side of the tracks,
Yo Momma,
And almost anyone that tried to get elected in recent memory.

Look, I no this is a forum and everything, but why are we even discussing this? It doesn't matter wether it's natural or unnatural, it's somthing that exsists in at least 40-45% of the population and isn't going to go away. Can't we just respect these people and not invite people to call them 'unnatural'


This is part of something that started a little while ago here. The main points used against homosexuality are:

1) The Bible

2) It's unnatural

3) Hetero marriage needs to be protected

So there's a thread here, somewhere, which refutes each of those points. These threads exist because the equal rights and liberation from intolerance ideas are obviously not enough.


I seem to remember reading somewhere on planetout.com that Fox filmed a program called "Seriously, I'm Gay!", which was a reality show were the two contestants had to convince their friends and families that they were gay, with blind dates, 'gay-acting' and everything. GLAAD were sent an advance copy and asked it to be cut. Now, I agree that such a show reinforces gay stereotypes, but I find it interesting that both contestants are reported as saying it was utter hell. They tried to make a choice and failed miserably.

To the one wondering why we're even having this debate:

Personally, I think a mature understanding of sexuality in all its many forms would make for a happier society for everyone. We *all* suffer from the prejudices and controls encoded in the current mores: these were an attempt to control sexuality, and hence, *people,* through laws that make all the wrong assumptions about how it *works.*


If we want to have a society with more health and happiness for *everyone,* I think it's important that we gain a more sophisticated understanding of the complexity of our sexuality. Repressed sexuality causes strife and war, as I think the bitterness of this debate amply shows.

Whether or not one is identified as gay, themselves, *everyone* is confined by a pretty strict model of sexuality that, at least in terms of marriage, clearly doesn't work for everybody, and doesn't actually take the realities of sexuality into account. Basically, this model presumes universal procreative monogamy, but can't really enforce it, anyway; (cause *that's* unnatural to our instincts) and once the rules are broken, as they quite often are, all bets are suddenly off: there's just about no social guidance whatsoever, and great disharmony results.

Even straight alpha males suffer from homophobia, because what may be a perfectly natural instinct to express their masculinity over more, ah, receptive males, is socially-constructed here to be a *threat* to that same masculinity. The sexual feelings are, by societal conditioning, labeled 'unacceptable,' and so, unfortunately, tend to spill out as everything from social and political hostility, to *violence,* (and, tellingly, rape, which can be involved in most of the worst incidents of homophobic violence.)

Short of that, as it is in most cases, it still isn't good for people's sense of well-being. It obviously bothers them. The 'I don't want to hear about it, this is sick, I don't want to hear about it, I shouldn't have to accept it exists, I don't want to hear about it,' sort of response to gay people wanting the same rights as anyone else.

To wit, homophobia makes *straight* people uncomfortable with themselves, cause it's taboo to even *look* at your own sexuality. The only option, for some, seems to be to destroy or at least render unacceptable the existence of any other possibilities, in order to validate the box *they're* in.

That's not freedom.

Particularly in Western society, we're woefully short of terms and understandings of the complexities of sexuality. We have male and female, straight and gay (with bisexuality being some kind of confusing combination of the other two terms rather than the manifold ways one can be bi,) and, for the most part a bunch of dirty and negative-sounding terms even for 'normal' sexuality.

That's why it's good to talk about this. I mean, a consensus that it's not OK to repress, discriminate against and slander gay people, would be a definite step forward, but it's also a chance to start coming to a mature and complete understanding of something that's a big part of everyone's life.

Frankly, people are being reactionary these days, because things *are* changing, and they're afraid they're losing a control they never really had.Wow, that was fantastically said, and made quite a few good points. I agree completely.

I'm surprised this is still being replied to. I would have thought that any disagreeing with homosexuality would have been argued or scared away long ago.

Well it seems idiocy can not be argued out of existance. If people WANT to hate gay people they will. They are the ones that make the choice to be weird ol' homophobes, we have no choice in the matter apart from the choice between being true to our natures or lying to ourselves and denying ourselves full and happy lives. Also it seems all the homophobes have left the building and now only us pro-gay people are left.

no. :headbang:

my answer is quite simply no.



im not saying that it is wrong, (is anything in this day and age?)

my opinion is if 2 people of the same sex do this :fluffle: it makes me extremely :confused:

no. :headbang:

my answer is quite simply no.



im not saying that it is wrong, (is anything in this day and age?)

my opinion is if 2 people of the same sex do this :fluffle: it makes me extremely :confused:

So you get confused? Does the fact that you do not share their feelings make what they do un natural? Or is it something else? Did aliens abduct me and tweak with my brain?

No, Evox? No what?

No you don't want to have gay sex?
Or possibly be a snuggly Pac-Man creature?

Umm,

....OK, I'm willing to bet no one's pressuring you.

No, you can't let other people live?

Too bad.



*curtseys for the compliment, btw,*

I don't know if anybody mentioned this before, but I'd recall it was Darwin who made some research about this... He found a group of apes and some female apes chose to mate with another female, rather than a male...

So I'd say that it's yes and no... IF we assume that 'love' itself is just a "error" in the brain (as some scientist said), then no...

But if love is ment to be there, then it's kinda same thing... it could be (JUST A THEORY, which maybe that someone else has thought the same way) that it's kinda like an error too... which I think that might be rather likely... But in the same way; in both of my views, it's still natural... If it is error that there is love, then it's an error made by nature and the same thing goes with the other one...

I'm not gay (atleast I think not) but I still do have gay friends (actually one friend...) who are just like anyone else (from the outside, ofcourse) So I don't hate gay people or anything... the things I have said, are just theories...

Are Playstations natural? Are buildings natural? Are cars natural?

People talking about banning unnatural things should concentrate on more obviously unnatural examples first.

Once we're all living in caves and hunting with our bare teeth, then stamping out homosexuality on the grounds that it's unnatural may make some sense. Of course they still wouldn't get very far, because it isn't.

Actually love was invented by Erasmus and we have all been brainwashed by society to believe it is real.
And to anyone disputing homosexuality being real: BIGOTS!

I'm still kind of amused that it seems people oppose homophobia because when they see gay people being affectionate (which they seem to find ways to do a great deal of somehow,) makes them turn with great consternation into unhappy purple Pac-Man creatures.

And possibly bang their heads repeatedly on walls, though that may come beforehand.

:)

I'm still kind of amused that it seems people oppose homosexualitybecause when they see gay people being affectionate (which they seem to find ways to do a great deal of somehow,) makes them turn with great consternation into unhappy purple Pac-Man creatures.

And possibly bang their heads repeatedly on walls, though that may come beforehand.

:)

Eh, sorry bout the lousy editing, there. Multitasking. :)

I think that anyone should have an opinion on such matters unless they are themselves homosexual, because do they really know what it's like at all?

There are animals that use sex for non-procreative reasons. And not just dolphins! Monkeys too. It isn't just humans. *Nods, walks out*

Definitely, Veneficus, if a 'majority' of people don't actually know what they're talking about with regards to this, they probably shouldn't feel entitled to define 'how it is' for others who *do* know what it's like.

In most 'criticisms of homosexuality,' there's certainly demonstrated a fundamental disregard for the life-experiences of other living people.

Makes one wonder what's at stake.

no. :headbang:

my answer is quite simply no.



im not saying that it is wrong, (is anything in this day and age?)

my opinion is if 2 people of the same sex do this :fluffle: it makes me extremely :confused:

Sorry to burst your bubble, but homosexuals tend to be quite repulsed by heterosexual acts, we just get used to it.

I wouldn't make that assumtion, none of my guys friends that are gay really mind Hetero couples. Some might but that's a really big generalazation. Sorry about how I spelled that..... I'm tired.

[QUOTE=Kybernetia]Lesbians can´t have sexual intercourse. QUOTE]

We can't???? :eek:

Hmmmmm wonder what I have been doing with my girlfriends for many years :confused:

Hate to break it to you Kybernetia but we can and we do :D

Try and look beyond your penis fixation and work it out

Oh and lesbians can catch sexually transmitted diseases too - especially herpes - that's why there are safe sex items like dental dams out on the market

The Thread that Will Not Die returns!!!

Sorry to burst your bubble, but homosexuals tend to be quite repulsed by heterosexual acts, we just get used to it.

I agree

And of course we tend not to think about what the hetrosexuals are doing to each other, cos we've got erm... other things to think about ;)

If by natural, you mean "occurring in nature, without the influence of an interfering agent," then there's really no debate here. It's natural. The apes and dogs aren't gay (which they are occasionally) because they were raised poorly, I'll tell you that much.

If by natural, you mean "intended", well that's a whole 'nother can o' worms. I myself am gay, but I don't pretend to know why. Sexuality is too complex a thing to boil down to "It was because of my absent father" (My Dad was great.) or "It's in my DNA" (still unproven, though strong evidence exists).

is this still going on? everything that could be said for either side has been said here. Someone make this a sticky once and for all. lol

I agree

And of course we tend not to think about what the hetrosexuals are doing to each other, cos we've got erm... other things to think about ;)

Yeah, I don't get grossed out to the point of vocal or visible disgust, but the idea of the vagina...really freaks me out. Sorry ladies. Love the rest of you!

You think Jesus was a homosexual?

No i dont...jesus is a fictional character in the worlds best selling book..anyhoo thats another debate.

yeah, i thought the bible had some really good lines in it.
"it is better to live in the desert with no water than to live with a nagging wife"
haha, oh man, genius, oh, thats great.
but yeah i love gay people they are much more witty and clever then most straight people, they are much more fun to hang out with, and usually they smell better. i don't know why. better hygene, more expensive soaps, perhaps their pharamones are more pleasing to me.
sadly i am not gay, perhaps in the next life god will grant me that honor

Yeah, I don't get grossed out to the point of vocal or visible disgust, but the idea of the vagina...really freaks me out. Sorry ladies. Love the rest of you!

Yeah, but here's an interesting note (although I know it doesn't apply to all). I'm a bonafide fruitfly, so I just adore gay men. But what I don't understand is why so many of them are obsessed with breasts (although not with vaginas at all)!

Sorry to burst your bubble, but homosexuals tend to be quite repulsed by heterosexual acts, we just get used to it.

Yeah, there's alwys someone in it that just shouldn't be there. IT'S JUST WRONG!

Reccessive Genes. Thats why we have sexuality in the first place.

I swear, I'm in High School and I know more about genetics than most of the people here.
I'm in middle school and I can Definitely ditto your quote

I'm in middle school and I can Definitely ditto your quote

sorry to both of you, but if you think human sexuality or homosexual behavior is attributable to recessive genes then neither of you knows much about genetics at all. as somebody who actually has studied genetics, i can tell you that your misconceptions are just as bad as those of the average person on these forums...just because your misconceptions are a bit less homophobic doesn't make them any more accurate.

I hear you get a free degree in biogenetics in every third can of Sprite...













...simmer down folks, that was a joke...;)

You seem to know a lot about love and sexuality, Bottle - would you mind explaining this then? Because I always thought homosexuality was partially genetic, and you sure surprised me when you said that chemically, infatuation doesn't turn into love for 2 years. I'm curious to know more.

Yeah, I don't get grossed out to the point of vocal or visible disgust, but the idea of the vagina...really freaks me out. Sorry ladies. Love the rest of you!


ha! huzzah for levity.

To clarify, here's what I had heard:

I read about a study with identical twins. Researchers found pairs of identical twins where one twin was gay, and asked the other twin their orientation. 60% of the second twins were also gay. This was a strange result, because if homosexuality were entirely genetic, 100% of the twins would be gay. On the other hand, if homosexuality wasn't genetic at all, 5-10% of the second twins would be gay, corresponding with the population average. Therefore, the study concluded that there must be some genetic element to sexual orientation, but that environment or other factors had to also be influences.

Twins studies have been a little ambiguous or contadictory in my experience, but certainly that study indicates that genetics or the hormonal balance in the womb have an important influence. It could even be that occasionally one twin gets enough of the hormones to change over to gay, but the other doesn't, so we can't assume an environmental cause.

The one thing that really annoys me about homophobia is the tendency of homophobes to pass judgement, and even to restrict our chances in life and our liberty. If you don't like gays, there's not much to be done about that, apart from actually meeting gay people and getting to know us, but it doesn't really affect us. Eminem is an example of this- he's not too keen on the gay idea, but he's big enough to admit it's nothing more than a personal issue.

So why can't these people just avoid us and leave us to fight for the rights we're entitled too?

You can not "choose" homosexuality. Nor is it natural. Being gay is liked being mentally retarded. I mean, many homosexuals are "proud to be gay", but that is like being proud of having Autism. I think a really good description of a homosexual is "sexually retarded".

And thank you so very much for giving us an example of "mentally retarded" so as to judge your theory.

You seem to "know" a lot of stuff that is just fascist crap, you know that?

I don't think so. for a species to survive it must mate. Homosexuals would have died out if it were natural. There is nothing different in the chemical or physical homosexual or straight person, there is nothing different in the brain waves. I think it is just a state of mind that people choose.

Hmm... interesting New Dragon.

While I completely disagree with you (there are animals that continue to practice homosexuality and we can be pretty sure it's not a fad), I have a proposition to test your 'state of mind' theory.

Assuming you're straight, I challenge you to: Choose to change your state of mind to that of a homosexual nature for the period of one year. In order to be a successful test of your theory, you must fully immerse yourself in the 'state of mind' (i.e. have lots of gay sex).

When you're finished, please return to your normal state of mind and ping me.

And you call that intercourse??? Well, it depends what definition you use. They may be able to have some kind of sexual relations but not intercourse. Since Clinton you should know the difference.
And by the way: I´m male.

Clinton lied to save his arse and almost got impeached for it. Sucking dick isn't sex? Only in his world.

I provide links for my claim - or rather the fact that I´m stating that homosexuals have a very, very high risk to contracting Aids due to their lifestyle. Promiscuity and homosexuality are the main factors for the spread of Aids in the Western world.

http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/jsochapter29.htm

http://www.mdccc.org/PAGES/Articles/Just%20the%20Facts%20AIDS%20and%20the%20Homosexual%20Lifestyle!.htm

http://www.natap.org/2003/reuters/040203_2.htm

Promiscuity, actually. Homosexuality has nothing to do with it. Also, www.mdccc.org - oh, dear. Well we know where your hatred of homosexuality comes from then.

[New Dragoon #1]
I don't think so. for a species to survive it must mate. Homosexuals would have died out if it were natural. There is nothing different in the chemical or physical homosexual or straight person, there is nothing different in the brain waves. I think it is just a state of mind that people choose.

Of course it's natural.

The "itch" will be scratched, and if, for whatever reason, something other than a vagina is prefered (or available) to scratch that itch with...

It will be rationalized as "morally proper" by those with that preference (or availability).

This applies to amoeba and penguins, as well as humans.

I don't think so. for a species to survive it must mate. Homosexuals would have died out if it were natural. There is nothing different in the chemical or physical homosexual or straight person, there is nothing different in the brain waves. I think it is just a state of mind that people choose.
I beg to differ. I am heterosexual and I have always viewed that as pre-determined. I don't know how, but it is IMO. Same with homosexuality.

Am I the only one who sees the illogic in that it's a choice when faith healing psychiatrists offer "treatment" (aka fundamentalist brainwashing) for it while secular professionals reject the choice belief and most of all, it's 'treatment'? :rolleyes:

I don't think so.
However, many things, both good and bad aren't natural. It may have escaped your notice, but sitting in front of a monitor typing messages to people all across the world isn't "natural".

Far more important if you really have to ask questions, is "Is homosexuality harmful?" or "Does anyone whose opinion I respect give a toss?"

The answers to both these questions is "No", by the way.